Full text of Monthly Labor Review : December 1981, Volume 104, Number 12

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 1981


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

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary
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.
Subscription price per year —
$21 domestic; $26.25 foreign.
Single copy $3.
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
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 Laurel, Md.
Library of Congress Catalog
Card Number 15-26485

Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I Boston: Paul V Mulkern
1603 JFK Federal Building, Government Center,
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II
New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region III
Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
W est Virginia

Region IV
Atlanta: Donald M. Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 30367
Phone: (404) 881-4418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V Chicago: William E Rice
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street,
Chicago, III. 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
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: Elliott A. Browar
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

December cover:

Detail from “ Forgotten Things,”
a woodcut by G. Albee,
courtesy The National Gallery of Art,
Washington, D.C., Rosenwald Collection.
Cover design by Richard L. Mathews,
Division of Audio-Visual Communication Services,
U.S. Department of Labor.


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

Regions IX and X
San Francisco: D. Bruce Hanchett
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017,
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington

/ '
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
DECEMBER 1981
VOLUME 104, NUMBER 12
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor

J. Moy, C. Sorrentino

3

Unemployment and layoff practices in 10 countries
Jobless rates reached new highs in Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands
and were lowest in Japan and Sweden; statistical treatment of layoffs evaluated

P. Capdevielle, D. Alvarez

14

International comparisons of productivity and labor costs
Manufacturing productivity slowed or declined in 1980, and unit labor costs accelerated,
as output generally turned downward; compensation advanced in most countries studied

M. Andrews, D. Schlein


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

21

Bargaining calendar will be heavy in 1982
Major contracts covering 3.6 million workers will expire or be reopened next year,
including auto and trucking agreements; job security is likely to be the key issue

Arthur Padilla

32

The unemployment insurance system: its financial structure
Since the early 1970’s, there has been a departure from the exclusive reliance
on employer taxes to pay for benefits, reflecting new programs, larger U.S. role

Robert Ball

38

Employment created by construction expenditures
A billion dollars spent on construction generates 24,000 full-time jobs for one year,
most of them in supporting industries, according to 13 studies of labor requirements

REPORTS
Donald M. Fisk
John G. Olsen
Lois Plunkert

45
47
52

Pilot study measures productivity of State, local electric utilities
Labor and material requirements for Federal building construction
bls tests feasibility of a new job openings survey
DEPARTMENTS

2
45
52
57
58
62
67
107

Labor month in review
Productivity reports
Research summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics
Index of volume 104

Labor M onth
In Review
REPORT TO CONGRESS. On October
26, U.S. Secretary of Labor Raymond J.
Donovan sent to the Congress a final
report on actions taken in response to
recommendations made in 1979 by the
National Commission on Employment
and Unemployment Statistics (nceus).
Excerpts from the Secretary’s report:
Discouraged workers. The Com­
mission’s major definitional recommen­
dation was for a change in the measure­
ment of discouraged workers (persons
outside the labor force who are not look­
ing for jobs because they believe none is
available). Criticizing the present defini­
tion as both too arbitrary and too sub­
jective, the Commission recommended
that the measurement of discouraged
workers be based on prior job search
(during the preceding 6-month period),
availability, and desire for a job. The
Commission also recommended contin­
uation of the present practice of classify­
ing this group as not in the labor force,
rather than as unemployed.
I fully support these and the other
recommendations relating to labor force
data.
Seasonal adjustment. To improve the
accuracy of current labor force statistics,
the Commission recommended that im­
portant current statistics be adjusted on
a concurrent basis—calculating new fac­
tors every month based on the current
month’s data. I believe that prior an­
nouncement of factors is desirable in
order to maintain public confidence in
important time series and thus am not
accepting this recommendation. BLS
research has shown that a 6-month up­
date procedure would improve the ac­
curacy of seasonal adjustment in the last
half of each year. The bls implemented
the 6-month update of factors in
January 1980. The official seasonal ad­
justment factors are published with data
for January and July, but bls also
makes available publicly each month

2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

unemployment rates based on a concur­
rent adjustment as well as on five other
unofficial alternative approaches. Both
the bls and Census Bureau are carrying
out continuing research efforts in the
area of seasonal adjustment, and, if
future findings suggest the desirability of
a change to a concurrent or other pro­
cedure, this will be seriously considered,
in consultation with the government’s
working group on statistics.
Sample expansion. Although I believe
that more accurate State and area
unemployment estimates and more reli­
able data on minority workers are
desirable, I cannot in good conscience
support increased expenditures of more
than $20 million to accomplish these
recommendations. The President’s over­
all goals for improving the economy re­
quire careful control of government
spending. These new initiatives that are
recommended by the Commission must*
therefore, be rejected. Because of the
importance of these issues, however, I
have asked the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics to work out methods—to the ex­
tent feasible within current budget con­
straints—to improve both area and
minority worker data as a part of the
redesign of the CPS.
Armed Forces. A major Commission
recommendation was to include the
Armed Forces in the official national
labor force and unemployment statistics
but to exclude them from State and area
data. This is a significant change from
the current practice, which has been to
base the official national unemployment
rate on the civilian labor force. I accept
the Commission’s recommendation on
inclusion of the Armed Forces. Under
the present volunteer system, employ­
ment in the Armed Forces is not sub­
stantively different from civilian
employment, and I believe that the of­
ficial national unemployment rate
should be based on a labor force which

includes members of the Armed Forces
stationed in the United States.
Objectivity of data. The Commission
reiterated the Gordon Committee’s em­
phasis on the need for objectivity in the
release of data. The NCEUS reviewed the
development and analysis of data by the
bls and emphasized the nonpolitical
nature of the bls. I am pleased at the
Commission’s findings on the integrity
and objectivity of the bls. That objec­
tivity must be preserved, and I pledge
that this Administration will do all that
it can to ensure that the Bureau’s work
will continue to be conducted in a
thoroughly nonpartisan environment.
The country needs accurate and credible
data, and I am committed to the preser­
vation and enhancement of the profes­
sionalism with which the bls operates.
Funding arrangements. The Commis­
sion recommended the administrative
and funding arrangements for all
employment and unemployment Fed­
eral-State statistical programs be placed
in the bls. I have already taken steps to
improve the management of the Depart­
ment of Labor, and the Commission’s
recommendation should be reviewed
within our overall management improve­
ment framework. I am, therefore, re­
questing the Assistant Secretary for Ad­
ministration and Management to chair a
committee, with representation from the
Employment and Training Administra­
tion and the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
to review these issues. They will make
recommendations for any changes con­
sidered desirable as part of our overall
review of programs and funding.
Single copies of the “ Final Report of
the Secretary of Labor on the Rec­
ommendations of the National Commis­
sion on Employment and Unemploy­
ment Statistics’’ are available from the
Office of Information, U.S. Department
of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20210. □

Unemployment, labor force trends,
and layoff practices in 10 countries
Unemployment rates reached record highs
in Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands
and were the lowest in Japan and Sweden;
statistical treatment of laid-off workers is evaluated
JO YANNA M OY A N D CONSTANCE SORRENTINO

After declining in 1979, unemployment rates resumed
their upward trend in 1980 in most major industrial
countries. In the first half of 1981, unemployment rates
leveled off in North America and Japan, but continued
rising in Western Europe. By May 1981, the British rate
was 11 percent— the highest in Britain’s post-World
War II history, and the highest rate recorded by any
country in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ series of com­
parative unemployment rates. Unemployment also
reached record highs in France and the Netherlands. In
contrast, jobless rates of only 2 percent were recorded
in the two nations where unemployment has been the
lowest and most stable, Japan and Sweden. (See table
1.)

This article examines unemployment and labor force
trends in the United States and nine other nations
through the first half of 1981, based on data approxi­
mating U.S. concepts. For the first time, adjusted labor
force statistics are presented for the Netherlands. The
Dutch data are shown on an annual average basis only.
Some revisions to previously published estimates for
other countries are also presented. The revisions gener­
ally arise from the inclusion of more recent survey re­
sults. (See appendix for an explanation of the Dutch
statistics and of the revisions.)
Joyanna Moy and Constance Sorrentino are economists in the Divi­
sion of Foreign Labor Statistics and Trade, Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics.


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

In addition, persons on temporary layoff are excluded
from the unemployed in France and Great Britain, and
this has had a slight impact on the comparative rates.
In the past, persons on layoff had been included in the
unemployed for comparability with U.S. concepts.
However, layoff practices are so fundamentally different
abroad, compared with U.S. practices, that BLS has de­
cided to make no adjustments on this point. The ques­
tion of layoffs in international unemployment compar­
isons is discussed in detail.

Unemployment
In the 1960’s and first half of the 1970’s, unemploy­
ment rates in the United States and Canada were much
higher than in Western Europe, Japan, and Australia.
However, this situation has been changing in recent
years. (See table 2.) In 1979, the U.S. rate of 5.8 percent
was surpassed in Australia, France, and Canada; and
unemployment in Great Britain and the Netherlands
was close to the U.S. rate. In 1980, the U.S. rate rose to
7.1 percent. Only Canada and Great Britain had jobless
rates above that level, but Australia, France, and the
Netherlands all had rates of more than 6 percent. As of
m id-1981, unemployment rates in the United States,
Canada, and France were more than 7 percent and the
British rate had soared to 11 percent. Unemployment
began to recede in Australia, but the German jobless
rate, which had averaged 3 percent in 1979 and 1980,
reached 4 percent— the highest recorded in the past
3

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Unemployment and Layoffs in 10 Countries

Table 1. Quarterly unemployment rates approximating
U.S. concepts, seasonally adjusted, 1978-81
Period

United
Canada
States

Aus­
tralia 1

Japan France2

Ger­
Great
many2 Britain3 Italy 4 Sweden

1978 .
I ....
II . . . .
Ill . . . .
IV . . .

6.0
6.3
6.0
5.9
5.9

8.4
8.4
8.5
8.4
8.2

6.3
6.7
6.3
6.4
6.3

2.3
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.3

5.4
4.8
5.3
5.7
5.6

3.4
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.3

6.3
6.5
6.4
6.2
6.1

3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.9

2.2
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.1

1979 .
I ....
II . . . .
Ill . . . .
IV . . .

5.8
5.8
5.7
5.7
5.9

7.5
7.9
7.6
7.1
7.3

6.2
6.3
6.2
6.0
6.0

2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1

6.1
5.8
6.2
6.3
6.2

3.0
3.2
3.0
2.9
2.8

5.7
5.9
5.6
5.5
5.6

3.9
3.8
3.9
3.9
3.9

2.1
2.2
2.2
2.0
1.9

1980 .
I ....
II . . . .
Ill . . . .
IV . . .

7.1
6.2
7.3
7.5
7.6

7.5
7.5
7.7
7.5
7.4

6.1
6.0
6.2
6.1
5.9

2.0
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2

6.5
6.2
6.4
6.5
6.6

3.0
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.3

7.4
6.1
6.7
7.5
8.9

3.9
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.8

2.0
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.2

1981
I .. . .
II . . . .
Ill . . . .

7.4
7.4
7.2

7.2
7.2
7.5

5.6
5.6
5.8

2.2
2.4

7.2
8.0
8.2

3.6
4.0
4.6

10.1
10.8
11.2

3.9
4.6
4.5

2.2
2.2
2.5

( 5)

1Quarterly data are for February, May, August, and November.
2 Preliminary data from 1979 forward.
3 Preliminary data from 1980 forward.
4 Quarterly data are for January, April, July, and October.
5 Not available.
N ote: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, Italy, and Great Britain are calculated by
applying annual adjustment factors to current published data, and therefore should be
viewed as only approximate indicators of unemployment under U.S. concepts. Published
data for Australia, Canada, Japan, and Sweden require little or no adjustment.

two decades. Swedish and Japanese unemployment,
which averaged only about 2 percent in 1979 and 1980,
showed a slight upward trend in 1980 which continued
into 1981. In April, the Japanese rate, 2.4 percent, was
its highest monthly rate since late 1978.
Italian unemployment statistics are difficult to inter­
pret. The BLS tentative adjustment of the Italian statis­
tics to approximate U.S. concepts indicates an unem­
ployment rate of about 4 percent in 1979 and 1980,
rising to 4.6 percent in the second quarter of 1981. Ac­
cording to the Italian labor force survey, an additional
4 percent of the labor force are looking for work, but
have not taken any active steps to find work in the past
month. BLS has excluded such persons from the Italian
unemployed because U.S. concepts require that a person
actively seek work in the past 4 weeks to be counted as
unemployed (unless on temporary layoff or waiting to
begin a new job).1 By classifying such persons as out of
the labor force rather than as unemployed, the Italian
unemployment rate looks quite favorable. However, it
implies a very large number of discouraged workers,
that is, persons who want jobs but who have stopped
actively looking for work because they believe no jobs
are available.2
The Italian labor market situation is also complicated
by a large amount of unrecorded employment, known
as “black labor” in Italy.2 The other countries covered
here also have unrecorded employment, but not to the
same extent as in Italy. Some persons classified in the
Digitized 4for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Italian survey as not working and looking for work
may well have done some work during the survey peri­
od which they do not declare when replying to the sur­
vey.

Other labor market indicators
Differences in unemployment rates— after adjustment
to a common statistical base— reflect the significant dif­
ferences in the institutions and social programs as well
as in the level of economic activity among the 10
countries studied here. Differences in growth and sec­
toral composition of the labor force also affect unem­
ployment rates. Because unemployment rates alone do
not indicate the full extent of labor force underutiliza­
tion, other labor market indicators, such as employ­
ment, employment-population ratios, participation rates,
and migration are also examined in this article.
Employment. In 1980, civilian employment in the Unit­
ed States was about 13 percent greater than in 1974, the
year before the full effects of the 1974-75 recession were
felt. Only Canada had a sharper employment increase.
In Australia, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, and Swe­
den, employment was up 3 to 7 percent; in France, only
1 percent; and in Germany and Great Britain, employ­
ment was 2 percent below 1974 levels. These rates of
change in employment are, of course, related to dif­
ferential rates of growth in the population of working
age and to changes in the level of unemployment— all
countries except Sweden had higher unemployment
rates in 1980 than in 1974. The rates also reflect labor
force participation; as will be shown later, only the
United States, Canada, and Sweden had significantly
higher labor force participation rates in 1980 than in
1974.
While U.S. employment has risen substantially since
1974, the rate of increase slowed in 1979 and employ­
ment rose only 0.3 percent in 1980. In Britain, a large
drop in the number of persons with jobs in 1980 more
than offset small increases recorded the previous 3
years. Employment could have dropped even further
were it not for the existence of special employment and
training measures. In March 1981, 1.2 million Britons
were covered under special employment programs, the
most extensive of which subsidizes employers who cut
working hours rather than lay off workers. According
to the British Department of Employment, these pro­
grams kept approximately 345,000 persons from becom­
ing unemployed in March.4 The Netherlands was the
only other country with a 1980 decline in employment,
but the fall was not nearly as severe as in Great Britain.
In France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden, employment
was bolstered by extensive programs which assisted
workers during periods of reduced working hours. In
France, the number of workers collecting partial unem-

Germany, workers on shorter hours dropped to 88,000
in 1979, the lowest since 1973. In late 1979, however,
partial unemployment was again rising and in the
fourth quarter of 1980, 270,000 persons, 1 percent of

ployment benefits declined sharply in 1979, but rose by
60 percent in 1980 to 179,000, approximately 1 percent
of the labor force. The number of working days com­
pensated doubled to more than 10 million in 1980. In
Table 2.

Civilian labor force, employment, and unemployment approximating U.S. concepts, 10 countries, 1974-80

[Numbers in thousands]
United
States

Canada

Australia

Japan

France

Germany

Great
Britain

Italy

Nether­
lands

Sweden

Labor force:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

91,011
92,613
94,773
97,401
100,420
102,908
104,719

9,639
9,974
10,206
10,498
10,882
11,207
11,522

6,053
6,169
6,244
6,358
6,399
6,480
6,655

52,440
52,530
53,100
53,820
54,600
55,210
55,740

21,590
21,620
21,800
22,130
22,300
122,500
122,670

26,040
25,630
25,400
25,360
25,520
' 25,780
' 25,990

24,850
25,100
25,330
25,520
25,650
25,580
125,440

20,060
20,270
20,490
20,530
20,630
20,910
21,210

4,760
4,830
4,890
4,950
14,970
15,040
’ 5,060

4,037
4,123
4,149
4,168
4,203
4,262
4,314

Labor force participation rate2’
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

61.2
61.2
61.6
62.3
63.2
63.7
63.8

60.5
61.1
61.1
61.5
62.6
63.3
64.0

63.0
63.2
62.7
62.7
62.0
61.7
62.2

63.0
62.4
62.3
62.5
62.8
62.7
62.6

57.2
56.7
56.7
57.1
57.1
’ 57.3
’ 57.4

54.4
53.4
52.8
52.4
52.8
'52.6
'53.0

62.6
63.0
63.3
63.5
63.4
62.8
'62.1

47.9
47.9
48.1
48.0
47.7
47.8
48.0

48.2
49.3
49.1
49.0
'48.5
’ 48.7
'48.4

64.9
65.9
66.0
65.9
66.1
66.8
'67.2

Employment:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

85,936
84,783
87,485
90,546
94,373
96,945
97,270

9,125
9,284
9,479
9,648
9,972
10,369
10,655

5,891
5,866
5,946
6,000
5,997
6,075
6,250

51,710
51,530
52,020
52,720
53,360
54,040
54,600

20,960
20,710
20,800
21,040
21,100
'21,130
121,200

25,620
24,740
24,510
24,460
24,650
' 25,000
'25,210

24,080
23,950
23,820
23,900
24,040
24,130
’ 23,560

19,500
19,620
19,760
19,790
19,870
20,100
20,380

4,580
4,580
4,630
4,700
'4,710
14,770
' 4,740

3,957
4,056
4,083
4,093
4,109
4,174
4,228

Employment-population rate3:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

57.8
56.0
56.8
57.9
59.4
60.0
59.3

57.3
56.9
56.7
56.6
57.4
58.6
59.2

61.3
60.1
59.7
59.2
58.1
57.9
58.4

62.2
61.2
61.1
61.2
61.3
61.4
61.3

55.5
54.3
54.1
54.3
53.8
'53.8
'53.6

53.5
51.5
50.9
50.5
51.0
'51.0
'51.4

60.7
60.2
59.6
59.4
59.4
59.3
'57.5

46.6
46.4
46.3
46.2
45.9
46.0
46.1

46.3
46.7
46.5
46.5
’ 45.9
’ 46.1
'45.3

63.6
64.8
64.9
64.8
64.6
65.4
’ 65.9

Unemployment:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

5,076
7,830
7,288
6,855
6,047
5,963
7,448

514
690
727
850
911
838
867

162
302
298
358
402
405
405

730
1,000
1,080
1,100
1,240
1,170
1,140

630
910
1,000
1,090
1,200
'1,370
'1,470

420
890
890
900
870
'780
'780

770
1,150
1,510
1,620
1,610
1,450
'1,880

560
650
730
740
760
810
830

180
250
260
250
'260
'270
'320

80
67
66
75
94
88
86

Unemployment rate:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

5.6
8.5
7.7
7.0
6.0
5.8
7.1

5.3
6.9
7.1
8.1
8.4
7.5
7.5

2.7
4.9
4.8
5.6
6.3
6.2
6.1

1.4
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.3
2.1
2.0

2.9
4.2
4.6
5.0
5.4
'6.1
'6.5

1.6
3.5
3.5
3.5
'3.4
'3.0
'3.0

3.1
4.6
6.0
6.3
6.3
5.7
'7.4

2.8
3.2
3.6
3.6
3.7
3.9
3.9

3.8
5.2
5.4
5.1
'5.2
'5.4
'6.3

2.0
1.6
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.1
2.0

Unemployment rate (as published
by each country)4:
1974 ......................................
1975 ......................................
1976 ......................................
1977 ......................................
1978 ......................................
1979 ......................................
1980 ......................................

5.6
8.5
7.7
7.0
6.0
5.8
7.1

5.3
6.9
7.1
8.1
8.4
7.5
7.5

2.7
4.9
4.8
5.6
6.3
6.2
6.1

1.4
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.1
2.0

2.8
4.2
4.6
4.9
5.3
6.1
6.4

2.6
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.3
3.8
3.8

2.6
4.1
5.6
6.1
6.0
5.6
7.4

55.4
55.9
56.7
7.2
7.2
7.7
7.6

3.5
5.0
5.3
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.8

2.0
1.6
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.1
2.0

Year

1Preliminary estimate based on incomplete data.
2 Civilian labor force as a percent of civilian working-age population.
3 Civilian employment as a percent of civilian working-age population.
4 Published and adjusted data for the United States, Canada, and Australia are identical.
For France, unemployment as a percent of the civilian labor force; for Japan, Italy, and Swe­
den, unemployment as a percent of the civilian labor force plus career military personnel; for
Germany, Great Britain, and the Netherlands, registered unemployed as a percent of
employed wage and salary workers plus the unemployed. Except for France, which does not
publish an unemployment rate, these are the usually published unemployment rates for each
country.
5 Italian Central Institute of Statistics estimate made for comparability with the revised la­
bor force survey, introduced in 1977.


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

N ote: Data for the United States relate to the population 16 years and over. Published data
for France, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands relate to the population 14 years and over; for
Sweden, to the population age 16 to 74; and for Canada, Australia, and Japan, to the popula­
tion 15 years and over. For Great Britain, the lower age limit was raised from 15 to 16 in 1973.
The statistics have been adapted, insofar as possible, to the age at which compulsory schooling
ends In each country. Therefore, the statistics for France relate to the population 16 and over
and for Germany and the Netherlands, to the population 15 years and over. The age limits of
the statistics for Canada, Australia, Japan, Great Britain, and Italy coincide with the age limits of
the published statistics. Statistics for Sweden remain at the lower age limit of 16, but have been
adjusted to include persons 75 years of age and over.

5

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Unemployment and Layoff's in 10 Countries
the labor force, collected short-time benefits. In Italy,
the number of hours subsidized rose from 287 million in
1979 to 296 million, approximately 37 million days, in
1980. In Sweden, programs such as training and public
works assist the unemployed and disabled. The number
of persons enrolled in these programs has exceeded the
number of jobless since 1973. In 1977, enrollment was
more than double the number of unemployed. Since
1978, when the average number of persons in training
and public works programs reached 170,000, enrollment
has declined slowly. Persons in training for labor mar­
ket reasons made up 40 percent of total enrollments in
the early 1970’s; by 1977, this figure had risen to 55
percent. In 1979, enrollment in training programs re­
turned to the proportions recorded in the early 1970’s,
as enrollment in public works projects expanded from
18 percent of the total in 1977 to 31 percent in 1979.
The relative movement of workers out of the goodsproducing sector and into the service sector continued
its long-term trend in all countries. Employment in in­
dustry— mining, manufacturing, and construction —
which at one time absorbed many surplus agricultural
workers, now appears to be declining as a proportion of
total civilian employment in all of the countries.
As of 1979-80, the agricultural sector (including for­
estry and fishing) accounted for about 15 percent of ci­
vilian employment in Italy, 10 percent in Japan, 9
percent in France, and under 7 percent in the other
countries. Twenty years earlier, agriculture accounted
for about 30 percent of employment in Japan and Italy,
more than 20 percent in France, and more than 10 per­
cent in all of the other countries except the United
States and the United Kingdom.
Employment in services— which includes employ­
ment in transportation, communications, and public
ultilities, wholesale and retail trade, finance, insurance,
and real estate, public administration, and personal,
business, and miscellaneous services— has been growing
both absolutely and as a proportion of total employ­
ment in all countries. In 1980, service employment
reached 50 percent of the total in Germany, leaving Ita­
ly as the only country with more workers engaged in
the production of agricultural and industrial goods than
of services. In 1960, service employment accounted for
more than half of the total only in the United States
and Canada; two-thirds of U.S. and Canadian employ­
ment is now in the service sector.
Employment in industry has been declining as a pro­
portion of total employment in most of the countries
since at least the mid-1960’s. The exceptions are Japan
and Italy, where industrial employment continued to
rise relative to total employment until 1974. However,
Germany, where industrial employment has been mov­
ing slowly downward, still has the highest proportion of
industrial workers— 44 percent. Industrial employment
6

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

in the other countries ranges from under 30 percent in
the United States, Canada, and Australia to about 38
percent in Italy and the United Kingdom.
Employment-population ratios. In 1980, civilian employ­
ment as a percent of the population of working age—
the employment-population ratio— declined in Great
Britain, the Netherlands, the United States, and France.
This occurred because employment declined in Great
Britain and the Netherlands and employment growth in
the United States and France did not match the in­
creases in their working-age population. For the United
States, this was the first decline in the employment-pop­
ulation ratio since the recession of 1975; between 1975
and 1979, the ratio had increased by an average of 1
percentage point a year.
The employment ratio is the highest in Sweden,
where it rose to 65.9 percent in 1980. The Japanese em­
ployment-population ratio fell to 61.2 percent in 1975
and has remained at about that level since. In the Unit­
ed States, Canada, Australia, and Great Britain, the ra­
tios have ranged between 57 and 60 percent in recent
years, while the ratios for France and Germany are
somewhat lower. Italy and the Netherlands are the only
countries studied where fewer than one-half of the civil­
ian working-age population is employed.5 This reflects
low female labor force participation rates in these two
countries, although the Italian figures would be under­
stated to the extent that persons engaged in “black la­
bor” — and not otherwise employed— are not counted
in the Italian survey. Black labor, or unreported em­
ployment, exists to some extent in all countries, but it is
of greatest concern in Italy.
Participation rates. The U.S. labor force participation
rate— the ratio of the civilian labor force to the civilian
working-age population— was 63.8 percent in 1980, lit­
tle changed from 1979, but substantially higher than the
1974-75 level of 61.2 percent. Only Canada had a
sharper rise over this period. But, Sweden continued to
have the highest labor force participation rate— 67.2
percent in 1980. In all three countries, male participa­
tion rates have been falling, but they have been more
than offset by rising female participation. (See table 3.)
In the other countries, 1980 participation rates were
about the same or lower than in 1974, as slowly rising
female rates only matched or failed to match declining
male rates. Australia, Japan, and Great Britain at one
time had higher labor force participation rates than the
United States, but in 1978, the U.S. rate surpassed
those in Australia and Japan and in 1979, the British
rate fell below the U.S. rate and continued downward
in 1980.
The lowest labor force participation rates are in Italy
and the Netherlands, where less than half of the work-

Table 3.
Year

Labor force participation rates approximating U.S. concepts, by sex, 1974-80
United States

Canada

Australia

Japan

France1

Germany

Great Britain

Italy

73.5
72.0
71.0
70.2
70.6
4 70.1
4 70.2

80.9
81.2
81.4
81.1
80.4
79.2
478.0

71.3
71.0
70.5
69.1
68.6
68.2
67.8

37.9
37.4
37.2
37.1
37.5
4 37.9
4 38.2

46.1
46.6
47.1
47.5
48.1
48.0
447.6

26.6
26.9
27.6
28.6
28.6
29.2
29.9

Men:
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

78.7
77.9
77.5
77.7
77.9
77.9
77.4

78.7
78.4
77.6
77.6
77.9
78.4
78.3

82.7
82.2
81.5
81.0
79.8
79.5
79.2

81.5
81.0
80.9
80.3
80.1
79.9
79.6

73.0
73.2
72.6
71.6
71.4
71.6

Women:
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

45.6
46.3
47.3
48.4
50.0
51.0
51.6

43.0
44.4
45.2
46.0
47.8
48.9
50.3

43.5
44.5
44.3
44.8
44.5
44.3
45.5

45.7
44.8
44.8
45.7
46.4
46.6
46.6

41.6
42.5
42.9
44.2
43.3
44.3

( 3)

( 3)

Netherlands2

( 3)
74.7
( 3)
73.4
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)

( 3)
28.0
( 3)
28.8
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)

Sweden

76.9
77.0
76.5
75.6
75.1
75.2
75.0

53.3
55.2
55.8
56.7
57.5
58.7
59.7

’ Data are for March.
2 Data are for March-May.
3 Not available.
4 Preliminary estimate.

the civilian working-age population. Working age is defined as 16-year-old and over in the
ed States, France, and Sweden; 15-year-old and over in Australia, Canada, Germany,
Japan; and 14-year-old and over in Italy. For Great Britain, the lower age limit was raised
15 to 16 in 1973. The institutionalized working-age population is included in Japan and

N ote:

many.

Data relate to the civilian labor force approximating U.S. concepts as a percent of

ing-age population is employed or looking for work.
For the Netherlands, the low rates may be explained, in
part, by provisions of the social security system, as dis­
ability payments are usually more generous than early
retirement pensions or unemployment benefits. There­
fore, according to the Organization for Economic Coop­
eration and Development, “the more favorable benefits
and the weak demand for labor may have encouraged
continuing shifts from the active population into inac­
tivity.”6^ 1979, the number of disability recipients was
12 percent of the labor force, twice the proportion in
1973.
Male-female differences in labor force participation
rates were widest in Italy and in the Netherlands and
narrowest in Sweden. In 1980, the participation rate for
Italian women was still substantially less than half the
rate of their male counterparts. In Sweden, the rate for
women was 80 percent of that for men, reflecting in
part, extensive government-financed day care facilities,
separate taxation for married women, parenthood insur­
ance, and greater flexibility in working hours.
Migrant workers. In 1973-74, several European Commu­
nity nations banned the recruitment of foreign workers
from outside the Community. Consequently, many un­
employed foreign workers remained in the host countries
because re-entry was uncertain and social bene­
fits such as unemployment insurance were more gener­
ous than in the home countries. This trend of jobless
alien workers remaining in the host nations contributed
to the sharp rise in overall unemployment recorded in
Western Europe during the 1974-75 recession.
Since 1974, the jobless rates of foreign workers have
been significantly higher than the overall unemployment
rates. This contrasts with the situation of the 1960’s
and early 1970’s when unemployment rates of migrant

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

Unitand
from
Ger-

workers were much lower than the overall rates. The
higher foreign worker jobless rates reflect their concen­
tration in sectors vulnerable to economic downturns,
such as in manufacturing, construction, hotels, and res­
taurants. In addition, migrant workers tend to be young
or unskilled or both, two groups with high incidences of
joblessness.
In France, the overall jobless rate, as recorded in the
March 1973 labor force survey, was 3.4 percent and the
foreign worker rate was 2.7 percent (not adjusted to
U.S. concepts). By March 1976, the foreign worker un­
employment rate had risen to 6.5 percent, compared to
the overall rate of 6 percent. In March 1979, the for­
eigners’ jobless rate, 9.2 percent, was significantly
higher than the overall rate of 7 percent. In Germany,
the overall 1973 unemployment rate (based on registra­
tion statistics and not adjusted to U.S. concepts) was
1.2 percent, compared with the foreign worker jobless
rate of 0.8 percent. By 1975, the overall rate, 4.7 per­
cent, was lower than the migrant worker rate of 6.8
percent. In 1980, the alien workers’ jobless rate was 5.2
percent, compared with the overall rate of 3.8 percent.
In Sweden, migrant workers’ unemployment rates
have been double the overall rate since 1977 when the
data were first collected in the labor force survey. Data
on registered foreign workers available from the second
half of 1974 are also indicative of their rising unemploy­
ment. Foreign workers accounted for 4.3 percent of all
registrations in the second half 1974, 8.6 percent in
1978, and 6.9 percent in 1980.
Employment of foreign nationals in Germany de­
clined sharply during the 1974-75 recession and did not
begin to rise until 1978. In March 1981, alien worker
employment reached 2 million for the first time since
1975. In Sweden, foreign worker employment has risen
slowly since 1977 to 225,000 in 1980. In contrast, the
7

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Unemployment and Layoffs in 10 Countries
number of foreign nationals with a job in France has
declined since 1977. However, foreign worker employ­
ment in March 1979, 1.4 million, was still higher than
in 1974.
The demographic pattern of migrants in Western Eu­
rope has changed in the past decade. In the 1960’s and
early 1970’s, the foreign population consisted primarily
of economically active men whose families remained in
the home countries. Beginning in the mid-1970’s, when
new migration from non-European Community member
states was banned, the number of dependent family
members in Western Europe increased rapidly as host
countries liberalized integration programs and promoted
family unification. In 1972, 65.6 percent of Germany’s
foreign population were in the labor force, compared
with 48.7 percent in 1979. This proportion is expected
to rise again as dependents of “settled” migrant work­
ers are now eligible to obtain work permits.

Treatment of layoffs
In the U.S. labor force survey, persons on layoff who
are awaiting recall to their jobs are classified as unem­
ployed. In European countries and Japan, however,
many such persons are classified as employed. In the
past, BLS made adjustments to include such persons in
the unemployed count in two of the European countries
— France and Great Britain. Japanese, Italian, and Ger­
man unemployment data also would have been adjusted
if reliable data on layoffs had been available. In recent
years, when reliable layoff data became available, ad­
justments were developed for those countries. However,
BLS reconsidered its strict application of the U.S. defi­
nition after labor statisticians in these other countries
questioned the procedure. The statisticians pointed out
that European and Japanese layoff practices are quite
different from those in North America, and therefore,
strict application of the U.S. definition was unwar­
ranted.
International differences in the classification of laidoff workers stem mainly from the degree of job attach­
ment. North American and Australian workers on lay­
off have relatively little attachment to their former jobs,
while European and Japanese workers on layoff have a
very strong job attachment, even during lengthy lay­
offs, because they are employed under work contracts.
They regard themselves as employed, and unlike the
North American workers, they are virtually certain to
be recalled to their jobs. Because of these differences,
BLS now does not adjust the unemployment figures for
European countries and Japan to include persons on lay­
off who are waiting to be recalled. Persons on layoff
continue to be included in the unemployed count in the
United States, Canada, and Australia.
It should be noted that persons on layoff represent a
form of labor underutilization in all countries, whether
8

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

they are classified as employed or unemployed. To en­
hance international comparisons of how labor markets
are functioning, it would be desirable to measure and
compare total labor slack— that is, unemployment,
workers on layoff, workers on part time for economic
reasons, and discouragement. However, sufficient com­
parable data for all countries have not yet been devel­
oped. The following discussion points out the differ­
ences among the statistical treatments of layoffs and the
layoff practices of the major industrial countries, and
the impact of the change in BLS procedures on the com­
parative unemployment rates.
U.S. definitions. Persons on layoff who are awaiting re­
call to their jobs are counted as unemployed in U.S.
unemployment statistics. The only requirement is that
they must be currently available for work. Unlike other
unemployed persons, they are not required to have been
actively seeking work in the prior 4 weeks. Even so, a
special BLS survey in May 1976 indicated that most
people on layoff do indeed look for work. About 80
percent of those on layoff in May 1976 looked for work
during their current spell of unemployment (not neces­
sarily the past 4 weeks.)7
ILO definitions. The Eighth International Conference of
Labour Statisticians, under the auspices of the Interna­
tional Labour Office ( i l o ), established standard defi­
nitions of labor force and unemployment in 1954. These
ILO definitions specify that persons on layoff without
pay are to be included in the unemployed. At the time
these definitions were established, very few laid-off
workers received remuneration from their firms. Now,
however, most laid-off workers in Europe and Japan re­
ceive payments directly from their firm or from the firm
and government combined. The ILO plans to convene a
Conference of Labour Statisticians in October 1982 to
discuss updating these concepts.
The Working Party on Employment and Unemploy­
ment Statistics of the Organization for Economic Coop­
eration and Development (OECD) recently commissioned
a study of the statistical treatment of layoffs and partial
unemployment.8 Its findings were discussed at the June
1981 meeting of the Working Party, a gathering of dele­
gates from the statistical offices of most member
countries. The Working Party argued that the ILO defi­
nition of layoffs has a number of shortcomings and
should be revised. A new definition was proposed as an
international standard: to be counted as unemployed, a
person on layoff would have to have weak job attach­
ment and to be looking for work. Strength of job at­
tachment would be measured by circumstances such as
(1) existence of a specific recall date or a specific cir­
cumstance (noneconomic) that would result in immedi­
ate recall; (2) elapsed length of layoff; and (3)

maintenance of the wage or salary payment to the em­
ployee. The proposed definition would make it possible
to distinguish between situations where a very strong
link remains between the person laid off and the em­
ployer and those where this link becomes tenuous or
broken. In the latter case, the laid-off worker becomes
closely comparable to the dismissed worker.
Data on recall dates and job search of laid-off per­
sons are not regularly collected in most labor force sur­
veys. Plans are underway to introduce questions on
these points in the U.S. survey in 1983. Canada and
Australia currently collect data on job search by laidoff workers but not on recall dates; none of the remain­
ing countries collects any of this information. If the
1982 ILO Conference of Labour Statisticians adopts an
international standard along the lines recommended by
the OECD, more detailed data on layoffs would be avail­
able.
Definitions in other countries. In Canada, Australia, and
Sweden, persons on layoff who are awaiting recall to
their jobs are classified as unemployed. However, there
are specifications in each country which make the treat­
ment of such persons different from the practice in the
United States. In all three countries, persons on layoff
do not have to be seeking work to be classified as un­
employed, except that after a specified period in Canada
(26 weeks) and Australia (4 weeks), they do have to be
taking active steps to find work. The U.S. survey does
not impose a time limit beyond which laid-off persons
must seek work. The Australian and Swedish surveys
follow the il o definition in that it specifies that layoffs
should be “without pay” for classification as unem­
ployed. No such specification is made in the U.S. or Ca­
nadian surveys, but in both countries, layoffs are
generally unpaid. There are a small number of persons
on paid layoff in North America, Australia, and Swe­
den, and such persons generally report themselves as
employed.
Because of the lengthy period allowed in Canada be­
fore jobseeking is required (26 weeks), it does not ap­
pear that this cutoff has much effect on the comparative
statistics. Most persons laid off for that length of time
would be looking for work and, therefore, would be in­
cluded in the unemployment data.
Unpublished data for Australia, supplied by the Aus­
tralian Bureau of Statistics, indicate that there are, on
average, only about 2,000 persons laid off without pay
for 4 weeks or longer who are not actively looking for
work. Such persons would be classified as unemployed
in the United States, but are regarded as “not in the la­
bor force” in Australia. They are equivalent to less than
0.5 percent of total Australian unemployment, and, if
included, would make no difference in the comparative
Australian jobless rate.

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

The Swedish Central Bureau of Statistics indicated
that there were about 1,500 persons on unpaid layoff in
1979 and 1980. These persons are included in the Swed­
ish unemployment figures, but they represent only
about 1.7 percent of the total. Data are not available on
the extent of their job search activity.
In Japan and Western Europe, persons on layoff who
are awaiting recall to their jobs are generally classified
as employed. They are regarded as “with a job, but not
at work” (except for unpaid layoffs in Sweden). The
reason for this classification is that such persons regard
themselves as having a job rather than as “jobless.”
They rarely seek other employment, and they continue
on the payroll of their firms.
Differences in layoff practices. Initially, during economic
declines, hours are cut back in all countries. As output
declines worsen, North American and Australian em­
ployers usually rely on temporary or indefinite layoffs.
In Western Europe and Japan, however, employers try
to maintain their work forces by making further use of
“short-time schedules,” where hours at work are re­
duced in order to spread available jobs among a larger
number of persons. Legal restraints on layoffs in Eu­
rope and Japan make worksharing a more attractive op­
tion than it is in the United States. The fact that special
payments are available for workers placed on shortened
workweeks also encourages worksharing.9 In the United
States, Canada, and Australia, unemployment insurance
systems may actually cause workers and their unions to
prefer layoffs rather than reduced hours. American
workers whose hours are cut receive no compensation
from the State (except in California10), unless their earn­
ings fall below the level of benefits to which they would
be entitled in a layoff. Even then, benefits are limited
roughly to the differences between full weekly benefits
and the income earned during the week in question. The
Canadian and Australian systems are similar.11 Further­
more, it may be in the U.S. employer’s interest to resort
to layoffs rather than to a reduction in hours because
fringe benefits cost more under a worksharing system.
There are few, if any, such costs associated with work­
ers on layoff. On the other hand, the cost to employers
of losing skilled workers and having to hire and train
new workers when business improves must also be
weighed.
Layoffs in Europe and Japan normally take the form
of reduced hours or fewer days worked during the
week, rather than entire weeks without work. Occasion­
ally, there may be a temporary plant shutdown or a
practice of working alternate weeks, so that some laidoff workers in these countries may be out of work en­
tirely during some weeks.
During the layoff or short-time period in Europe and
Japan, a strong employment relationship is maintained
9

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Unemployment and Layoffs in 10 Countries
between workers and firms. This relationship is much
stronger than in the United States because of the exis­
tence of work contracts abroad. In most cases, Europe­
an and Japanese workers remain on the payroll and
receive payments from the firm (subsidized by the gov­
ernment) for the time not worked. Furthermore, they
retain seniority and other employment-related benefits
(for example, health and old-age benefits insurance). In
short, the workers are treated as if they had maintained
their employment relationship. They usually do not en­
gage in jobseeking activities because they regard them­
selves as employed and they are virtually certain to
return to their jobs at the end of the layoff period.
In North America and Australia, workers usually do
not work under employment contracts. Laid-off workers
do not remain on the payroll and generally do not re­
ceive payments from their firms. A few U.S. industries
(auto and steel, for instance) are exceptions to the extent
that supplemental unemployment benefits ( s u b ) are paid
by the firm to laid-off workers. These benefits are com­
bined with regular unemployment benefits to provide a
higher level of wage replacement. The U.S. labor force
survey does not collect information on whether laid-off
workers are receiving SUB payments, because no distinc­
tion is made in the U.S. definition concerning paid ver­
sus unpaid layoffs.
A 1974 analysis of 52,000 U.S. private industry
health care plans, covering 28 million workers, indicat­
ed that 45 percent of the workers participated in plans
that explicitly did not extend protection to workers who
had been laid off.12 An additional 15 percent were in
plans that provided no information on health benefits
after layoff; presumably, most also did not have layoff
benefit protection. The remaining 11 million workers, or
40 percent, were in plans reporting definite provisions
to continue health benefits for at least 1 month after
layoff. The degree of protection for those with layoff
health benefits varied considerably. A little more than
half were covered for 3 months or longer; about onefifth had less than 3 months of coverage; and slightly
more than one-fifth had plans in which layoff benefits
varied by length of employment. Data were not avail­
able for the remainder.
An analysis of major U.S. collective bargaining agree­
ments shows that seniority rights (and recall rights) are
generally limited to a specified time period.13 The work­
er who has not been recalled by the expiration of this
period almost always loses his seniority. Nonunionized
workers generally lose all seniority when laid off.
Premlence o f layoffs. Persons on layoff accounted for al­
most 20 percent of total U.S. unemployment in 1980,
up from 14 percent in 1979 and around 12 percent in
earlier years. Persons on layoff were 1.4 percent of the
U.S. labor force in 1980, and less than 1 percent in ear­
Digitized10for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

lier years. About 44 percent of those on layoff in 1980
were unemployed less than 5 weeks; 9 percent were laid
off 27 weeks or longer.
Layoffs compose a smaller proportion of unemploy­
ment in Canada and Australia. Canadians on layoff
have accounted for 7 to 8 percent of total unemploy­
ment and 0.6 percent of the labor force in recent years.
Data on layoffs are not published in the Australian la­
bor force survey reports. However, the Australian Bu­
reau of Statistics indicates that, on average, some
10.000 to 12,000 persons claim to have a job from
which they have been laid off. Of these, about 1,000 are
being paid and are classified as employed. About 2,000
are on unpaid layoff for 4 weeks or more and are not
looking for work — they are classified as not in the la­
bor force. About 1,000 are laid off without pay for 4
weeks or more and are actively looking for work— they
are classified as unemployed. The remaining 6,000 to
8.000 persons are laid off without pay for less than 4
weeks and are classified as unemployed, unless they are
laid off because of bad weather or plant breakdown, in
which case they are classified as employed. Therefore,
the number of layoffs in the unemployed count totals
only 7,000 to 9,000, or about 2 percent of total unem­
ployment and 0.1 percent of the labor force.
Unpublished labor force survey tabulations for Ger­
many indicate that the number of persons on short-time
schedules for economic reasons who worked zero hours
during the reference week is very sm all— at the most,
25.000 workers in the deep recession year of 1975
(about 0.1 percent of the labor force) and much smaller
numbers in other years. Inclusion of the 25,000 would
raise the adjusted rate for 1975 from 3.1 to 3.2 percent.
In other years, there would be no impact on the com­
parative rate. Although there have been a substantial
number of workers on short-time schedules in Germa­
ny, most work shorter hours each day rather than being
laid off for weeks at a time. Such workers on reduced
hours are regarded as employed under both U.S. and
German definitions.
The revised Italian labor force survey, instituted in
1977, generates unpublished data on the number of
“underemployed” persons who worked no hours in the
reference week. According to the Italian Central Bureau
of Statistics, there are a substantial number of such per­
sons— 102,000 in 1977 and 110,000 in 1978, or about
0.5 percent of the labor force. If added to current un­
employment figures, these persons would raise the 1977
comparative rate from 3.6 to 4.1 percent and the 1978
rate from 3.7 to 4.2 percent.
For Japan, special surveys conducted each March
have produced data on the number of persons on layoff
who worked zero hours in the reference week. Virtually
all of these persons are on paid layoffs. There were
100.000 such persons in 1977 and 140,000 in 1978; or

about 0.2 percent of the labor force. Adjusting the un­
employed to include them would raise the 1977 compar­
ative rate from 2.0 to 2.2 percent, and the 1978 rate
from 2.3 to 2.6 percent.
For France, the number on layoff an entire week has
averaged about 20,000 since 1971. In Great Britain, the
number of persons on layoff for an entire week averaged
about 13,000. For both countries, this was less than 0.1
percent of the labor force in most years. In the past, the
BLS has adjusted French and British unemployment
data to include persons on layoff an entire week who
were waiting to return to their jobs. Table 4 shows un­
employment rates for both countries, including and ex­
cluding the layoff adjustments. Whether persons on
layoff are included makes very little difference in the un­
employment rates in France and Great Britain.
Conclusion. Layoffs in Europe and Japan typically are
in the form of short-time work schedules. Classification
of short-time workers who work 1 or more hours a
week is clear: they are considered employed under Unit­
ed States, ILO, and all other countries’ concepts. Classi­
fication of workers doing no work during the reference
week (because of economic reasons) is less clear: this
group can be characterized according to their “zero
hours” worked. On one hand, it could be argued that,
as with American workers on layoff, foreign workers on
zero hours for economic reasons should also be classifi­
ed as unemployed. This would be a very strict applica­
tion of U.S. definitions.
On the other hand, it could be argued that layoffs in
Europe and Japan are fundamentally different from
North American layoffs. The overriding difference is the
degree of job attachment. Persons on layoff are appro­
priately counted as unemployed in the United States be­
cause they are “jobless.” In Europe and Japan,
however, such persons have work contracts and, there­
fore, have a job. Workers on layoff in these countries
feel a strong attachment to their jobs and usually con­
tinue to receive payments directly from their firm. They
do not regard themselves as unemployed, do not seek

Table 4. Unemployment rates for France and Great
Britain, adjusted for layoffs and approximating U.S.
concepts, 1971-80
Great Britain

France
Year

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

..................
..................
..................
.................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

With layoff
adjustment

Without layoff
adjustment

With layoff
adjustment

Without layoff
adjustment

2.8
2.9
2.8
3.0
4.3
4.7
5.0
5.4
6.1
6.6

2.7
2.8
2.7
2.9
4.2
4.6
5.0
5.4
6.1
6.5

3.9
4.3
3.2
3.1
4.7
6.0
6.4
6.3
5.8
7.5

3.9
4.2
3.2
3.1
4.6
6.0
6.3
6.3
5.7
7.4

work, and answer surveys to the effect that they have a
job. Under the North American systems, workers on
layoff have much weaker job attachments. They are of­
ten not recalled to their jobs, and they frequently en­
gage in job search while on layoff.
European workers on layoff for a full reference week
still have the same degree of job attachment as workers
on reduced weekly hours. In the first case, workers may
simply be working alternate weeks as their firm’s most
convenient form of worksharing. Thus, to consider the
“zero hours” workers as unemployed and the “shorttime” workers as employed would not be consistent. It
would be applying different labor force classifications to
essentially the same situation.
European and Japanese layoffs, even at the level of
zero weekly hours, are not directly comparable with
U.S. layoffs. U.S. definitions should not be forced onto
the data for other countries where practices are so dif­
ferent from our own. Therefore, for international com­
parisons, BLS will consider European (except for the
small number of persons on unpaid layoff in Sweden)
and Japanese workers on layoff as employed, even if
they work no hours in the reference week. Adjustments
for layoffs previously made to French and British data
have been eliminated in the data shown in this article.
The impact of this change on the adjusted unemploy­
ment rates is very small.
□

FOOTNOTES

1There could be a number of persons registered as unemployed
who do not consider registration to be an active job search step, be­
lieving that the government is looking for work for them. Registration
is valid for 30 days from the end of the month registered (or from 59
to 31 days); for the youth employment exchanges, it is valid for 3
years. Registration is an effective job search method for persons seek­
ing manual work and for youths seeking special public administration
jobs. Other jobseekers may not feel preparation for job entry exami­
nations in an active job search method. In addition, it is not the usual
practice in Italy to make frequent inquiries regarding the status of
one’s employment application.
; However, prior to 1967, the United States classified very few dis­
couraged workers as unemployed. There was no specific question on
discouraged workers in the U.S. survey prior to 1967. Respondents


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

volunteered that they were discouraged, and only a limited number of
discouraged workers were enumerated as unemployed. In 1967, how­
ever, a new questionnaire was introduced that broadened the search
period for unemployment from an implied 1 week to 4 weeks and also
eliminated the practice of reliance on volunteered information. The
questionnaire includes specific questions that attempt to measure la­
bor force discouragement.
' “Black labor” is unrecorded employment; the worker may moon­
light or it may be the primary job. Taxes, social security, and other
contributions are not withheld. For an analysis of “black labor” in It­
aly, see CENSIS, “L’Occupazione Occulta,” CENSIS Ricerca No. 2
(Rome, CENSIS, 1976).
4 Department of Employment, “Special Employment and Training
Measures,” Press Notice, Mar. 24, 1981, p. 1.

11

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Unemployment and Layoffs in 10 Countries
For further information, see I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a riso n s o f U n e m ­
Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978), pp. 23-26.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, “Eco­
nomic Survey, Netherlands” (Paris, OECD, 1981), p. 35.
J o b S e a rch o f th e U n e m p lo y e d , M a y 1976, Special Labor Force
Report 210 (Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Bernard Grais, “Layoff's and Partial Unemployment,” paper pre­
pared for the fifth meeting of the OECD Working Party on Employ­
ment and Unemployment Statistics, June 9-11, 1981 (Paris, OECD,
May 1981).

p lo y m e n t,

For further information, see
p lo y m e n t, p. 59.

I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a riso n s o f U n e m ­

The California program, begun in 1978, allows unemployment in­
surance benefits to be paid to workers whose wages and hours are

reduced as a temporary alternative to layoff's. Employers’ participa­
tion in the program is voluntary. See Fred Best and James Mattesich,
“Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe,” M o n th ­
ly L a b o r R ev ie w , July 1980, pp. 13-22. In addition, Arizona recently
passed a worksharing compensation law.
1Canada has also experimented with the short-time compensation
concept. See “Work Sharing in Canada,” Department of Employment
and Immigration, Ottawa, Canada, April 1978.
'■“Health Benefits for Laidoff Workers,”
February 1976.

S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin ,

M a jo r C o lle c tiv e B a rg a in in g A g re e m e n ts : L a y o ff, R e c a ll, a n d
W o rk s h a r in g P ro ced u res, Bulletin 1425-13 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,

1972), p. 49.

APPENDIX: Adjustment to U.S. concepts
This article contains revisions of the Bureau’s pre­
viously published unemployment estimates for France,
Germany, and Great Britain. The revisions for France
arise from the omission of the previous adjustment to
exclude persons on layoff from the unemployed. Also,
data from the October 1978, 1979, and 1980 and March
1979 and 1980 surveys have been incorporated in the
revised estimates.
For Germany, the revisions in this article relate to a
new adjustment made to the unemployment data to ex­
clude persons not currently available to begin work and
the inclusion of 1979 labor force survey results. The ad­
justment is the outcome of the recommendations made
by Carol L. Jusenius and Burkhard von Rabenau in
their review of BLS adjustment methods for Germany
prepared for the National Commission on Employment
and Unemployment Statistics. (See “Unemployment
Statistics in the United States and the Federal Republic
of Germany: Problems of International Comparisons,”
paper prepared for the National Commission on Em­
ployment and Unemployment Statistics, December
1978.) The BLS is now using unpublished 1977
Microcensus (German household survey) tabulations on
current availability for work in making the new adjust­
ment. The survey indicated that there were a significant
number of students enumerated as unemployed who
were not currently available to begin work because they
were still in school (the German survey is taken in
April and the school year ends in July).
Data on the number of unemployed students are re­
ported each year in the survey results and these figures
have been used to make estimates for years other than
1977. (The adjustment to exclude students not currently
available for work should be regarded as a partial ad­
justment. There may be some other persons who should
be excluded because they were not available for work
and BLS is now pursuing this point with the German
Federal Statistical Office.) This revision lowers previous
estimates for 1975 forward by about 0.3 percentage
point. For earlier years, there is very little change.
The British data were also modified to exclude the
layoff adjustment and to incorporate data from the
1977 through 1979 General Household Surveys. In ad­
Digitized 12
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

dition, a new method of determining the number of
unregistered unemployed persons has been used.
Previously, estimates of total comparable unemploy­
ment were derived by inflating the British General
Household Survey data to universe levels. However, the
General Household Survey has a very small sample size
which makes it difficult to measure accurately year-toyear changes in the unemployment rate. Therefore, a
better method would be to start with the count of regis­
tered unemployed persons, as it is a total universe
count, and to modify that count in several ways to ar­
rive at unemployment approximating U.S. concepts.
The estimated number of registered persons who did
some work during the reference week is subtracted, as
are “inactive” registered men. The latter group consists
mainly of older workers who report themselves as eco­
nomically inactive in the General Household Survey,
but who register as unemployed to obtain credits to­
ward their pensions. Added to the registered unem­
ployed are: (1) adult students (age 18 and over) who
registered as unemployed but who are not included in
the official British registration figures; and (2) the
unregistered unemployed. The latter estimate was de­
rived from the General Household Survey results.
The following tabulation shows the previously
published and revised British unemployment rates for
1970 to date (asterisks indicate that General Household
Survey data were not incorporated in the estimates):
Year

1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............

Previous

Revised

3.1
3.7
4.1
2.9
2.9
4.1
5.5
*6.2
*6.1
*5.8
*7.5

3.0
3.9
4.2
3.2
3.1
4.6
6.0
6.3
6.3
5.7
*7.4

is now investigating a further adjustment for Great
Britain to exclude persons not currently available for
work from the unemployed count. Such data were colBLS

lected in the recent General Household Surveys which
the United Kingdom conducted under the auspices of
the Statistical Office of the European Communities.
However, there are some problems in interpreting these
data, and they are not used in this article.
In the United States, labor force participation rates
and employment-population ratios are calculated using
the civilian noninstitutional working-age population.
The ratios previously shown for Canada and Italy also
excluded the institutional population, but the ratios for
the other countries did not. With this article, the ratios
for Australia, France, Great Britain, and Sweden have
been revised to conform with the U.S. definition; the fig­
ures for the Netherlands also exclude the institutional
population. Participation rates and employment ratios
for Japan and Germany, however, are still based on
data including the institutionalized population, because
data on the size and age-sex distribution of this popula­
tion group are not available.
The impact of the exclusion of the institutional popu­
lation was to raise both the labor force participation
rate and employment-population ratio by about 1 per­
centage point, except for the French participation rates.
The French rates were raised by only .2 of a percentage
point, because a majority of the institutionalized popu­
lation is excluded from the scope of the labor force sur­
vey. There is no significant difference in the impact on
participation rates by sex. In all of the countries, the
number of men and women residing in the various insti­
tutions is roughly equal.

The Netherlands
This article introduces Dutch labor force and unem­
ployment statistics adjusted to approximate comparabil­
ity with U.S. definitions from 1973 forward. Results
from the biennial Dutch labor force survey— the A K T—
were used to estimate the adjusted Dutch labor force
statistics. Because of the infrequency of earlier surveys
and limited data, attempts to adjust Dutch data prior
to 1973 would be less reliable. (According to the Neth­
erlands Central Bureau of Statistics, even the results of
the 1973 survey are not reliably comparable with later
survey results because of changes in sampling methods
and some changes in the survey questionnaire; however,
the 1973 survey results appear to be sufficiently compa­
rable with the later surveys and are used in the b l s
analysis.) In addition, limited data currently preclude
the calculation of quarterly and monthly jobless rates
approximating U.S. concepts.
BLS analysis found that the AKT overstates the num­
ber unemployed under U.S. concepts while employment
office registrations understate unemployment on a U.S.
basis. For example, in M arch-M ay 1977, adjusted un­
employment was estimated at 233,300, compared with
the Dutch survey figure of 299,800 and the registered
unemployed figure of 191,700.
The “official” Dutch data on joblessness relate to
persons age 15 to 65 who do not have a job and are


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

registered at an employment office for full-time work
(25 hours or more a week since 1977 and 30 hours or
more prior to 1977). Persons on temporary layoff are
allowed to register, but only if they have been out of
work for at least 1 week. Registration must be renewed
monthly in order to remain on the register and is com­
pulsory for recipients of unemployment insurance bene­
fits. The count is taken on the day preceding the last
full working day of the month. Unemployment rates are
calculated by dividing the registered unemployed by an
annual estimate of the wage and salary labor force.
The Dutch labor force survey collects data in such a
manner that the population can be classified according
to two definitions of economic activity— in the “strict
sense” and in the “broad sense” . The labor force in the
“strict sense” is comprised of persons who initially clas­
sify themselves as employed or unemployed. The labor
force in the “broad sense” is the sum of the labor force
in the “strict sense” and the “marginal” labor force.
The “marginal” labor force consists of persons who do
not initially classify themselves as economically active—
for example, housewives, students, pensioners— but
who upon further probing reveal that they worked or
looked for work. The labor force in the “broad sense”
more closely corresponds to U.S. concepts and is used
to estimate the adjusted data.
The number of AKT unemployed was adjusted to ex­
clude: (1) persons not currently available for work ex­
cept for temporary illness, (2) persons who had not yet
commenced seeking work, and (3) persons younger than
the legal school-leaving age. Adjustments could not be
made for a few other differences from U.S. concepts,
but the number involved are probably very small. AKT
employment data were adjusted to exclude: (1) the
Armed Forces, (2) unpaid family workers working less
than 15 hours a week, and (3) persons younger than the
legal school-leaving age.
Adjustment ratios for unemployment and employ­
ment were calculated by comparing adjusted AKT data
to published data. Separate ratios by sex were compiled
for the unemployed because of the wide sex differential
in the propensity to register. Monthly registered unem­
ployment data were weighted according to the distribu­
tion of the survey interviews to more closely correspond
to the AKT survey period of M arch-May. Because of
the lack of reliable data, no adjustments were done to
make the published employment estimates more closely
match the survey period. The adjustment factors were
then applied to annual average published statistics un­
der the assumption that the ratios for the survey period
are representative of the entire year. Adjustment factors
for years between survey years were interpolated, and
factors from the last survey are maintained until the re­
sults of later surveys become available. For most years,
the resultant unemployment rates approximating U.S.
concepts are slightly higher than the official rates. A
more detailed description of the adjustment method is
available from the authors.

13

International comparisons of trends
in productivity and labor costs
Manufacturing productivity slowed or declined
in 1980 and unit labor costs accelerated,
as output generally turned downward
in the United States and 10 industrial nations;
compensation was up in most countries
but was offset by gains in consumer prices
Patricia Capdevielle and D onato A lvarez
Manufacturing productivity declined during 1980 in the
United States, Canada, and Germany and slowed in the
eight other industrial countries studied, as output
turned down in all countries except Japan and Italy and
adjustments in employee hours were mixed. Productivi­
ty was down 0.3 percent in the United States and 1.4
percent in Canada, and was up by more than 6 percent
in Japan and Italy, and an average 2.3 percent in all
eight European countries.
Unit labor costs accelerated in all 11 countries in
1980, but the increases varied— from less than 1 per­
cent in Japan (where unit labor costs declined the previ­
ous year) to 11 percent in the United States and
Sweden, nearly 15 percent in France and Italy, and 23
percent in the United Kingdom. Measured in U.S. dol­
lars (to account for relative changes in exchange rates),
unit labor costs declined 2.5 percent in Japan; exchange
rate changes moderated cost trends in Denmark and It­
aly, but accentuated those in Canada and the other Eu­
ropean countries, with the United Kingdom registering
a 35-percent increase.
Hourly compensation rose 7 to 11 percent in most

Patricia Capdevielle and Donato Alvarez are economists in the Divi­
sion of Foreign Labor Statistics and Trade, Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics. Brian Cooper, an economist in the same division, assisted in the
preparation of the data.

Digitized14
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

countries in 1980, larger increases occurring only in
France (15 percent) and in Italy and the United King­
dom (21 and 23 percent). For most countries, the in­
creases were within 1 percent of those of the previous
year. Because consumer prices accelerated, however, real
hourly compensation declined in five of the countries
and increased 5 percent or less in every other country.
This article describes developments in manufacturing
productivity (as measured by output per hour), hourly
compensation, real compensation, and unit labor costs
in 1980, and in the years since 1973, in the United
States, Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the
United Kingdom, and four smaller European countries
— Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Sweden.1
Data are presented for the eight European countries
and for the 10 foreign countries combined.2 Percent
changes for 1960-80, 1960-73, and 1973-80 shown in
the tables are computed using the least squares method
— that is, from the least squares trend of the logarithms
of index numbers— in order to remove much of the ef­
fect of cyclical changes on the average rates of change
and thereby estimate the underlying trends.3 The data
reflect revised underlying statistics for several countries
— notably Japan, Denmark, and the United Kingdom.4
(Annual indexes from 1950 forward are available from
authors.)
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 effectiveness, as well as
the skills and efforts of the work force.

Manufacturing productivity
In 1980, manufacturing productivity declined about
1.5 percent in Canada and 0.3 percent in the United
States and Germany. Productivity increased, but at a
slower rate than in the preceding year, in the other Eu­
ropean countries and Japan— about 0.5 percent in
France, Sweden, and the United Kingdom and 1.5 per­
cent in Denmark; 3 to 4 percent in Belgium and the
Netherlands; and more than 6 percent in Japan and Ita­
ly. (See table 1.)
In the 7 years since 1973, manufacturing productivity
has increased at average annual rates of more than 6
percent in Japan and Belgium; between 3 and 6 percent
in France, Germany, Italy, Denmark, and the Nether­
lands; and only 2 percent in the United States, Canada,
Sweden, and the United Kingdom. For all countries,
this represents a slowdown from the 1960-73 period.
The 1980 productivity declines in the United States
and Canada reflected decreases in output which were
only partly offset by declines in hours. In the United
Kingdom, a substantial drop in output (9 percent) was
more than offset by decreases in hours. Output either
fell or slowed substantially from 1979 in all countries
except Japan and Italy, which registered gains of

Table 1.

around 7 percent. Labor input declined in every country
except Japan and Germany.
The 1980 output drop in the United States (4.6 per­
cent) was greater than the decline which occurred in
1974, but less than the subsequent decline in 1975. In
the United Kingdom, the 9-percent output decline in
1980 was greater than in the previous recession.
The underlying rate of growth for manufacturing out­
put in the 1973-80 period was about 2 percent in Cana­
da, 1.8 percent in Europe, and 6 percent in Japan,
compared with 2.5 percent in the United States. Among
the European countries, only France, Italy, and Den­
mark had higher underlying rates than the United
States.
In 1980, total hours rose about 1 percent in Japan
and Germany, but fell in all other countries. The largest
declines were in the United States and Belgium— 4 to 5
percent— and the United Kingdom— nearly 10 percent.
Employment changes corresponded with changes in to­
tal hours, except for Italy where employment increased
moderately. (See table 2.)
The 1980 decline in U.S. employment and hours was
the first since the 1974-75 recession. In contrast, em­
ployment and hours have continued to decline in all or
nearly all years in every European country except Italy.
U.S. employment and hours surpassed 1973 levels in
1978 and continued rising in 1979. However, because of
the 1980 declines, U.S. manufacturing employment was
only 1.5 percent above the 1973 level and total hours
were down 1 percent. Among the other countries, only
Canada and Italy show 1973-80 employment increases

Changes in manufacturing productivity and output in 11 countries, 1960-80

[Annual changes in percent]
Eight
Ten
European
foreign
countries countries

United
States

Canada

Japan

France

Germany

Italy

United
Kingdom

Belgium

Denmark

Netherlands

Sweden

2.7
3.0
1.7

3.8
4.5
2.2

9.4
10.7
6.8

5.6
6.0
4.9

5.4
5.5
4.8

5.9
6.9
3.6

3.6
4.3
1.9

7.2
7.0
6.2

6.4
6.4
5.1

7.3
7.6
5.6

5.2
6.7
2.1

5.4
5.9
4.2

5.9
6.4
4.7

...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................

-2.4
2.9
4.4
2.4
.9
1.1
-.3

1.6
-2.6
4.9
5.1
3.1
1.2
-1.4

2.4
3.9
9.4
7.2
7.9
8.0
6.2

3.5
3.1
8.2
5.1
5.3
5.4
.6

6.0
4.8
6.3
5.3
3.8
6.3
-.7

4.9
-4.4
8.6
1.1
2.9
7.3
6.7

.8
-2.0
4.0
1.6
3.2
3.3
.3

5.4
5.2
10.3
5.0
6.0
5.8
3.6

3.3
10.4
7.7
3.7
4.4
2.3
1.7

8.3
-1.7
12.7
4.1
6.0
5.5
3.7

3.6
-.4
1.0
-1.5
4.3
8.1
.6

4.3
1.4
7.1
3.4
4.1
5.9
2.3

3.9
1.9
7.3
4.3
5.0
6.1
3.1

Output:
1960-80 ........................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-80 ........................................

3.7
4.7
2.5

4.9
6.3
1.9

10.2
13.0
6.1

5.5
6.6
2.7

4.0
5.3
2.1

5.6
6.8
3.4

1.8
3.0
-1.1

5.3
6.5
1.4

4.4
5.2
2.7

4.9
6.4
1.7

3.4
5.1
-.4

4.2
5.4
1.8

5.4
6.8
2.9

-4.2
-7.1
9.6
6.7
5.4
3.1
-4.6

3.8
-6 .3
5.5
1.4
5.7
3.8
-2 .6

-2 .0
-4.0
13.3
7.3
7.3
9.2
7.1

3.2
-2.1
7.0
3.7
2.7
3.1
-1.1

.3
-5.2
7.2
2.8
1.8
5.0
.3

6.4
-9.7
12.6
2.1
1.8
6.7
6.5

-1.2
-7 .0
2.0
1.9
.5
.2
-9.4

4.3
-6.6
8.4
- .6
1.9
3.6
-1.3

1.5
-2.1
8.8
2.1
2.7
3.5
.0

4.4
-6.7
8.0
.9
1.8
2.7
.9

4.8
-1 .5
-.4
-5.6
-1.3
6.7
-.6

2.1
-5.4
6.9
2.2
1.7
4.0
-.5

1.2
-5.1
8.4
3.4
3.4
5.4
1.5

Year

Output per hour:
1960-80 ........................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-80 ........................................
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................

N ote:

Rates of change computed from the least squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers.


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

15

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity and Labor Costs Abroad

Table 2.

Changes in manufacturing employment and hours in 11 countries, 1960-80

[Annual changes in percent]

Year

United
States

Aggregate hours:
i960 80 ....................
1960-73 ....................
1973-80 ....................

Canada

Japan

France

Germany

Italy

United
Kingdom

Belgium

Denmark

Netherlands

Sweden

Eight
European
countries

Ten
foreign
countries

0.9
1.6
.7

1.0
1.7
-.3

0.8
2.1
-.7

-0.1
.6
-2.1

-1.3
-.2
-2.6

-0.3
-.1
-.1

-1.7
-1.2
-2.9

-1.8
-.4
-4.5

-1.9
-1.1
-2 .2

-2.3
-1.1
-3.7

-1.7
-1.5
-2.4

-1.1
-.4
-2.3

-.5
.4
-1.7

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

-1 .9
-9.7
4.9
4.2
4.4
2.0
-4.1

2.1
-3.9
.6
-3 .5
2.5
2.6
-1.2

-4.3
-7 .6
3.6
.1
-.5
1.1
.8

-.3
-5 .0
-1.1
-1 .3
-2.4
-2.2
-1.7

-5.4
-9 .6
.8
-2.4
-1.9
-1 .3
1.0

1.4
-5 .5
3.8
1.0
-1.1
-.6
-.2

-2 .0
-5.1
-1.9
.2
-2 .6
-3.0
-9 .6

-1 .0
-11.2
-1.7
-5.4
-3.9
-2 .6
-4.7

-1.7
-11.3
1.0
-1.5
-1 .6
1.2
-1.7

-3.6
-5.1
-4.2
-3 .0
-3.9
-2 .6
-2.7

1.2
-1.1
-1 .5
-4.1
-5.4
-1 .3
-1 .2

-2.2
-6.7
-.2
-1.2
-2.3
-1.8
-2.7

-2.7
-6.8
1.0
- .9
-1.5
- .7
-1.5

Employment:
1960-80 ....................
1960-73 ....................
1973-80 ....................

1.0
1.5
.8

1.3
1.9
.3

1.6
3.0
-.8

.6
1.2
-1.2

-.4
.5
-1 .8

1.2
1.4
.1

-.9
-.5
-2.2

-.5
.6
-3.6

-.6
.2
-1.7

-1 .0
.0
-2 .7

-.2
-.2
-.9

-.1
.5
-1.5

.4
1.1
-1.3

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

-.4
-8 .6
3.7
3.6
4.2
2.6
-3.4

2.0
-2.5
.1
-2.2
2.5
3.9
-1.1

.2
-5.1
.4
-.2
-1.1
.0
.9

1.3
-2.7
-1 .0
-.5
-1.7
-1.8
-1.4

-2 .6
-6.7
-2.4
-.8
- .6
.3
.7

2.5
-.4
.2
.1
-1.0
.5
.2

1.9
-3.8
-2.2
-.4
-2.4
-2.5
-5.9

1.1
-6.1
-4.1
-3.9
-4.1
-2.7
-2.7

-3.6
-8.4
.6
-.6
-.4
1.3
-2.6

-.4
-3.3
-3.9
-2.7
-2.8
-1 .6
-2.2

2.4
.9
-.2
-3.5
-2.8
.3
-.2

.3
-3 .9
-1 .7
- .7
-1 .6
- .9
-1 .6

.4
-4.2
-1 .0
-.7
-1.3
- .5
- .9

Average hours:
1960-80 ....................
1960-73 ....................
1973-80 ....................

.0
.1
-.1

-.3
-.2
- .5

-.8
-.9
-.1

-.7
-.5
-.9

- .9
-.8
- .9

-1 .5
-1 .5
- .3

-.8
-.7
-.8

-1 .2
-1 .0
-.9

-1.4
-1.3
-.5

-1 .3
-1.1
-1.0

-1.4
-1.3
-1.5

-1 .0
-.9
-.8

-.8
-.8
-.5

-1 .5
-1 .2
1.2
.6
.2
- .6
-1 .0

.1
-1.4
.5
-1.3
.0
-1.2
-.1

-4 .5
-2 .6
3.2
.3
.6
1.1
-.1

-1.5
-2.3
-.1
-.9
-.7
-.4
-.3

-2.9
-3.1
3.2
-1 .6
-1.4
- .6
.3

-1.1
-5.1
3.5
.9
-.1
-1.1
-.4

-3 .8
-1 .3
.3
.6
- .2
- .5
-3.9

-2.1
-5.4
2.5
-1.5
.3
.6
-2 .0

2.0
-3 .2
.4
-.9
-1.2
-.1
1.0

-3.2
-1.8
-.3
-.3
-1.1
-1.1
-.5

-1.1
-2 .0
-1.3
-.7
-2 .6
-1 .6
-1 .0

-2 .5
-2 .9
1.5
-.4
-.7
-.9
-1.1

-3 .0
-2.8
2.0
-.2
-.3
-.3
-.6

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
Note:

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

Rates of change computed from the least squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers.

and no country shows an overall gain in aggregate
hours. The following tabulation shows total percentage
changes in employment and hours between 1973 and
1980:
Employment

Hours

-0.9

United States.............

1.5

Canada ......................
Japan ........................
France ......................
Germany ..................
Italy ...........................

2.5
-5.0
-7.7
-11.6
2.2

-7.0
-13.3
-17.7
-1.4

United Kingdom . . . .
Belgium ....................
Denmark ..................
Netherlands .............
Sweden......................

-14.5
-20.6
-13.4
-15.9
-3.1

-22.0
-26.7
-15.1
-22.7
-12.7

-

1.0

Hourly compensation
In 1980, hourly compensation increased 21 to 24 per­
cent in Italy and the United Kingdom, 15 percent in
France, and 7 to 11 percent in the other countries.
These increases were somewhat smaller than those of
the previous year in Canada, Germany, Denmark, and
the Netherlands. For the United States, Japan, and
France, the 1980 increases were slightly larger than the
16 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

year earlier changes; and for Sweden, Belgium, Italy,
and the United Kingdom, the acceleration was more
significant. (See table 3.)
In all countries, the compensation increases of the
last 2 years were below the peak gains of 1974 or 1975.
The moderation was greatest in Japan, where the recent
7 percent gains were less than one-fourth of their 31
percent peak advance. Compensation gains also slowed
significantly in the smaller European countries— Bel­
gium, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark— where
recent compensation increases were about one-half or
less of their peak gains. Compensation increases did not
diminish as much in Canada and the larger European
countries; and in the United States, the 1979 and 1980
average increases were only about 10 percent below the
1975 peak. However, the peak 1975 compensation in­
crease in the United States was relatively small— 12
percent. In contrast, the peak compensation gains were
about 30 percent in Italy, the United Kingdom, and Ja­
pan; around 20 percent in France, Belgium, Denmark,
the Netherlands, and Sweden; and 15 percent in Canada
and Germany.
Except for the Netherlands, hourly compensation in­
creases have decelerated, then rebounded, since 1973.
For most countries, the smallest compensation gains oc-

curred in 1978. In the United Kingdom and Sweden,
the smallest gains occurred in 1977 and 1979, respec­
tively. Compensation increases began moderating in
1976 in Japan and Germany, and since then annual
wage gains have fluctuated. Only the Netherlands has
shown a steady deceleration in hourly compensation in­
creases since 1973.
Despite the rebounds, only in the United States,
France, Italy, and the United Kingdom did recent in­
creases in hourly compensation equal or exceed the un­
derlying average rates of gain for 1973-80. In the other
seven countries, the 1980 increases were well below the
underlying trend.

ed at a more rapid rate than wages.
For the United States, 1980 was the second consecu­
tive year of real declines in hourly compensation. None
of the other countries had declines in real hourly com­
pensation in 1979, although several did in 1977 or 1978.
In general, consumer prices have not moderated as
much as manufacturing compensation since the 1974—75
inflation peak. Furthermore, the 1980 consumer price
increases in the United States, France, Italy, and Swe­
den matched or surpassed their previous high rates.
Consequently, whereas most countries had substantial
gains in real hourly compensation in 1974—75, few
showed significant gains in 1980.
Over the 1973-80 period, real hourly compensation
increased less than 1 percent annually in the United
States; 1.7 percent in Japan; about 2 to 4 percent in
Canada and most European countries; and 5 percent in
Germany. This contrasts with 1960-73 real compensa­
tion gains of about 2 to 3 percent per year in the Unit­
ed States and Canada; about 4 to 6 percent in France,
Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and the United Kingdom;
and 7 to 8 percent in Japan, Italy, Belgium, and the
Netherlands.
The fairly narrow range in the 1973-80 average annu-

Real hourly compensation. Real hourly compensation,
which takes into account changes in consumer prices,
declined in 5 of the 11 countries in 1980— down 2 to 3
percent in the United States and Sweden, and around 1
percent in Canada, Japan, and Denmark— and was al­
most unchanged in Italy and the Netherlands. Real
compensation increased about 1 to 5 percent in France,
Germany, Belgium, and the United Kingdom. However,
except for Belgium, even these gains were lower than
those of the previous year, as consumer prices accelerat­

Table 3.

Changes in manufacturing hourly compensation and in consumer prices, 11 countries, 1960-80

[Annual changes In percent]
United
States

Sweden

Eight
European
countries

Ten
foreign
countries

13.2
12.8
10.6

11.8
10.1
13.8

11.9
9.9
13.8

12.1
10.2
12.8

21.0
19.3
11.7
11.8
10.3
10.9
10.7

19.2
14.4
12.4
8.6
8.6
7.5
6.9

17.8
21.3
18.0
8.6
13.5
8.4
11.1

18.5
18.6
12.7
11.7
11.6
13.0
15.0

21.4
18.1
11.0
11.1
9.9
11.1
12.5

6.6
6.9
3.9

5.2
5.3
2.3

6.6
7.4
3.4

5.0
5.3
3.3

5.6
5.7
4.0

5.5
5.8
3.2

7.8
4.9
.4
-3 .6
7.3
5.2
4.7

8.3
6.9
2.7
3.6
2.4
2.8
3.2

5.0
8.8
2.4
0.6
0.2
1.2
-1 .4

8.7
3.8
3.3
1.8
4.4
3.1
.3

7.2
10.5
7.0
-2 .6
3.2
1.1
-2 .3

6.7
6.5
2.9
2.0
4.6
3.9
2.8

6.7
6.0
1.5
1.9
3.5
3.2
1.4

8.1
4.1
16.9

8.6
4.8
15.6

5.5
3.6
7.8

7.8
6.2
10.6

6.2
5.0
7.0

6.4
4.6
10.2

6.0
4.0
9.5

6.2
4.1
9.3

19.4
17.2
16.5
19.3
12.4
15.7
21.1

16.0
24.2
16.5
15.9
8.3
13.4
18.0

12.7
12.8
9.2
7.1
4.5
4.5
6.7

15.2
9.6
9.0
11.1
10.1
9.6
12.3

9.6
10.2
8.8
6.7
4.1
4.2
6.5

9.9
9.8
10.3
11.4
10.0
7.2
13.7

11.0
11.4
9.5
9.5
6.7
8.8
11.9

13.7
11.4
9.4
9.1
6.3
7.6
10.9

Canada

Japan

France

Germany

Italy

United
Kingdom

Belgium

Denmark

6.7
5.0
9.3

8.6
6.4
11.9

15.1
14.6
10.5

12.0
9.7
15.2

10.3
9.4
9.7

16.0
12.3
20.1

12.7
8.7
19.1

12.4
10.7
12.0

13.3
11.8
13.1

10.6
11.9
8.0
8.3
8.2
9.8
10.7

15.1
14.8
14.3
12.8
7.5
9.9
9.4

31.2
17.0
6.7
9.7
5.9
6.6
7.1

20.2
19.7
14.3
14.1
12.9
13.9
15.0

15.3
12.7
7.3
9.9
8.5
9.1
7.9

24.6
28.9
19.8
18.8
14.4
17.6
21.3

25.0
30.3
17.0
11.7
16.2
19.3
23.6

22.0
20.6
12.1
11.0
7.0
7.4
10.1

1.5
1.8
.7

3.1
3.0
2.6

6.9
8.2
1.7

5.1
5.1
4.2

6.2
6.3
5.2

7.2
7.9
2.7

3.8
3.7
3.1

...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................

- .3
2.5
2.1
1.7
.5
-1.3
-2.5

3.8
3.6
6.3
4.4
-1 .3
.7
-.7

6.5
4.7
-2 .5
1.5
1.6
2.8
- .6

5.7
7.1
4.2
4.3
3.5
2.9
1.3

7.9
6.2
2.8
6.1
5.9
5.1
2.5

4.3
10.0
2.8
-.4
1.7
1.6
.1

Consumer Price Index:
1960-80 ....................
1960-73 ....................
1973-80 ....................

5.1
3.2
8.6

5.3
3.2
9.1

7.7
5.9
8.7

6.6
4.3
10.6

3.8
3.0
4.3

11.0
9.1
5.8
6.5
7.7
11.3
13.5

10.9
10.8
7.5
8.0
9.0
9.1
10.1

23.2
11.7
9.4
8.1
4.2
3.7
7.7

13.7
11.8
9.6
9.4
9.1
10.8
13.6

6.9
6.1
4.4
3.5
2.5
3.9
5.3

Year

Hourly compensation:
1960-80 ....................
1960-73 ....................
1973-80 ....................
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................

Real hourly
1960-80
1960-73
1973-80
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
N ote:

compensation:
....................
....................
....................

...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................

Netherlands

Rates of change computed from the least squares trend of the logarithms of the Index numbers.


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

17

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity and Labor Costs Abroad
al real hourly compensation increases (1 to 5 percent)
contrasts with the wider differentials in nominal hourly
compensation growth rates (9 to 20 percent). The two
countries with the largest hourly compensation increases
— the United Kingdom and Italy at 20 percent— also
had the largest price increases (more than 15 percent)
and consequently had only average real compensation
gains. On the other hand, Germany, with the smallest
hourly compensation increase (except for the United
States), had the largest real compensation gain because
prices offset less than half the compensation change.
The United States had the smallest 1973-80 real com­
pensation gain because consumer prices offset more
than 90 percent of the compensation increase.
Real compensation measurement. Hourly compensation
is designed to measure employer expenditures for the
benefit of workers. Compensation includes gross pay­
ments made directly to employees-—pay for time
worked; vacation, holiday, and other leave pay; and all
bonuses and other special payments— and also employ­
er contributions to legally-required insurance programs
and to contractual and private welfare plans for the
benefit of employees.
Hourly compensation includes more than the current
labor income of employees. It includes employer expen­
ditures for benefit programs from which employees may
derive additional current income (for example, family
allowances or reimbursements for medical expenses). It
also includes employer contributions for benefit plans
from which employees may derive future benefits (such
as national and supplementary company or union pen­
sion plans).
Real compensation, therefore, measures the constant
purchasing power of total labor compensation, includ­
ing employer (and employee) payments to both current
and deferred social benefit plans. Real compensation
covers much more than real spendable weekly earnings
— an alternative real income measure— which excludes
employer and employee contributions for social insur­
ance and employee income taxes.5
Real hourly compensation was computed by dividing
hourly compensation by the consumer price index for
each country. The consumer price index is a statistical
measure of the changes in prices of goods and services
bought by either the whole population or a particular
group.
It should be noted that the real compensation mea­
sures are not strictly comparable among all 11 countries
because of differences in their consumer price indexes.
First, the indexes do not cover the same population
groups in each country. (These differences should not
have any significant effect on comparative trends, how­
ever. For Germany and the Netherlands, indexes cover­
ing different population groups show almost the same
18

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

price trends.) Second, the indexes for France, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom are computed using annually
revised weights, while the indexes for the other
countries are base weighted. Third, and most important,
the indexes treat owner-occupied housing differently. In
France, Italy, Belgium, and Denmark, owner-occupied
housing costs (except possibly maintenance and munici­
pal rates) are excluded from index coverage on the
premise that home purchase is an investment. In Japan,
Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom
before 1975, owner-occupied housing is covered by an
imputed rent measure. Indexes for the other countries,
and the United Kingdom beginning 1975, cover certain
house purchase expenditures, including mortgage inter­
est. The United Kingdom covers mortgage interest,
measured using current interest rate trends, but not
house prices. Sweden computes a user cost function
which includes measures of depreciation and the cost of
both invested and borrowed capital. Canada also com­
putes a user cost function which includes depreciation
cost and mortgage interest, measured using average in­
terest rate trends. The United States covers home pur­
chase along with other housing costs, including current
house prices and mortgage interest at current rates.
The differences in the treatment of owner-occupied
housing can have a significant effect on measured
consumer price— and real compensation— trends.6 In
particular, countries measuring current mortgage inter­
est rates will show relatively higher consumer price in­
creases during periods of rising interest rates (and
relatively lower increases during rate declines).
For the United States, the average annual percent in­
crease in consumer prices for 1975-80 was 8 percent
based on a BLS experimental index which covers
homeownership with an imputed rent measure, com­
pared with the 9-percent measured by the conventional
price index. Furthermore, the differences between the
two indexes are even greater in the last 2 years. There­
fore, using the “imputed rent” consumer price index,
real hourly compensation shows no decrease at all in
1979 and a much smaller decline (.6) in 1980.

Unit labor costs
Unit labor costs, which reflect changes in both pro­
ductivity and hourly compensation, increased about 6
percent in 1980 in Belgium; 9 to 11 percent in the Unit­
ed States, Canada, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark; 14
percent in France and Italy; and 23 percent in the Unit­
ed Kingdom; but less than 1 percent in Japan and only
3 percent in the Netherlands. (See table 4.)
The 1980 increases were higher than those of 1979 in
all countries— but only moderately so in Denmark and
the Netherlands. The acceleration in unit labor costs
was either entirely or primarily the result of the deterio­
ration in productivity growth in most countries, partic-

Table 4.

Changes in manufacturing unit labor costs in 11 countries, 1960-80

[Annual changes in percent]
United
States

Canada

3.8
1.9
7.5

4.7
1.8
9.5

...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................

13.3
8.8
3.4
5.7
7.3
8.6
11.0

Unit labor costs In U.S. dollars:
1960-80 ........................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-80 ........................................

Year

Unit labor costs:
1960-80 ........................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-80 ........................................
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................

N ote:

Eight
Ten
European foreign
countries countries

France

Germany

Italy

United
Kingdom

Belgium

Denmark

Netherlands

Sweden

5.3
3.5
3.4

5.9
3.1
9.9

4.7
3.7
4.7

9.5
5.1
16.0

8.8
4.1
17.2

4.9
3.5
5.5

6.5
5.1
7.6

5.5
4.8
4.8

6.5
3.5
11.2

6.2
3.8
9.2

5.8
3.5
7.7

13.2
17.8
9.0
7.3
4.3
8.6
10.9

28.1
12.6
-2.5
2.4
-1.8
-1.3
.8

16.2
16.1
5.6
8.6
7.3
8.1
14.3

8.7
7.5
.9
4.4
4.6
2.7
8.7

18.7
34.9
10.4
17.5
11.2
9.6
13.7

24.1
32.5
12.7
10.7
12.8
15.4
23.3

15.8
14.6
1.6
5.6
1.0
1.5
6.3

17.1
8.0
3.7
7.8
5.6
8.3
8.9

10.0
16.4
- .3
4.3
2.5
1.9
3.1

13.5
21.7
17.3
11.0
6.7
- .3
10.5

13.5
16.9
5.3
8.2
7.1
6.7
12.4

16.8
15.9
3.5
6.6
4.7
4.7
9.1

3.8
1.9
7.5

4.4
1.9
6.4

8.0
4.9
8.3

6.5
2.8
10.9

9.3
6.1
11.2

7.7
5.4
9.6

6.6
2.6
15.3

7.8
4.6
10.6

7.9
5.0
9.3

8.9
6.1
10.3

7.8
4.2
11.3

7.6
4.2
11.4

7.3
3.9
10.3

13.3
8.8
3.4
5.7
7.3
8.6
11.0

15.8
13.3
12.5
-.4
-2.8
5.7
11.1

19.0
10.7
-2.4
13.3
26.2
-5.7
-2.5

7.2
30.3
-5.3
5.5
17.1
14.3
15.3

11.5
13.1
-1 .6
13.1
21.0
12.4
9.8

6.2
34.5
-13.3
10.5
15.6
12.0
10.5

18.5
25.8
-8.5
7.0
24.0
27.7
35.1

15.5
21.5
-3.4
13.7
15.1
8.8
6.7

16.0
14.6
-1 .6
8.5
15.1
13.4
1.8

13.9
23.8
-4.8
12.3
16.4
9.7
4.2

11.5
30.2
11.5
8.2
5.6
5.1
12.0

11.3
22.9
-5.1
9.7
18.6
14.5
14.1

13.3
19.7
-3.9
9.8
19.1
8.7
9.6

Japan

Rates of change computed from the least squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers.

ularly in France, Germany, and Sweden. In Belgium,
Italy, and the United Kingdom, hourly compensation
advances as well as productivity slowdowns contributed
substantially to the cost acceleration.
In U.S. dollars. When measured in U.S. dollars, with
changes in exchange rates taken into account, unit labor
costs declined 2.5 percent in Japan in 1980 and in­
creased about 2 to 4 percent in Denmark and the Neth­
erlands; 7 percent in Belgium; 10 to 12 percent in the
United States, Canada, Germany, Italy, and Sweden; 15
percent in France; and 35 percent in the United King­
dom.
For the United Kingdom, 1980 was the third year of
substantial foreign currency appreciation of the pound.
On the other hand, the Danish krona declined more
than 6 percent relative to the dollar in 1980 after sub­
stantial increases in the previous 2 ,years. The Japanese
and Italian currencies declined about 3 percent relative
to the dollar; the other currencies were almost
unchanged— up less than 1.5 percent. (In 1981, howev­
er, all the foreign currencies have declined against the
dollar.)
Exchange rates have fluctuated considerably since
1973, and each foreign currency has undergone one or
more large appreciations or declines versus the dollar.
The overall effects of the exchange rate movements from
1973 to 1980 have been to add about 5 to 6 percent to
the annual unit labor cost increases for Japan, Germa­
ny, Belgium, and the Netherlands and 1 to 2 percent
for France and Denmark, while offsetting the average
annual cost increases of the United Kingdom and Cana­

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

da by 2 to 3 percent, and of Italy by more than 6 per­
cent. For Sweden, the overall effect of exchange rate
changes during the 1973-80 period was negligible.
Exchange rate changes have, to a large extent, offset
the substantial differentials in unit labor cost trends
among the countries. Consequently, in all countries ex­
cept the United Kingdom, the underlying trends in unit
labor costs measured in U.S. dollars show much less
variation from country to country than do unit labor
costs in national currency. From 1973 to 1980, unit la­
bor costs measured in U.S. dollars increased about 6 to
8 percent per year in the United States, Canada, and Ja­
pan and 9 to 11 percent in the continental European
countries, compared with average annual increases
(measured in national currencies) that ranged from only
3.4 percent in Japan, around 5 percent in Germany,
Belgium, and the Netherlands, and up to 16 percent in
Italy.
The United Kingdom, since 1977, has been an excep­
tion. From 1973 to 1977, the relative value of the
pound fell 29 percent. Consequently, a very large gain
of 105 percent in unit labor costs was reduced to 46
percent when measured in U.S. dollars— compared with
an increase of 35 percent in the United States. However,
from 1977 to 1980, the United Kingdom had larger unit
labor cost gains than any of the other countries and the
value of the pound rose 33 percent. Consequently, a
61-percent increase in unit labor costs became 114 per­
cent in U.S. dollars— compared with an increase of 29
percent in the United States. During 1973-80, unit la­
bor costs in the United Kingdom rose 17.2 percent per
year in pounds and 15.3 percent in U.S. dollars.
□
19

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity and Labor Costs Abroad
FOOTNOTES

1The data relate to all employed persons, including the self
employed, in the United States and Canada and to all wage and sala­
ry employees in the other countries. Hours refer to hours paid in the
United States, hours worked in the other countries.
Compensation includes all payments made by employers directly to
their employees (before deductions), plus employer contributions to
legally required insurance programs and to contractual and private
welfare plans for the benefit of employees. Labor costs include, in ad­
dition to compensation, employer expenditures for recruitment and
training; the cost of cafeterias, medical facilities, and other plant facil­
ities and services; and taxes (other than social security taxes, which
are part of compensation) levied on payrolls or employment rolls. An­
nual data are not available for total labor costs. Labor costs, as used
in this article, approximate more closely the concept of compensation.
However, unit labor costs have been adjusted to include all significant
changes in taxes that are regarded as labor costs. Hourly compensa­
tion— along with the real compensation measures— are not so adjust­
ed in this article. For the United States and Canada, compensation of
self-employed workers is measured by assuming that their hourly
compensation is equal to the average for wage and salary employees.
To compute the series for the eight European countries and ten
foreign countries, the data have been combined by aggregating the
output, compensation, and hours figures for each year, adjusting
where necessary for compatibility of coverage and concept. Average
exchange rates for 1974-80 were used to aggregate the output and
compensation data. The use of 1974—80 exchange rates, however, does
not imply that these rates reflect the comparative real value of curren­
cies for manufacturing output. Moreover, the use of exchange rates
for a different time period would have little effect on the combined se­
ries.

Digitized 20
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

This differs from the compound rate of change method used by
Arthur Neef and Patricia Capdevielle in “International comparisons
of productivity and labor costs,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , December
1980, pp. 32-39.
4 For Japan, gross product originating in manufacturing in constant
prices, used as the output measure since 1970, was rebased on 1975
constant prices rather than 1970 constant prices. For Denmark, the
output, employment, and employee compensation measures (for 1966
through 1977) are now based on their new national accounts statis­
tics. For the United Kingdom, the employment data for 1976-79 are
now based on final data from the annual Census of Manufactures.
The final data show a greater employment drop, and therefore the
productivity decline since 1973 is less severe than that shown in NeefCapdevielle, “International comparisons.”
The 1980 measures for five countries— France, Germany, Italy, the
United Kingdom and Sweden— are based in part on preliminary na­
tional accounts statistics. For the other six countries, the measures for
1980 are based on current indicators of manufacturing output, em­
ployment and hours, and hourly compensation. The estimates based
on current indicators, as well as preliminary national account statis­
tics, are subject to revision as more complete information becomes
available.
5For a comparison of the two real labor income measures for the
United States, see Jack Alterman, “Compensation per man-hour and
take-home pay,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1971, pp. 25-34.
6 For an analysis of the effect on measured inflation of the treatment
of owner-occupied housing, weighting, and other factors for the Unit­
ed States, see Jack E. Triplett, “Reconciling the CPI and the PCE
Deflator,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , September 1981, pp. 3-17.

The beginnings of flexitime
Flexitime— the most common of the alternative work patterns—
was adopted by European employers as a means of attracting more
workers. Not surprisingly, the concept is most widely used in Germa­
ny and Switzerland, where labor shortages have been most acute.
Flexitime was born in 1967 at the German aerospace firm of
Messerschmidt-Bolkow-Blohm and instituted among 4,000 employees
at the corporation’s headquarters near Munich. Since then, Austria,
Belgium, Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, and the Scandinavian nations
have shown significant interest in flexible working hours.
In the United States the concept has grown more slowly, partly be­
cause there has been no reason to solicit employees in most areas of
the country, partly because legislative and union protections on hours
and overtime have acted as restraints.
“Innovations in Working Patterns,”
Transatlantic Perspectives,
January 1981, p. 27

Bargaining calendar
will be heavy in 1982
Contracts expire or reopen for 3.6 million workers,
including those in auto, rubber, and trucking industries;
negotiations will be influenced by economic conditions,
with job security likely to be the most vital issue
Mary A nne A ndrews

and

D avid Schlein

Collective bargaining in 1982 will be heavy, following a
year of light activity. About 3.6 million workers are
covered by major agreements expiring or reopening in
1982, compared with approximately 2.6 million in 1981.1
Except for the automobile and meat products indus­
tries, whose agreements expire in September, most talks
in key industries will occur before midsummer. Con­
tracts in petroleum refining expire in January; trucking
agreements terminate in March; contracts in rubber ex­
pire in April; and those in electrical products, in June
and July. Contracts in these six industries cover almost
1.2 million workers. A notable change in the 1982
round of bargaining will probably be union attempts, in
some of these industries, to restore or retain previous
wage and benefit gains.
Attention will also focus on the construction indus­
try, where some 500,000 workers are covered by about
175 major agreements scheduled to expire or be re­
opened in 1982. In 1981, 225 major agreements, cover­
ing 700,000 workers, were renegotiated. Construction
employment in September 1981 was down slightly from
the level of a year earlier. After rising dramatically from
1979 levels, the unemployment rate in this industry has
remained about 16 percent since the end of 1980. The
industry has had slight declines in overall activity in the
last 2 years. The value of construction put in place de­
creased significantly in residential housing, whose work
force is substantialy unorganized, but increased in the

Mary Anne Andrews and David Schlein are economists in the Office
of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

more heavily organized commercial construction field.
Large wage increases may be proposed by unions in
areas where commercial construction activity continues
to be brisk. Average wage increases for the first three
quarters of 1981 were 13.9 percent for the first year and
11.4 percent over the life of the agreement, compared to
11.5 percent and 9.3 percent for the total economy.
We do not know, of course, the economic conditions
that will exist at the time of the negotiations. But, as
the Nation entered the fourth quarter of 1981, the econ­
omy was sending out mixed signals. After a robust first
quarter, the economy slipped in the second and third
quarters. The Gross National Product increased 8.4 per­
cent in real terms in the first quarter, but declined 1.6
percent in the second quarter and rose only 0.6 percent
in the third quarter. Interest rates, although dropping
from recent record levels, have remained high. Employ­
ment displayed solid growth in the first half of the year,
but the expansion waned in the third quarter. The un­
employment rate, after being fairly stable in the first
half of 1981, dropped from 7.6 percent in June to 7 per­
cent in July, but began to increase in August and
reached 7.5 percent in September. The Consumer Price
Index ( c p i ), after slowing from a 9.6-percent annual
rate in the first quarter of 1981, to 7.4 percent in the
second quarter, increased to 13.5 percent in the third
quarter.
About 56 percent of the workers covered by agree­
ments with 1982 expirations or scheduled reopeners
have cost-of-living adjustment ( c o l a ) clauses. Although
there has not been a substantial increase in the preva­
lence of COLA provisions in major agreements in recent
21

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Bargaining Calendar fo r 1982
years, concern about COLA clauses remains high. Be­
cause the majority of COLA provisions do not limit the
amount of the wage increase that can result, major con­
tracts that have such clauses and expire in 1982 have,
on the average, provided for a substantially larger total
wage increase over the life of the agreement than con­
tracts without COLA clauses. The following tabulation
shows the average annual wage change (in percent) of
the expiring contracts:
N e g o tia te d

Contracts expiring in 1982 . . .
With C O L A ..................................
Without c o l a ..........................

N e g o tia te d

change

change

p lu s COLA

5.9
4.7
7.4

8 .8

8.1
—

Petroleum refining
Contracts covering 50,000 employees of the Nation’s
oil companies2 expire on January 8, 1982. The Oil,
Chemical and Atomic Workers Union ( o c a w ) repre­
sents the bulk of employees affected by negotiations.
Table 1.

The remainder are represented by the Operating Engi­
neers, Seafarers, Teamsters, and several local, indepen­
dent unions. Contract negotiations are conducted
locally by individual bargaining units, each of which ne­
gotiates a separate agreement that historically follows
the lead of the first company to settle. Contracts in the
industry generally cover 2 years.
In the last round of negotiations in 1979, a pattern
for settlement in the industry was set when Gulf Oil
Corp., which set the pattern in the two previous con­
tract negotiations, and the o c a w agreed to a 2-year
contract on January 11, 1979. Afterwards, the o c a w
quickly negotiated similar accords with other major oil
companies. By the end of January, the union had settled
for all but 10,000 of the 60,000 employees it represented
at 100 petroleum refining and petrochemical companies.
The agreements generally provided for 73 cents-perhour wage increases in 1979, and 5-percent increases in
1980; increased company contributions to hospital in­
surance; and a January 1980 contract reopener for
wages, health benefits, and vacation provisions.

Calendar of major collective bargaining activity

[Workers in thousands]
Contract expirations1

Scheduled wage reopenings

Year and month

Principal industry and activity
Number

1,900

Workers covered

Number

Workers covered

8,987.9

30

115.1
78.3

Total 1982 ........................................

620

3,579.2

24

January........................................................

95.3
33 9
557.0
331.6
549.5
454.0

3

_

4.9

March ..........................................................
April ............................................................
M a y ..............................................................
June ............................................................

41
17
44
98
124
99

5
7
2
1

15.4
21.7
7.7
3.7

J u ly ..............................................................
August..........................................................
September...................................................

53
36
40

180.9
135.0
1,004 8

2
1
—

13.9
2.3
—

O ctober........................................................

26
27
15

59.6
117.3
60.2

1
1
1

1.4
11
62

Total 1983 ........................................

725

3,264 3

5

11 8

January........................................................
February .....................................................
March ..........................................................
April ............................................................
M a y..............................................................
June ............................................................
J u ly ..............................................................
August..........................................................
September...................................................
O ctober........................................................

31
38
70
104
96
114
39
98
52
42
16
25

73.8
144 8
211.8
279.5
364.1
478.0
100.1
1,152.9
174.6
175.6
31.6
77.4

1

18

—
1
3

—
4.3
5.7

Total 1984 ........................................

266

January-June...............................................
July-December............................................

233
33
9
280

Petroleum refineries
Trucking
Construction, rubber
Construction, apparel
Electrical equipment, food and kindred products,
construction
Electrical equipment
Food production (meatpacking)
Automotive, farm and construction equipment,
and apparel

Tobacco

_

_

—

-

—
—
—

_

—
—
—
_

972.0

1

25.0

654.7
317.3
47.9
1,124.5

_
_

1
—

25.0
—

' Twelve agreements covering 40,000 workers are excluded because they have no fixed ex­
piration or reopening date.
2These include 103 major agreements, covering 273,000 workers, which are due to expire
between October 1 and December 31,1981; and 177 agreements, covering 853,000 workers,
which expired prior to October 1, but for which necessary information had not been

Digitized22
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

_

Glass, construction
Construction
Aluminum, lumber, and construction
Construction, copper
Steel, telephone
Longshoring (East and Gulf Coasts)
Aerospace

Construction, metal containers
Bituminous coal

—

_

fully gathered.
N ote: Only bargaining units in the private nonagricultural economy affecting 1,000 workers
or more are considered for this table. Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not
equal totals.

When the contract was reopened, an impasse oc­
curred, and the OCAW started a nationwide strike
against petroleum refining companies on January 8,
1980. Eleven weeks later, a settlement was reached with
Gulf that set the pattern for OCAW settlements with
other oil companies.3 However, the nationwide work
stoppage extended until early July, and became the long­
est strike in the industry’s history. At its peak, the
strike involved refiners processing about 70 percent of
the Nation’s petroleum needs, but the companies’
white-collar employees continued to maintain operations
by working extended schedules.
Table 2.

Although the dispute began over the contract re­
opener issues, the settlements extended the existing con­
tracts for an additional year (to 1982). The agreements
provided for an immediate wage increase of 52 cents per
hour, plus a 5-percent increase already scheduled for
1980; a 10.5-percent increase in 1981; increased compa­
ny contributions to health insurance coverage; establish­
ment of dental plans; and improved vacations for long­
term employees.
The current negotiations are scheduled to begin in
November 1981. Eight major demands have been set by
OCAW’s National Oil Bargaining Policy Committee and

Major contract expiration and wage reopening dates, by industry

[Workers in thousands]

Industry

All industries ...........................
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 .............................
Nonmanufacturing . . . .
Mining, crude petroleum and
natural gas production.........
Construction.............................
Transportation, except railroads
and trucking ........................
Railroads.................................
Trucking .................................
Communications......................
Utilities, gas and e le c tric .........
Wholesale tra d e ......................
Retail trade, except restaurants
Restaurants.............................
Finance, insurance, and real
estate....................................
Services, except hotels and
health services ....................
H o te ls ......................................
Health services ......................

1982
Contracts

Workers
covered

1,900

Workers
covered

Con­
tracts

Workers
covered

972.0

9

47.9

280

1,124.5

24

78.3

5

11.8

118
10
—
2

245.7
15.9

5
1

16.3
8.0

136
22

318.9
47.2

6
—

18.1
—

1
—

2.8
—

4

4.9

2

7.5

9.0

2

7.4

5

12.3

59.3
5.8
43.8

2
3
12

2.6
2.9
16.8

—
—

—
—

—
—
7

—
—
7.6

1
—

1.5
—

—
—

—
—

4
4

12.1
9.5

1

4.4

11
8

18.9
17.1

—

—

—
1

—
2.8

Workers
covered

Con­
tracts

8,987.9

620

3,579.2

725

3,264.3

266

896
100
8
18

3,897.6
306.1
23.4
47.1

279
33
1
7

2,094.1
161.4
1.1
15.2

358
34
7
5

1,222.6
73.5
22.3
19.5

52

475.1

42

446.4

3
11
4
26
8
12

14.4
22.1

2
8
18

30
31

63.7
60.5

6
7

13.8
11.8

Workers
covered

7.5

Con­
tracts

Workers
covered

Con­
tracts

Con­
tracts

66.2
22.7
90.6

1983 or later

1982

Workers
covered

Workers
covered

15
15
63

Unknown or
in negotiation2

Con­
tracts

Con­
tracts

4.3
14.0
22.3

1985 or later

1984

1983

19

37.8

16

30.8

1

1.5

2

5.4

15
14

82.9
34.5

12
2

78.5
12.0

3
5

4.4
6.0

—
5

—
14.7

—

—

—
2

—
1.8

1
1

1.1
1.8

—

—

36
113
55
85

86.9
483.0
102.5
271.5

4
12
11
22

6.9
17.7
20.8
142.4

18
79
18
37

56.2
405.5
30.9
85.9

10
11
10
14

16.6
14.2
18.0
22.4

—
1
1
1

—
.9
1.3
1.8

4
10
15
11

7.1
44.6
31.5
19.0

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

100
103

439.9
1,150.8

41
25

255.0
811.3

40
41

147.8
202.4

11
14

15.3
65.3

—

—

8
23

21.8
71.8

1

6.2

—

—

13

32.1

4

14.8

4

8.7

2

2.3

3

6.4

11

20.3

6

13.4

2

3.4

2

2.3

—

1,004

5,090.3

341

1,485.1

367

2,041.6

148

726.4

4

1

1.2

—

31.6

144

805.6

18

60.2

4

9.0

.7
59.5

—
10

—
35.7

—
3

—
4.7

—
—
—
—
4
—
2

—
—
—
—
14.4
—
5.9

—
—

—
—

—

—

1
—
—
—

4.3
—
—
—

1
1

1.0
3.2

—
—

—
—

16
476

200.6
1,540.2

1
169

1.3
452.5

12
186

36.6
751 9

2
96

162.0
272.0

—
2

—
4.3

1
23

66
18
19
46
75
22
145
22

289.9
398.5
473.9
756.0
210.0
44.2
652.0
68.3

13
—
17
7
33
10
50
8

54.6
—
470.3
21.6
102.1
24.4
180.2
19.8

22
—
2
30
19
7
58
8

87.5
—
3.6
709.1
60.4
10.5
265.0
32.4

7
—
—
5
6
1
18
1

42.4
—
—
17.4
14.7
2.8
154.5
3.0

—
—
—

—
—
—

—

—

—
—
—
1

—
—
—
2.3

24
18
—
4
17
4
19
4

105.4
398.5
—
7.8
32.8
6.5
52.3
10.8

19

104.9

5

40.4

3

20.4

1

2.5

10

41.6

42
19
19

128.8
126.9
96.0

15
4
9

49.8
8.8
59.3

11
4
5

34.5
21.1
8.7

7
4

13.5
41.5

9
6
5

30.9
30.5
28.1

1Twelve agreements covering 40,000 workers are excluded because they have no fixed ex­
piration or reopening date.
2These include 103 major agreements, covering 273,000 workers, due to expire
between October 1 and December 31,1981; and 177 agreements, covering 853,000 workers,
which expired prior to October 1, but for which necessary information had not been


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

Scheduled wage reopening

Year of contract termination1

Total

—
1

—
25.0

fully gathered.
N ote: Only bargaining units in the private nonagricultural economy affecting 1,000 workers
or more are considered for this table. Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not
equal totals.

23

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Bargaining Calendar fo r 1982
have been accepted by the rank-and-file. Reportedly,
guarantees against layoffs and plant closings head the
list of demands. Other proposals include employer con­
tributions to a supplemental pension plan; -elimination
of employee payments to health plans; a 2-year agree­
ment; “substantial” wage increases; an 11th holiday;
improved vacations; and “no retrogression in previous
terms and conditions.”

Trucking
In November, the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of
America ( i b t , Ind.) will begin negotiating its 3-year Na­
tional Master Freight Agreement, which covers approxi­
mately 300,000 truck drivers and warehouse workers
and expires on March 31, 1982. Employers will be rep­
resented by Trucking Management, Inc. ( t m i ), the in­
dustry’s main bargaining agent. These will be the first
negotiations since the passage of the Motor Carrier Act
of 19804 and the election of the Teamsters’ new presi­
dent, Roy Williams.5
Coupled with approximately 30 local and area sup­
plemental agreements, the Master Freight Agreement
regulates the terms and conditions of employment of
most unionized drivers and warehouse workers in the
industry. Wage increases, cost-of-living adjustments, in­
creases in employer contributions to benefit plans, as
well as most other economic benefits and certain work­
ing rules are determined in national negotiations. Actu­
al wage rates, most working rules, and allocations to
the health and welfare funds are set in the supplemental
agreements, as are addenda which provide local excep­
tions to economic benefits and working rules.
Some drivers in the Midwest, particularly in the Chi­
cago area, do not participate in national bargaining.
Seven Teamster locals and the Chicago Truck Drivers,
Helpers and Warehouse Workers Union (Ind.) represent
approximately 35,000 workers in bargaining with sever­
al employer associations. Since 1973, the Chicago area
agreements have terminated concurrently with the Mas­
ter Freight Agreement.
The last round of negotiations (in 1979) was influ­
enced by Federal wage guidelines, which sought to hold
average annual wage and benefit increases to 7 percent.
The Carter Administration threatened speedy deregula­
tion of the industry if a settlement violated these guide­
lines, and the Interstate Commerce Commission, which
regulates rates in the industry, threatened not to ap­
prove trucking rates that would incorporate wage in­
creases in excess of the guidelines. After a 10-day work
stoppage, which started as a selective strike against ap­
proximately 73 companies and quickly evolved into a
national lockout conducted by TMI, a settlement was
reached.6 This was the longest work stoppage in 15
years of national bargaining in the trucking industry.
Digitized24
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The 3-year agreement provided hourly wage or
equivalent mileage increases of 80 cents in 1979, and 35
cents each in 1980 and 1981; semiannual COLA of 1 cent
per hour for each 0.3-point movement in the CPI; in­
creased employer contributions to the pension, and
health and welfare funds; and improvements in paid
holidays, paid funeral and jury duty leave, meal and
lodging allowances, and sick leave.
In the fall of 1980, TMI attempted to reopen the
agreement to delay or eliminate COLA increases. Deregu­
lation was blamed, at least in part, for hardship in the
industry. The Teamsters refused to bargain nationwide,
but granted concessions, with employee approval, to in­
dividual companies in hardship cases. Such concessions
included flexible starting times, waiving of seniority pay
guarantees, and forgoing sick pay and vacations that ex­
ceed 3 weeks.
Information on 1982 demands is not yet available.
However, negotiations undoubtedly will be influenced
by the effects of deregulation and the state of the econo­
my. Trucking tonnage has been static since deregulation
began. There have also been a number of consolidations
and bankruptcies in recent years, as marginal companies
have been hit hard by recession and competition from
nonunionized trucking companies. Because of this (ac­
cording to press reports) the Teamsters may be willing
to accept a smaller economic package and may attempt
to negotiate a separate contract with short-haul truck­
ing companies, which have been most adversely affected
by competition from nonunionized trucking companies,
to avoid potential job losses. In return, the union (ac­
cording to press reports) will probably be asking for
concessions relating to job security, subcontracting, and
cost-of-living raises, which would be used to maintain
health, welfare, and pension benefits. Management has
expressed interest in negotiating more flexible work
rules (such as those relating to starting and quitting
times and weekend work) and reduced pension and
health benefits.

Rubber
Major labor contracts between the United Rubber,
Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers of America (Rub­
ber Workers) and the “Big Four” tiremakers— Good­
year Tire and Rubber Co.; Firestone Tire and Rubber
Co.; B. F. Goodrich Co.; and Uniroyal, Inc.— covering
nearly 55,000 workers, are up for renewal on April 20,
1982. Contracts with several smaller tire companies ex­
pire throughout the year.7 In the past, bargaining has
been conducted separately with each company. The
Rubber Workers has selected a “target” from among
the “Big Four” for full-scale bargaining. Once an ac­
cord has been reached, it has been used as a pattern for
subsequent settlements with companies throughout the
industry. Uniroyal was selected as the “target” in 1979;

Table 3.

Expiration, reopening, and wage adjustment provisions of selected collective bargaining agreements

[Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code]
1972
SIC
Code

Union2

Industry and employer1

Employees
covered

Contract term
and reopening
provisions3

1982 provisions for
automatic cost-ofliving review4

1982 provisions for
deferred
wage increases5

Manufacturing
20

21

22

23

24

26

Food and kindred products:
California Processors, Inc.
Frozen Food Employers Association
(California)6
George A. Hormel and Co.
John Morrell & Co.
Sugar Cos. Negotiating Committee
(Hawaii)6
Wilson Foods Corp.
Tobacco manufacturers:
Phillip Morris, U.S.A. (Richmond, Va.)

Textile mill products:
Dan River, Inc. (Danville, Va.)
Fieldcrest Mills, Inc. (Virginia and North
Carolina)
Apparel and other finished products:
Clothing Manufacturers Association of U.S.A.
Cotton Garment Manufacturers6
Fashion Apparel Manufacturers Association
Greater Blouse, Skirt and Undergarment
Association, Inc.
Industrial Association of Juvenile Apparel
Manufacturers, Inc. (Greater New York
City)
New York Coat and Suit Association
Lumber and wood products, except furniture:
Western States Wood Products Employers
Association (Boise-Cascade Corp., Champi­
on International Co., Crown Zellerbach
Corp., Georgia-Pacific Corp., International
Paper Co., ITT-Rayonier Inc., Louisiana-Pa­
cific Corp., Publishers Paper Co., Simpson
Timber Co., and Weyerhauser Co.)
Paper and allied products:
International Paper Co., Southern Kraft
Division

60,000
8,000

July 1,1979 to July 1,1982
July 1,1979 to June 30,1982

Food and Commercial Workers
Food and Commercial Workers
Longshoremen and
Warehousemen (Ind.)
Food and Commercial Workers

7,000
6,500
9,000

Sept. 1, 1979 to Aug. 31, 1982
Sept. 1, 1979 to Sept. 1, 1982
Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1983

January and July
January and July

6,000

Sept. 1,1979 to Aug. 31,1982

May

Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco
Workers

7,200

Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1983

January, thereafter
quarterly

United Textile Workers
Clothing and Textile Workers

7,000
5,000

June 22,1980 to June 21,1983
Mar. 1, 1981 to Feb. 29, 1984

Clothing and Textile Workers
Clothing and Textile Workers
Ladies Garment Workers
Ladies Garment Workers

56,000
60,000
8,000
18,000

Oct. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1982
Sept. 1,1979 to Aug. 31,1982
June 1,1979 to May 31,1982
June 1,1979 to May 31,1982

Ladies Garment Workers

6,000

June 1,1979 to May 30,1982

Ladies Garment Workers

20,000

May 1,1979 to May 31,1982

Woodworkers; Lumber Production and
Industrial Workers (Ind.)

37,000

Paperworkers and Electrical Workers
(IBEW)

8,000

Teamsters (Ind.)
Teamsters (Ind.)

Feb. 1:

10 percent

Feb. 1:

43 cents

June 1,1980 to May 31,1983

June 1:

70 cents

June 1,1979 to May 31,1983

June 1: 4 percent to
nearest 1/2 cent

January and March

Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products:
B.F. Goodrich Co.
Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.
General Motors Corp., Inland Manufacturing
Division (Dayton, Ohio)
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.
Uniroyal, Inc.

Rubber Workers
Rubber Workers
Rubber Workers

9,300
15,300
6,900

January and April
Apr. 21, 1979 to Apr. 20, 1982
January and April
Apr. 20, 1979 to Apr. 19,1982
Sept. 15, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 March and June

Rubber Workers
Rubber Workers

22,300
8,300

Apr. 21,1979 to Apr. 20,1982
June 18,1979 to Apr. 19,1982

January and April

32

Stone, clay, and glass products:
Brockway Glass Co., Inc.
Owens-Illinois, Inc.

Glass Bottle Blowers
Glass Bottle Blowers

7,150
12,400

Apr. 1, 1980 to Mar. 31, 1983
Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1983

April
April

Apr. 1:
Apr. 1:

55 cents
55 cents

33

Primary metal industries:6
8 major basic steel companies:
Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp.; Armco Inc.;
Bethlehem Steel Corp.; Inland Steel Co.;
Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp.; National
Steel Corp.; Republic Steel Corp.; United
States Steel Corp.
Aluminum Co. of America

Aug. 1,1980 to Aug. 1,1983

February, thereafter
quarterly

Aug. 1:

15-47 cents

9,150

June 1,1980 to May 31,1983

June 7:

15-28 cents

10,000

June 1, 1980 to May 31,1983

March, thereafter
quarterly
March, thereafter
quarterly
February, thereafter
quarterly
March, thereafter
quarterly
February, thereafter
quarterly
February, thereafter
quarterly
March, thereafter
quarterly
February, thereafter
quarterly

June 7:

15 cents

Aug. 1:

15-47 cents

Aug. 1:

25 cents

June 7:

15 cents

30

Aluminum Co. of America
Armco Steel Corp. (Middletown, Ohio)

Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp.
Kaiser Steel Corp., Steel Manufacturing
Division (Fontana, Calif.)
National Steel Corp., Weirton Steel Division
(Ohio and West Virginia)
Reynolds Metals Co.
United States Steel Corp., salaried
employees

Steelworkers

Aluminum Workers
Steelworkers
Armco Employees
Independent
Federation (Ind.)
Steelworkers
Steelworkers

215,200

6,000

Aug. 1,1980 to July 31,1983

11,000

June 1,1980 to May 31,1983

5,550

Aug. 1,1980 to July 31,1983

10,000

Aug. 1, 1980 to Aug. 1, 1983

Steelworkers

8,100

June 2, 1980 to May 31,1983

Steelworkers

5,200

Aug. 1,1980 to Aug. 1,1983

Independent Steelworkers Union (Ind.)

June 7:

15-28 cents

Aug. 1:

15-47 cents

Aug. 1: $12-36
bi-weekly

See footnotes at end of table.


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

25

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Bargaining Calendar for 1982

Table 3.

Continued — Expiration, reopening, and wage adjustment provisions of selected collective bargaining agreements

[Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code]
1972
SIC
Code

34

35

36

Industry and employer1

372

38

39

Contract term
and reopening
provisions3

1982 provisions for
automatic cost-ofliving review4

1982 provisions for
deferred
wage increases5

Steelworkers

11,000

Feb. 16, 1981 to Feb. 19, 1984

February

Feb. 15:

Machinery, except electrical:
Briggs and Stratton Corp. (Milwaukee, Wis.)
Caterpillar Tractor Co.

Allied Industrial Workers
Auto Workers

7,900
40,000

Aug. 1, 1980 to July 31, 1983
Oct. 1, 1979 to Sept. 30,1982

February
March, thereafter
quarterly
March, thereafter
quarterly
March, thereafter
quarterly
January, thereafter
quarterly

Aug. 1:

Deere and Co. (Illinois and Iowa)

Auto Workers

31,000

Oct. 20, 1979 to Sept. 30, 1982

International Harvester Co.

Auto Workers

35,000

Oct. 1,1979 to Sept. 30,1982

Timken Co. (Columbus and Wooster, Ohio)

Steelworkers

7,800

July 20, 1980 to Aug. 29, 1983

Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies:
General Electric Co.
General Electric Co.
General Motors Corp. (New Jersey, New York
and Ohio)
GTE Sylvanla, Inc.6

Electrical Workers (UE, Ind.)
Electrical Workers (IUE)
Electrical Workers (IUE)
Multi AFL-CIO unions and Teamsters
(Ind.)
Carpenters
Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Communications Workers
Electrical Workers (UE, Ind.)
Electrical Workers (IUE)
Federation of Westinghouse
Independent Salaried Unions (Ind.)

16,400
70,000
23,450
9,000

Aug. 22:

15-27 cents

8 percent

15-38 cents

July 1, 1979 to June 27, 1982
July 1, 1979 to June 27, 1982
Sept. 18,1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 March and June
Oct. 6, 1979 to Oct. 5, 1982

March

13,000
13,000
5,200

Dec. 1,1979 to Dec. 1,1982
Dec. 1, 1979 to Dec. 1,1982
Oct. 1, 1980 to Feb. 28, 1983

22,650
5,500
18,000
11,250

Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6, 1983
Sept. 4,1979 to July 11,1982
July 16, 1979 to July 11, 1982
July 16, 1979 to July 26, 1982

June and September
June
January and March,
thereafter quarterly
August
January
January
January

Mar. 1:

3 percent

Aug. 8:

3 percent

Transportation equipment — motor vehicle and
motor vehicle equipment:
American Motors Corp. (Wisconsin)

Auto Workers

8,300

Sept. 17, 1980 to Sept. 16, 1983 March, thereafter
quarterly

Sept. 20: 25-41 cents

American Motors Corp., Jeep Corp. (Ohio)
Budd Co. (P&M)

Auto Workers
Auto Workers

5,750
9,000

Jan. 1,1980 to Jan 31,1983
Feb. 2, 1980 to Mar. 4, 1983

Feb. 1: 3 percent
Apr. 27: 21-40 cents

Chrysler Corp., Engineering Dept.
Chrysler Corp. (P&M)

Auto Workers
Auto Workers

5,400
64,000

Dana Corp.

Auto Workers

7,500

Ford Motor Corp.
General Motors Corp.
Mack Truck, Inc.

Auto Workers
Auto Workers
Auto Workers

158,000
400,000
6,250

Auto Workers

6,100

Transportation equipment — aircraft:
Bendix Corp.
Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Lockheed-California
Division
McDonnell Douglas Corp. (California and
Oklahoma)
McDonnell-Douglas Corp. (St. Louis, Mo.)6
United Technologies Corp., Pratt Whitney
Aircraft Division (Connecticut)

373

Employees
covered

Fabricated metal products:
Continental Group, Inc.

Hughes Aircraft Co. (California)
RCA Corp.
Rockwell International Corp. (Cedar Rapids,
Iowa)6
Western Electric Co. Inc.
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Westinghouse Electric Corp.

371

Union2

Transportation equipment — shipbuilding:
General Dynamics Corp., Electric Boat
Division (Groton, Conn.)
Litton Systems, Inc., Ingalls Shipbuilding
Division (Pascagoula, Miss.)
Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Co.
(Virginia)
Pacific Coast Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Firms
Professional, scientific and controlling
instruments; photographic and optical goods;
watches and clocks:
Honeywell, Inc. (Minneapolis and St. Paul,
Minn.)
Miscellaneous manufacturing:
National Association of Doll Manufacturers,
Inc. and Stuffed Toy Manufacturers
Association, Inc. (New York, N.Y.)

See footnotes at end of table.

Digitized 26
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

March, thereafter
quarterly
Oct. 25, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 March and June
Sept. 17,1979 to Sept. 14,1982 March, thereafter
quarterly
Dec. 3,1979 to Dec. 5,1982
March, thereafter
quarterly
Oct. 4, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982
March and June
Sept. 17, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 March and June
Oct. 22,1979 to Oct. 20,1982
March, thereafter
quarterly

Apr. 30, 1980 to Apr. 29, 1983

Machinists

14,000

Oct. 20, 1980 to Oct. 1, 1983

Auto Workers

10,000

Oct. 17, 1980 to Oct. 9, 1983

Machinists
Machinists

Metal Trades Council and Teamsters
(Ind.)
Metal Trades Council and Teamsters
(Ind.)
Steelworkers

9,000
9,700

12,750
6,400

May 11, 1981 to May 13, 1984
Nov. 28, 1978 to Nov. 28,1982

May 3:

3 percent

Oct. 2: $1.38 per hour

May 5:

3 percent

July 1, 1979 to June 30, 1982
Feb. 1,1981 to Jan. 29,1984

17,000

Mar. 31,1980 to Oct. 31,1983

35,000

July 1, 1980 to June 29, 1983

Teamsters (Ind.)

8,000

Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1982

Novelty and Production Workers

7,500

July 1, 1979 to June 30,1982

Pacific Coast Metal Trades Dept, and
Teamsters (Ind.)

January, thereafter
quarterly
January, thereafter
quarterly
January, thereafter
quarterly
February

January

February, thereafter
quarterly

Mar. 1: 10 cents,
Oct. 4: 50 cents
July 1: 40 cents

Table 3.

Continued— Expiration, reopening, 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 term
and reopening
provisions3

1982 provisions for
automatic cost-ofliving review4

1982 provisions for
deferred
wage increases5

Nonmanufacturing
12

42

44

Bituminous coal and lignite mining:
Association of Bituminous Contractors, Inc.

Mine Workers (Ind.)

12,000

Bituminous Coal Operators Association6

Mine Workers (Ind.)

160,000

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
Water transportation:6
Dry Cargo Cos., Atlantic and Gulf coasts
Dry Cargo Cos., Tankers, Atlantic and Gulf
coasts
New York Shipping Association, Port of New
York
Pacific Maritime Association
Standard Freightship Agreement, Unlicensed
personnel
Standard Tanker Agreement, Unlicensed
personnel
Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore,
Inc., Port of Baltimore

45

48

49

53

Airlines:6
United Airlines, Inc., flight attendants
Communications:
American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Long
lines dept.
Bell Telephone Co. of Pennsylvania

Teamsters (Ind.)
Teamsters (Ind.)
Teamsters (Ind.)

July 1,1981 to Oct. 1,1984

7,700

Apr. 1,1979 to Mar. 31,1982

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

June, thereafter
quarterly
June

June:

50 cents

June:

50 cents

December

June 16:

Masters, Mates and Pilots
Maritime Union

5,000
15,000

June 16,1981 to June 15,1984
June 16,1981 to June 15,1984

Longshoremen (ILA)

10,200

Oct. 1,1980 to Sept. 30,1983

Longshoremen and Warehousemen
(Ind.)
Seafarers

11,000

July 1, 1981 to July 1,1984

10,750

June 16,1981 to June 15,1984

December

Oct. 1: $1.20 per
hour
July 3: $1.462
average
June 16: 7.5 percent

Seafarers

December

June 16:

10,750

June 16,1981 to June 15,1984

Longshoremen (ILA)

5,000

Oct. 1,1980 to Sept. 30,1983

Air Line Pilots

9,100

Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1982

7.5 percent

7.5 percent

Oct. 1: $1.20 per
hour

Communications Workers

23,300

Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August

Aug. 8:

3 percent

Federation of Telephone Workers of
Pennsylvania (Ind.)
Communications Workers
Communications Workers

11,950

Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August

Aug. 8:

3 percent

20,500
5,500

Mar. 5,1980 to Mar. 4,1983
Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August

Mar.: 3 percent
Aug. 8: 3 percent

General Telephone Co. of California
Illinois Bell Telephone Co. (Illinois and
Indiana)
Illinois Bell Telephone Co. (Illinois and
Indiana)
Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
Mountain State Telephone and Telegraph Co.

Electrical Workers (IBEW)

13,800

Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August

Aug. 8:

Communications Workers
Communications Workers

20,000
29,200

Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6,1983
Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6, 1983

August
August

New England Telephone and Telegraph Co.

Electrical Workers (IBEW)

16,000

Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6,1983

May

New England Telephone Co.
New Jersey Bell Telephone Co.

Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Electrical Workers (IBEW)

6,300
11,450

Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6, 1983
Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

May
August

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
Western Electric Co., Inc.
Western Electric Co., Inc.

Communications Workers
Communications Workers
Communications Workers

88,000
14,750
14,000

Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6, 1983
Aug. 10, 1980 to Aug. 6, 1983
Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August
August
August

Aug. 8: 3 percent
Aug. 8: 50 cents to
$14.00
Aug. 8: $1.43 to
$2.45
Aug. 8: 50 cents
Aug. 8: 50 cents to
$14.00 weekly
Aug. 8: 50 cents
Aug. 8: 18-19 cents
Aug. 8: 2-38 cents
per hour

Western Union Telegraph Co.
Wisconsin Telephone Co.

Telegraph Workers
Communications Workers

9,500
6,250

July 28, 1979 to July 27, 1982
Aug. 10,1980 to Aug. 6,1983

August

Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Electrical Workers (IBEW)

7,500
13,850

June 1,1980 to May 31,1982
Jan. 1,1980 to Dec. 30,1982

Electric, gas, and sanitary services:
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. (New York)
Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (California)
Retail trade — general merchandise:
R. H. Macy and Co., Inc. (New York, N.Y.)
Woodward and Lothrop, Inc. (Maryland, D.C.
and Virginia)

54

Chicago Truck Drivers (Ind.)

June 7,1981 to Sept. 30, 1984

Retail trade — food stores:
Chain and independent food stores (Illinois
and Indiana)6
Chicago area grocery stores (Illinois)
Cleveland Food Industries Committee (Ohio)
Denver retail grocers (Colorado)
Food Employers Council, Inc.
Retail meat industry and independent retail
operators (Los Angeles, Calif.)
Food Employers Labor Relations Association
of Northern California6

Retail, Wholesale and Department
Store
Food and Commercial Workers

7,000

Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 30,1982

6,000

July 1,1979 to June 30, 1982

Food and Commercial Workers

10,000

Aug. 8: 1979 to Sept. 7,1982

7,000
8,400
9,300

July 1, 1979 to June 26, 1982
Sept. 1,1980 to Sept. 3, 1983
May 26, 1979 to May 5,1982

March

Food and Commençai Workers

6,500

Nov. 5, 1979 to Nov. 4, 1982

May

Food and Commercial Workers

17,000

I

Mar. 5,1980 to Mar. 5, 1983

Aug. 8: 50 cents to
$13.00 weekly

Jan 1:

Food and Commercial Workers
Food and Commercial Workers
Food and Commercial Workers

3 percent

3 percent

Feb. 7:

8 percent

Sept. 6:

40 cents

Mar. 5:

58 cents

See footnotes at end of table.


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

27

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Bargaining Calendar for 1982

Table 3.

Continued— Expiration, reopening, and wage adjustment provisions of selected collective bargaining agreements

[Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code]
1972
SIC
Code

54

Industry and employer1

65

70

78

80

Employees
covered

Contract term
and reopening
provisions3

1982 provisions for
automatic cost-of
living review4

1982 provisions for
deferred
wage increases5

Retail trade — food stores: (Continued)
Food Industry Agreement (St. Louis, Mo.)
Food Market Agreement of Minneapolis
(Minnesota)
Jewel Cos., Inc., Jewel Food Division (Illinois
and Indiana)
Philadelphia Food Stores (Pennsylvania, New
Jersey and Delaware)
Retail Food Store Agreement (San Jose,
Calif.)
Stop and Shop Cos., Inc. (New England)

58

Union2

Food and Commercial Workers
Food and Commercial Workers
United Retail Workers Union (Ind.)

8,500
7,200
14,000

May 6,1979 to May 7,1982
Mar. 3,1980 to Feb. 25, 1983

Food and Commercial Workers

5,000

Mar. 9,1980 to Mar. 5,1983

September

Food and Commercial Workers

6,800

Jan. 1,1980 to Feb. 28,1983

February, thereafter
quarterly

Food and Commercial Workers

8,000

Feb. 11,1979 to Feb. 13,1982

Retail trade — eating and drinking places:
Restaurant-Hotel Employers Council of
Southern California

Hotel and Restaurant Employees

10,000

Mar. 16,1979 to Mar. 15,1983

Finance, insurance, and real estate:
Bronx Realty Advisory Board, Inc. (New York)
Building Managers Association of Chicago6
Realty Advisory Board of Labor Relations,
Inc., Apartment Buildings (New York, N.Y.)

Service Employees
Service Employees
Service Employees

11,000
12,500
20,000

Sept. 15,1979 to Sept. 14,1982
Apr. 1, 1980 to Mar. 31, 1982
April 21, 1979 to April 20, 1982

New York Hotel Trade Council

Hotels, rooming houses, camps, and other
lodging places:
Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. (New
York)6
Hotel Employers Association of San Francisco
(California)
Hotel Industry (Hawaii)
Nevada Resort Association, Resort Hotels
(Las Vegas, Nev.)

Feb. 25:

11 percent

Sept. 23, 1979 to Sept. 18,1982
Mar. 1: 45 cents

22,500

June 1, 1978 to May 31,1985

Hotel and Restaurant Employees

6,000

July 1,1980 to Aug. 14, 1983

June 1: $17.20-25.00
per week
Aug. 14: 8 percent

Hotel and Restaurant Employees
Hotel and Restaurant Employees

10,000
15,000

June 1,1977 to May 31,1982
Apr. 2, 1980 to Apr. 1, 1984

Apr. 2:

35-70 cents

Actors

39,000

Feb. 7,1979 to Feb. 6, 1982

Jan. 1:

15 percent

9,000

Apr. 1, 1980 to Mar. 31,1982

Motion pictures:
Screen Actors Guild, Commercials Contract
Medical and other health services:
Kaiser-Permanente Medical Program of
Southern California (Los Angeles and
Orange Counties, Calif.)

Service Employees

1Geographical coverage of contracts is interstate unless specified.
2 Unions are affiliated with AFL-CIO, except where noted as independent find.).
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-

Goodyear, in 1976.
In the last round of bargaining, the Rubber Workers
first attempted to reach an agreement with Uniroyal,
but an impasse occurred and a strike began on May 9,
1979. The union then turned its attention to Goodrich.
After 3 days of marathon negotiations, Goodrich and
the union signed a contract that also set the pattern for
employees at Uniroyal and Firestone.8The 3-year agree­
ments provided 72 cents per hour wage increases spread
over the life of the contract, plus an additional 40 cents
for skilled trades workers; quarterly COLA adjustments
set at 1 cent per hour for each 0.3-point movement in
the CPI in the first year, and 1 cent for each 0.26-point
movement in the second and third years; improved holi­
day, life insurance, medical, and pension benefits; 6
months’ advance notice of plant closings, with the
having the right to bargain on such decisions;
Digitizedunion
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal28
Reserve Bank of St. Louis

tion is given.
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 is not on file with the Bureau of Labor Statistics; information is based on newspa­
per accounts.
S ource: Contracts on file with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Oct. 1, 1981. Where no con­
tracts are on file, table entries are based on newspaper accounts.

and company pledges to remain neutral in the union’s
efforts to organize new tire plants. The union continued
negotiations with Goodyear, the last major holdout,
and reached agreement in July, 1 day before a strike
deadline. The settlement generally followed the pattern
set by Goodrich, Uniroyal, and Firestone. Goodyear,
however, refused to sign a neutrality pledge, but did es­
tablish an optical insurance plan.
The domestic tire and rubber industry, like several
other strategic manufacturing industries, has had prob­
lems in recent years. Sales have lagged over the last 3
years as a result of increased use of longer-wearing radi­
al tires, the auto industry slump, rising gasoline prices,
and high interest rates. Also foreign competitors, such
as France’s Michelin Tire Co. and Japan’s Bridgestone
Tire Co., have steadily made headway in the U.S. tire
market.9

Since 1978, domestic tiremakers have slashed produc­
tion capacity by 23 percent, largely by permanently
closing 18 outmoded facilities. Since the last round of
negotiations, between 10,000 and 12,000 Rubber Work­
ers have lost their jobs because of plant closings and
40,000 have been temporarily laid off because of declin­
ing sales. Responding to these cuts, the union has
granted a number of wage-and-benefit and work-rule
concessions to forestall plant closings.
The union’s bargaining goals are still being formulat­
ed. However, job security, continuation of the cost-ofliving adjustment formula, and pension rules are ex­
pected to be key objectives.10

Electrical machinery, equipment, and supplies
Agreements covering about 250,000 workers are
scheduled to expire in the electrical machinery, equip­
ment, and supplies industry. Key negotiations occur at
General Electric Co. ( g e ) in June, covering 107,000 em­
ployees, and at Westinghouse Electric Corp. in July,
covering 50,500 employees. Other negotiations involving
large bargaining units in the industry in 1982 include
GM, 23,450 employees; Radio Corporation of America,
13,000; Hughes Aircraft Co., 13,000; General Telephone
and Electronics (Sylvania), 9,000; and Allen-Bradley
Co., 4,800.
As in the past, bargaining will be conducted at GE
and Westinghouse by the Coordinated Bargaining Com­
mittee of General Electric and Westinghouse Unions,
which now represents 13 labor organizations.11 Under
the committee agreement, each union negotiates a sepa­
rate contract containing similar terms for each bar­
gaining unit. Contract negotiations usually start at GE.
In the past, the settlements at GE have influenced the
terms of subsequent accords in the industry.
Terms at some companies, however, will probably be
more like contracts in other industries than those in
electrical machinery. The agreement between GM and
the International Union of Electrical, Radio and Ma­
chine Workers ( i u e ) has much in common with auto
workers’ contracts. Similarly, the International Brother­
hood of Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) and the Communica­
tions Workers of America sometimes use telephone
industry settlements as their model.12
In the last contract negotiations, GE settled with the
IUE and the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine
Workers of America ( u e ) on July 2, 1979. The 3-year
contracts provided for 44.5 cents per hour wage in­
creases over the term of the contract; a 38 cent an hour
cost-of-living increase, plus future semiannual COLA ad­
justments of 1 cent per hour for each 0.2-point rise in
the CPI; a company-financed dental plan covering em­
ployees and their dependents; and improved sickness
and accident, medical, life insurance, and pension bene­
fits. By the end of the month, g e had also settled on

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

similar terms with the 11 other unions of the Coordi­
nated Bargaining Committee.
The Westinghouse settlements were similar to those
accepted at GE. The Federation of Westinghouse Inde­
pendent Salaried Unions settled first, on July 24, 1979.
The Federation agreed to change the fully employer-fi­
nanced pension plan to one that was partially paid for
by employees. Unlike the Federation, the three other
major unions struck on July 16, 1979, because of the
company’s demand that employees begin to make con­
tributions to the pension plans. The IBEW settled on
August 19, and the IUE and UE, on September 4, on the
same economic terms as those at GE. As a compromise
to reach agreement, Westinghouse dropped its proposal
for contributory pensions, and the unions accepted a
slight decrease in the pension benefits they had been de­
manding. The settlements also included improved job
protection provisions for workers adversely affected by
plant shutdowns, relocations, or production “cutbacks.”
The electrical products industry has problems that
could affect negotiations. Foreign competition has beset
it for some time. In some instances, foreign competitors,
such as Sanyo, Matsushita, and Sharp, have built plants
in the United States. Another problem is governmentmandated energy-efficiency standards for appliances,
which tend to increase manufacturing costs. In addition,
the general scaling-back of utility usage due to energy
conservation measures, and rising prices of electricity
and resultant curtailing of generating plant capacity
have reduced sales of heavy duty generators and trans­
mission equipment. The slump in the new housing m ar­
ket, which accounts for about one-third of the unit sales
of major appliances in a normal year, has hurt demand
for major appliances. These problems have begun to
take their toll in layoffs because of sales declines. For
example, in October 1981, GE temporarily laid off all its
15,800 production workers at its Appliance Park facili­
ties in Louisville, Ky.
Negotiations between the Coordinated Bargaining
Committee and GE and Westinghouse were to begin in
November 1981. Although final union demands have
not been announced, union sources indicate that a ma­
jor demand in 1982 will include protection against au­
tomation and high technology (particularly the in­
troduction of robots and computers), wage increases,
and improved COLA benefits. Other likely proposals deal
with neutrality pledges, subcontracting, c o l a and medi­
cal insurance plans for retirees, union security, and em­
ployee contributions to pension plans.

Meat products industry
Approximately 50,000 employees in the meat pro­
ducts industry are covered by agreements scheduled to
expire on August 31. All of the major old-line, union­
ized meatpacking firms— Armour and Co., George A.
29

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Bargaining Calendar for 1982
Hormel and Co., Swift and Co., John Morrell and Co.,
and Wilson and Co.— as well as several smaller compa­
nies,13 will be involved in the negotiations. The United
Food and Commercial Workers International Union
( u f c w ) 14 represents about 90 percent of organized work­
ers in the industry. The remaining employees are repre­
sented by two independent unions— The National
Brotherhood of Packinghouse and Industrial Workers
and the Teamsters.
Contracts are negotiated with individual companies
either on a single plant or company-wide basis. Larger
packers, such as Armour, Morrell, Swift, and Wilson,
negotiate master agreements. One firm usually signs a
pattern-setting agreement, after which similar contracts
are negotiated by the others.15 Variations in contract
terms often occur because of differences in plant loca­
tions or company practices.
In the last round of negotiations, Morrell settled with
the UFCW in July 1979, more than a month in advance
of the August 31 expiration date. The 3-year contract
called for wage increases of 15 cents an hour in the first
year, 20 cents in the second, and 25 cents in the third;
semiannual COLA adjustments of 1 cent for each
0.3-point rise in the CPI; and improved vacation, dental,
optical, and pension benefits. The agreement set a pat­
tern for 28,000 workers at Swift, Hormel, Armour, and
Cudahy. After a 4-week strike, Oscar Mayer followed
the pattern in contracts with the UFCW for 4,000 em­
ployees in Iowa and Wisconsin.
Long-established packing companies have been faced
with many problems since the 1960’s. The meatpacking
industry is characterized by relatively wide fluctuations
in meat production and prices, with consequent changes
in sales volume. Profit per unit of output tends to be
low, so that packing companies must rely on high sales
volume and careful cost management to be successful.
In addition, there is keen competition and technological
change. In recent years, relatively new and aggressive
firms, such as Iowa Beef Processors, Inc., have taken
over an increasing share of the market for beef with
new, highly automated plants and new marketing tech­
niques. The old-line meat packers have suffered declin­
ing volume and profits and have been forced to close
many of their older, less efficient plants. Some older
companies have responded by placing greater emphasis
on more highly processed meat products and on brand
names.
The union’s bargaining goals are still being formulat­
ed. However, because of technological changes, mergers,
and plant closings in recent years, job security issues
are likely to loom as important items of discussion.

Automobiles
Master agreements between the International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Imple­
30FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ment Workers of America ( u a w ) and the “Big Three”
auto manufacturing companies— General Motors Corp.
( g m ), Ford Motor Co., and Chrysler Corp.— are up for
renewal on September 14, 1982. Approximately 550,000
actively employed auto workers will be involved,
380,000 at GM, 112,000 at Ford, and 56,000 at
Chrysler.16 UAW contracts at American Motors Corp.,
covering 9,500 workers, do not expire until September
1983.
The u a w bargains individually with each of the ma­
jor firms. In the past, the union has picked a target
company shortly before the contracts expired and di­
rected its primary efforts at reaching an agreement with
that firm. The major terms of the agreement would then
be offered to the other companies. The target firm varies
depending upon the union’s perception of its position
and that of the auto companies. In 1979, GM was the
target; in 1976, Ford; and in 1973, Chrysler.
In 1979, the last round of negotiations, the Auto
Workers settled with GM only hours before a strike
deadline.17 The 3-year agreement provided increased
benefits for current and future retirees; an immediate
wage increase of 24 cents per hour; and wage increases
of 3 percent each in 1979, 1980, and 1981. Quarterly
COLA adjustments were to be 1 cent per hour for each
0.3-point increase in the CPI for the first and second
year, and 1 cent per hour for each 0.26-point movement
in the third year, with a 14-cent diversion of COLA pay­
ment to help defray the cost of improvements in bene­
fits. A stock ownership plan was initiated, similar to
that for salaried employees. Other provisions included
increased employer contributions to the supplemental
unemployment benefit fund; transfer rights, with full se­
niority, to new plants manufacturing items similar to
those in plants represented by the union; and improved
holiday, dental, optical, medical, and life insurance bene­
fits.
The agreement set a pattern for auto workers at
Ford, but not at financially beleaguered Chrysler, with
which the Auto Workers agreed, in October 1979, to a
wage-and-benefit package that was $203 million less
than the GM settlement pattern would have provided. In
exchange, Chrysler nominated union President Douglas
Fraser for a seat on its board of directors. In January of
both 1980 and 1981, the union agreed to further pay
and benefit cuts totaling $865 million to help Chrysler
meet the requirements of new Federal loan guarantee
legislation.
The industry is currently restructuring to produce the
smaller, more fuel-efficient cars now in demand. As it
does, plants are being closed, workers are being laid off,
and some production is being moved abroad. Even with
these changes, the industry faces huge challenges— for­
eign competition, high interest rates, a sluggish econo­
my, costly government safety and environmental

regulations, and financial problems. According to indus­
try figures, 1980 was the weakest sales year for Ameri­
can automakers in the domestic market in almost 20
years, and the industry lost $4 billion. With annual
sales only slightly improved over last year, Chrysler re­
ported a $287 million loss for first half of 1981; Ford, a
$379 million loss; and GM, a profit of $705 million.
Given the industry’s problems, there probably will be
a major change in the focus of negotiations. The Auto
Workers has already requested an early start to negotia­
tions and has shown an interest in job and income

guarantees, protection against contracting out of jobs,
profit-sharing, and stock ownership arrangements. GM
and Ford are reportedly considering offering profit-shar­
ing plans as a substitute for cost-of-living adjustment
provisions and are talking about substantial changes in
the industry’s wage structure and cuts in labor costs.
Ford is studying employment-guarantee alternatives,
while Chrysler is mulling over a modified cost-of-living
plan. All three companies are considering tougher rules
on absenteeism and “overmanning,” as well as relaxing
“restrictive” work rules.
□

FOOTNOTES

' Major agreements are those that cover 1,000 workers or more.
Major oil companies are Gulf, Cities Service, Texaco, Mobil,
Union Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, Standard Oil of Califor­
nia (Chevron), British Petroleum, Standard Oil of Ohio (Sohio), Stan­
dard Oil of Indiana (Amoco), Atlantic Richfield, Shell Oil, Sun Oil,
Tenneco, Exxon, Conoco, Occidental, Getty, Marathon, Ashland,
Amerada Hess, and Charter.
Twelve small oil refineries, employing about 1,700 workers, had
settled with OCAW by mid-February, but the union continued to
strike against the major oil companies and other small refineries. The
Gulf accord quickly provided a basis for settlement for all major oil
refining companies except Chevron, which resisted meeting the pat­
tern.
4The act seeks to reduce regulation of the trucking industry by
making it easier to be certified to operate a route, by allowing owneroperators to haul certain freight that was previously denied to them,
and by eventually ending collective rate making.
5Williams succeeded Frank Fitzsimmons, who died in May 1981.
"About 15,000 steel-haulers continued striking, with the last of the
strikers returning to work on May 7, 1979. The steel-haulers won a
return to the pre-1976. pay system, under which owner-operators re­
ceived a flat percentage of the entire amount their employer received
for hauling a load. They also won pay for six days of sick leave. They
did not, however, win their demand for a separate, binding vote on
their supplemental agreement.
URW contracts, covering about 11,000 workers, at the General
Tire and Rubber Co., Kelly-Springfield Tire Co., Gates Rubber Co.,
Dunlop Tire and Rubber Co., Cooper Tire and Rubber Co., and
Armstrong Rubber Co., expire in 1982.
"In February of 1979, Firestone and the URW had signed a no­
strike, no-lockout agreement that obligated Firestone to accept the
URW designated industry settlement if the parties failed to reach an
accord on their own.
4 Foreign penetration of U.S. markets has not necessarily been
through imports. Michelin, for example, established tire plants in
Greenville and Anderson, South Carolina in 1975.


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

"A change of union leadership could be a factor in the negotia­
tions. URW president Peter C. Bommarito, who has held the reins
since 1966, did not seek reelection at the union’s October 1981 con­
vention.
"The Coordinating Bargaining Committee was established in 1966
to strengthen the negotiations in the industry. The Committee in­
cludes 11 AFL-CIO affiliated unions— International Union, Allied
Industrial Workers of America; United Brotherhood of Carpenters
and Joiners of America; International Union of Electrical, Radio and
Machine Workers; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers;
International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers; American Flint
Glass Workers’ Union of North America; International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers; United Association of Jour­
neymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry
of the United States and Canada; Sheet Metal Workers’ International
Association; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and
Agricultural Implement Workers of America; and United Steelwork­
ers of America— and 2 independent unions— the International
Union, United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America;
and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers of America.
1 The CWA and IBEW agreements with Western Electric do not
expire until 1983.
' Rath Packing Co., Oscar Mayer and Co., Cudahy Co., Dubuque
Packing Co., and Hygrade Food Products.
14The UFCW was created in June 1979 by a merger of the Amal­
gamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America and
the Retail Clerks International Union.
15 Morrell set the pattern in 1979, and Wilson signed the patternsetting agreement in 1976. Before that Armour or Swift usually set
the pattern.
'"As of August 1981, an additional 107,000 employees were on in­
definite layoff at these three companies.
17This was the first time industry bargaining was settled without a
strike against the target company since 1964, and the first industry
bargaining without a strike against any major producer since 1953.

31

The unemployment insurance
system: its financial structure
Since the early 1970’s, there has been a
departure from the past exclusive reliance
on employer taxes to pay for benefits;
a built-up Federal role and the advent of
new benefit programs have replaced it
A

rthur

P a d il l a

The current Federal-State system of unemployment in­
surance (u i) traces its origins to the Social Security Act
and related laws of 1935. The clear expectation of the
Congress and of President Roosevelt was that this legis­
lation would lead to the creation of State UI programs
broadly compatible with Federal law. This anticipation
was based in part on the economic incentives inherent
in the act, whereby employers who paid taxes to a Fed­
erally approved State UI program would be exempt
from most of the Federal unemployment payroll tax.1
Today there are UI programs in the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Is­
lands, each providing compensation in accordance with
its own benefit standards.2 These 53 systems cover 90
percent of all employers and 95 percent of all wage and
salary employers. To fund the programs, States tax em­
ployers at rates which reflect, to varying degrees, the
employer’s record in laying off workers. Employers with
relatively favorable histories in worker layoffs will there­
fore pay lower payroll taxes than other firms.
Over the years, the financing of regular u i benefits
has been based on the concept of individual employer
responsibility for the insurance costs of unemployment.
In an im portant sense, the costs of unemployment beneArthur Padilla is associate vice president for academic affairs at The
University of North Carolina system. This article is based on a study
done while the author was on the staff of the Brookings Institution.
32


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

fits have been treated for nearly half a century as anoth­
er expense of doing business.

Employers absorb fewer costs
Since the early 1970’s, the UI system has depended
less and less on State employer taxes to pay for benefits,
thus weakening the relation between previous work and
earnings on the one hand and insurance benefits on the
other. The initiation of the extended benefits program in
1970 and of the Federal supplemental benefits program
in 1974 signaled the beginning of a significant Federal
role. These nonregular programs, which basically extend
the time during which benefits may be collected, have
resulted in larger costs and have required the imposition
of higher taxes and tax rates on employers. A substan­
tial part of the Federal employer tax is set aside to pay
for half of the costs of the extended benefits program;
States pay for the other half from their own payroll tax­
es. General U.S. Treasury revenues, as well as the Fed­
eral payroll tax, financed the now-expired supplemental
benefits program during its 4-year duration.3
Beyond its increasingly im portant position in financ­
ing extensions of unemployment benefits, the Federal
Government performs another related role. When a
State’s UI reserves are depleted (either because the level
of benefits it awards is too high in relation to its tax re­
ceipts or because it has endured relatively steep unem­
ployment rates over time), that State may borrow

interest-free Federal funds to meet its benefit obliga­
tions.
The 1974—75 recession, longest since World War II
and following closely the severe recession of 1970, pain­
fully underscored the financial weaknesses of many
State Ul programs. About half of the State systems
exhausted their reserves and were forced to take inter­
est-free advances as a direct result of the mid-1970’s
downturn and, as of March 1981, 17 States continued
to owe nearly $6 billion in outstanding loans.4 In addi­
tion to this State debt, the expansion of nonregular bene­
fits (extended benefits, supplemental benefits, and other
programs) during the 1970’s resulted in a large Federal
debt, still outstanding. The Federal share of the debt in
the extended benefits program is currently about $1.8
billion, and an additional $5.8 billion is due the Trea­
sury for costs of the supplemental benefits program.
The following section describes, in general terms, the
complex financial structure of the Ul program. It will
serve as a preface to later discussions about problems of
the State trust funds, the pursuant debts of many
States, and other immediate and longer-term issues.

Current financial conditions
The existing financial structure of the Ul system is ex­
tremely complicated. Employer taxes as well as general
U.S. Treasury revenues flow through a perplexing maze
of trust funds and special accounts to pay for loans to
States, regular benefits, extended benefits, and other
special Ul programs such as Public Service Employ­
ment, trade readjustment allowances, and unemploy­
ment compensation for Federal employees. Originally,
the employer taxes went to the State trust funds to pay
for the regular benefits, and to the Employment Securi­
ty Administration Account to cover State and Federal
costs of operating the program.
Specifically, Title IX of the Social Security Act
established the Unemployment Trust Fund in the U.S.
Treasury to hold receipts from Federal and State Ul tax­
es. There are separate accounts within the fund for each
of the States, as well as three distinct Federal accounts.
The Federal accounts are the Employment Security A d­
ministration Account, the Extended Unemployment
Compensation Account, and the Federal Unemploy­
ment Account.
The current Federal unemployment tax rate is 3.4
percent of the first $6,000 of each employee’s annual
wages and employers receive credit for 2.7 percentage
points of the tax, if they operate in a State with an ap­
proved Ul system.5 The remainder (0.7 percentage
points) is distributed between the employment security
account (0.45 percentage points) and the extended com­
pensation account (0.25 percentage points). As pre­
viously indicated, the former pays all administrative ex­
penses, both Federal and State, while the latter funds

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

half of extended benefits and all of the Federal supple­
mental benefits (which expired in 1978). The State trust
funds pay for 100 percent of the regular benefits and for
the other half of the extended benefits.
It is im portant to observe that general revenues also
are funneled into the extended compensation account
and the Federal account. The latter account serves the
critical function of providing repayable interest-free ad­
vances to States with depleted reserves, and with 17
States currently devoid of any reserves, this aspect of Ul
financing is significant. Any excess of payroll tax re­
ceipts remaining after payment of State and Federal ad­
ministrative costs is directed by law to this account,
which has a statutory ceiling of 0.125 percent of total
wages in covered employment (currently about $1.2 bil­
lion). If either account is depleted, congressional appro­
priations from general revenues are necessary. These
appropriations from Treasury funds are actually loans
without interest which by law must be repaid either
from direct State repayments of outstanding loans or
from increases in the Federal payroll tax through re­
duced employer credits.
The 17 States with outstanding loan balances as of
March 1981 are shown in table 1. The total unpaid
amount is $5,926 billion, with five States (Illinois,
Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, and Pennsylvania) ac­
counting for three-fourths of the debt. Illinois and
Pennsylvania each owe sums which exceed the statutory
limit of approximately $1.2 billion in the Federal ac­
count, the fund used to provide loans to all States with
depleted reserves. Most of these debtor states have
owed for 6 years or more. Why is it that so many States
owe significant sums to the Federal account and are, in
effect, being subsidized by nondebtor States? This arti­
cle will now analyze the State debt to the Federal ac­
count and then review the Federal debt to the extended
compensation account.

Table 1. States with outstanding Federal loan balances
as of March 1981, and date loans were first made
State

T o ta l....................................
Arkansas ........................................
Connecticut ’ .................................
Delaware1 ......................................
District of Columbia1 ......................
Illin o is '.............................................
Kentucky ........................................
Maine1 ............................................
Michigan..........................................
Minnesota ......................................
New Jersey1 .................................
Ohio ...............................................
Pennsylvania1 ...............................
Puerto Rico1 .................................
Rhode Island1 ...............................
Vermont1 ........................................
Virgin Islands1 ...............................
West Virginia .................................

Amount outstanding

$5,936,386,940
62,500,000
368,776,887
49,332,893
59,302,145
1,280,770,410
30,000,000
36,169,356
886,000,000
99,800,000
659,127,836
520,933,000
1,530,814,839
84,425,098
120,880,971
40,597,195
7,142,310
99,814,000

Date of loan

January
March
November
November
December
February
September
April
April
January
March
October
April
February
February
February
September

1976
1972
1975
1975
1975
1981
1975
1975
1975
1975
1977
1975
1975
1975
1974
1975
1980

1State making repayments through reduced employer credits toward Federal taxes.

33

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Financing Unemployment Insurance

The Federal account and State debt
As early as 1939, an excess of payroll tax receipts
over unemployment benefits paid was apparent and
year-end reserves in State trust funds were rising rapid­
ly. Between 1943 and 1946, benefit payments as a per­
centage of total wages were extremely low. As a result,
reserves in State trust funds reached 10.4 percent of to­
tal wages in 1945 and 9.4 percent in 1946, levels never
again experienced in the reserve-to-wages ratio. More­
over, from 1946 to 1953, costs continued to fall in rela­
tion to contributions, and States steadily cut payroll tax
rates to reduce the large surpluses in their accounts.
(These trends in Ul financial measures expressed as a
percentage of total and taxable wages are presented in
table 2.)
The “supersolvency” period ended during the 1957—
58 recession, as the benefit costs ratio (that is, the ratio
of expenditures on benefits to total wages in covered
employment) rose to approximately double that for the
preceding years. Since then, year-end reserves as a per­
centage of total wages (the reserve ratio) have remained
below about 3.5 percent. Low benefit expenditures were
experienced in the mid- and late 1960’s and the slight
decline in year-end reserves which began in the late
1950’s as a result of a rise in unemployment was
arrested. The reserve ratio, as seen in table 2, stayed be­
tween 3 and 3.5 percent of total payrolls during the
1960’s. However, the downturn in 1970-71 dampened
optimism about the continued solvency of many State
Ul systems. Even though the benefit cost ratio during
this recession was relatively modest (in comparison to
1958) at approximately 1.2 percent of covered payrolls,
reserves had fallen to 2.1 percent of total wages by the
end of 1972. More importantly, a few States with unex­
pectedly high benefit costs had to borrow large sums
from the loan fund to meet liabilities during 1972-74.

ing loan balances in early 1981 (“debtor” States), it is
clear that their unemployment rates have been signifi­
cantly higher than those in “nondebtor” States. In addi­
tion, the “trigger” for extended benefits has been more
likely to come on and stay on in the debtor States than
in others (that is, insured unemployment rates of debtor
States are more apt to be above the 4-percent extended
benefits “trigger” than are those of nondebtor States).
For instance, during fiscal 1979 and 1980, States with
outstanding balances were paying for extended benefits
an average of 8 months per year, compared to approxi­
mately 4 months for the other two-thirds of the coun­
try. The adverse economic conditions present during the
1970’s have affected all State Ul systems, but the debtor
States apparently have experienced more severe econom­
ic conditions.
Another important consideration is the degree to
which insolvent States are responsible for their financial
plight. In particular, it has been suggested that the Fed­
erally mandated extension of benefits (both the extend­
ed and supplemental benefits programs) contributed to
the very high costs which some States experienced dur­
ing the 1974-75 recession. First, it should be noted that
the supplemental benefits program was always exclu­
sively a Federal program, and thus never added a
financial burden to State systems. Second, while the ex­
istence of extended benefits may lengthen the duration
of unemployment and raise program costs slightly, reg­
ular Ul benefits have historically exceeded by very large
margins the costs associated with the extended benefits
program. The costs of the State share of this program
do not go very far in explaining the depletion of re­
serves among debtor States; only during 1975 and 1976
were extended benefits costs more than 5 percent of to-

Table 2. Trends in unemployment insurance financial
measures, selected years, 1940-78
Percent of total wages

Reasons fo r State financial distress. Insolvency in State
Ul systems, a situation in which accumulated net re­
serves and current payroll tax receipts do not meet cur­
rent benefit costs, became a noticeable problem in a few
States during the early 1970’s. However, it was not un­
til 1975 that State insolvency reached the current acute
stage. From 1972 to 1974, only three States received in­
terest-free advances from the system, while in 1975 and
1976, 23 States had outstanding loans. Throughout the
1970’s, 26 different Ul systems received advances. While
it is beyond the scope of this article to delve into Stateby-State detail on the particular causes of insolvency, it
will be useful to discuss certain factors which apparent­
ly have contributed significantly to the problem.
The incidence of unemployment has accelerated in re­
cent years, and some States have been disproportion­
ately affected. Considering States which had outstand­
Digitized34
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Year

1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978

.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............

Average

Reserve
ratio
tax rate
(percent
Average (percent
Taxes
Benefit
of
employer
of
collected costs
total
tax rate taxable
wages)
wages)

2.63
1.74
1.16
.81
1.17
1.18
.65
.94
.90
1.16
1.27
1.35

1.60
.67
1.33
.91
1.40
.84
1.01
1.07
2.03
1.39
1.16
.93

2.50
1.50
1.18
.81
1.15
1.18
.64
.94
.89
1.20
1.29
1.37

2.70
1.71
1.50
1.18
1.88
2.12
1.34
2.00
1.98
2.58
2.85
2.77

5.60
10.38
6.76
5.56
3.29
3.17
3.11
1.88
.53
.13
.13
.55

Reserve multiple
ratio1

Actual

High cost

3.50
15.49
5.08
6.11
2.35
3.77
3.08
1.75
.26
.09
.11
.60

1.60
1.55
1.51
.92
.24
.06
06
.25

1Reserve multiple ratio (actual) = reserve ratlo/beneflt costs ratio, and reserve multiple
ratio (high cost) = reserve ratio/1958 benefit ratio or reserve ratio/1975 benefit ratio. (The
“ high cost’’ multiple ratio is one measure of fiscal solvency, with 1.5 considered a minimum
level of reserve adequacy. The “ high cost" years are 1958 and 1975.)
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Unemploy­
ment Insurance Service.

tal costs. Indeed, comparison of payroll tax receipts
with benefit expenditures shows that debtor States gen­
erally lacked tax revenues necessary to meet even regu­
lar U l benefit costs during the mid- and late 1970’s.
The evidence further shows that relative taxing
efforts, in absolute terms and in comparison to total
wages, of debtor States are not as high as might be
expected given their costs. In 1978, about half had an
average employer tax rate as a percent of taxable wages
of 2.8 percent (the national average) or more, and 1978,
it is noted, follows several years of continued insolvency
for these States. Some debtor States did experience soar­
ing costs during the mid-1970’s which obviously con­
tributed to their indebtedness. However, the problem in
some States (for example, Michigan and Connecticut)
appears to be related to a policy of maintaining relative­
ly low reserves in comparison to payrolls and of con­
tinuing to impose tax rates well below those of other
States with comparable costs. In contrast, others (such
as North and South Carolina) had very high increases
in costs during 1975 but did not go into debt because
they entered the recession with very high reserves, and
some (for example, California) survived the escalated
costs by raising payroll taxes as the economy worsened.
It should be underscored that these uneven financing
patterns among States lend little support for a Federal
policy of loan forgiveness, because of the inequities such
a solution would create among solvent and debtor
States.
Possible solutions to the problem. Hindsight suggests that
more fiscally prudent reserve levels in debtor States
might have been helpful in avoiding insolvency. In the
past, several solvency standards or rules have been
suggested to ensure that States would have sufficient
funds to meet yearly program costs without creating
vast surpluses or large deficits in reserve funds. The “re­
serve multiple” rule is the one most often recommended
and the Department of Labor generally urges States to
adapt it to their own cost experiences.6 However, simple
arithmetic shows that use of the standard of the 1.5 re­
serve multiple ratio (that is, a value of at least 1.5 for
the reserve ratio divided by the high cost ratio) in re­
serves at the start of 1970 would not have forestalled
insolvency in most of the States which experienced it
during the 1970’s. Indeed, a reserve multiple of 2 would
not have been enough in many cases. For one thing,
this reserve multiple rule is apparently predicated on
there being sufficient time between recessions for ade­
quate reserves to accumulate. Back-to-back recessions
such as those of 1970-71 and 1974-75 evidently do not
permit this rebuilding without some increase in tax
rates. Also, the reserve multiple rule does not account
for liberalizations in benefits which have occurred.7
The National Commission on Unemployment Com­

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

pensation, an independent advisory body to Congress
and the President, recently provided a set of policy rec­
ommendations pertinent to the financing of the UI sys­
tem. The commission circuitously addressed the issue of
outstanding State loans by suggesting that all States be
“reimbursed from Federal general revenues for the State
share of extended benefits costs during the period of the
national ‘on’ trigger,” on a retroactive basis. (A related
recommendation was that existing loans not be required
to bear interest in the future.)
Reimbursement of the States for their share of ex­
tended benefits costs during the national trigger periods
would cost the Federal Government about $3.3 billion.
Because most of those monies would be going to
nondebtor States, the reduction in the current State
debt would amount to $1.3 billion, slightly less than
one-third of the $5.9 billion outstanding. Thus, a liabili­
ty of more than $4.6 billion would remain if the recom­
mendation were accepted. The merits of this recom­
mendation seem to relate to the propositions that all
States should be treated equally, and that cutting back
the debt from $5.9 to $4.6 billion would somehow pro­
vide a fresh start in solving long-term problems. It may
also be an implicit recognition of the disparate impact
that the 1975 recession had among States. On the other
hand, the recommendation does not address the issue of
the remaining State debt and sets a significant precedent
in forgiving repayment of sizable sums. It further raises
the issue of equity in the treatment of States which have
not borrowed or which have borrowed but have repaid
their debts, and those which have yet to repay substan­
tial loans. Therefore, in terms of fairness to nondebtor
States, it would be preferable not to dismiss any of the
debt. Loan policy should also be modified to begin
charging interest for any outstanding loan balances, to
prevent the implicit subsidy going from nondebtor to
debtor States. The current debt is costing (conservative­
ly) about $600 million in forgone interest, an expense
being met by employers and taxpayers in nondebtor
States.

The Federal side
In addition to the $5.9 billion owed by 17 States to
the Federal Unemployment Account, there is also a
Federal debt due the Extended Unemployment Com­
pensation Account, which at the end of 1980 amounted
to $7.6 billion. Therefore, the combined total debt for
the Ul system is more than $13.5 billion.
The current Federal debt to the extended compensa­
tion account consists of $1.8 billion for the extended
benefit program and $5.8 billion for the Federal supple­
mental benefit program, which expired in 1978. As not­
ed earlier, funds from the Federal Unemployment Tax
Account ( f u t a ) are used to finance all administrative
costs in the UI system, as well as the Federal share of
35

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Financing Unemployment Insurance
extended and supplemental benefits costs. Before 1977,
the FUTA tax was 0.5 percent of covered wages, and 90
percent of that (or 0.45 percentage points) flowed into
the Employment Security Administration Account to
cover administrative costs. The remaining 0.05 percent­
age points paid for the Federal share of the extended
benefits through the extended compensation account
fund, which explains why the Federal debt rose so rap­
idly between 1970 and 1977.
In 1977, Congress recognized that the 0.05 percent
could not meet the mounting costs of the additional un­
employment benefits programs it had established, and
the FUTA tax rate was raised to 0.7 percent. The portion
of the Federal tax designated for administrative ex­
penses remained at 0.45 percent while the percentage
designed to pay the extended and supplemental benefits
rose from 0.05 to 0.25. This last figure is currently be­
ing used to retire (slowly) the existing Federal debt, al­
though if an unemployment increase should retrigger
the extended benefits program, the funds would then be
used purely for paying current expenses. And, if those
costs should exceed the amount which the 0.25-percent
tax generates, additional borrowing from general reve­
nues would occur and the Federal share of the debt
would grow once again.
The present statutory limit of the extended compen­
sation account is 0.125 of total wages in covered em­
ployment, or about $1.2 billion. After the outstanding
indebtedness of this account has been repaid to general
revenues, the 0.7-percent net tax will again drop to 0.5
percent. One-tenth of net collections, or 0.05 percent
would flow into the extended compensation account to
rebuild it; the remaining 0.45 percent would continue to
go into the extended compensation account to cover ad­
ministrative costs; and the total Federal unemployment
tax would thus be reduced from 3.4 to 3.2 percent.
Even if the unemployment rate remained at a level
below that which would trigger the extended benefits
program, the extended compensation account would not
be replenished very rapidly after its debt to general rev­
enues is finally paid off.8 Back-to-back recessions, such
as those in the 1970’s, or periods of sustained high un­
employment, would quickly deplete its reserves and
again require borrowing from general revenues.
The supplemental benefits program, as noted above,
was enacted in December 1974, to provide “emergency”
supplemental benefits for persons who had exhausted

both their regular and extended benefits. The Federal
tax receipts flowing into the extended compensation ac­
count did not begin to meet the high costs associated
with the nonregular programs, and advances to the ac­
count from general Treasury revenues were required.
The current extended compensation account debt for
the supplemental benefits of $5.8 billion must, accord­
ing to statute, be repaid to the Treasury from receipts
of the Federal payroll tax on employers. This debt was
incurred from the beginning of the supplemental bene­
fits program through March 1977. Subsequently, sup­
plemental benefits costs were charged directly to general
revenues, not to the extended compensation account,
thus relieving the States and employers of the costly
burden. This practice continued until the program was
terminated in 1978.
Congressional authorization to cover costs of the sup­
plemental benefits program from general revenues is
tacit acknowledgment that at least some portion of the
costs of benefit extension should be borne by taxpayers
at large rather than by individual employers. The con­
cept of individual employer responsibility, which is the
basis for the States’ experience-rated tax systems, makes
sense only if employer accountability for unemployment
is relatively short-lived. Therefore, any extensions of
benefits beyond those that individual States are able
and willing to provide should be funded by the Federal
Government.
Employers would be relieved of this burden by fol­
lowing another National Commission on Unemploy­
ment Compensation recommendation to cancel at least
part of this Federal debt. Future depletions of the ex­
tended compensation account might also be avoided if
the current statutory funding limit of the account were
raised to at least 0.25 percent of total wages in covered
employment, and provisions made for automatic in­
creases in the FUTA tax should reserves in the extended
account fall below that fraction. However, any further
extension of benefits beyond those of the extended bene­
fits program, such as a new supplemental benefits pro­
gram, should be paid totally from general revenues.
Among other things, general revenue financing would
encourage Congress to find the revenues before
extending unemployment benefits, something which has
not been done previously. This financing arrangement
would also be consistent with the principle of limited
individual employer responsibility.
□

FOOTNOTES
' Employers operating in States with approved UI systems original­
ly received a 2.7-percent credit toward the 3.0-percent Federal tax
rate. The remaining 0.3 percentage points (or 10 percent of the total
Federal rate) was paid by employers to cover all administrative costs
of the program. Since 1961, the Federal tax rate has risen to 3.4 per­

Digitized 36
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

cent of taxable
the n e t Federal
ered wages.
The current
Puerto Rico to

wages while the credit has held at 2.7 percent. Thus,
tax rate has increased from 0.3 to 0.7 percent of cov­
maximum weekly benefits range from a low of $72 in
a high of $202 in Ohio, with an overall average maxi-

mum benefit of about $104 per week. These benefits are not taxable
for single individuals with gross incomes of less than $20,000 per year
or for married persons filing joint returns with gross incomes below
$25,000.
There are other benefit programs which are funded out of general
revenues, such as the “Redwood” program for displaced forestry
workers in California.
4 Of these 17 States, 11 were making repayments to the U.S. Treas­
ury through reduced employer credits, as provided in the Federal Un­
employment Tax Act. This method of repayment is tantamount to
raising the effective tax rates for all employers in the State.
Before 1961, the Federal tax was 3 percent; from 1961-70, 3.1 per­
cent; between 1970 and 1977, 3.2 percent; and, since 1977, it has been
3.4 percent of taxable wages. The total credit allowed to employers in
States with approved UI programs has remained at 2.7 percentage
points, or nine-tenths of the original 3.0-percent payroll tax.


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

"See Paul Mackin,

B e n e fit F in a n c in g in U n e m p lo y m e n t In su ra n ce : A

(Kalamazoo, Mich., Upjohn In­
stitute for Employment Research, 1978), pp. 31 ff. The reserve multi­
ple rule suggests that a State’s reserve ratio should be 1.5 to 3 times
the highest consecutive 12-month benefit costs ratio since 1958. Both
types of ratios are expressed as a percentage of total wages in covered
employment which adjusts these indices for rising total wages. It is
thought that States with reserve multiple ratios of 1.5 would have suf­
ficient funds in reserve (and in current tax receipts) to pay for the in­
creased costs of a recession as severe as the worst experienced since
1958.
P r o b le m o f B a la n c in g R es p o n s ib ilitie s

Paul Mackin,

B e n e fit F in a n cin g ,

pp. 31 ff.

s If only 0.05 percent of taxable wages is allowed to flow into the
extended compensation account, it would take approximately 6 to 8
years at present wage levels to reach the current statutory limit of the
account, assuming no program costs for extended benefits.

Reducing structural unemployment
Unemployment can be said to be structural in nature if aggregate
demand is high enough to provide jobs at prevailing wages for every­
one seeking work but job openings remain unfilled because of a per­
sistent mismatching of skills or geographical locations. If the
mismatching is resolved voluntarily through mutual search by work­
ers and employers in a reasonably short period of time, say 8 or 10
weeks, the resulting unemployment falls in the frictional category. The
unemployment becomes structural, however, if the mismatching can­
not be resolved by such voluntary action and the job seekers are re­
quired to develop new skills or change their place of residence but are
effectively precluded from doing so. In the former instance the work­
ers choose to remain unemployed because of the likelihood of finding
suitable work, while in the latter their unemployment is involuntary in
the sense that they cannot overcome the barriers that bar them from
such work.
— F r a n k C. P ie r s o n

The M inimum Level o f Unemployment
and Public Policy (Kalamazoo, Mich.,

W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment
Research, 1980), p. 53.

37

Employment created
by construction expenditures
A billion dollars spent on construction
generates 24,000 full-time jobs for 1 year,
most of them in supporting industries,
according to studies of 13 activities
covering over half the value of new construction
R obert Ball

Almost 24,000 workers were employed for one full year
for each billion dollars spent in 1980 for new construc­
tion such as buildings, houses, and highways. More
than half of the jobs were created in industries that pro­
duce, sell, and deliver materials and equipment required
for construction, such as the manufacturing, trade,
transportation, and mining industries. (See table 1.) The
13 activities surveyed covered more than half of the val­
ue of new construction. Each activity created roughly
an equivalent number of jobs in the economy. The
fewest jobs were generated in commercial office build­
ings and civil works land projects (nearly 22,000 jobs
per billion dollars) and the largest number were in pub­
lic housing (26,000 jobs).

The studies: limitations and uses
Since 1959, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has sur­
veyed labor and material requirements for various types
of construction activity. The studies are designed to
measure the total employment impact of construction
activities, primarily those which would be affected by
government actions. Total employment includes labor
at the construction site (onsite) and labor required to
manufacture, sell, and transport the materials, equip­
ment, and supplies used in construction (offsite). The
employment impact is developed only for expenditures
on construction contracts. No attempt is made to meaRobert Ball is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Tech­
nology, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Digitized38
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

sure the impact of activities such as planning, design
work, purchasing rights of way, land acquisition and
development, and public utilities installations. The em­
ployment generated from the spending and respending
of wages and profits— the “rippling” or multiplier effect
— also falls outside the scope of these studies.
The studies provide information on the amount of la­
bor time required to complete the various types of ac­
tivity per $1,000 of construction contract cost; cost of
material, equipment, and supplies; distribution of costs;
and occupational requirements of the specific activity.
Data are collected by visits of b l s field representa­
tives to all general contractors and subcontractors
whose projects were in a sample of projects completed
during a specific time period— usually 1 year. The sam­
ple is selected from the universe of projects known to
have been completed during the period. The universe is
obtained from information provided by the Federal
agency financially supporting the construction or insur­
ing the funding of the construction or, for private sector
activities, by the Bureau of the Census. Factors such as
regional location, cost, and type of structure are consid­
ered in the sample design.
For each project, data are obtained on the total cost
of the project, the contract cost of each operation, and
the physical characteristics of the project. This informa­
tion is important in determining how well the sample
represents the universe and is also used in subsequent
analysis.
Onsite employment information, obtained from con-

tractors’ payroll records, is used in developing onsite
employee-hour requirements, wages, and total payroll
costs. Access to the payroll records makes possible the
collection and presentation of information on occupa­
tional distributions, timing of construction operations,
and wage relationships between crafts.
Information collected on the distribution of costs is
broken down by labor costs, material costs, and over­
head and profit. In addition, a detailed listing of materi­
als by type is obtained from written invoices and
interviews with the contractors.
Offsite employment estimates are derived from the
materials and equipment cost information. The esti­
mates are developed in two stages. First, input-output
tables, developed by the Department of Commerce, are
used to derive volume of output in various industries
generated by each of the materials purchased. Second,
by applying industry productivity factors, the volume of
output is translated into the amount of employment
generated in each industry.
To apply the input-output tables appropriately, data
on material purchases, which are obtained in current
dollars, have to be adjusted to prices corresponding
with those in the input-output tables. This requires a
carefully developed set of material price indexes. In or­
der to apply industry productivity factors, current data
on productivity for each industry must be developed.
The major intent of these studies was originally to
determine the impact of public works programs on em­
ployment, but the data have stimulated interest in other
forms of analysis. Occupational data, for example, are
used by the Department of Labor to help determine fu­
ture training needs and predict shortages and surpluses

in skilled trades, and are used by the Bureau as bench­
marks for the occupational matrix which, in turn, is
used to project occupational demand for the construc­
tion industry. Market analysts and manufacturers find
data on type and value of materials extremely valuable
for projecting demand for their products. Materials
data also serve as benchmarks for the Department of
Commerce’s input-output tables. In addition, subse­
quent resurveys provide data on trends in onsite labor
requirements which give indications of construction pro­
ductivity change. Thus, the studies have been gradually
expanded to cover private as well as public construc­
tion. Plans are to eventually cover all major types of
construction activities as well as to resurvey various ac­
tivities periodically.
This article summarizes data from all the activities
studied to date.1Because the data relate to various con­
struction activities and time periods, they provide a gen­
eral picture of the employment generating effects of
construction expenditures. The employment estimates
are stated in terms of full-time year-long jobs. Because
of part-time workers, transients, and the seasonal nature
of employment in the construction industry, more
workers would normally be employed than indicated by
the full-time job estimates. In addition, while many ma­
jor construction activities are covered, several signifi­
cantly different activities are not.2
Also, the estimates are somewhat conservative due to
the productivity assumptions used. Data on the decline
in onsite labor requirements, used as proxy productivity
increases, extend from 1959-60 into the mid-1970’s. Af­
ter that period, productivity growth in the economy
generally dropped off sharply. However, because more

Table 1. Estimated jobs generated per billion dollars of contract expenditures (in 1980 dollars) for various types of
construction, by industry
Construction industries
Activity

Other industries

All industries
Total

Onsite

Offsite

Total

Manufacturing

Trade, trans­
portation,
and services

All other

Private housing:
Multifamily ................................................................
Single-family..............................................................
General hospitals..........................................................
Elementary and secondary schools .............................
Federally-aided highways ............................................

25,400
22,000
24,800
23,200
24,600

11,100
9,500
12,700
10,300
11,900

9,900
8,300
11,400
9,100
10,900

1,200
1,200
1,300
1,200
1,000

14,300
12,500
12,100
12,900
12,700

7,600
6,100
6,800
7,300
5,900

5,200
5,100
4,200
4,200
4,800

1,500
1,300
1,100
1,400
2,000

Sewer works:
Lines .........................................................................
Plants.........................................................................
College housing ............................................................

23,600
24,000
22,500

9,800
10,100
10,900

9,300
9,400
9,400

500
700
1,400

13,900
13,900
11,600

8,100
8,700
6,300

3,900
3,700
4,000

1,700
1,400
1,300

Civil works:
Land .........................................................................
Dreoging ...................................................................
Public housing ..............................................................
Federal office buildings.................................................
Commercial office buildings..........................................

21,900
23,100
26,000
24,900
21,900

10,000
13,600
14,600
11,000
9,800

9,500
12,300
12,200
9,700
8,800

500
1,400
2,400
1,400
1,000

11,900
9,500
11,400
13,900
12,100

4,500
4,700
5,800
7,000
6,700

5,200
3,500
4,300
5,500
4,200

2,200
1,200
1,200
1,300
1,300

N ote: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.
These estimates of employment requirements were developed from labor requirements studies data. Data were adjusted for price and productivity changes between the years of the most
recent surveys and 1980. Productivity adjustments used were the average annual rates of decllne In onsite labor requirements In constant dollars. For a description of deflators used, see


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

Survey o f C urrent Business, August 1974, pp. 18-27.

Estimates of the number of full-time jobs generated per billion dollars of expenditure were
derived using 1,800 employee hours per year-round job for onsite construction; 2,000 hours for
offsite construction; 2,089 for manufacturing; 1,795 for trade, transportation, and services; and
2,041 for mining and all other.

39

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Employment Created by Construction Spending
recent construction measures are not available, the earli­
er figures are extrapolated to obtain the 1980 employ­
ment figures. As a result, the employment estimates
have probably been slightly underestimated.
The studies upon which this article is based include
federally-aided highways, Federal office buildings, Corps
of Engineers civil works land and dredging projects,
sewer lines and plants, elementary and secondary
schools, commercial (private) office buildings, college
housing, public housing, private single- and multi-family
housing, and general hospitals. Resurveys are underway
for three of these activities in addition to a new study of
retail stores and shopping centers.3

Employment impact
One interesting feature of the data is the narrow
range of total labor requirements for different types of
construction activities studied within roughly the same
time period. This is true regardless of whether the activ­
ity involves residential buildings, nonresidential build­
ings, or heavy construction. For example, of the 10
activities studied during 1958-63, total hours generated
per $1,000 of expenditures ranged from 208 for sewer
plants to a little more than 250 for highways and civil
works dredging. (See table 2.) Of the four activities sur­

Table 2.

Onsite labor. Onsite hours showed more variation than
did total hours, ranging from 72 hours per $1,000 of ex­
penditure for single-family housing to 134 for civil
works dredging in 1958-63 and from 42 for schools to
50 for multifamily housing in 1971-72. According to
more recent studies, the range in onsite hours has nar­
rowed somewhat. For example, in the 1975-76 period,
the range was from 30 hours for Federal office buildings
to 33 for public housing.
The ratios of onsite hours to total hours also showed
considerable variation. They ranged from 33 percent for
single-family housing to 53 percent for civil works
dredging, two of the first studies to be conducted. Civil
works dredging projects, unlike other construction ac­
tivities, require that much of the onsite work be done
by ships’ crews working on dredges and barges. Howev­
er, in residential construction, the ratios of onsite to to-

Employee hours created per $1,000 of contract expenditures (in current dollars), by industry, all studies, 1958-76
Construction

Activity and year

Federally-aided highways:
19582 ......................
1976 ........................
Federal office buildings:
19592 ......................
1973 ........................
1976 ........................
Public housing:
I9602 ......................
19682 ......................
1975 ........................
Commercial office buildmgs:
1974 ........................
Elementary and secondary
schools:
19592 ......................
19652 ......................
1972 ........................
College housing:
19612 ......................
1972 ........................

Total,
all
indus­
tries

250.7
80.5

235.8
( 3)
( 3)

246.0
175.1
( 3)

97.5

231.8
193.2
114.1

236.3
( 3)

Other industries

Onsite

Offsite1

Manu­
fac­
turing

97.3
32.2

9.0
3.3

66.1
22.8

97.1
42.8
29.8

113.7
79.6
33.2

37.2

86.0
72.3
41.6

93.6
48.3

10.9
4.7
4.7

15.9
11.9
7.1

4.8

11.7
8.8
6.0

14.1
8.1

79.2
( 3)
( 3)

65.3
47.8
( 3)

33.0

78.0
65.8
40.8

77.5
( 3)

Construction

Trade,
trans­
porta­
tion,
and ser­
vices

Mining
and all
other

52.5
15.4

25.8
6.9

35.7
( 3)
( 3)

36.9
26.7
( 3)

16.6

41.4
34 4
18.8

37 2
( 3)

12.9
( 3)
( 3)


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

Activity and year

Civil works:
Land projects:
1960 .............................
1972 .............................
Dredging projects:
1960 .............................
1972 .............................

Total,
all
indus­
tries

Other industries

Manu­
fac­
turing

Trade,
trans­
porta­
tion,
and ser­
vices

Mining
and all
other

Onsite

Offsite1

84.7
43.2

4.5
2.5

53.2
( 3)

46.9
( 3)

24.1

( 3)

133.9
57.0

15.6
7.0

56.8
( 3)

31.6
( 3)

13.5
( 3)

213.4
( 3)
251.4

( 3)

* Sewer works:
Lines:
1963 .............................
1971 .............................
Plants:
1963 .............................
1971 .............................

208.8
128.3

85.9
48.0

4.8
3.0

75.9
48.8

27.2
18.8

15.0
9.7

208.1
127.4

82.7
47.0

5.7
4.0

80.0
51.6

27.1
17.6

126
7.2

Private multifamily housing:
19712 ...........................

137.5

50.0

6.5

46.9

26.1

8.1

14.8
120
6.8

Private single-family housing:
19622
19692 ...........................

7
145.6

51.9

8.2

47.2

29.6

8.7

138
( 3)

General hospitals:
I9602
19662 ...........................

?Pfi fl
189.0

76.1

9.8

64.0

29.6

9.5

Nursing homes:
19664 ...........................

192.7

73.7

8.4

66.6

33.6

10.4

14.2
8.8
( 3)

5.9

’ Revised, based on adjustment to 1979 benchmarks of Em ploym ent and E arnings series.
Some SIC groupings were not revised for earlier years; thus data on offsite construction hours
are not strictly comparable. Differences, however, would be slight.
2 Indirect data revised from original study results due to reprocessing materials through

40

veyed in 1971 and 1972, employment ranged from 114
hours for elementary and secondary schools to 138
hours for private multifamily housing. Sewer lines and
plants fell between these two extremes.4 More recent
studies show the same relationship; however, most have
been abbreviated studies and thus do not report total
hours.

improved input-output tables.
3 Not available.
4 Estimated except for onsite construction hours. Based on case study
Note: Detai| may not add t0 totals because of rounding

Table 3. Estimated employee hours created per $1,000 of contract expenditures (in 1980 dollars) for various types of
construction, by industry
____________________________________________________
Other industries

Construction industries
Activity

Total

Onsite

Offsite

Total

Manufacturing

Trade, trans­
portation,
and services

All others

All industries

Private housing:
Multifamily ................................................................
Single-family..............................................................
General hospitals ..........................................................
Elementary and secondary schools .............................
Federally-aided highways ............................................

48.5
41.9
47.1
44.4
46.6

20.2
17.3
23.1
18.7
21.6

17.9
14.9
20.5
16.3
19.6

2.3
2.4
2.6
2.4
2.0

28.3
24.6
24.0
25.7
25.0

15.8
12.8
14.2
15.3
12.4

9.4
9.2
7.5
7.6
8.6

3.1
4.2
2.3
2.8
4.0

Sewer works:
Lines .........................................................................
Plants.........................................................................
College housing ............................................................

45.4
46.1
42.9

17.7
18.3
19.9

16.7
16.9
17.0

1.0
1.4
2.9

27.7
27.8
23.0

16.9
18.2
13.2

7.0
6.7
7.2

3.8
2.9
2.6

Civil works:
Land .........................................................................
Dredging ...................................................................
Public housing ..............................................................
Federal office buildings.................................................
Commercial office buildings..........................................

41.0
43.5
49.2
47.4
41.9

18.1
24.8
26.8
20.1
17.9

17.1
22.1
22.0
17.4
15.9

1.0
2.7
4.8
2.7
2.0

23.2
18.7
22.4
27.3
24.0

9.3
9.9
12.1
14.7
13.9

9.4
6.3
7.8
9.9
7.5

4.5
2.5
2.5
2.7
2.6

N ote: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. Data were adjusted for price and productivity change between the years of the most recent surveys and the current year for which
price indexes were available. The appropriate deflator for each construction activity was used

tal hours were also rather wide— from 33 percent for
single-family housing to 46 percent for public housing.
After adjusting the data for price and productivity
changes and extrapolating the data to 1980 to facilitate
comparison, the narrow range of the level of total hours
becomes even more evident, ranging from 41 per $1,000
for civil works land projects to 49 for public housing
construction. Onsite hours exhibited considerably more
variation, extending from 17 hours for single-family
housing to 27 for public housing. (See table 3.) Onsite
labor requirements are affected by factors such as archi­
tectural design and structural features, relative propor­
tion and types of materials and equipment used,
differences in occupational skills and labor-capital
ratios, and varying price and wage levels.
Onsite occupational requirements, like onsite hour re­
quirements, vary significantly by type of construction
activity, reflecting the characteristics of the projects
and, particularly, the materials used. For example, car­
penters, normally the largest group of skilled workers
for building construction, reached their highest level in
residential construction. For single-family housing, they
represented more than one-third of all onsite occupa­
tional hours. On the other hand, for heavy construction
such as highways, sewer lines and plants, and civil
works construction, carpenters accounted for a rela­
tively small proportion of hours, 1 to 2 percent. Con­
versely, operating engineers were the largest group of
skilled workers for highways, sewer lines and civil
works land projects (composing about one-fourth of
onsite requirements) and one of the smallest for build­
ing construction (1.4 to 4 percent). Plumbers accounted
for 14 to 16 percent of onsite employment for hospital
construction, but very few plumbing jobs were generat­

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

to adjust employment requirements for price changes from the most recent study year to 1980.
See Survey o f C urrent Business, August 1974, pp. 18-27 for a description of the deflators
used.

ed in heavy construction activities.
Unskilled and semiskilled workers represented about
a third of the construction jobs overall, from a little
more than 23 percent for schools to around 50 percent
for highways and civil works land projects.
According to the studies, no dramatic shifts have oc­
curred in occupational requirements for construction.
Obviously, some slight shifts have occurred, such as the
displacement of plasterers by wallboard installers, and
of carpenters who lay hardwood floors by soft floor lay­
ers, but these changes have been gradual. In addition,
except for single-family housing where the proportion of
laborers and helpers increased from 23 percent in 1962
to 28 percent in 1969, there has been no evidence that
more intensive use of prefabricated components in
building structures has stimulated substitution of lower
skilled workers for higher skilled craftworkers. Indeed,
even in single-family housing construction, this trend
could reflect the geographic shift of a larger volume of
houses being built in the South where lower skilled
workers normally account for a higher percentage of
employment. (Detailed data on the distribution of
onsite hours by occupation are available from the au­
thor.)
Offsite labor requirements. There are two types of offsite
hours. First are those generated in the contractors’ of­
fices and warehouses— hours which are required to sup­
port the onsite construction work. These hours
normally average about 5 percent of total hours, based
on data from the Bureau’s employment and earnings
survey. The other type of hours are generated in indus­
tries other than construction and are estimated from the
use of materials, equipment, and supplies.5 These hours
41

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Employment Created by Construction Spending
normally account for about 60 percent of total hours.
Usually, the greater the degree of préfabrication of
materials used, or the greater the proportion of materi­
als costs, the greater the number of offsite hours re­
quired. For example, more hours in manufacturing are
required when ready-mix concrete is used than when
contractors mix their own concrete at the site of con­
struction. Similarly, the inclusion of built-in equipment
such as escalators, elevators, and air-conditioning in­
creases costs and manufacturing hours substantially.
The effect on employment in individual industries varies
for each type of construction because of differences in
the construction process, including use of construction
materials and equipment. Single-family housing con­
struction, for example, uses a large quantity of lumber
and wood products and, hence, has a significant impact
on employment in establishments providing those mate­
rials.
The percentage of offsite hours to total hours varied
widely among the surveys, ranging from 47 for civil
works dredging to about 67 for single-family housing.
Within residential construction, the range was from 54
for public housing to 67 for single-family housing.
The ratio of offsite to onsite hours averaged about
1.5, and ranged from 0.9 for civil works dredging to 2.0
for single-family housing. This means that each hour
Table 4.

spent at the site of construction generated an average of
one and one-half hours of work in offsite construction
and in other industries which produce the materials,
equipment, and supplies used at the site.

Distribution of costs
In general, the distribution of various cost compo­
nents shows a declining proportion of total costs going
to materials, supplies, and equipment; a relatively stable
proportion going to onsite wages and salaries; and an
increasing proportion going to overhead and profit. (See
table 4.) One possible explanation for this trend is the
increasing cost of construction financing and, to a lesser
extent, higher indirect labor costs relative to onsite
wages and salaries. Materials, equipment, and supplies,
while increasing in cost, apparently are declining rela­
tive to other cost components. In addition, new materi­
als, improvements in existing materials, and substi­
tutions of materials which meet performance building
codes while reducing costs (for example, plastic pipe in­
stead of copper pipe for heating, ventilating, and airconditioning and cold water applications) all contribute
toward lowering of the proportion of materials to total
costs.
Onsite wages and salaries average about one-fourth to
one-third of all costs. Materials, which formerly ac-

Distribution of construction contract costs, 1958-76

[In percent]

Activity

Total
contract
costs

Onsite
wages
and
salaries

Materials,
supplies, Construc­
and
tion
built-in
equipment
equipment

Overhead
and
profit1

Federally-aided highways:
1958 .............................
1976 .............................

100.0
100.0

23.9
23.8

50.6
46.7

( 2)
( 2)

25.5
29.5

Federal office buildings:
1959 .............................
19733 ...........................
1976 .............................

100.0
100.0
100.0

29.0
34.0
25.8

51.3
50.0
42.5

1.9
( 4)
2.9

17.7
16.0
28.8

Public housing:
1960 .............................
1968 .............................
19753 ...........................

100.0
100.0
100.0

35.5
32.4
32.7

45.0
41.9
48.7

2.5
1.5
4.4

17.0
24.2
14.2

Commercial office buildings:
1974 .............................

100.0

26.7

42.2

2.7

28.5

Activity

Civil works:
Land projects:
1960 .................................
1972 .................................
Dredging:
1960 .................................
1972 .................................

Total
contract
costs

Onsite
wages
and
salaries

Materials,
supplies, Construc­
and
tion
built-in
equipment
equipment

Overhead
and
profit1

100.0
100.0

26.0
25.0

35.0
32.0

19.3
20.0

19.7
24.0

100.0
100.0

32.3
30.0

17.3
24.0

24.9
28.0

25.0
19.0

100.0
100.0

24.3
24.3

44.5
35.2

11.2
16.7

200
23.8

100.0
100.0

26.6
25.2

49.2
47.0

8.2
5.6

16.0
22.2

Private multifamily housing:
1971 .................................

Sewer works:
Lines:
1963 .................................
1971 .................................
Plants:
1963 .................................
1971 .................................

Elementary and secondary
schools:
1959 .............................
1965
1972 ..

100.0

27.9

44.2

3.0

24.8

100.0
100 0
100.0

26.7
25 8
28.2

54.1
54 2
44.4

1.4
1.0
2.1

17.8
19.0
25.3

Private single-family housing:
19625 ...............................
19695 ...............................

100.0
100.0

22.1
20.4

47.2
43.4

1.0
.9

29.7
35.3

College housing:
1961 .............................
19723

100.0
100 0

29.3
36 0

52.6
51.1

1.6
( 4)

16.5
13.0

General hospitals:
1960 .................................
1966 .................................

100.0
100.0

28.2
29.6

53.2
50.4

1.2
1.3

17.4
18.7

Nursing homes:
19666 ...............................

100.0

28.7

53.7

1.2

16.4

11ncludes offsite wages, fringe benefits, construction financing costs, inventory, and other
overhead and administrative expenses as well as profit.
2 Equipment included with overhead and profit.
^ E s tim a te d . Includes actual costs of general contractors and estimated costs of subcontrac-

Digitized42
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4 Equipment included in materials,
5 Includes selling expenses.
6 Estimated, based on case study.
Note; Detai| may not add t0 totals due t0 rounding

counted for almost 50 percent of costs, now average
about 40 percent. Contractor capital equipment varies
from 1 to 3 percent for building construction to onefourth to one-third of costs for some heavy construction
projects. Overhead and profit compose roughly a fourth
of costs for most types of construction projects. Includ­
ed in “overhead” are such costs as supplemental wage
benefits, insurance, construction finance charges, office
and warehousing expenses, and salaries for offsite work­
ers. (Data on the distribution of onsite hours by type of
materials used are available from author.)
Materials, equipment, and supplies. Materials, equip­
ment, and supplies, which are used to derive the indi­
rect labor requirements, vary considerably by type of
construction activity. Highways and civil works dredg­
ing projects, for example, require huge quantities of
gravel, crushed and broken stone, and other minerals.
Lumber products, while used by all types of construc­
tion activity, are one of the largest components of cost
for residential construction, and by far are the largest
for single-family housing construction where they ac­
count for nearly 40 percent of material costs.
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products compose
roughly a fourth of costs for most construction activi­
ties. Civil works requires the least, proportionately, and
sewer lines, the most.
The construction equipment category represents the
rental or depreciation costs of contractors’ capital
equipment used in the construction process, such as
tractors, bulldozers, cranes, compressors, and trucks.
These costs normally account for a very small propor­
tion of costs for building construction, less than about 4
percent of contract costs. Heavy construction such as
sewer and civil works projects, on the other hand, nor­
mally requires large amounts of equipment to excavate
and move large quantities of dirt and rocks as well as
ready-mix concrete, brick and block, and other materi­
als. These may account for nearly 30 percent of all
costs.

Trends in onsite labor
Because technical problems still impede development
of an adequate productivity measure for the construc­
tion sector, the best available insight into changes in
construction productivity is provided by these studies of
labor and materials requirements for various types of
construction over time. Although declines in employeehour requirements would seem to be another way of
expressing increases in output per employee-hour,
changes in construction labor requirements reflect the
introduction of new methods, equipment, and materials;
geographic shifts in demand; and shifts in the type of
construction activity; as well as improvements in pro­
ductivity. The effects of productivity change on employ­

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

ee-hour requirements are difficult to isolate from these
other factors.
Changes in onsite hours per $1,000 constant dollars
for each construction activity ranged from a decline of
0.3 percent per year for highways between 1970 and
1976 to a 4.7-percent drop for public housing between
1968 and 1975. (See table 5.) The small decline for
highways reflects the lower level of activity of the inter­
state highway program and a shift to more labor inten­
sive projects such as noninterstate highways, partic­
ularly in urban areas. The sharp decline in the rate for
public housing reflects the shift from conventional pub­
lic housing (those built under the direct supervision of
local housing authorities) to turnkey projects (those
built and completed by private contractors and then
turned over to local housing authorities). When conven­
tional projects only are used for comparison, the decline
was 1.7 percent per year. (Data used to develop the av­
erage annual rates of decline for onsite hours are avail­
able from the author.)
Within these two extremes, most rates fell in the

Table 5. Change in onsite employee-hour requirements
per deflated dollar for various types of new construction
activities studied during 1958-76
Activity and year

Average annual percent change

Federally-aided highways:
1958 to 1976 ..........................................................
1970 to 1976 ..........................................................
1958 to 1970 ..........................................................

-1.5
-0.3
-2.2

Federal office buildings:
1959 to 1975 ..........................................................
1972 to 1975 ..........................................................
1959 to 1972 ..........................................................

-2.2
-1.8
-2.3

Elementary and secondary schools:
1959 to 1971-72 ...................................................
1964-65 to 1971-72 .............................................
1959 to 1964-65 ...................................................

-1.8
-1.6
-2.0

College housing:
1960-61 to 1971-72 ............................................

-2.5

Civil works:
1960 to 1971-72 ...................................................

-2.4

Civil works land projects:
1960 to 1971-72 ...................................................

-3.7

Sewer works line projects:
1963 to 1971..........................................................

-2.3

Sewer works plant projects:
1963 to 1971..........................................................

-2.2

Private single-family housing:
1962 to 1968-69 ...................................................

-1.9

Public housing:
1960 to 19751 ........................................................
1968 to 19752 .......................................................
1968 to 1975’ ........................................................
1960 to 1968 ..........................................................

-3.9
-1.7
-4.7
-3.2

General hospitals:
1959-60 to 1965-66 ............................................

-0.9

11ncludes both conventional and turnkey projects in 1975.
2 Includes only conventional projects in 1975.
Note: Average annual rates of change were calculated from the midpoints of construetion for the various surveys.

43

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Employment Created by Construction Spending
l-to-3-percent range. It should be noted that the latest
of the resurveys occurred in 1976. In the latter part of
the seventies, productivity rates in the economy in gen­

eral declined, indicating that the decline in onsite labor
requirements may have been significantly less than those
reported here for earlier periods.
□

FOOTNOTES

For a previous article, see Claiborne M. Ball, “Employment Ef­
fects of Construction Expenditures,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , February
1965, pp. 154-58.
The major activities not covered by these studies are industrial
plants, utilities, farm, commercial (other than office buildings), addi­
tions and alterations, and maintenance and repair work. Furthermore,
force account construction activities are outside the scope of these
studies. The activities that are covered relate only to new construc­
tion, not to work such as housing rehabilitation and road repair. Such
activities could be expected to be more labor intensive than many of
those studied.
Federally-aided highways have been studied every 3 years since
1958. The 1961 hours are counted among the 10 activities, but are not
shown in the table; the 1961 hours are 235 total and 92 onsite con­
struction.
4Several abbreviated studies were designed and conducted to allow
more frequent measurement of the labor requirements of different
types of construction as well as to reduce survey costs. These studies

omitted the collection of onsite occupational and materials data.
Indirect labor requirements were developed by aggregating the
materials, supplies, and equipment cost data by product group. After
calculating the average amount required per $1,000 of contract cost
for each product group, this bill of materials was deflated to the 1972
price level by the appropriate Producers’ Price Index. These constant
dollar values of materials, equipment, and supplies were then pro­
cessed by the Bureau’s Office of Economic Growth, using various
interindustry studies of the U.S. Department of Commerce to generate
estimates of final demand. Sector productivity factors were then ap­
plied to derive employee hours for the various industry groupings.
The offsite hours in this article have been recently revised to incorpo­
rate the latest revisions of the input-output tables. Some older studies
also were rerun on input-output tables for years closest to the study
year which were not available at the time the original studies were
done.
Maurice G. Wright, formerly of the Division of Technological Stud­
ies, and Karen J. Horowitz of the Office of Economic Growth assisted
in the development of these offsite employee-hour estimates.

A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supple­
ment, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be
considered for publication, communications should be factual and an­
alytical, not polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed
to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212.

44


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

Productivity
Reports
Pilot study measures productivity
of State, local electric utilities
D onald M. F isk
State and local government electric power output per
employee increased 52 percent between 1967 and 1978,
in line with the productivity advance of private utilities
and more than double the increase in the private econo­
m y.1(See table 1.)
The electric utilities owned by States, counties, and
municipalities posted an average annual increase of
about 3 percent over the 12-year period, according to a
pilot study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Between
1967 and 1972, the average annual increase was 6.7 per­
cent but fell to 2.8 percent between 1973 and 1978, in
response to the sharp increase in fuel costs, higher inter­
est rates, uncertainty concerning future demand, rising
construction costs, regulatory delay, and new environ­
mental protection requirements.
The data were developed as part of an investigation
into the feasibility of calculating a series of State and
local government productivity indexes. Currently, no
national productivity indexes exist for State and local
governments, which employ 13.4 million persons, or 13
percent of the civilian labor force.
Electric power generation and distribution was select­
ed as one of the first services to be examined because of
its readily identifiable output, good base of analytic
knowledge, ongoing data collection system, and private
sector measurements. The methodological approach fol­
lowed that used for private sector utilities.

Rise in output uneven
The number of kilowatt hours sold by State and local
government electric utilities to “ultimate customers”
(electricity users or consumers) increased 64 percent be­
tween 1967 and 1978. The average annual increase was
4.0 percent. Output increased every year, although the
growth between 1971 and 1975 was not as large as in

Donald M. Fisk is an economist in the Office of Productivity and
Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

the preceding and subsequent years. The average annual
increase between 1967 and 1971 was 8.3 percent; be­
tween 1971 and 1975, it was 1.3 percent; and between
1975 and 1978, it was 4.4 percent.
Like kilowatt hours, the number of customers served
and the amount of revenue earned by State and local
electric utilities increased in every year between 1967
and 1978. The average increase in customers was rela­
tively constant at 2.3 percent per year. The annual aver­
age increase in revenue was 11.7 percent (unadjusted for
price change) with rapid acceleration in the latter part
of the period. The average annual increase between
1973 and 1978 was 17.9 percent.
State and local systems sell about 37 percent of their
kilowatt hours to residential users, 56 percent to indus­
trial or commercial users, and 7 percent to other users,
such as railroads and highway and street lighting au­
thorities. These percentages were virtually unchanged
throughout the period.
Output of the 33 largest utilities— those with over 1
billion kilowatt hour sales in 1978— increased 6 per­
cent, or faster than total output. In absolute terms, the
growth in sales was 95 percent, compared with 64 per­
cent for all public utilities.
Table 1. Output per employee, output, and employees of
State and local government electric utilities, 1967-78
[1967 = 100]
All utilities
Year

Large utilities

Output
Output
per
per
Output Employees
Output Employees
employee
employee

Index:
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978

......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................

100.0
110.5
127.1
129.9
136.6
137.9
135.9
135.1
135.4
144.2
151.4
152.4

100.0
108.7
118.8
128.2
137.3
138.9
141.6
143.3
143.9
151.4
157.3
164.1

100.0
98.4
93.5
98.7
100.5
100.7
104.2
106.1
106.3
105.0
103.9
107.7

100.0
104.9
111.1
116.1
117.1
126.2
135.7
132.5
135.8
144.0
159.4
164.0

100.0
105.5
114.9
124.0
130.0
140.1
153.5
152.8
156.5
165.7
183.9
195.3

100.0
100.6
103.4
106.8
111.0
111.0
113.1
115.3
115.2
115.1
115.4
119.1

3.0
2.8

4.0
3.1

0.9
.3

4.4
4.6

6.0
5.3

1.6
.7

Average annual
percent change:
1967-1978 .............
1973-1978 .............

45

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity Reports

Employment growth slows
Employment in State and local government electric
power utilities increased about 8 percent between 1967
and 1978, an average annual rate of increase of 0.9 per­
cent. Between 1973 and 1978, the rate declined to 0.3
percent. In 1978, these utilities employed about 66,000
persons, 7 percent of whom worked part time.
Between 1967 and 1978, employment by large utili­
ties increased about 19 percent, an average annual
change of 1.6 percent, or double the industry average.
The rate decreased to 0.7 percent between 1973 and
1978.
Statistics are not available to compute a public elec­
tric utility hours index but other data suggest that such
an index would parallel the total employee index. The
trend of the number of full-time equivalent employees,
for example, matches the trend of total employment.
Also, the trends of labor hours and total employment
closely parallel each other for the private electric utili­
ties (table 2).
Wages and salaries of the public utility employees in­
creased 117 percent between 1967 and 1978, an average
annual rate of increase of 7.8 percent. Between 1967
and 1972, the rate was 6.6 percent, almost the same as
the increase in output per employee. Between 1973 and
1978, the average annual increase was 7.5 percent, while
output per employee dropped to 2.8 percent per year.

Market share
There are about 2,220 State and local government
electric power utilities in the United States today. Every
State except Hawaii and Montana has at least one gov­
ernment-owned utility. Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, and
Nebraska each have more than 100. Almost all are op­
erated by local governments. Of the several dozen State-

Table 2. Output per employee, output, employees and
employee hours of private-sector electric utilities, 1967-68
[1967 = 100]
Year

Output per
employee

Output

100.0
107.7
114.7
118.7
125.1
132.1
137.7
134.3
139.7
145.2
151.6
150.0

100.0
110.1
120.6
129.5
138.0
149.7
161.5
161.3
165.3
172.9
184.2
191.6

3.7
2.4

5.8
3.9

Employees

Employee
hours

Index:
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978

....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................
....................................

<

100.0
102.2
105.1
1091
110.3
113.3
117.3
120.1
118.3
119.1
121.5
127.7

100.0
102.3
105.8
109.4
110.3
113.8
118.9
120.6
116.9
118.3
121.0
129.5

2.1
1.3

2.0
1.3

Average annual percent change:
1967-1978 ...........................
1973-1978 ...........................


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

operated utilities, four account for most of the sales to
ultimate customers. They are located in New York,
South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas.
State and local government utilities sell about 12 per­
cent of the Nation’s kilowatt hours, serve about 14 per­
cent of the electric utility customers and own about 12
percent of the industry’s plant and equipment. Most of
the government utilities are small, having on the aver­
age about 30 employees.
By contrast, the 1,160 utilities owned by investors
and cooperatives have on the average about 435 em­
ployees each. They sell 84 percent of the Nation’s pow­
er, serve 86 percent of the market and own 80 percent
of the industry’s plant and equipment.
The Federal Government, which is primarily a gener­
ator and wholesaler of electricity, accounts for the bal­
ance.
In 1967, State and local government generating capa­
city was divided among steam, 66 percent, hydro­
electric, 29 percent, and internal combustion, 5 percent.
By 1978, in a shift away from steam, nuclear power
accounted for 8 percent of capacity.
Today, State and local governments generate almost
as much electricity as they distribute and sell. As re­
cently as 1970, they purchased about 30 percent of the
power they sold.
Large systems dominate sales and service. The top 10
account for about 35 percent of the kilowatt sales, the
top 25, about 50 percent, and the top 150, about 85
percent. The 25 largest utilities employ, on the average,
1,150 employees.
The smaller utilities are increasingly joining forces to
capture some of the economies enjoyed by the large
utilities. There are 51 joint public action agencies in 31
States involving more than half of the 2,220 public
power systems. Joint action projects range from joint
purchasing to joint ownership of generating and trans­
mission facilities.

Private utilities
As noted, aggregate growth in output per electric
utility employee between 1967 and 1978 was about the
same in the private utilities as in State and local govern­
ment, or 50 percent compared with 52 percent. Howev­
er, the annual growth rates of the two types of
enterprises varied substantially by subperiod.
Private output and employment grew much faster.
(See table 2.) For output, the increase was 92 percent
compared with 64 percent, and for employment, 28 per­
cent compared with 8 percent.
A somewhat different picture emerges when the large
State and local utilities are compared with all private
utilities. The big public systems have about 925 employ­
ees each, compared with 435 in the private utilities.
Output per employee grew faster in the government

utilities, 64 percent compared with 50 percent. The av­
erage annual increases were 4.4 percent and 3.7 percent.
During 1967-78, both private and government output
per employee grew more than twice as fast as that of
the overall economy, which registered an increase of
only 21 percent.
But the slowdown in productivity growth so often
observed and discussed in the overall economy was also
in evidence in the electric power industry. The private
business sector posted a 1.1-percent rise in output per
employee from 1967 through 1972 and 0.8 percent from
1973 through 1978. The deceleration was sharper for
electric utilities, from 5.5 percent in 1967-72 to 2.4 per­
cent in 1973-78 for private utilities and 6.7 percent to
2.8 percent for State and local government utilities. □
--------- F O O T N O T E ---------1Includes States and local governments or political subdivisions
that engage in the generation, transmission, or distribution of electric
energy for sale. The industry is designated as SIC 4911 in the S ta n ­
d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la ssifica tio n M a n u a l, 1972. All average annual rates
of change are based on the linear least squares trend of the logarithms
of the index numbers.

APPENDIX: Measurement techniques
Indexes of output per employee measure changes in
the relationship between the output of a function and
the employment expended on the output. The index of
output per employee is derived by dividing the index of
output by the index of functional employment.
The preferred output for the electric power index
would be the kilowatt hours sold to ultimate customers
separated by class of service provided— residential,
commercial and industrial, and other— each weighted
by the number of employees required to produce one
unit in the specified base period. Thus, those services
which require more labor time to produce are given
more importance in the index.
In the absence of the number of employees by class
of service, unit revenues have been used as weights in
calculating outputs for the private and large govern­
ment utilities. Class of service is not available for total
State and local government output so this index is not
weighted by that factor.
Employment indexes were derived from Bureau of
Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and individual utili­
ty data. Employees and employee hours are each con­
sidered homogenous and additive, and thus do not re­
flect changes in the qualitative aspects of labor such as
skill and experience.
The indexes of output per employee do not measure
any specific contribution, such as that of labor or capi­
tal. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of factors, for
example, changes in technology, capital investment, ca­
pacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and ef­
fort of the work force, managerial ability, and labor
management relations.

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

Labor and material requirements
for Federal building construction
John G. Olsen
Continuing a long-term trend, the number of employee
hours required per constant dollar of expenditure for
Federal building construction is declining. Each $1,000
(in 1959 dollars) spent on Federal building projects in
1976 generated about 68 onsite employee hours, com­
pared with 72 employee hours in 1973 and 97 hours in
1959 (table l).1 Assuming a continuation of this trend,
an estimated 64 onsite employee hours per 1,000 (1959)
dollars would have been generated in 1980.2
In terms of employment, each $1 billion spent on
Federal building construction during 1980 generated the
equivalent of about 24,900 year-long, full-time jobs
throughout the economy.3 About 11,000 of these would
be in the construction industry, 9,700 onsite and 1,400
offsite.4 In addition, about 13,900 jobs would be in in­
dustries that produce, transport, and sell the materials,
equipment, and supplies used in Federal building con­
struction.5 In comparison, during 1980, for each $1 bil­
lion expended for commercial office building con­
struction about 21,900 jobs were generated, and about
23,200 jobs were generated per $1 billion spent on ele­
mentary school and secondary school construction.6
These data are from a study of all Federal buildings
completed in the continental United States in 1976 and
1977 under the auspices of the Public Buildings Service,
General Services Administration.7 The study originally
comprised 33 projects, but was reduced to 24 due to
lack of cooperation by contractors and because some
projects were judged to be out of the scope of this sur­
vey. Lack of cooperation in supplying data was particu­
larly acute in the West.8 As a result, data for the West
are not sufficiently reliable to permit publication of sep­
arate figures for that region. However, data for the
West were adjusted for nonresponse and were included
in national totals. Projects in the study included regular
Federal and Social Security Administration office build­
ings, border stations, and other buildings included in
the last two BLS studies on Federal building construc­
tion. Federal and Social Security Administration office
buildings accounted for about 80 percent of all projects
in 1973 and 1976. Although all three of these surveys
are essentially studies of office buildings, several factors
make comparisons among them difficult.
The average building size, for example, varies consid­
erably among the studies. In 1959 (1962 study), the av-

John G. Olsen is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Tech­
nology, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

47

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity Reports

Table 1. Employee hours required per $1,000 of Federal
building construction, by industry, 1959, 1973, 1976, and
estimated 1980
Current dollars

Industry

Constant 1959 dollars

1959

1973

1976

All in du strie s....................

235.7

( 3)

81.5

47.4

Construction ................................
O n s ite ........................................
O ffs ite .......................................

107.9
97.1
10.8

47.7
42.8
4.9

34.5
29.8
4.7

Other Industries2 .........................
Manufacturing .........................
Trade, transportation, and
s e rv ic e s ................................
Mining and other ....................

127.8
79.2

( 3)
( 3)

35.7
12.9

( 3)
( 3)

19801 1973

1976

1980'

( 3)

187.4

172.8

20.1
17.4
2.7

80.2
71.9
8.2

79.3
68.5
10.8

73.3
63.5
9.8

47.0
26.0

27.3
14.7

( 3)
( 3)

108.1
59.8

99.5
53.6

16.5
4.5

9.9
2.7

( 3)
( 3)

37.9
10.3

36.1
9.8

'The 1980 employment estimates were developed from 1976 survey data adjusted for
price and productivity changes from the midpoint of the 1976 survey.
2 Indirect employment data were revised from the original 1959 survey results because of
the reprocessing of materials data, through improved input-output tables.
3 Data not available.
Note:

Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

erage size was about 94,000 square feet. This dropped
to 67,000 in 1973 (1976 study) and rose to 266,000 in
1976. A further complication is introduced by the aboli­
tion of the Post Office Department, whose physical
plant was under the control of the General Services Ad­
ministration, as are most Federal office buildings. After
the establishment of the new U.S. Postal Service, con­
trol of the buildings reverted to the new agency. Thus,
Postal Service buildings are excluded from the 1973 and
1976 studies. In addition, a larger proportion of small
Social Security Administration office buildings, those
with 10,000 square feet of floor space or less, were in­
cluded in the 1973 study and made up about 40 percent
of all projects.
As a result of these factors, only the broadest com­
parisons can be made among these studies.

Onsite labor requirements
Onsite labor requirements accounted for the largest
component of total labor requirements for new Federal
building construction in 1976. Federal building projects
averaged about 30 onsite employee hours per $1,000 of
contract cost, about 37 percent of all employee-hour re­
quirements. Federal and Social Security Administration
office building projects generated slightly lower onsite
labor requirements than other Federal building projects,
an average of about 29 hours, compared with 33.
Federal building projects during 1976 required an av­
erage of 378,000 onsite employee hours, or about 210
employee years of onsite labor, compared with 119,000
onsite hours in 1973 and 171,000 hours in 1959. On a
square-foot basis, Federal building projects in 1976 gen­
erated an average of almost 142 onsite employee hours
per 100 square feet, a decline from the approximately
177 onsite employee hours generated in 1973, and the
183 hours in 1959.
Onsite employee hours per $1,000 (constant 1959) de­
48 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

creased at an average annual rate of 2.2 percent be­
tween 1959 and 1976.9 From 1959 to 1973, the annual
rate declined an average of 2.3 percent. Between 1973
and 1976, it fell an average of 1.6 percent.
The change, over time, of onsite employee-hour re­
quirements per unit of output reflects the introduction
of new methods, equipment, and materials, and shifts in
the composition and location of construction. Although
changes in onsite employee-hour requirements reflect
some differences in the type of structures built in the
survey years, they provide a rough indication of produc­
tivity trends in this type of construction.
Onsite employee-hour requirements contributed by
skilled trades workers increased from about 60 percent
of total onsite employee hours in 1959 to more than 68
percent in 1976 (table 2). This rise paralleled significant
increases in the proportion of onsite work performed by
structural iron workers, elevator constructors, cement
finishers, operating engineers, and electricians. These
trends reflect greater use of structural steel and concrete
as building materials, as well as a larger mix of multi­
story office buildings with elevators. The percentage of
semiskilled and unskilled workers fell during 1959-76,
reflecting the increasing mechanization of construction
laborers’ tasks.
Table 2. Onsite employee hours required per $1,000 of
Federal building construction cost, by occupation, 1959
and 1976
Occupation

Onsite
employee hours

Percent
distribution

1959

1976

1959

1976

All occupations ........................................

97.1

29.8

100.0

100.0

Skilled trades.......................................................
Bricklayers.......................................................
Carpenters.......................................................
Cement finishers..............................................
Electricians .....................................................
Elevator constructors ......................................
Glaziers............................................................
Insulation workers............................................
Iron workers, ornamental.................................
Iron workers, reinforcing .................................
Iron workers, structural...................................
Lathers ............................................................
Operating engineers........................................
Painters............................................................
Plasterers .......................................................
Plumbers and pipefitters .................................
Plumbers .....................................................
Pipefitters.....................................................
R o ofers............................................................
Sheet-metal workers........................................
Soft floor layers ..............................................
Terrazzo workers and tile setters....................
Other skilled workers ......................................

58.2
5.0
12.2
2.0
8.8
.7
.4
2.1
.8
2.1
1.2
1.8
2.3
2.0
2.0
8.5

20.4
.8
4.1
1.0
3.4
.4
.1
.4
.3
.4
1.7
.3
1.1
.5
.3
2.4
1.3
1.1
.3
1.3
( 2)

59.9
5.2
12.6
2.1
9.1
.8
.4
2.1
.8
2.2
1.2
1.8
2.4
2.1
2.0
8.7

68.3
2.7
13.9
3.3
11.5
1.4
.5
1.4
.9
1.2
5.8
1.1
3.6
1.6
1.1
7.9
4.5
3.4
1.0
4.5

Laborers and other...............................................
Laborers, helpers, and tenders ......................
Truckdrivers.....................................................
O ther................................................................
Professional, technical, and clerical workers . . . .
Superintendents and blue-collar supervisors . . . .

( ')
( 1)
.7
4.9
.2
.5

.7

5.0
.2
.5

.1
.6

(’ >

1.2

(’ )

4.2

33.0
31.5

7.0
6.4

34.0
32.5

23.6
21.4

.9
.6

.2
.4

.9
.6

1.4

2.2

.8

3.6

1.6

2.3
3.7

2.8
5.3

1Data not available.
2 Less than .05 employee hours.
Note:

(’ )
n

Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

.2

.8

Table 3. Onsite employee-hour requirements in Federal
building construction, by type of contractor, 1959, 1973,
and 1976
Type of contractor'

Employee hours
required per $1,000

Percent
distribution

1959

1973

1976

1959

1973

1976

97.1

42.8

29.8

100.0

100.0

100.0

General contractors ...............................
Plumbing, heating, ventilating, and airconditioning......................................
Heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning
Plumbing .............................................
Electrical .................................................
Plastering and lathing .............................
Structural and ornamental iron wo r k . . . .
Structural steel erection......................
Ornamental iron work ........................

38.5

16.1

9.1

39.6

37.6

30.5

19.5
( 2)

4.9
4.0
.9
3.3
.5
1.8
1.7
.1

20.1

( 2)
<2)

8.5
5.9
2.6
4.2
2.7
1.7
1.4
.2

19.9
13.7
6.1
9.8
6.4
3.9
3.3
.6

16.6
13.6
3.0
11.2
1.6
6.0
5.8
.2

Elevator and other equipment installation
Elevators .............................................
Mechanical and equipment installation
Masonry and stonework ........................
Site preparation, excavation, and grading

1.5
( 2)
( 2)
7.7
2.0

1.6
.4
1.2
1.2
.9

P)
P)

3.8
1.0
2.8
2.9
2.2

P)
P)

Roofing and sheet metal w o rk ................
Roofing and gutter work ....................
Sheet metal work (except heating) . . .

1.2
( 2)
( 2)

2.3
2.1
.2

1.6
1.3
.3

Painting and paper hanging....................
Ceramic tile, terrazzo, and m a rb le .........
Other .....................................................
Concrete work ....................................
Carpentry.............................................
Acoustics.............................................
Wallboard............................................

2.0
1.4
5.7
( 2)
( 2)
( 2)
( 2)

1.2
1.2
8.7
1.8
1.8
.5
.1

1.5
1.0
17.1
6.0
1.2
1.8
2.9

T o ta l............................................

P)
9.5
4.7
3.4

.8

P)
P)
9.8
4.8
3.5

P)
P)
1.5

P)
P)

1.5
1.4

7.9
2.1

1.0
.9
.1

.5
.4
.1

P)
P)

.5
.5
3.7
8
.8
.2

.5
.3
3.0
1.8
.3
.5
.9

P)

1.2

2.1
1.4
5.9

P)
P)
P)
P)

2.8

5.2
4.7

1 Because many contractors perform more than one operation, contractors are classified
according to the major cost component of their work.

2 Data not available.
3 Less than .05 employee hours.
N ote :

Offsite employment requirements for industries other
than construction accounted for about 58 percent of to­
tal labor requirements in 1976, a slight increase from
1959. The distribution of employment among various
industries showed increasing variation from 1959 to
1976. Trade, transportation, and services increased from
about 15 percent of total labor requirements in 1959 to
about 20 percent in 1976, due largely to substantial
growth in the employment share contributed by retail
trade and services. In both studies, mining and other in­
dustries accounted for about the same proportion of to­
tal labor requirements, between 5 and 6 percent. The
manufacturing sector declined slightly from about 34
percent in 1959 to about 32 percent in 1976. The trend
towards an increasing proportion of total labor require­
ments represented by offsite employment is expected to
continue, as the growing use of prefabricated compo­
nents gradually shifts some onsite construction jobs to
other industries.

Distribution of costs
Onsite wages and salaries made up about 26 percent
of total contract costs for new Federal building con­
struction projects in 1976. In each survey, materials,
built-in equipment, and supplies composed the largest
share of total costs. The following tabulation shows the
percentage distribution of costs for the three surveys:10

Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

1959 1973 1976
General contractors accounted for 31 percent of
onsite employee-hour requirements in 1976. Compared
with the two earlier studies, this represents a continuing
decline in the proportion of onsite hours worked by
general contractors (table 3). The major subcontracting
groups employed in Federal building construction are:
heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning; electrical;
concrete; and structural steel. Along with the general
contractors, these groups accounted for more than twothirds of all onsite hours in 1976.

Offsite labor requirements
Offsite labor requirements represent builders’ admin­
istrative, estimating, and warehousing activities, and the
labor to produce and distribute materials, equipment,
and supplies used in the construction process. Expendi­
tures for Federal building construction during 1976 gen­
erated an estimated 52 offsite employee hours per
$

1, 000 .

Estimates of contractors’ offsite employment require­
ments, based on BLS employment data, indicate that the
proportion of total labor requirements contributed by
offsite construction employees increased from 4.6 per­
cent in 1959 to 5.8 percent in 1976. This trend reflects
the increasing complexity of many construction projects
requiring more planning, coordination, and offsite work.

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

Onsite wages and salaries.........
Materials, built-in equipment, and
supplies .................................
Contractors’ equipment ............
Overhead and profit...................

29.0 34.0 25.8
513 1 50 0 42 5
1.9/
2.9
17.7 16.0 28.8

The cost distribution in the tabulation suggests that a
significant change occurred between 1959 and 1976 in
the relative cost shares for Federal building construc­
tion. The proportion of costs represented by materials
fell from about 51 percent in 1959 to below 43 percent
in 1976. The proportion contributed by onsite wages
also declined slightly, while contractors’ equipment
showed a slight rise. Overhead and profit costs, which
include salaries of offsite workers, supplemental benefits,
performance bonds, contractors’ profits, and expenses
for interest, office, and miscellaneous items increased
from 18 percent in 1959 to almost 29 percent in 1976.
Factors contributing to this large rise included increases
in the proportion of total labor requirements contribut­
ed by offsite construction employees; a rise in interest
rates for contractor loans; and increases in employer
contributions for supplemental benefits such as paid
holidays and vacations, health insurance, and retirement
plans.
Materials, supplies, and equipment costs for Federal
building construction amounted to about $454 per
49

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Productivity Reports

Table 4. Materials, equipment, and supplies used in
Federal building construction, 1959 and 1976
Type of material

All materials, equipment, and supplies
Materials, built-in equipment, and
related supplies....................................
Agricultural products...............................
Mining and quarrying nonmetalic
minerals, except fuels ........................
Textile mill products ...............................
Apparel and other finished products
made from fabrics and other similar
materials ............................................
Lumber and wood products, except
furniture ...............................................
Furniture and fixtures .............................
Paper and allied products ......................
Chemicals and allied products...............
Petroleum refining and related products
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products
Primary metal products...........................
Fabricated metal products, except
ordnance, machinery, and
transportation equipment ....................
Machinery, except electrical....................
Electrical machinery, equipment, and
related supplies....................................
Instruments and related products...........
Miscellaneous manufacturing products ..
Total contractors’ construction equipment ..

Value per $1,000 of
Percent distribution
contract cost
19591

1976

1959

1976

532.50

446.35

100.00

100.00

513.40
( 2)

417.27
1.03

96.41

93.48
.23

2.20
( 2)

2.18
7.43

.41
( 2)

( 2)
17.60
1.80

.30

( 2)

( 2)

.49
1.66

.07

( 2)
5.50
4.70
( 2)
115.00
57.60

10.29
1.83
2.02
4.90
4.95
2.99
100.93
92.93

3.31
.34
( 2)
1.03
.88
( 2)
21.60
10.82

2.31
.41
.45
1.10
1.11
.67
22.61
20.82

122.70
79.10

86.27
47.52

23.04
14.85

19.33
10.65

89.00
15.40
2.80

45.13
4.54
2.04

16.71
2.89
.53

10.11
1.02
.46

19.10

29.08

3.59

6.52

1 Because detailed data have been regrouped for 1976, group totals may vary slightly
from those presented in earlier publications of the survey data.
2 Data not available.
N ote :

Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.

$1,000 of construction costs in 1976 (table 4). This rep­
resents a decline of about $78 per $1,000 from the 1959
survey, about 15 percent. In both 1959 and 1976, of the
total costs for materials, supplies, and equipment, only
7 percent was allocated to contractor construction
equipment (capital equipment used in the construction
process). The remaining 93 percent was for materials,
supplies, and equipment that became part of the build­
ings, such as heating and air-conditioning units.
Materials, supplies, and built-in equipment accounted
for more than two-fifths of construction costs in 1976.
Three major product groups made up more than three-

fifths of the costs of all materials. Stone, clay, glass, and
concrete products constituted the largest material
grouping, representing almost $101 per $1,000 of total
project costs. Most important within this group were
ready-mix concrete and concrete products. Primary met­
al products were the next largest group of materials—
about $93 per $1,000 of total cost. Structural steel
products, which contributed almost $80 per $1,000, rep­
resented the largest single cost category in the primary
metals .group. Fabricated metal products (except ord­
nance, machinery, and transportation equipment), the
third largest group, accounted for more than $86 per
$1,000 of contract cost. Within this group the impor­
tant products were metal reinforcing bars and expended
metal lath, and fabricated sheet metal products.
Federal building projects completed during 1976 and
1977 consisted primarily of steel-framed, multistory of­
fice buildings. Most projects had a built-in roof with a
concrete roof base, an acoustical tile ceiling, drywall in­
teriors, a concrete floor base with carpet covering, and a
basement. A majority of the buildings had forced-air
heating, central air-conditioning, and outdoor parking
areas. All structures of more than two stories contained
elevators.
Project characteristics varied somewhat by region.
Hourly earnings for all construction averaged $8.66,
ranging from $7.64 in the South to $9.93 in the North
Central. Wages as a percentage of contract costs varied
from about 24 percent in the South to about 28 percent
in the North Central.
The Northeast led all regions in average cost per
project and per square foot, reflecting several factors. A
higher proportion of projects in the Northeast had
more than two stories, and thus, required elevators. In
addition, average hourly earnings of onsite workers in
the Northeast were higher than in the South and West,
and the proportion of contract costs allocated to over­
head and profits was the highest of any region.
A final report on this survey, with detailed analysis of
regional differences, material costs, and occupational re­
quirements, is in preparation.
□

FOOTNOTES

1These survey findings are from a series of studies, conducted by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, on construction labor requirements.
The data from this series are used to assess the impact of construction
expenditures on employment, to make budgetary decisions, to aid in
developing countercyclical employment and expenditure policies, to
evaluate training needs, to anticipate occupational shortages and bot­
tlenecks in skilled trades, and to provide indicators of productivity
changes in construction.
The survey on which this report is based was designed primarily to
determine the number of employee hours per $1,000 of new Federal
building construction. Employee hours include both onsite and offsite
construction employment, and that required to deliver the needed ma­
terials. No attempt was made to measure the labor required for plan­
ning, design work, and public utilities installation. The employment
50 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

generated from the spending and respending of wages and profits —
the multiplier effect— also fell outside the scope of the survey.
This is the third BLS study of Federal building construction. See
John G. Olsen, “Decline noted in hours required to erect Federal of­
fice buildings,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1976, pp. 18-22, Ro­
land V. Murray, “Labor requirements for Federal office building con­
struction,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , August 1962, pp. 889-93, and
L a b o r R e q u ir e m e n ts f o r F e d e r a l O ffice B u ild in g C o n stru ctio n (BLS Bul­
letin 1331), 1962.
The 1973 survey of Federal building construction was one of a
group of abbreviated studies of construction labor requirements. To
allow more frequent measurement of the labor requirements of dif­
ferent types of construction as well as to reduce survey costs, the ab­
breviated studies omitted the collection of onsite occupational and

material data. Material and equipment cost information is used to
generate indirect employment estimates for the industries which mine,
manufacture, and transport construction materials. As a result, de­
tailed data on occupational requirements, material usage, and indirect
employment impact are not available for the 1973 survey.
The 1980 employment estimates for Federal building construction
were developed from 1973 and 1976 survey data adjusted for price
and productivity changes. The deflator used to adjust survey data for
price change is the Bureau of the Census’ cost index for “nonresidential building” construction. This consists of: an unweighted av­
erage of the Bureau of the Census single-family housing price index,
excluding value of lot; the Turner Construction Company cost index;
and the Federal Highway Administration structures price index. The
nonresidential building construction price deflator, derived from an
unweighted average of the three indexes on a 1972=100 base, equaled
217 in 1980, 136.8 at the midpoint of the 1976 survey, and 109.3 at
the midpoint of the 1973 survey.
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
adjustment for price variations, between the 1973 and 1976 surveys.
The annual rate of change averaged 1.6 percent during this period.
Estimates of the number of full-time jobs per $1 billion spent in
1980 were derived using 1,800 hours per employee year for onsite
construction; 2,000 hours for offsite construction; 2,089 for manufac­
turing; 1,795 for trade, transportation, and services; and 2,041 for
mining and all other.
Because of part-time workers, transients, and the seasonal nature of
employment in the construction industry, more workers would be
employed than indicated by the full-time jobs estimates.
4 Offsite construction labor requirements were estimated from the
ratio of nonconstruction workers to total workers for the special trade
contractor (Standard Industrial Classification 17) segment of the con­
tract construction industry as shown in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s,
March issues of the years covered.
Indirect labor requirements were developed by aggregating the
material, supply, and equipment cost data by product group. After
calculating the average amount required per $1,000 of contract cost
for each product group, this bill of materials was deflated to the 1972
price level by the appropriate Producer Price Index. These constant
dollar values of materials, equipment, and supplies were then pro­
cessed by the Office of Economic Growth, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
using the 1972 Interindustry Study of the Bureau of Economic Analy­
sis of the U.S. Department of Commerce, to generate estimates of fi­
nal demand. Sector productivity factors were then applied to derive
employee hours for the manufacturing sector; the trade, transporta­
tion, and services sector; and the mining and all other industries sec­
tor. Karen J. Horowitz of the Office of Economic Growth assisted in
the development of these offsite employee-hour estimates.
'These 1980 employment estimates were developed from earlier
BLS survey data adjusted for price and productivity changes. For re­


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

ports on the earlier studies see Barbara Bingham, “Labor and materi­
al requirements for commercial office building projects,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , May 1981, pp. 41-48, and John G. Olsen, “Labor and
material requirements for new school construction,” M o n th ly L a b o r
R ev ie w , April 1979, pp. 38-41.
Although the study was based on project completions, most of the
value put in place occurred between 1973 and 1977, with peak activi­
ty in 1976.
The length of time between the data year and the year of publica­
tion results from several factors. A considerable amount of time is
needed to define and refine the universe and collect, compile, and veri­
fy the data. Actual data collection does not begin until at least a year
after construction is completed, and surveyed projects require many
personal visits to contractors and subcontractors, with numerous fol­
low-up visits. Additional time is required for preparation and publica­
tion of the results. Nevertheless, data presented indicate trends in
labor and material requirements and are useful in analyzing changes
in these factors over periods of time. Data also serve as benchmarks
for developing current estimates of employment generating effects on
construction expenditures.
*Data from the study were provided for the continental United
States and four broad geographic regions. The States included in each
region were: Northeast— Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and
Vermont; North Central— Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota,
and Wisconsin; South — Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of
Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missis­
sippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia, and West Virginia; and West — Arizona, California, Colora­
do, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washing­
ton, and Wyoming.
For reasons discussed in the text of this article, no separate data
are presented for the West region, but those for the other regions and
for the Nation as a whole are believed to be accurate. The detailed
data, however, have a wider margin of sampling error and may be
subject to other limitations. But, except for the data estimated by the
contractors, there are no known sources of probable nonsampling er­
ror. Sampling variances are being developed by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Average annual rates of change in the article were calculated be­
tween the midpoints of the various surveys. The midpoint of a survey
is based on estimates of the value of surveyed construction put in
place by year of construction time. For the 1976 survey, most of the
value put in place occurred between 1973 and 1977 with the midpoint
falling in 1975. For the 1973 survey, most of the value put in place
was erected between 1971 and 1973 with the midpoint occuring in
1972.
"For 1973, general contractors’ costs were obtained directly, but
some subcontractors’ costs were estimated by general contractors.

51

Research
Summaries
BLS tests feasibility of
a new job openings survey
Lois P l u n k e r t
In 1977, Congress asked the Bureau of Labor Statistics
to collect job openings data by occupation and region.
This information would be used by the Government in
analyses of the causes of unemployment, and to help
plan training and employment programs. Accordingly,
the Bureau undertook a series of cooperative FederalState surveys in Florida, Massachusetts, Texas, and
Utah during March 1979-June 1980 to explore the fea­
sibility of gathering these data.
Because the Bureau had already acquired consider­
able experience in collecting job openings data by
industry during the 1969-73 Job Openings and Labor
Turnover Survey project, the recent pilot tests instead
emphasized the collection of occupational detail and the
ability of employers to accurately report the number of
job openings. Data from the pilots were also used to
determine the sample size required to provide occupa­
tional detail at the State level, and the cost of such a
survey.
The participating States were chosen to provide ap­
propriate regional representation, and because they had
demonstrated a willingness and ability to cooperate in
the project. Each State was assigned a probability sam­
ple of 1,200 establishments drawn across all nonagricultural industries, except private households and public
administration. State staff collected the data in tandem
with the Labor Department’s ongoing monthly labor
turnover survey. Each State was required to conduct a
response analysis survey of 200 of its sample units, and
a quality measurement of job openings data collected
by telephone from 225 units. Utah and Massachusetts
also undertook special studies of recruiting and hiring
activity in 100 of their establishments.
The pilot tests were divided into two phases roughly
corresponding to fiscal 1979 and fiscal 1980. The first

Lois Plunkert, a project director with the Division of Occupational
Pay and Employee Benefit Levels, Bureau of Labor Statistics, con­
ducted this study when she was an economist with the Bureau’s Divi­
sion of Occupational and Administrative Statistics.


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

a

phase included three quarterly job openings collections
during March-September 1979, and tabulation and
analysis of the results. These tests were chiefly con­
cerned with the method of soliciting participation, the
nature of the data to be collected, and the format of the
survey questionnaire. Also part of the first phase was a
Response Analysis Survey, conducted following the col­
lection of data for March, and designed to measure the
quality of information gathered by mail. The second
phase consisted of three quarterly collections of job
openings data during the October 1979-June 1980 peri­
od; a quality measurement of data collected by tele­
phone; and a case study for which selected participating
units kept daily records of recruiting and hiring activity
during March 1980.
The pilot tests showed that occupational data on job
openings can be collected, but the task is difficult and
costly, and at present the Bureau has no plans for initi­
ating a job openings survey. The specific results of the
study and conclusions are outlined below.
Collection methodology. Response rates for the first
quarter pilot test varied widely among the four States—
36 percent in Texas, 50 percent in Florida, 56 percent in
Utah, and 82 percent in Massachusetts. Initial response
rates similar to that in Massachusetts can only be
achieved if certain collection procedures are carefully
followed.
First, the sample should be phased in over a 1-year
period. Because States must exert intensive effort to
achieve high initial response, the workload must be
small. Ideally, between 1,000 and 1,500 units per quar­
ter should be introduced through the first year.
Data should be collected from small units (fewer than
50 employees) by telephone. Because recruiting and hir­
ing occur infrequently in small units, these employers
usually have nothing to report, and therefore feel that it
is unnecessary and a nuisance to complete and return
the questionnaire. The pilot tests showed telephone con­
tacts to be less objectionable, and capable of eliciting
the data with speed and reliability.
Units slated to respond to the survey by mail— those
with 50 or more employees— should first be solicited
for participation by telephone. These employers should
be contacted before the questionnaires are mailed to ex­
plain the survey, ask their cooperation, identify a con­

tact person in the firm, and confirm the mailing
address. This procedure facilitates follow-up of firms
which do not respond, and minimizes delays in collect­
ing the often perishable job openings data.
Establishments which do not respond to the initial
mailing must be followed-up aggressively. The pilot
tests showed that response from mail collection im­
proved considerably when employers received reminders
by telephone. And, especially sensitive large firms
should be visited by a field agent for solicitation or fol­
low-up, or both. Largest units as a class had the lowest
response rate in the four participating States, indicating
that some additional collection effort is needed.
Quality o f the data. The Response Analysis Survey
attempted to assess overall collectibility of data by iden­
tifying both the type and magnitude of collection prob­
lems. It included a unit profile and a quality
measurement component. The unit profile test examined
in general fashion the recruiting and hiring process, in­
formation flow, and recordkeeping practices within the
reporting establishments. The quality measurement
component tested the validity of the data originally col­
lected by matching it against information for the same
reference date collected at a later time by personal in­
terview. The strongest evidence concerning the feasibili­
ty of a job openings survey is provided by the
qualitative unit profile results. However, caution should
be used in interpreting the pilot findings because of the
modest sample sizes in some categories.
The tests indicate that the extent to which respon­
dents are well informed concerning job openings in
their firms varies by size of establishment. As a general
rule, respondents in small firms and in large manufac­
turing firms are knowledgeable and able to supply job
openings data. However, a significant number of re­
spondents in mid-size firms (50-250 employees) report
gaps in their information which would lead to underes­
timates of job openings. Test results for large
nonmanufacturing firms are mixed, but, overall, not
strong enough to substantiate collectibility.
Even though records on job openings in large firms
have improved since the mid-1960’s, those in mid-size
firms remain sketchy. A high percentage of large firms
keep formal records of recruiting activity for 28 days or
more. Most small firms are able to provide valid data
from memory. Mid-size firms present a mixed picture,
with large numbers lacking job openings records. This
highlights the perishable nature of the data, and dic­
tates collection as soon as possible after the reference
date.
Telephone contact appears to be a viable collection
method for firms with fewer than 50 employees. Pilot
results from telephone collection of job openings data
are similar to those obtained by personal visit, which

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

are taken to be the standard. While we were unable to
completely isolate the effects of collection methods from
other factors, our survey estimates indicate that person­
al visits found, on average, only about 5 percent more
firms with openings than telephone collection. If inter­
viewers are properly trained, collection is timely, and
telephone response is carefully monitored for quality
and periodically bolstered with personal visits, this
method should yield data of acceptable quality.
The pilot tests used the last business day of the
month as a reference date, but survey results indicate
that this may not be appropriate for collecting data on
job openings. First, there appears to be a weekly pat­
tern to the data, with Mondays accounting for the larg­
est numbers of job openings. This suggests that a
designated and constant day of the week would be pref­
erable to a “floating” day. And secondly, there appear
to be monthly patterns, with unique (if offsetting) oc­
currences at the ends of the months. Therefore, we rec­
ommend a more typical reference date— specifically,
Wednesday of the week containing the 12th of the
month.
Scope o f the data. The purpose of a comprehensive job
openings survey would be to measure opportunity for
employment. Therefore, it is im portant to know not
only whether the respondent can and will report the re­
quested data accurately, but also what portion of unmet
demand for labor is measured in this survey and what is
not measured. Three separate issues emerge: the cover­
age of the definition of a job opening; the composition
of the universe of firms to be studied; and the impor­
tance of unmeasurable opportunities for self-employ­
ment.
The pilot results indicate that the survey definition of
a job opening— a position for which the employer is ac­
tively recruiting— yields appropriate measures of em­
ployment opportunities for wage and salary workers.
The infrequent hiring that does take place without some
type of recruitment occurs mainly in small and mid-size
nonmanufacturing firms. The test definition, therefore,
is effective in setting forth strict criteria without exclud­
ing significant paths to employment.
Establishments in business for less than a year cannot
be surveyed. New establishments take about a year be­
fore they appear on the BLS sampling frame. Excluding
these establishments would undercount the level of job
openings, but consistency could be maintained year af­
ter year.
The scope of the data is best limited to wage and sal­
ary job openings in all industries except agriculture and
private households, and opportunities for self-employed
cannot be measured. Even if a nationwide survey were
funded, it would not be practical to collect information
outside the pilot universe of industries.
53

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Research Summaries
Survey design. The survey design should allow for statis­
tical measurement of the accuracy of the estimates pro­
duced, and ensure high response rates and consistency
of scope over time. In particular, this means that a
probability sample of firms would be required, so that
estimates of the sampling error for the statistics being
measured might be developed.
Sample members should be rotated periodically; that
is, new firms should replace some of the previously sur­
veyed firms after a designated time. This procedure
would ensure that all firms in business 1 year or longer
are represented by the sample, and that adequate survey
response rates could be maintained. The pilot test re­
sults indicate that the optimal procedure would be to
replace one-eighth of the sample each quarter. However,
it should be noted that, while pilot evidence does sug­
gest that the recommended survey design could main­
tain an adequate response rate, the scheme has not had
a full field test.
Cost considerations. A full-scale national survey is esti­
mated to cost between $25 and $30 million. This esti­
mate pertains to a Federal-State cooperative statistical
program which would collect quarterly job openings
and new hires data in tandem with the monthly labor
turnover information, and provide publishable estimates
of job openings by State for all occupations with at
least 500 openings. National statistics would be publish­
able in considerable occupational and industrial detail.
The required sample size, the special problem of dealing
with smaller firms, and optimal collection methods were
taken into account in developing the cost estimate.
A national survey capable of producing occupational
estimates at the State level would require a very large
sample: about 275,000 units, or between 4,000 and
6,000 per State. The samples used in the pilot tests
(1,200 units per State) could provide estimates with
small relative errors only for total current job openings
and for the largest estimating cells. Most detailed esti­
mates had very high sampling errors. Much larger sam­
ples would be required to produce reliable statistics on
the number of unfilled jobs by occupation.
Because the job openings rate in firms with fewer
than 250 employees was about 50 percent higher than
in larger firms, considerable resources and effort should
be expended to solicit the participation of small firms in
the survey. Additionally, high weights associated with
the smallest firms in the pilot tests at times resulted in
large numbers of estimated openings from a few re­
ports, while the majority of small firms reported no
openings. This, in turn, resulted in high variances. The
implication for a full-scale survey is that small firms
should be sampled more heavily to keep establishment
weights as low as possible.
And finally, the pilot tests indicated that the tele­
Digitized 54
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

phone should be used for solicitation of participation,
data collection from small firms (about a third of the
sample), and follow-up of nonrespondents. Telephone
contact is much more expensive than use of the mails,
but because representatives of small firms tend to rely
on memory, strict adherence to a compressed schedule
is essential. This also means that a relatively large State
staff would be required to complete the calls, in the ab­
sence of technological enhancements such as computerassisted telephone interviewing.
A comprehensive report about the pilot study ap­
pears in L. Plunkert, Job Openings Pilot Program: Final
Report. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22151, 1981 (Pb. 81-228538). $33.50.
□

Container plant workers win largest
gains in glassware manufacturing
A Bureau of Labor Statistics study of the pressed or
blown glass and glassware industry in May 1980 found
that wages in glass container manufacturing averaged
$7.66 an hour— a 65-percent increase over the $4.63 av­
erage reported in May 1975.1 Average straight-time
earnings of workers in other types of glassware plants
rose 48 percent— from $4.32 an hour to $6.40. Conse­
quently, the pay advantage for glass container workers,
accounting for about two-thirds of the survey employ­
ment, rose from 7 percent in 1975 to 20 percent in
1980.
The nationwide study, which covered about 83,000
workers and approximately 200 establishments, also
found that in each industry earnings for the middle 50
percent of workers spanned a narrow range.2 Contribut­
ing to this concentration of earnings was the relatively
high incidence of pay plans based on single rates for in­
dividual jobs (covering 69 percent of workers in glass
container plants; 32 percent in other glass factories) and
the almost universal coverage of union contracts.
From the preceding observations, earnings for most
individual occupations were also closely concentrated.
In glass container plants, for example, the spread of the
middle range of earnings by occupation was typically
less than 40 cents an hour. In other glass and glassware
firms, the spread was usually larger— about 50 cents to
$1.50 an hour.
On the other hand, the broad mix of skill require­
ments in both industries provided for substantial dif­
ference in pay between the highest and lowest paid oc­
cupational groups studied. For example, the top earners
in glass container firms were forming-machine upkeepers averaging $10.85; the lowest paid were janitors at
$6.58. In the other glassware industry, the highest hour-

ly average was $8.95 for mold makers while the lowest
average was $5.25 for watchmen. The following tabula­
tion illustrates average straight-time hourly earnings of
surveyed jobs common to both industries:
Department and
occupation
Batch house and furnace:
Furnace operators.....................
Cullet handlers..........................
Machine forming:
Forming-machine upkeepers . . .
Mold polishers..........................
Maintenance:
Machinists.................................
Maintenance trades helpers . . .
Miscellaneous:
Power truckers..........................
Janitors......................................

Glass
containers

Other
glassware
industry

$7.54
7.09

$6.79
6.05

10.85
7.19

7.85
5.83

10.06
7.13

8.62
6.36

7.22
6.58

6.23
5.90

Nearly all establishments in the survey operated un­
der labor-management contracts covering all or a ma­
jority of their production workers. Most of the union
members were represented by The American Flint Glass
Workers Union of North America (A F L -C io ) or The
Glass Bottle Blowers Association of the United States
and Canada ( a f l - c i o ). Bargaining is generally conduct­
ed on a company-by-company basis. During the 1980
negotiations with major producers, an uncapped costof-living-adjustment ( c o l a ) clause was adopted for the
glass container industry which provides annual adjust­
ments of 1 cent for each 0.5-point movement in the BLS
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers in excess of 9 percent. COLA clauses
applied to about nine-tenths of the workers in glass
container establishments, and to slightly over one-half
in other glassware plants.
All establishments in the Bureau’s sample provided
paid holidays, usually 12 per year, and paid vacations.
Typical vacation provisions were at least 1 week after 1
year of service, 2 weeks after 2 years, 3 weeks after 10
years, 4 weeks after 15 years, and at least 5 weeks after
25 years of service.
At least seven-eighths of the workers in both indus­
tries were with employers who paid some or all of the
cost of life, accidental death, sickness and accident, hos­
pitalization, surgical, and basic and major medical in­
surance. Slightly over two-fifths of the glass container
employees worked in plants providing separate non­
contributory dental plans; less than one-tenth of the
other glass and glassware workers were eligible for such
benefits. Generally, retirement pension plans were fi­
nanced by the employer and covered all workers in
both industries.
A comprehensive report, Industry Wage Survey:
Pressed or Blown Glass and Glassware, BLS Bulletin

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

2109, May 1980, will be for sale by the Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash­
ington, D.C. 20402.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1For an account of the 1975 study, see Carl Barsky, “Container
plants top pay scale in glassware manufacturing,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e ­
view, September 1976, pp. 47-49.
The index of dispersion, calculated by dividing the middle range
of earnings by median earnings, is 15 in glass containers and 20 in
other glassware. These values fall within the first quartile of an array
of dispersion indexes for 43 manufacturing industries discussed in an
article by C.B. Barsky and M.E. Personick, “Measuring wage disper­
sion: pay ranges reflect industry traits,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , April
1981, pp. 35-41. Dispersion indexes for most industries typically fell
between 24 and 36, according to the article.

Pay hikes tracked
for local-transit employees
Increases in union wage rates for local-transit operat­
ing employees averaged 10.3 percent between July 1,
1979, and July 1, 1980. The average increase for opera­
tors of surface cars and buses was 10.1 percent, com­
pared with 11.9 percent for elevated and subway
equipment operators. The overall increase for transit
workers was the third largest for the decade, according
to an annual survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.1 This study presents local-transit wage rates
set by labor-management agreements in large cities (de­
fined as those with at least 100,000 inhabitants).
Regionally, the largest wage rate increases for transit
employees were reported in the Pacific States (16.3 per­
cent). The smallest were reported in New England (6.3
percent) and the Southwest region (7.4 percent). The
1979-80 increase was highest (13.0 percent) for the
smallest cities studied— 100,000 to 250,000 inhabitants
— and lowest (9.2 percent) for those with 1 million in­
habitants or more. Increases varied considerably among
individual cities. (See table 1.)
On July 1, 1980, union wage rates for local-transit
operating employees averaged $9.01 an hour; for opera­
tors of surface cars and buses, about nine-tenths of all
employees covered by the survey, the average was
$9.02; and for operators of elevated and subway equip­
ment, it was $8.94. Six years earlier, the wage dif­
ferential favored subway equipment operators by 60
cents, or 11 percent.
The highest paying regions in the survey— the Great
Lakes, Pacific, Border States, and New England— had
wage levels ranging between $9 and $10 per hour. The
lowest paying region, the Southwest, averaged $7.37.
Union contracts commonly provide for pay dif­
ferentials among local-transit operators by length of ser55

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Research Summaries

Table 1.

Average wage rates by region: selected cities, July 1, 1980

[Union local-transit operating employees]

City and region 1

Average
hourly
rate1

Change from
July 1,1979
Cents
per hour

City and region1
Percent

All cities ........................................................................

$9.01

82

10.3

New England .............................................................................
Boston, Mass. (II) ................................................................
New Bedford, Mass. (IV) ....................................................
New Haven, Conn. (IV) ......................................................
Providence, R.l. (IV) ...........................................................
Stamford, Conn. ( I V ) ...........................................................

9.13
9.65
7.50
8.29
8.16
8.30

54
36
81
100
84
100

6.3
3.8
12.1
13.7
11.5
13.7

Middle A tla n tic ..........................................................................
Albany, N.Y. ( I V ) ...................................................................
Buffalo, N.Y. (Ill) ...................................................... ............
New York, N.Y.’( I ) ................................................................
Newark, N.J. (Ill)' ’...................................................................
Philadelphia, Pa. ( I ) ..............................................................
Pittsburgh, Pa. ( I I ) ..........................................................
Rochester, N.Y. ( I ll ) ..............................................................
Scranton, Pa. ( I V ) ................................................................

8.66
7.76
8.01
8.69
9.00
8.08
9.80
8.21
7.20

75
79
68
83
55
52
79
31
50

9.5
11.3
9.3
10.5
6.5
6.9
8.8
39
75

Great Lakes ............................................................................
Akron, Ohio (III) ...................................................................
Chicago, III. (1) .....................................................................

Detroit, Mich. (1) ..................................................................
Flint, Mich. ( I V ) .....................................................................
Grand Rapids, Mich. ( I V ) ....................................................
Hammond, Ind. ( I V ) ..............................................................

Rockford, III. (IV)
Toledo Ohio (III) .

Omaha, Nebr. ( I ll) ................................................................
Border S ta te s .............................................................................
Baltimore, Md. (II) ................................................................
Louisville, Ky. (ill) ................................................................
Norfolk, Va. (Ill)..............................................................
Washington, D.C. ( I I ) .....................................................

9.22
8.33
7.55
8.56
10.23

80
66
14

9.3
8.6
1.9

100

10.9

Southeast ..................................................................................
Atlanta, Ga. ( I ll) ............ ....................................................
Chattanooga, Tenn. (IV )......................................................
Jacksonville, Fla. (II) ...........................................................
Memphis, Tenn. (II) ...........................................................
................................................................
Miami, Fla. (Ill)
Nashville-Davidson, Tenn. (Ill) ..........................................
St. Petersburg, Fla. ( I V ) ......................................................

8.01
9.71
7.81
8.00
8.84
7.49
7.33
5.21

79
143

10.9
17.3

76
101
40

10.5
12.9
5.6

92

21.4

Southwest ..................................................................................
Fort Worth, Tex. (Ill) ...........................................................
Houston, Tex. ( I ) ...................................................................
New Orleans, La. ( I I ) ...........................................................
San Antonio, Tex. ( I I ) ...........................................................

7.37
6.15
8.15
7.07
6.87

51
40
53
56
43

7.4
7.0
7.0
8.5
6.8

Wichita, Kans. ( I ll ) ..............................................................
M o u n ta in ....................................................................................
Phoenix, Ariz. (II) ................................................................
Salt Lake City, Utah (IV) ....................................................
P a c ific .........................................................................................

Los Angeles, Calif. (1) .........................................................
Riverside, Calif. (IV) ...........................................................

1The regions used in this study include: New England— Connecticut, Maine, Massachu­
setts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Middle A tlantic— New Jersey, New York
and Pennsylvania; Border States— Delaware, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Maryland, Vir­
ginia, and West Virginia; Southeast— Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Tennessee; Southwest— Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas;
G reat Lakes— Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Middle West—
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; Mountain— Arizona,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Pacific— Alaska, California,
Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Population size of city is shown in parentheses as
follows: Group 1-1,000,000 or more; Group H-500,000 to 1,000,000; Group III-250,000 to
500,000; and Group IV-100,000 to 250,000.

vice. Wage rate averages in table 1 were usually based
on the top rate of the pay structure reported in each la­
bor-management agreement within an individual city
studied.2 To develop averages, the rates at or near the
top of the progression were weighted by the number of
employees at these rates (about 65,100 total). Distribu­
tions of wage rates developed by the study and year-toyear wage changes also relate only to union members at
these rates. For national and regional wage averages,
the 62 cities studied were appropriately weighted to re­
flect union rates of local-transit operating employees in
all cities with populations of 100,000 or more.
A comprehensive report, Union Wages and Benefits:
Local-Transit Operating Employees, July 1980, BLS Bul-

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

Seattle, Wash. (II)'. ...........................................................
Spokane, Wash. ( I V ) ...........................................................

Average
hourly
rate2

$9.77
7.28
11.48
8 32
9 20
8.16
8.31
7.21
7.50
8.33
7 53
9 14
9 84
8 75
7 94

Change from
July 1,1979
Cents
per hour

Percent

73
68

9.5
10.3

86
73
78

11 5
86
106

120
91
82
49
101
105
57
43

20.0
13.8
10.9
70
124
11 9
70
57

8 43
8 91
7.73
9 61
5 35

82
71

106
86

97
50

11 2
103

7.94
9 31
8.23
6.86

79
101
96
61

11.1
122
13.2
9.8

9.60
7 80
8.98
9 51
9.74
9 58
9.26
9 63
9.76
9 90
9.32
10.31
8.66

133
36
140

16.3
48
18.5

33

3.6

192

24.9

190
119
112
84

23 8
14.6
12.2
10.7

2Wage rates used to calculate these averages represent those available and payable only
on July 1,1980, and do not include later increases retroactive to that date or before. Such ret­
roactive increases are included in the wage rates reported in the following year’s survey. Aver­
ages were developed by weighting the top rate of length-of-service progressions that ended at
3 years or less for each occupation in each contract by the number of union members at that
rate on the survey date. In seven cities where progressions extended beyond 3 years, all con­
tract-stipulated rates, and associated union membership, at steps of 3 years or beyond were in­
cluded in the averages.
N ote : Variations in the size of annual increases from survey to survey may reflect, in part,
timing of negotiations. Dashes indicate no change in rate.

letin 2117, is for sale by the Superintendent of Docu­
ments, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C. 20402.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------Higher increases were reported in 1973-74 (11.5 percent) and
1974-75 (11.3 percent). Union wage rates included in the BLS surveys
are the straight-time hourly rates agreed upon through collective
bargaining between employers and unions. They do not include em­
ployer payments for vacations, holidays, or other purposes. Thus,
they may not represent actual amounts earned by employees.
A single top rate was used whenever the progression ended at 3
years or less— in 55 out of 62 cities. For progressions extending be­
yond 3 years, all contract-stipulated rates, and associated union mem­
bership, at steps of 3 years or beyond were included.

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.

E m p l o y e r a n d lo c a t i o n

American Cyanamid Co., Lederle Laboratories Division (Pearl River,
N.Y.)
American Insulated Wire Corp. & Northeast Cable Corp. (Massachusetts
and Rhode Island)
Atlantic Richfield Co. and Arco Pipeline Co. (Interstate)......................
Atlantic Richfield Co. (California) .....................................................

I n d u str y

U n io n

1

N u m ber of
w orkers

Chemicals.............................

Chemical Workers ...........................

1,450

Primary metals ....................

Electrical Workers (IBEW) ..............

1,300

Petroleum............................. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .
Petroleum............................. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .

3,200
1,200

Bowen-McLaughlin-York Co., Division of Harsco Corp. (York, Pa.) . . . Transportation equipment . . . .
Bulova Watch Co., Inc. (New York)................................................... Instruments ........................

AutoWorkers.................. ..............
Maintenance and Service Employees
(Ind.)

1,800
1,250

Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Richmond Refinery (Richmond, Va.) ..................

Petroleum............................

Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .

1,050

Desota Inc., Jackson Furniture Division (Jackson, Miss.)......................
Dupont E.I. De Nemours and Co. (Martinsville, Va.) ...........................

Furniture.............................
Chemicals.............................

Carpenters .....................................
Martinsville Nylon Employees’ Council
Corporation (Ind.)

1,300
2,850

First National Stores, Inc., 2 agreements (Massachusetts)......................
Food Employers Council, Inc. (Los Angeles, Calif.)...............................

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

Food and Commercial Workers........
Service Employees ...........................

3,350
1,150

Government Services, Inc. (Maryland, D.C., and Virginia)....................
Gulf Oil Co., U.S. Port Arthur Refinery (Port Arthur, Tex.)..................

Restaurants ........................
Petroleum.............................

Hotel and Restaurant Employees . . . .
Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .

1,100
2,500

Independent Meat Markets (Missouri and Illinois)2 ...............................
ITT Gwaltney, Inc. (Smithfield, Va.)...................................................

Retail trade ......................... Food and Commercial Workers........
Food products .................... Teamsters (Ind.) .............................

1,000
1,300

Mobil Oil Corp., Beaumont Refinery Yard Unit (Texas)........................

Petroleum............................. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .

1,550

National Union Electrical Corp., Eureka Division (Illinois)....................
Northern Illinois Gas Company.........................................................
Northrop World Wide Aircraft Services, Inc. (Alabama) ......................

Electrical products................
Utilities ...............................
Air transportation................

Machinists .....................................
Electrical Workers (IBEW) ..............
Machinists .....................................

1,500
1,800
1,200

Pineapple Companies, Factory and Plantations (Hawaii)2 ......................

Food products ....................

Longshoremen and Warehousemen . . .

4,200

Shell Oil Company (California)...........................................................
Sugar Cos., Negotiating Committee (Hawaii) .......................................
Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company (Chester, Pa.)......................
Sunbeam Corp., Sunbeam Appliance Co. (Chicago, 111.)........................

Petroleum.............................
Food products ....................
Transportation equipment . . . .
Electrical products................

Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers . .
Longshoremen and Warehousemen . . .
Boilermakers...................................
Machinists .....................................

1,150
9,000
2,800
1,050

Weyerhaeuser Company (Oklahoma and Arkansas)...............................

Lumber...............................

Woodworkers .................................

2,000

'Affiliated with AFL-CIO except where noted as independent (Ind.).


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

2Industry area (group of companies signing same contract).

Developments in
Industrial Relations

Conrail employees forgo pay increases
The financially troubled Consolidated Rail Corp.
gained a new lease on life when a majority of its 70,000
union-represented employees ratified restrictions on
wage increases intended to save the carrier $200 million
annually in the 3 years beginning April 1, 1981. Em­
ployees not represented by unions will forgo a matching
portion of their pay increases, saving Conrail an addi­
tional $29 million during each year.
The agreement provided that all wage and benefit
provisions of the coming national railroad settlement
would apply to Conrail employees, except that wage in­
creases (including cost-of-living adjustments) effective
before January 1, 1982, will be paid only to the extent
that their sum exceeds a 10-percent pay increase. Also,
increases effective on or after January 1, 1982, will be
paid to Conrail employees, but only to the extent that
their sum exceeds a 12-percent pay increase.
The wage restrictions were specified in the Northeast
Rail Service Act of 1981, which also provides for
Conrail to receive $592 million in aid from the Federal
Government, bringing the total to $3.9 billion since
Conrail was formed in 1976 from six bankrupt rail­
roads. The Reagan Administration had sought legisla­
tion that would have permitted a selloff of Conrail’s
freight and commuter operations within a few months
after enactment, but the Northeast Rail Service Act
provided for a longer delay. In 1983, the Secretary of
Transportation will be permitted to sell Conrail in
pieces if the carrier fails either of two financial tests. If
it passes both, Conrail may be sold only as an entity
until June 1, 1984, with Conrail employees having first
right of refusal.
The legislation also permits Conrail to abandon
unprofitable freight lines unless financial aid is received
from State or local government units. (A subsidiary,
Amtrak Commuter Services, was set up to operate com­
muter services on a contract basis for local transit agen­
cies.) The act also permits Conrail to reduce

“Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben
and other members of the staff of the Division of Developments in
Labor-Management Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is
largely based on information from secondary sources.

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

employment levels, with affected employees to receive
termination allowances of up to $25,000, calculated at
$350 for each month of service, plus other types of ben­
efits not to exceed $20,000. These benefits will be paid
out of the new Federal aid that was designated for this
purpose.

More concessions in rubber industry
Worker concessions on pay and work rules continued
in the rubber industry, as two Rubber Workers locals
agreed to revisions in their contracts with Goodyear
Tire & Rubber Co. and Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
The changes at Goodyear came after the company
announced that it would close its 50-year-old air spring
plant in Akron and would build a replacement plant in
the area only if the workers agreed to cost-reduction
measures. The changes saved about 80 jobs and could
result in the addition of another 150 jobs at the new fa­
cility. The measures included an end to automatic costof-living adjustments, a $1.38 an hour reduction (to
$8.62) in starting pay, and withdrawal of the operation
from the companywide contract between the company
and the union.
At Firestone, the concessions involved a small plant
in Akron that mixes rubber for tire retreading. The 285
employees agreed to a $1 pay cut, consolidation of the
18 skilled trades job grades into 5, and adoption of a
provision giving Firestone the right to operate the plant
7 days a week without paying a premium for weekend
work. Despite the changes, Firestone did not guarantee
that it would continue to operate the plant, which had
been losing money. Earlier in the year, Firestone closed
its last tiremaking plant in Akron.
The closing of an inner tube factory in Indianapolis,
Ind., was temporarily averted when members of United
Rubber Workers Local 110 agreed to an 11-percent pay
cut and to suspension of the provision for automatic
quarterly cost-of-living adjustments provided by the
3-year contract that had been negotiated earlier this
year. The quarterly adjustments will be resumed and
employees could retrieve some of the lost pay if Indi­
anapolis Rubber Co. attains a specified level of profits.
Company president Donald R. Alsop said that Indi­
anapolis Rubber had experienced a decline in profits in

each of the preceding 4 years and that the union con­
cessions were needed to improve chances of winning re­
newal of a major sales contract.
The cut affected about 350 members of the local
union and 80 nonunion salaried employees. Prior to the
cut, production workers averaged about $9.07 an hour
plus $2.70 in benefits.

Rubber Workers change leaders
Highlighting the 31st convention of the Rubber
Workers was a change in presidency of the 150,000member union, as Peter Bommarito confirmed his earli­
er decision not to seek a new term of office. Bommarito
had directed the union for 15 years. Milan Stone, the
international vice president of the union, was elected to
the post. Stone joined the union in 1946 in Eau Claire,
Wise., held several union leadership posts in that area,
joined the international union staff as a field representa­
tive in 1963, then moved up through several posts until
he was appointed vice president in 1977.

Transport Workers discuss merger
At the Transport Workers 16th convention, delegates
established a Mass Transit Division and adopted a reso­
lution calling for consideration of a possible merger
with the Amalgamated Transit Union. The new division
will parallel the structure of the existing Railroad Divi­
sion and the Air Transport Division. It will, according
to the resolution, engage in “the formulation and coor­
dination of efforts to meet the needs of our mass transit
members on pay, hours, benefits, and working condi­
tions.” Union president William G. Lindner and other
officers were elected for new 2-year terms.

Five unions coordinate bargaining
Five unions used a coordinated approach in
bargaining with the Square D Co. for workers at 27
plants in 14 States. The tactic, first used by the unions
in 1975, has resulted in uniform benefits at the plants.
Although pay rates are not uniform, the accord did
provide for the same pay increases at all locations. The
wage-and-benefit package was valued at $3.52 an hour,
including automatic quarterly cost-of-living adjustments
calculated on the assumption that the Consumer Price
Index will rise 11 percent a year during the period.
The accord provided for “set” increases of 62 cents
an hour effective immediately, 34 cents on the first anni­
versary, and 33 cents on the second. According to the
unions, pay averaged $7.84 an hour prior to the settle­
ment. Benefit changes included a new paid personal
leave plan giving employees 4 days off in the first and
second years and 5 in the third year; a new prescription
drug plan; and dental coverage for employees and de­
pendents.

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

The unions involved in the talks were the Interna­
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (representing
3,800 workers), the Machinists (1,600), the Teamsters
(375), the Molders (190), and the Auto Workers (70).

Federal pay goes up
There were several im portant decisions affecting Fed­
eral employees: white-collar workers received a 4.8-percent salary increase; military personnel received a larger
increase; and the frequency of automatic cost-of-living
adjustments in pensions for retirees was reduced.
The 4.8-percent increase for 1.4 million employees
under the General Schedule pay system was effective
under provisions of the Federal Pay Comparability Act
of 1970. Under the act, 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 Labôr) determined that a 15.1-percent
increase would be necessary for Federal white-collar
employees to attain pay comparability with equivalent
occupations in the private economy. This finding was
derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual sur­
vey of professional, administrative, technical, and cleri­
cal pay.
However, President Reagan, using his authority
under the act, proposed a 4.8-percent increase to the
Congress. Either the House of Representatives or the
Senate could have rejected the proposal, and the Presi­
dent would have had to put into effect an increase “in
accord with the comparability principle” — presumably
that recommended by the pay agent.
The President said the 4.8-percent increase was the
estimated amount that would have resulted if the modi­
fications to the act he had proposed to Congress in
March had been enacted. The proposed modifications
included basing the survey job comparisons on wage
and benefit costs, instead of the existing wages-only
comparisons; including State and local government em­
ployees in the survey; and determining the salaries for
Federal clerical and lower-level technical employees
through local surveys, instead of using the national re­
sults.
The increase ranged from $382 a year for employees
in the first length of service step of pay grade 1 to
$2,280 for employees in the third (of 10) step of grade
15. Employees in the top two steps of grade 14 and the
fourth step of grade 15 received only part of the 4.8
percent increase because, by law, salaries for General
Schedule employees cannot exceed the $50,112.50 salary
of presidential appointees at the lowest level of the Ex­
ecutive Schedule. The limit precluded any increase for
employees in the top 6 steps of grade 15 and all em­
ployees in grades 16, 17 and 18 and for those in the Se­
nior Executive Service, established under the Civil
Service Reform Act of 1978.
59

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Developments in Industrial Relations
Under the Executive Salary Cost-of-Living Adjust­
ment Act of 1975, members of the Congress and Execu­
tive Schedule personnel would have automatically
received the 4.8-percent increase— which would have re­
sulted in a matching increase for the General Schedule
employees at the $50,112.50 limit. However, the Con­
gress voted to forgo the increase. Federal judges, who
also are covered by the Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act,
did receive the increase, because Congress’ decision to
forgo the increase came 27 minutes after the start of the
fiscal year. This brief delay permitted the increase to go
into effect and it could not be withdrawn because of a
constitutional clause prohibiting Congress from reduc­
ing salaries of sitting judges.
About 450,000 Federal blue-collar workers will re­
ceive a 4.8-percent pay increase. Their pay is adjusted
annually, based on comparisons with prevailing local
pay rates for the same occupations in the private econo­
my. However, special legislation and a presidential or­
der limits their pay increase to 4.8 percent.
A linkage to white-collar pay changes usually applies
to the 2 million members of the Armed Forces, but the
Congress legislated a larger pay increase to make mili­
tary service more attractive. The increases range from
10 percent for recruits to 17 percent for senior sergeants
and petty officers; commissioned officers received a
14.3- percent increase. The act also provided for a
14.3- percent increase in housing and food allowances
and for special bonuses and allowances to help attract
and retain personnel with certain critical skills.
A new merit pay system was scheduled to become ef­
fective in October for white-collar supervisors and man­
agers in General Schedule grades 13, 14 and 15.
However, the Administration delayed the change after
the General Accounting Office, Congress’ investigative
arm, asserted that the performance rating systems
established by some agencies were not consistent with
the requirements of the Civil Service Reform Act. As a
result, all supervisors and managers in the three grades
received a 4.8-percent increase in October, with some
receiving more based on their performance. These merit
increases were financed by a pool of money made avail­
able by the termination of length of service step in­
creases for supervisors and managers in the three
grades. Under the delayed plan, the employees would
have been guaranteed only half of the 4.8-percent in­
crease and the other half, plus the money resulting from
the termination of step increases, would have formed a
larger money pool for merit increases.
Pensions for Federal retirees will be adjusted annual­
ly in March, beginning in 1982. Previously, the adjust­
ments were semiannual in March and September.
(Retirees did not receive the September 1981 adjust­
ment.) The new law provides for each of the March ad­
justments to equal the percentage change in the BLS
60


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

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers during the 12-month period ending
with the preceding December.

Transit workers get cost-of-living raise
More than 33,000 New York City transit employees
received a scheduled 36-cent-an-hour cost-of-living ad­
justment after a panel certified that the transit authority
and the two unions involved had agreed on the required
$16.8 million in cost reductions to offset the adjust­
ment. The offset provision was required by the transit
authority’s 1980 settlement with the Transport Workers
Union, which represents 31,000 of the employees, and
with the Amalgamated Transit Union.
A Transport Workers official said the cost reduction
moves included a 500-person cut in the workforce
through attrition or by shifting employees to new jobs
without filling their old jobs; consolidation of some op­
erations in one shop; and adoption of new output stand­
ards on some jobs.
The New York (State) Public Employment Relations
Board suspended for 18 months the dues-checkoff right
of the two unions for engaging in the 11-day strike that
preceded the 1980 settlement. The board said the walk­
out was the most serious violation in the history of the
Taylor Act, which prohibits strikes by public workers.
John E. Lowe, president of Local 100 of the Trans­
port Workers, said the decision to require the unions to
collect dues on a person-by-person basis would be
appealed to the courts. He pointed out that the unions
and their officers already had been fined $1.25 million
for the strike and that individual employees also had
been fined 1 day of pay for each day they were out.

California wine workers settle
In the Napa Valley of California, four wineries and
the United Farm Workers negotiated contracts for 300
grape workers. The 3-year accord with Christian Broth­
ers Winery, patterned after a contract the union negoti­
ated with Napa Valley Vintners in October 1980,
featured a $2.10-immediate increase in the minimum
hourly pay rate, bringing it to $6.20. In August 1982,
the minimum will increase by 50 cents with a possible
cost-of-living adjustment of up to 20 cents. Piecework
rates for pickers were increased by 18 percent effective
immediately, followed by an 8-percent increase in Au­
gust 1982 and a 10-percent increase in August 1983.
The agreement also provided for the reopening of
bargaining on wages and medical benefits in January
1983 (when the Napa Valley Vintners’ contract expires)
and for Christian Brothers to continue paying the full
cost of medical, vision, and dental care benefits, which
were improved.

Other employers settling were Charles Krug Winery
and St. Regis Vineyards (both for 1-year terms), and
Trefethen Winery (for a 3-year term).

ees of nonunion stores that might raise wages to reduce
the possibility of union organizing efforts.

Auto mechanics reach agreement, end strike
Restaurant contract may set pattern
In San Francisco, 4,000 restaurant employees will re­
ceive wage increases ranging from 39 to 45 percent as a
result of a settlement between the Golden Gate Restau­
rant Association and Local 2 of the Hotel and Restau­
rant Employees. The increases, to be implemented in
three steps over the 3-year contract term, will bring the
8-hour shift rates to $46.55 for dishwashers, $37.55 for
waiters’ assistants, $70.20 for bartenders, $58.20 for
cooks, and $36.10 for food servers. Prior to the settle­
ment, the respective rates were $32.55, $25.90, $50.45,
$41.40, and $25.90. There also were improvements in
paid holiday, sick leave, and jury duty provisions.
Health and welfare and pension benefits were to be ne­
gotiated later. The contract covered 125 restaurants,
and was expected to influence bargaining at 825 other
restaurants employing 7,000 members of the union.

Food store workers accept two-level pay structure
In the Michigan food store industry, a 3-year con­
tract between Meijer Inc. and its 10,000 workers creat­
ed a two-level pay structure under which workers in
Eastern Michigan will receive 50 to 75 cents an hour
more than those in Western Michigan. Company vice
president Wendall Ray said that the pay differential was
necessary for Meijer to compete effectively with the
lower pay rates of nonunion chains and the smaller or­
ganized chains that are more common in Eastern Michi­
gan. The Meijer employees are represented by the
United Food and Commercial Workers.
Wage increases ranged from 7.2 to 8.2 percent at the
beginning of the contract, with similar increases sched­
uled for the first and second anniversaries. After the ini­
tial increase, pay rates ranged from $3.95 an hour for
bakery and ice cream clerks to $11.11 for meat cutters.

Department store workers settle
In the San Francisco area, Local 1100 of the Retail,
Wholesale, and Department Store Employees Union ne­
gotiated 3-year contracts with the Macys and Emporium-Capwell department stores that provided for a total
of $1.55 in wage increases. Prior to the settlement, pay
rates ranged from $5.74 to $9.14 an hour. Local 1100
secretary-treasurer Dick Williams said that the settle­
ment covered only 4,000 workers, but the union would
use it as a model for bargaining with other stores in the
area. Williams contended that 125,000 workers could
ultimately be affected to some extent, including employ­

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

A 6-week strike against more than 200 automobile
dealers ended when the Employers Association of
Greater Chicago and Local 701 of the Machinists union
reached agreement. The accord will raise the mechanics’
pay rate to $12.80 an hour, from $10.35, over the
3-year term. The employers also agreed to raise their
payments to the health and welfare and pensions funds
to $28 and $22 a week, respectively, from $23 and $19,
and to increase tool insurance coverage to $8,000, from
$4,000. Terms of the settlement, which covered 2,900
mechanics, also were extended to employees of 45 deal­
ers who are not members of the association.

‘Voluntary separation’ at Montgomery Ward
Several hundred managers at Montgomery Ward and
& Co. were offered inducements under a “voluntary
separation program” the company instituted to help im­
prove its financial condition. Wards, a subsidiary of
Mobil Corp., lost $133 million in fiscal 1980 and $75
million in the first half of fiscal 1981.
Under the voluntary plan, managers electing to leave
Montgomery Ward receive separation pay equal to 5
percent of their annual salary for each year of service
up to 30. The plan is limited to employees with at least
10 years of service.
Several industry observers hailed W ard’s action, say­
ing that a similar approach adopted by Sears, Roebuck
& Co. earlier in the year had resulted in a smaller but
more effective management team. (See Monthly Labor
Review, April 1981, pp. 68-69, for details of Sears’ re­
tirement plan and for cost-reducing changes in retire­
ment benefits at Wards.)

Company waives penalty for early retirement
In a cost-reduction action in the forest products
industry, Crown Zellerbach Corp. eased pension eligi­
bility requirements to induce salaried employees to re­
tire early. The company said that curtailments and
closings of noncompetitive facilities made it necessary to
reduce the number of salaried personnel.
Under the one-time offer, eligible employees who re­
tire prior to December 31, 1981, receive pensions calcu­
lated without the usual actuarial reduction for early
retirement. In addition, they receive a $450-a-month
supplemental payment until they reach age 65. The vol­
untary plan was limited to the 700 employees (out of
7,500 salaried employees) between age 58 and 65 with
at least 5 years of service. Crown Zellerbach also agreed
to continue certain health insurance for participants. □
61

Book Reviews

Bargaining in a nationalized industry
Wages Policy in the British Coal Mining Industry: A
Study o f National Wage Bargaining. By L. J. Han­
dy. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1981.
313 pp., bibliography. $47.50.
This is an impressive study of the evolution of the
structure and level of wages in British coal mining from
nationalization of the industry in 1946 to 1974, with a
postscript on the réintroduction of incentive wage pay­
ments in 1977. It is based on a rich body of wage data,
hitherto unpublished, made available to the author by
the National Coal Board, and on extensive consultation
with miners, managers, and union officials in the coal­
fields.
In Britain, as in the United States, the postwar period
presented difficult problems of adjustment for the coal
mining industry. In 1946, coal supplied over 90 percent
of the primary fuel requirements of the United King­
dom. But beginning in the late 1950’s, the demand for
coal began to decline sharply, reflecting increasing costs
and competition from other fuels, primarily petroleum.
By 1967, half of the pits that had existed in 1957 had
been closed. Over the same period, a technological revo­
lution occurred in the extraction of coal at the face and
in other aspects of coal processing. Employment in the
industry, which averaged about 700,000 men between
1947 and 1957, fell below 300,000 by the early 1970’s.
Reform of the wage structure, especially in terms of
uniform rates of pay, was made more difficult by the
great diversity of the British industry in geographic lo­
cation, type of coal, and geological conditions in the
mining areas. Even within particular coalfields, wide
variations are likely to be found in the thickness of
seams and other aspects of coal geology. These factors
help to explain why historically the determination of
miners’ pay had been decentralized in the collective
bargaining process. The Miners’ Federation of Great
Britain (which reorganized into the present National
Union of Mineworkers in 1945) was formed in 1886. It
was a federation of relatively autonomous unions. Min­
ers’ pay consisted principally of two elements at the
time of nationalization. Basic time or piece rates were
negotiated locally and could vary from pit to pit within
Digitized62
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

a locality. The second component, a percentage addition
to basic rates, was determined on a wage district basis,
and was designed to facilitate speedy adjustment of
wage costs to the changing fortunes of the industry
within the district. Wages thus varied from pit to pit
and from coalfield to coalfield.
Nationalization had no immediate impact on the
wage structure of the industry, but the National Coal
Board and the National Union of Mineworkers were in
agreement that a new structure should be established.
Neither side, however, had clear ideas on the nature of
wage structure reform except perhaps that, in some
sense, there should be movement toward a national
structure. In the event, approximately a quarter of a
century was required to achieve this goal.
Handy describes and analyzes the gradual approach
to the achievement of wage structure reform in illumi­
nating detail. Gradualism was dictated by a variety of
circumstances, including considerations of cost, changes
in the product market and in coal technology, and, in
some measure, conflicting National Coal Board and
union wage objectives. Moreover, neither the Board nor
the union initially had much factual information on
wages actually paid in the industry, or on the appropri­
ate groupings of jobs for pay purposes. The first major
agreement on a national wage structure related to daywage men, and was not reached until 1955. This was
followed in 1966 by the abolition of piecework and the
establishment of day rates for miners employed at the
coal face. Finally, in 1971, uniform day wages were ex­
tended to workers employed on “elsewhere under­
ground” piecework tasks.
Impetus was given to the process at critical points by
the National Wage Tribunal (the arbitral body for wage
disputes within the industry at the national level), and
by the National Board for Prices and Incomes
(established in 1965 as an arm of national incomes poli­
cy). The overall result of this quarter century of effort,
the complexities of which are apparent from Handy’s
analysis, was a national structure of wage rates, the end
of local autonomy in wage determination, and, with the
shift to national bargaining, the creation of a strong
central trade union organization.
A wage structure consisting entirely of time rates was

not, however, of long duration. In a postscript to the
study, a brief account is given of the réintroduction of
incentive payments in 1977. Adverse productivity expe­
rience during the first half of the 1970’s was a major
factor in this development; the National Coal Board be­
lieved also that “ . . . an incentive scheme biased to­
wards coal-face production workers would provide a
useful, and probably less contentious, method of in­
creasing the internal pay differential between them and
other miners than would an attempt to do so in the an­
nual wage round.” It was thought that this would im­
prove recruitment for work at the coal-face.
The scheme finally agreed upon by the Board and the
union provided for specified incentive payments for coal­
face workers for output beyond a basic task, established
pit by pit, and for bonus payments to other workers
fixed as an agreed proportion of the average incentive
pay of a colliery or of a broader wage area. At least in
the short run, the réintroduction of incentive pay in this
form appears to have improved productivity, widened
internal wage differentials, and increased the level of
wages in mining relative to the level in other industries.
It has, of course, reintroduced an element of local
bargaining into the wage-setting process, and has made
the total wage system less uniform.
In addition to analysis of the development of a na­
tional wage structure under public ownership, Handy
deals also with changes in the general level of pay for
coal miners relative to the level for adult male workers
in other industries. Separate chapters of genuine interest
are devoted to wage structure reform in relation to pro­
ductivity, industrial relations, and labor mobility.
The reviewer knows of no study of comparable depth
of the changes that have occurred during the postwar
period in the structure of wages in coal mining in this
country. But considerable insight can be gained from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics Bituminous Coal Wage
Chronology (Bulletin 1799 and Supplement), which out­
lines the results of collective bargaining in the industry
from 1933 to 1977, and from several detailed occupa­
tional wage surveys of the industry, most recently for
January 1976 (Bulletin 1999).
There do appear to be rough parallels in postwar
wage structure development in the two countries. In the
industry in the United States, as represented by the
United Mine Workers and the Bituminous Coal Opera­
tors’ Association, there is now, in effect, a uniform na­
tional wage structure with occupations slotted into a
limited number of labor grades, each with a single rate.
Differentials among labor grades for both underground
and surface miners are comparatively quite narrow.
Geographic wage differentials have been eliminated and
incentive rates virtually ceased to exist by 1966. The
réintroduction of incentive rates does not at present ap­
pear to be an issue in the American industry.

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

The question of industry ownership aside, there were
similarities, but also differences, in the forces shaping
the postwar wage structures in coal mining in the two
countries. Handy has given us a splendid analysis of
British experience, the full scope and insight of which
cannot be reflected in a brief review. His study should
be of interest to anyone concerned with wage structure
problems, and one hopes that its price will not prove a
deterrent to the circulation it deserves.
— H. M. D outy

Washington, D.C.

The tax maze
Financing Government in a Federal System. By
George F. Break. Washington, The Brookings In­
stitution, 1980. 276 pp.
In 1965, the Brookings Institution held a conference
to address the major problems of intergovernmental fi­
nance and to propose solutions to those problems.
George F. Break prepared a manuscript to serve as a
background paper for the conference. In that manu­
script, published by Brookings in 1967 and entitled In ­
tergovernmental Fiscal Relations in the United States,
Break emphasized the need for more coordination
among Federal, State, and local governments in fiscal
matters and stressed that State and local governments
would need stronger fiscal support from the Federal
government in the future. In Financing Government in a
Federal System, the author surveys trends in intergov­
ernmental finance and reassesses the problems of
finance in a Federal system.
In his introductory chapter, the author discusses de­
velopments in receipts and expenditures at the Federal,
State, and local levels. Two of the most pronounced
trends are the rising importance of the individual in­
come tax as a share of own-source taxes at all levels of
government and the increased importance of Federal
grants as a source of revenue to State and local govern­
ments. The author also delineates the three central is­
sues in the book: intergovernmental tax coordination;
intergovernmental grants; and fiscal problems in urban
areas.
Break describes two types of intergovernmental tax
coordination problems— vertical overlapping, which is
characterized by different levels of government separate­
ly taxing the same tax base, and horizontal overlapping,
which is characterized by businesses and individuals
carrying out economic activities in different taxing juris­
dictions at the same level of government. An example of
horizontal tax overlapping is an individual working in
one jurisdiction, but living in another. Break argues
that “ . . . not coordinating State and local taxing activ63

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Book Renews
ity . . . can seriously impair . . . economic efficiency . . .
and is quite likely to place inequitable burdens on dif­
ferent taxpayers.” He proposes several solutions to ver­
tical overlapping, including complete separation of tax
bases, in which different levels of government are given
exclusive jurisdiction over a type of tax. An alternative
solution is the coordination of tax administration and
tax bases, in which similar or identical tax bases are
taxed and jointly administered by all levels of govern­
ment. In cases of horizontal overlapping, the author ar­
gues that taxes should be based on the benefits-received
principle. Break suggests a number of ways to coordi­
nate the apportionment of individual and business in­
come among jurisdictions to reflect benefits received. He
concludes that a more effectively coordinated tax system
would strengthen the economy and would considerably
improve the revenue-raising powers of State and local
governments by improving administrative efficiency and
lowering administrative costs.
In chapters 3 and 4, the author discusses intergovern­
ment grants in the United States. He notes that the ba­
sic justifications for grants rest on the grounds of bene­
fit spillovers (for example, when benefits from State or
local government services accrue to those who do not
pay for them) and on the grounds of redistribution to
alleviate fiscal imbalances among levels of government
(vertical imbalances) or among jurisdictions at the same
level of government (horizontal imbalances). The author
then describes three types of grants: Federal categorical
grants-in-aid (specific programmatic grants), general
revenue sharing (broad-based general purpose grants),
and block grants (grants covering broad functional
areas).
The author points out that categorical grants, such as
medicaid, remain the predominant form of Federal aid
to State and local governments. He recommends greater
coordination or consolidation of the myriad of categori­
cal grants, although previous attempts in the late 1960’s
and 1970’s met with little success. Break comments that
the second type of grants, general revenue sharing, was
conceived when the Federal Government showed bud­
get surpluses; by the time it was implemented in 1972,
the surpluses had disappeared. The author contends
that revenue sharing has “had little or no impact on ei­
ther political processes or governmental structure,” al­
though “its effectiveness . . . would be strengthened if
the program were given greater financial support.”
The final major category, block grants, which were
first established in 1966, was designed to consolidate
programs into broader functional areas to reduce ad­
ministrative costs and to increase the flexibility of speci­
fic program selection by State and local goverments.
The author comments that even though block grants
have frequently been accompanied by earmarking and

64 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

guidelines, the critical consideration is which State or
local governments receive funds rather than what those
funds are for. The author then describes several alterna­
tive approaches to the allocation process for block
grants.
In the final chapter, Break describes urban fiscal
problems. The beginning of the chapter covers urban
expenditures and describes the voluminous literature on
the determinants of those expenditures. He concludes
that “the contributions of this large body of literature
to . . . designing better urban policies are modest at
best.” In his discussion of urban revenues, he points out
that local government reform should be based on the
benefits-received principle. Reform measures should in­
clude shifting all financing responsibility for welfare to
State and Federal governments and the restructuring of
local governmental units to improve geographical
matching between service areas and tax bases. Finally,
he discusses the implications of tax and expenditure
limiting measures, such as California’s tax-limiting
Proposition 13. With respect to Proposition 13, he con­
cludes that Proposition 13 “is not . . . a particularly ef­
fective way of limiting the growth of government
spending or making it more efficient . . .” and “it adds
some new problems of its own such as the equity issue,
which will become more and more troublesome.”
Break’s book covers a wide variety of topics sur­
rounding the broad issues of intergovernmental finance.
His discussion on receipts is not an update of his earlier
work, but merely a reiteration. The difference between
the current book and his earlier manuscript centers on
the discussions of grants and urban economic problems.
A book addressing intergovernmental fiscal relations
with emphasis on grants and urban finance is timely
since the present Administration has proposed (and in
some cases implemented) major changes in the role of
the Federal Government in these areas. The author goes
to great lengths to detail alternative allocation methods
for aid to State and local governments, with particular
emphasis on recommendations by the Advisory Com­
mission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR). The
author’s stress on details is a weakness in the book. At
times, it appears as though he is attempting to splice
new details into the core of his earlier manuscript. This
makes some sections confusing and awkward. For read­
ers who are interested in broader questions of shifts in
intergovernmental fiscal relations within the last 10 to
15 years and preferred future policy directions, it is dif­
ficult to emerge from this book with clear insights.

—Thomas M. Holloway
Bureau of Economic Analysis
U.S. Department of Commerce

Publications received
Economic and social statistics

Becker, Gary S., A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, Mass.,
Harvard University Press, 1981, 288 pp., bibliography.
$

20.

Duncan, Joseph W., “Fast Interactive Color Mapping of Fed­
eral Statistics in Governmental Decisionmaking,” Statisti­
cal Reporter, September 1981, pp. 480-86.
“Reorganization of Federal Statistical Policy,” Statistical
Reporter, September 1981, pp. 469-74.
Sprehe, J. Timothy, “Implementing a New Federal Data Access
Policy,” Statistical Reporter, September 1981, pp. 47579.
Industrial relations

An Exchange on Research Methods: “Estimating the Narcotic
Effect of Public Sector Impasse Procedures,” by Richard
J. Butler and Ronald G. Ehrenberg; “Estimating the
Narcotic Effect: Choosing Techniques that Fit the Prob­
lem,” by Thomas A. Kochan and Jean Baderschneider,
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, October 1981, pp.
3-28.
Bacharach, Samuel B. and Edward J. Lawler, Bargaining:
Power, Tactics, and Outcomes. San Francisco, Calif.,
Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 1981, 234 pp. $15.95.
Bigoness, William J., Richard A. Mann, Barry S. Roberts,
“Does Your Collective Bargaining Agreement Violate
Anti-trust Law?” Personnel Administrator, October 1981,
beginning on p. 67.
Edwards, P. K., Strikes in the United States, 1881-1974. New
York, St. Martin’s Press, 1981, 336 pp. $27.50.
Fones-Wolf, Elizabeth and Kenneth Fones-Wolf, “Volunta­
rism and Factional Disputes in the AFL: The Painters’
Split in 1894-1900,” Industrial and Labor Relations R e­
view, October 1981, pp. 58-69.
Fosh, Patricia, The Active Trade Unionist: A Study o f M otiva­
tion and Participation at Branch Level. New York,
Cambridge University Press, 1981, 155 pp., bibliography.
$29.50.
Gasaway, Laura N., “Comparable Worth: A Post Gunther
Overview,” The Georgetown Law Journal, June 1981, pp.
1123-69.
Hill, Marvin, Jr. and Anthony V. Sinicropi, Remedies in Arbi­
tration. Washington, The Bureau of National Affairs,
Inc., 1981, 355 pp. $17.50.
Holzer, Harry J., The Im pact o f Unions on the Labor M arket
fo r White and Minority Youth. Cambridge, Mass., Na­
tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1981, 35 pp.
( nber Working Paper Series, 633.) $1.50.
Linhart, Robert, Margaret Crosland, trans., The Assembly
Line. Amherst, Mass., The University of Massachusetts
Press, 1981, 160 pp. $6.95, paper.
The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Sexual Harassment and
Labor Relations. Washington, 1981, 100 pp.
--------Unionization in the Legal Profession. Washington, 1981,
68 pp. $10, paper.

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

Industry and government organization

Crandall, Robert W. and Lester B. Lave, eds., The Scientific
Basis o f Health and Safety Regulation. Washington, The
Brookings Institution, 1981, 309 pp. $26.95, cloth;
$10.95, paper.
“Gun Control,” The Annals, The American Academy of Polit­
ical and Social Science, May 1981, pp. 1-67.
Meadows, Edward, “Bold Departures in Antitrust,” Fortune,
Oct. 5, 1981, beginning on p. 180.
Labor and economic history

Clark, Paul F.,

The Miners' Fight fo r Democracy: Arnold M ill­
er and the Reform o f the United Mine Workers. Ithaca,

N.Y., Cornell University, New York State School of In­
dustrial and Labor Relations, 1981, 190 pp. (Cornell
Studies in Industrial and Labor Relations, 21.) $16.95,
cloth; $9.95, paper.
Large, Stephen S., Organized Workers and Socialist Politics in
Interwar Japan. New York, Cambridge University Press,
1981, 326 pp., bibliography. $49.50.
Labor force

Blaustein, Saul J.,

Job and Income Security fo r Unemployed
Workers: Some New Directions. Kalamazoo, Mich., The

W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1981,
127 pp. $7, cloth; $5, paper.
Finegan, T. Aldrich, “Discouraged Workers and Economic
Fluctuations,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Oc­
tober 1981, pp. 88-102.
Siegel, Irving H., Fuller Employment with Less Inflation. Kala­
mazoo, Mich., The W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employ­
ment Research, 1981, 226 pp. $6, paper.
Solomon, Lewis C. and others, Underemployed Ph.D's.
Lexington, Mass., D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington Books,
1981, 350 pp. $32.95.

Treiman, Donald J. and Heidi I. Hartmann, eds.,

Women,
Work and Wages: Equal Pay fo r Jobs o f Equal Value.

Washington, National Academy Press, 1981, 136 pp.
$8.75.
Management and organization theory

Brass, Daniel J., “Structural Relationships, Job Characteris­
tics, and Worker Satisfaction and Performance,” Adminis­
trative Science Quarterly, September 1981, pp. 331-48.
Brown, Linda Keller, The Woman Manager in the United
States: A Research Analysis and Bibliography. Washing­
ton, Business and Professional Women’s Foundation,
1981, 87 pp., bibliography. $5.50, paper.
Busch, Edwin J. Jr., “Developing an Employee Assistance
Program,” Personnel Journal, September 1981, pp. 70811.

Cigler, Beverly A., “Organizing for Local Energy Manage­
ment: Early Lessons,” Public Administration Review, July
-August 1981, pp. 470-79.
Coltrin, Sally A. and Barbara D. Barendse, “Is Your Organi­
zation a Good Candidate for Flexitime?” Personnel
Journal, September 1981, pp. 712-15.
Dodd, John, “Robots: The New ‘Steel Collar’ Workers,” Per­
sonnel Journal, September 1981, pp. 688-95.

65

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Book Reviews

Eilig, Bruce R., “Pay Strategies During Inflationary Times,”
Management Review, September 1981, beginning on p.
23.
Foulkes, Fred K., “How Top Nonunion Companies Manage
Employees,” Harvard Business Review, September-October 1981, pp. 90-96.
Galaskiewicz, Joseph and Deborah Shatin, “Leadership and
Networking Among Neighborhood Human Service Orga­
nizations,” Administrative Science Quarterly, September
1981, pp. 434-48.
Groder, Martin G. and John von Hartz, Business Games: How
to Recognize the Players and Deal With Them. New York,
Boardroom Books, 1980, 259 pp. $50.
Kiechel, Walter III., “The Decline of the Experience Curve,”
Fortune, Oct. 5, 1981, beginning on p. 139.
Klauss, Rudi, “Formalized Mentor Relationships for Manage­
ment and Executive Development Programs in the Feder­
al Government,” Public Administration Review, JulyAugust 1981, pp. 489-96.
Lambright, W. Henry, “Preparing Public Managers for the
Technological Issues of the 1980s,” Public Administration
Review, July-August 1981, pp. 410-17.
Liebling, Barry A., “Riding the Organizational Pendulum . . .
Is it Time to (De)Centralize?” Management Review, Sep­
tember 1981, pp. 14-20.
Osgood, William R., Basics o f Successful Business Manage­
ment. New York, am acom , A division of American
Management Associations, 1981, 259 pp. $19.95.
Plachy, Roger J., “Leading vs. Managing: A Guide to Some
Crucial Distinctions,” Management Review, September
1981, pp. 58-61.
Pope, Jeffrey L., Practical Marketing Research. New York,
am acom , A division of American Management Associa­
tions, 1981, 296 pp. $24.95.
Roderick, David M., “Tough Talk About Health Care and Its
Costs —From a Corporate Chairman Who Also Serves as
a Hospital Trustee,” M anagement Review, September
1981, pp. 52-53.
Sambridge, Edward R., Purchasing Computers: A Practical
Guide fo r Buyers o f Computers and Computing Equipment.

New York, am acom , A division of American Manage­
ment Associations, 1981, 139 pp. $14.95.
Scanlan, Burt K. and Roger M. Atherton, Jr., “Participation
and the Effective Use of Authority,” Personnel Journal,
September 1981, pp. 697-703.
Skinner, Wickham, “Big Hat, No Cattle: Managing Human
Resources,” Harvard Business Review, September-October 1981, pp. 106-14.
Somers, Patricia, Charles Poulton-Callahan, Robin Bartlett,
“Women in the Workforce: A Structural Approach to
Equality,” Personnel Administrator, October 1981, pp. 6165.
Sutton, Harry L., Jr., “Controlling the Costs of Health Care
Where It Counts—From Within the System,” Manage­
ment Review, September 1981, pp. 48-55.
“The Older Worker,” Personnel Administrator, October 1981,
beginning on p. 19.

66 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Toffler, Barbara Ley, “Occupational Role Development: The
Changing Determinants of Outcomes for the Individual,”
Administrative Science Quarterly, September 1981, pp. 396418.
Productivity and technological change

Bylinsky, Gene, “A New Industrial Revolution Is on the
Way,” Fortune, Oct. 5, 1981, pp. 106-14.
Crocker, Thomas D. and Robert L. Horst, Jr., “Hours of
Work, Labor Productivity, and Environmental Condi­
tions: A Case Study,” The Review o f Economics and Sta­
tistics, August 1981, pp. 361-68.
Globerman, Steven, The Adoption o f Computer Technology in
Selected Canadian Service Industries: Case Studies o f Au­
tomation in University Libraries, Hospitals, Grocery R etail­
ing and Wholesaling, and Department and Variety Stores.

Ottawa, Economic Council of Canada, 1981, 53 pp.
$5.95, Canada; $7.15, other countries. Available from Ca­
nadian Government Publishing Center, Supply and Ser­
vices Canada, Ottawa.
Howard, Niles, “Electronic Mail: After Years of Promise—
It’s Here and Now,” D u n ' s B u s i n e s s M o n t h , September
1981, pp. 112-15.
Schluter, Gerald and Patty Beeson, “Components of Labor
Productivity Growth in the Food System, 1958-67,” The
Review o f Economics and Statistics, August 1981, pp. 378—
84.
Social institutions and social change

Levitan, Sar A. and Richard S. Belous, What's Happening to
the American Family ? Baltimore, Md., The Johns Hop­
kins University Press, 1981, 206 pp.
Olson, Lawrence, Christopher Caton, Martin Duffy, The E l­
derly and the Future Economy. Lexington, Mass., D.C.
Heath and Co., Lexington Books, 1981, 195 pp. $19.95.
Urban affairs

Ehrbar, A. F., “It May Be Time to Rent,” Fortune, Aug. 24,
1981, pp. 57-59.
Seiders, David F., “Changing Patterns of Housing Finance,”
Federal Reserve Bulletin, June 1981, pp. 461-72.
Webman, Jerry A., “UDAG: Targeting Urban Economic De­
velopment,” Political Science Quarterly, Summer 1981,
pp. 189-207.
Wages and compensation

Boschen, John F. and Herschel I. Grossman,

The Federal

Cambridge,
Mass., National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1981, 43 pp. ( nber Working Paper Series, 652.) $1.50.
Grossman, Herschel I., Indexation o f the M inimum Wage with
Rational Expectations. Cambridge, Mass., National Bu­
reau of Economic Research, Inc., 1981, 9 pp. ( nber
Working Paper Series, 653.) $1.50.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Union Wages and Benefits:
Building Trades, July 1, 1980. Prepared by Mark Scott
Sieling. Washington, 1981, 145 pp. (Bulletin 2091.) Stock
No. 029-001-02589-1. $5.50, Superintendent of Docu­
ments, Washington 20402.
M inimum Wage, Inflation, and Employment.

Current
Labor Statistics

N o te s on C u rren t L a b o r S ta tis tic s

.....................................................................................................................................

S c h e d u le o f r e le a s e d a te s fo r m a jo r B L S s t a t is t ic a l s e r ie s

68

...........................................................................

68

E m p l o y m e n t d a t a f r o m h o u s e h o l d s u r v e y . D e f i n i t i o n s a n d n o t e s .............................................................
1. Employment status of noninstitutional population, selected years, 1950-80 ................................................................
2. Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................
3. Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted .........................................................................................................
4. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted .....................................................................................................
5. Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................................
6. Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted
.................................................................
7. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................................................

69
69
70
71
72
73
73
73

E m p lo y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a ta fr o m e s t a b lis h m e n t s u r v e y s . D e f in it io n s a n d n o t e s
8. Employment by iqdustry, 1951-80
9. Employment by State ................................................................................................................................................................
10. Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group ................................................................................
11. Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ........................................
12. Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, 1977 to date .........................................................................................................
13. Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by major industry group ...................................................................................
14. Hours and earnings, by industry division, 1950-80
15. Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing g r o u p ..............................................................................
16. Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ......................................
17. Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group
.................................................................
18. Hourly Earnings Index, by industry division, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................
19. Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group
.................................................................
20. Gross and spendable weekly earnings, in current and 1967 dollars, 1961to date .......................................................

74
75
75
76
77
78
78
79
80
81
82
82
83
84

U n e m p l o y m e n t i n s u r a n c e d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n s ..................................................................................................................
21. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations ........................................................................................

85
85

P r i c e d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n s a n d n o t e s ..........................................................................................................................................
22. Consumer Price Index, 1967-80
23. Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected items ...........................................................
24. Consumer Price Index, cross classification of region and population size class ...........................................................
25. Consumer Price Index, selected areas .....................................................................................................................................
26. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing ...................................................................................................................
27. Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings .............................................................................................................
28. Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings ................................................................................................
29. Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ................................................................................................................
30. Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries
.................................................................................

86
87
87
93
94
95
96
98
98
98

P r o d u c t i v i t y d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n s a n d n o t e s ........................................................................................................................
31. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selectedyears, 1950-80
32. Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1970-80
33. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, andprices, seasonally adjusted .....................
34. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourlycompensation, unit costs, and prices . .

101

L a b o r -m
35.
36.
37.

104

a n a g e m e n t d a ta . D e f in it io n s
Wage and benefit settlements in major collective bargaining units, 1976 to date .........................................................
Effective wage rate adjustments going into effect in major collective bargaining units, 1976 to d a t e .....................
Work stoppages, 1947 to date ................................................................................................................................................


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

101
102
102
103

105
105
106

67

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.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 2-7 were revised in
the February 1981 issue of the R e v ie w 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- l l method. A detailed description
of the procedure appears in T h e X - l l A R I M A S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t
M e th o d by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No.
12-564E, February 1980). 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 - l l ARIMA 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 B L S H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r
S ta tistic s , Bulletin 2070, provides more detailed data and greater his­
torical coverage for most of the statistical series presented in the
M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w . More information from the household and es­
tablishment surveys is provided in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, a
monthly publication of the Bureau, and in two comprehensive data
books issued annually — E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n ite d S ta te s and
E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, S ta te s a n d A rea s. More detailed informa­
tion on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining appears in
the monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e ve lo p m e n ts . More detailed
price information is published each month in the periodicals, the C P I
D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P rices a n d P r ic e I n d e x es.

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
R e le a s e

P e r io d

R e le a s e

P e r io d

M L R ta b le

d ite

co v e re d

d a te

c o v e re d

num ber

S e r ie s

Employment situation..................................................................
Producer Price Index ..........................................................
Consumer Price Index ................................................................
Real earnings ............................................................................
Productivity and costs:
Nonfinancial corporations ........................................................
Labor turnover in manufacturing ..................................................
Work stoppages..........................................................................

68


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

November 6
November 10
November 24
November 24

October
October
October
October

December 4
December 8
December 22
December 22

November
November
November
November

1-11
26-30
22-25
14-20

November 25
November 30
November 30

3d quarter
October
October

December 29
December 30

November
November

31-34
12-13
37

EMPLOYMENT DATA FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

E m p lo y m e n t
d a t a
in this section are obtained from the
Current Population Survey, a program of personal interviews
conducted monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of about 60,000
households beginning in May 1981, selected to represent the
U.S. population 16 years of age and older. Households are
interviewed on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the
sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months.

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
long-term 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.
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.

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.

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 E m p lo y m e n t
a n d E a rn in g s.

Data in tables 2-7 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1980.

Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-80

[Numbers in thousands]
T o t a l la b o r f o r c e

C iv i lia n la b o r f o r c e

T o ta l n o n ­
Y ear

E m p lo y e d

U n e m p lo y e d
N o t in

i n s t it u t io n a l
p o p u l a t io n

N um ber

P e rc e n t o f
T o ta l
p o p u l a t io n

N o n a g r iT o ta l

A g r ic u l t u r e

c u l tu r a l

P e rc e n t o f
N um ber

in d u s t r ie s

la b o r f o r c e

la b o r
fo rc e

1950
1955
1960
1964
1965

..................................................
............................................................
............................................................
..........................................
............................................................

106,645
112,732
119,759
127,224
129,236

63,858
68,072
72,142
75,830
77,178

59.9
60.4
60.2
59.6
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

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................

131,180
133,319
135,562
137,841
140,182

78,893
80,793
82,272
84,240
85,903

60.1
60.6
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

1971
1972
1973
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

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................

156,048
158,559
161,058
163,620
166,246

96,917
99,534
102,537
104,996
106,821

62.1
62.8
63.7
64.2
64.3

94,773
97,401
100,420
102,908
104,719

87,485
90,546
94,373
96,945
97,270

3,297
3,244
3,342
3,297
3,310

84,188
87,302
91,031
93,648
93,960

7,288
6,855
6,047
5,963
7,448

7.7
7.0
6.0
5.8
7.1

59,130
59,025
58,521
58,623
59,425


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

69

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
2.

Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
1981

1980

A nnual a v erag e
E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

167,201
107,404
165,082
105,285
97,339
3,340
93,999
7,946
7.5
59,797

167,396
107,191
165,272
105,067
97,282
3,394
93,888
7,785
7.4
60,205

167,585
107.668
165,460
105,543
97,696
3,403
94,294
7,847
7.4
59,917

167,747
107,802
165,627
105,681
97,927
3,281
94,646
7,754
7.3
59,946

167,902
108,305
165,774
106,177
98,412
3,276
95,136
7,764
7.3
59,598

168,071
108,851
165,941
106,722
98,976
3,463
95,513
7,746
7.3
59,219

168,272
109,533
166,145
107,406
99,235
3,353
95,882
8,171
7.6
58,739

168,480
108,307
166,349
106,176
98,392
3,265
95,127
7,784
7.3
60,173

168,685
108,603
166,546
106,464
98,962
3,258
95,704
7,502
7.0
60,082

168,855
108,762
166,695
106,602
98,944
3,370
95,574
7,657
7.2
60,093

169,049
108,401
166,884
106,236
98,270
3,310
94,959
7,966
7.5
60,648

169,252
108,893
167,095
106,736
98,217
3,337
94,880
8,520
8.0
60,359

69,987
55,495
51,963
2,351
49,612
3,532
6.4
14,492

70,095
55,539
52,007
2,372
49,635
3,532
6.4
14,556

70,198
55,470
52,045
2,331
49,714
3,425
6.2
14,728

70,320
55,443
52,091
2,378
49,713
3,352
6.0
14,877

70,413
55,445
52,134
2,289
49,844
3,312
6.0
14,968

70,481
55,816
52,511
2,296
50,215
3,305
5.9
14,665

70,574
56,013
52,750
2,409
50,342
3,262
5.8
14,561

70,687
56,395
52,849
2,349
50,500
3,546
6.3
14,292

70,788
55,876
52,451
2,320
50,131
3,425
6.1
14,912

70,894
55,957
52,811
2,329
50,482
3,147
5.6
14,937

70,978
56,045
52,724
2,402
50,323
3,321
5.9
14,933

71,086
56,063
52,608
2,343
50,264
3,455
6.2
15,023

71,208
56,100
52,327
2,388
49,939
3,733
6.7
15,108

78,295
40,243
37,696
575
37,120
2,547
6.3
38,052

78,723
40,486
37,754
576
37,178
2,732
6.7
38,237

78,842
40,629
37,909
574
37,335
2,720
6.7
38,213

78,959
40,570
37,820
665
37,155
2,750
6.8
38,389

79,071
40,942
38,191
621
37,570
2,750
6.7
38,129

79,175
41,090
38,410
615
37,794
2,680
6.5
38,085

79,271
41,293
38,567
606
37,961
2,725
6.6
37,978

79,377
41,481
38,760
603
38,157
2,721
6.6
37,896

79,498
41,852
39,014
583
38,431
2,838
6.8
37,646

79,617
41,743
39,011
562
38,449
2,731
6.5
37,874

79,739
41,879
39,082
575
38,507
2,797
6.7
37,860

79,848
41,857
39,155
601
38,554
2,701
6.5
37,991

79,968
41,395
38,576
603
37,973
2,819
6.8
38,573

80,095
41,911
38,958
583
38,376
2,953
7.0
38,184

16,379
9,512
7,984
356
7,628
1,528
16.1
6,867

16,242
9,242
7,603
380
7,223
1,640
17.7
7,000

16,174
9,186
7,489
392
7,097
1,697
18.5
6,988

16,145
9,117
7,423
394
7,029
1,694
18.6
7,028

16,114
9,027
7,417
398
7,019
1,610
17.8
7,087

16,069
9,158
7,414
404
7,010
1,744
19.0
6,911

16,039
9,146
7,384
376
7,008
1,762
19.3
6,893

16,022
9,068
7,334
374
6,960
1,734
19.1
6,954

15,991
9,228
7,465
451
7,014
1,763
19.1
6,763

15,961
9,159
7,372
421
6,951
1,787
19.5
6,802

15,944
8,558
6,930
383
6,547
1,628
19.0
7,386

15,913
8,628
7,069
354
6,715
1,559
18.1
7,285

15,869
8,700
7,065
368
6,697
1,635
18.8
7,169

15,831
8,778
7,086
364
6,722
1,692
19.3
7,053

15,792
8,724
6,931
366
6,565
1,793
20.6
7,068

141,614
90,602
86,025
4,577
5.1
51,011

143,657
92,171
86,380
5,790
6.3
51,486

144,211
92,516
86,371
6,145
6.6
51,695

144,359 144,500
92,562 92,383
86,409 86,377
6,006
6,153
6.5
6.6
51,797 52,117

144,651
92,832
86,620
6,213
6.7
51,819

144,774
93,035
86,940
6,095
6.6
51,739

144,882
93,313
87,291
6,022
6.5
51,569

145,006
93,860
87,791
6,069
6.5
51,146

145,160
94,506
88,083
6,422
6.8
50,654

145,316
93,464
87,500
5,964
6.4
51,852

145,464 145,575
93,767 93,789
87,979 88,046
5,743
5,787
6.1
6.2
51,697 51,786

145,715
93,355
87,329
6,026
6.5
52,360

145,871
93,845
87,344
6,501
6.9
52,026

19,918
12,306
10,920
1,386
11.3
7,612

20,486
12,548
10,890
1,658
13.2
7,938

20,673
12,686
10,884
1,802
14.2
7,987

20,771
12,668
10,895
1,773
14.0
8,103

20,809
12,684
11,051
1,634
12.9
8,125

20,853
12,598
10,942
1,655
13.1
8,255

20,892
12,765
11,020
1,745
13.7
8,127

20,936
12,899
11,193
1,706
13.2
8,037

20,985
12,895
11,138
1,757
13.6
8,090

21,033
12,741
10,928
1,813
14.2
8,292

21,120
12,793
10,877
1,916
15.0
8,327

21,169
12,872
10,924
1,948
15.1
8,297

21,224
12,913
10,905
2,008
15.5
8,311

1979

1980

O c t.

163,620
104,996
161,532
102,908
96,945
3,297
93,648
5,963
5.8
58,623

166,246
106,821
164,143
104,719
97,270
3,310
93,960
7,448
7.1
59,425

167,005
107.288
164,884
105,167
97,206
3,319
93,887
7,961
7.6
59,717

68,293
54,486
52,264
2.350
49,913
2,223
4.1
13,807

69,607
55,234
51,972
2,355
49,617
3,261
5.9
14,373

76,860
38.910
36,698
591
36,107
2,213
5.7
37,949

N ov.

TO TAL

Total noninstitutional population' ..........................
Total labor force ......................................
Civilian noninstitutional population’ ......................
Civilian labor force ................................
Employed ......................................
Agriculture ..............................
Nonagrlcultural industries ........
Unemployed ..................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Not in labor force ..................................
M en, 20 ye ars and o ve r

Civilian noninstitutional population' ......................
Civilian labor force ......................................
Employed ............................................
Agriculture ....................................
Nonagricultural industries ................
Unemployed ........................................
Unemployment rate ..............................
Not in labor force ........................................
W om en , 20 years and o ver

Civilian noninstitutional population' ......................
Civilian labor force ......................................
Employed ............................................
Agriculture ....................................
Nonagricultural industries ................
Unemployed ........................................
Unemployment rate ..............................
Not in labor force ........................................
B o th s e x e s , 1 6 t o 19 y e a r s

Civilian noninstitutional population' ......................
Civilian labor force ......................................
Employed ............................................
Agriculture ....................................
Nonagricultural industries ................
Unemployed ........................................
Unemployment rate ..............................
Not in labor force ........................................
W h ite

Civilian noninstitutional population’ ......................
Civilian labor force ......................................
Employed ............................................
Unemployed ........................................
Unemployment rate ..............................
Not in labor force ........................................
B la c k a n d o t h e r

Civilian noninstitutional population' ......................
Civilian labor force ......................................
Employed ............................................
Unemployed ........................................
Unemployment rate ..............................
Not in labor force ........................................

1As in table 1, population figures are not seasonally adjusted.

Digitized 70
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

20,723
12,706
10,922
1,784
14.0
8,017

21,081
12,658
10,939
1,719
13.6
8,423

3.

Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[ Numbers in thousands]
1981

1980

A nnual av erag e
S e le c t e d c a t e g o r ie s

Sept

O c t.

98,944
56,368
42,577
38,315
23,683

98,270
56,349
41,920
38,169
23,174

98,217
56,046
42,171
38,059
23,399

51,857
15,966

52,123
16,299

51,826
16,254

52,104
16,347

11,174
6,440
18,288
30,922
12,482
10,550
3,425
4,466
12,930
2,648

11,418
6,220
18,254
31,038
12,575
10,567
3,481
4,415
13,284
2,689

11,217
6,369
18,238
31,113
12,508
10,501
3,499
4,605
13,002
2,732

11,341
6,295
17,937
30,637
12,202
10,334
3,453
4,649
13,093
2,717

11,434
6,225
18,099
30,222
12,124
10,187
3,530
4,381
13,231
2,752

1,464
1,644
231

1,377
1,657
258

1,457
1,568
235

1,472
1,629
250

1,416
1,649
254

1,470
1,616
264

88,195
15,628
72,567
1,241
71,327
7,021
306

88,877
15,512
73,365
1,164
72,201
6,761
338

87,734
15,460
72,274
1,146
71,128
7,005
369

88,291
15,349
72,942
1,211
71,731
6,886
389

88,189
15,140
73,048
1,236
71,812
6,942
378

87,457
15,111
72,346
1,052
71,294
7,093
392

87,556
15,151
72,405
1,114
71,291
7,033
448

89,202
72,761
4,044
1,517
2,527
12,397

89,870
73,375
4,143
1,630
2,513
12,352

89,625
73,115
3,798
1,367
2,431
12,713

90,837
74,232
4,225
1,632
2,593
12,380

89,823
72,932
4,187
1,654
2,533
12,704

88,886
72,192
4,537
1,675
2,862
12,157

89,448
72,187
5,026
2,023
3,003
12,235

J u ly

M a r.

A p r.

97,696
56,012
41,684
38,182
23,352

97,927
56,045
41,882
38,113
23,356

98,412
56,383
42,029
38,365
23,513

98,976
56,688
42,288
38,510
23,529

99,235
56,718
42,517
38,498
23,831

98,392
56,026
42,366
38,216
23,763

98,962
56,494
42,467
38,283
23,820

51,065
15,810

51,594
15,965

51,698
15,813

51,746
15,827

51,801
15,754

51,967
15,688

51,959
16,057

11,016
6,155
18,114
30,550
12,424
10,247
3,429
4,450
12,888
2,729

11,009
6,175
18,071
30,373
12,337
10,194
3,402
4,440
12,982
2,804

11,363
6,265
18,001
30,338
12,306
10,331
3,322
4,380
12,946
2,737

11,488
6,271
18,125
30,446
12,386
10,390
3,361
4,309
13,070
2,662

11,565
6,220
18,135
30,594
12,605
10,189
3,363
4,437
13,279
2,679

11,444
6,145
18,457
31,156
12,624
10,524
3,411
4,596
13,255
2,834

11,260
6,461
18,557
31,373
12,743
10,609
3,390
4,632
13,213
2,707

1,363
1,640
325

1,417
1,612
324

1,411
1,655
305

1,465
1,615
284

1,336
1,610
325

1,338
1,615
312

1,524
1,648
290

86,706
15,624
71,081
1,166
69,915
6,850
404

86,587
15,597
70,990
1,144
69,846
7,005
417

86,643
15,651
70,992
1,148
69,844
6,943
405

86,513
15,653
70,860
1,110
69,750
6,973
396

87,125
15,738
71,387
1,197
70,190
6,839
422

87,236
15,589
71,647
1,176
70,471
6,923
371

87,870
15,685
72,185
1,235
70,949
6,896
354

88,325
72,022
3,965
1,669
2,296
12,338

88,488
72,071
4,220
1,685
2,535
12,197

88,694
72,265
4,176
1,620
2,556
12,253

88,468
72,131
4,218
1,647
2,571
12,119

89,499
72,807
4,474
1,698
2,776
12,218

89,441
72,945
4,145
1,622
2,523
12,351

89,583
72,875
4,227
1,638
2,589
12,481

1980

O c t.

N ov.

D ec.

96,945
56,499
40,446
39,090
22,724

97,270
55,988
41,283
38,302
23,097

97,206
55,881
41,325
38,142
22,993

97,339
55,897
41,442
38,167
23,065

97,282
55,920
41,362
38,231
23,063

49,342
15,050

50,809
15,613

51,101
15,780

51,148
15,863

10,516
6,163
17,613
32,066
12,880
10,909
3,612
4,665
12,834
2,703

10,919
6,172
18,105
30,800
12,529
10,346
3,468
4,456
12,958
2,704

10,979
6,277
18,065
30,521
12,485
10,210
3,443
4,383
12,891
2,735

1,413
1,580
304

1,384
1,628
297

86,540
15,369
71,171
1,240
69,931
6,652
455

88,133
72,647
3,281
1,325
1,956
12,205

Jan.

M ay

June

Feb.

1979

Aug.

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

Total employed, 16 years and over ......................
Men ......................................................
Women........................................................
Married men, spouse present ........................
Married women, spouse present....................
O C C U P A T IO N

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 ......................................................
M A J O R IN D U S T R Y A N D C L A S S
OF W ORKER

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 W O R K 1

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

71

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
4.

Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[Unemployment rates]
A nnual averag e

1980

1981

S e le c t e d c a t e g o r ie s
1979

1980

O c t.

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

5.8
4.1
5.7
16.1

7.1
5.9
6.3
17.7

7.6
6.4
6.7
18.5

White, to ta l..................................................
Men, 20 years and over ........................
Women, 20 years and o v e r....................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................

5.1
3.6
5.0
13.9

6.3
5.2
5.6
14.8

Black and other, total....................................
Men, 20 years and over ........................
Women, 20 years and o v e r....................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................

11.3
8.4
10.1
33.5

Married men, spouse present........................
Married women, spouse present....................
Women who head families............................
Full-time workers..........................................
Part-time workers ........................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and over....................
Labor force time lost1 ..................................

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

7.5
6.4
6.7
18.6

7.4
6.2
6.8
17.8

7.4
6.0
6.7
19.0

7.3
6.0
6.5
19.3

7.3
5.9
6.6
19.1

7.3
5.8
6.6
19.1

7.6
6.3
6.8
19.5

7.3
6.1
6.5
19.0

7.0
5.6
6.7
18.1

7.2
5.9
6.5
18.8

7.5
6.2
6.8
19.3

8.0
6.7
7.0
20.6

6.6
5.7
5.8
16.0

6.6
5.7
5.8
16.4

6.5
5.5
5.9
15.4

6.7
5.5
6.0
16.8

6.6
5.4
5.7
17.4

6.5
5.4
5.6
16.9

6.5
5.2
5.7
17.2

6.8
5.6
6.0
18.0

6.4
5.3
5.7
16.5

6.2
4.9
5.8
16.1

6.1
5.1
5.4
15.6

6.5
5.3
5.7
17.0

6.9
5.9
6.1
17.6

13.2
11.4
11.1
35.8

14.2
12.1
12.3
37.4

14.0
12.0
12.2
36.6

14.0
11.6
12.3
37.5

12.9
10.5
11.0
36.5

13.1
10.8
11.9
35.4

13.7
10.8
12.6
37.3

13.2
10.6
11.8
36.1

13.6
11.8
12.0
33.6

14.2
12.5
12.0
38.6

13.6
11.6
12.0
36.4

15.0
12.4
12.8
45.7

15.1
13.0
13.7
37.5

15.5
13.3
13.3
42.9

2.7
5.1
8.3
5.3
8.7
1.2
6.3

4.2
5.8
9.1
6.8
8.7
1.7
7.9

4.6
6.0
10.2
7.3
9.1
2.2
8.4

4.4
5.9
9.9
7.4
8.6
2.2
8.3

4.3
5.8
10.4
7.3
8.2
2.3
8.2

4.2
6.2
10.5
7.1
9.2
2.2
8.2

4.1
5.8
9.6
7.1
9.1
2.1
8.1

4.1
6.0
9.4
7.1
9.0
2.1
3.1

3.8
5.9
9.8
6.9
9.0
2.0
8.2

4.1
5.9
10.3
7.3
9.7
2.0
8.6

4.2
5.6
10.6
7.0
9.2
2.2
8.0

3.9
5.6
11.5
6.7
9.3
2.0
7.9

3.9
5.3
9.8
6.7
9.7
2.1
7.9

4.3
5.9
10.6
7.2
9.6
2.1
8.5

4.7
6.1
10.7
7.7
9.5
2.1
9.1

3.3
2.4

3.7
2.5

3.9
2.6

3.9
2.5

4.0
2.6

3.9
2.8

3.7
2.6

3.9
2.7

4.0
3.2

4.1
2.9

3.8
2.8

4.1
2.8

3.9
2.4

4.1
2.8

4.1
2.6

1.9
3.9
4.6
6.9
4.5
8.4
5.4
10.8
7.1
3.8

2.4
4.4
5.3
10.0
6.6
12.2
8.8
14.6
7.9
4.4

2.5
4.6
5.6
10.8
7.1
13.2
10.6
15.3
8.3
4.4

2.4
4.8
5.6
10.7
7.1
13.0
10.6
15.0
8.3
4.0

2.5
4.7
5.8
10.5
7.1
12.9
8.8
14.8
7.8
4.0

2.4
4.4
5.7
10.2
6.8
12.1
9.1
15.0
8.0
5.0

2.4
4.0
5.3
10.1
7.2
11.9
8.3
14.9
8.7
4.7

2.6
3.8
5.9
9.8
7.1
11.3
9.3
14.1
8.1
5.1

2.4
4.0
5.6
9.6
6.8
11.5
8.1
13.8
8.5
3.7

2.7
4.6
5.6
10.0
7.7
11.9
8.2
13.1
9.4
5.4

2.8
4.1
5.3
9.8
7.2
11.0
8.4
14.8
9.0
6.0

2.7
5.1
5.7
9.4
6.7
11.1
6.9
14.2
8.0
4.5

2.8
4.7
5.6
9.3
6.9
11.0
7.9
12.9
8.9
5.6

2.7
5.2
5.7
10.2
7.6
11.5
8.9
14.4
8.9
3.7

2.7
4.9
6.1
11.0
8.4
12.8
7.9
15.7
9.3
6.1

5.7
10.2
5.5
5.0
6.4
3.7
6.5
4.9
3.7
9.1

7.4
14.2
8.5
8.9
7.9
4.9
7.4
5.3
4.1
10.8

7.8
14.6
9.2
9.5
8.9
5.3
7.8
5.6
4.4
11.1

7.8
14.8
8.9
9.0
8.6
4.9
8.2
5.5
4.2
10.1

7.7
13 8
8.8
9.0
8.5
4.9
8.3
5.5
4.1
10.6

7.5
13.3
8.4
8.3
8.5
5.8
7.6
5.8
4.4
11.5

7.5
13.2
8.4
8.5
8.2
5.5
7.6
6.0
4.3
12.1

7.3
14.7
8.0
7.9
8.3
6.4
7.3
5.6
4.6
11.9

7.2
14.4
7.4
7.3
7.6
5.7
7.3
5.9
4.9
9.1

7.8
16.3
7.9
7.3
8.9
5.9
8.4
5.9
4.8
11.1

7.4
16.6
7.6
7.4
7.8
4.7
7.5
5.8
4.5
13.1

7.2
15.0
7.3
7.3
7.3
4.0
7.9
5.6
4.5
10.3

7.2
16.7
7.0
6.4
7.9
4.8
7.8
5.6
4.4
12.6

7.6
16.3
7.8
7.6
8.0
4.0
8.6
5.9
4.6
10.6

8.1
18.0
8.6
8.6
8.6
4.6
8.3
6.3
4.6
13.3

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

O C C U P A T IO N

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......................................................
IN D U S T R Y

Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers2
Construction ................................................
Manufacturing..............................................
Durable goods ......................................
Nondurable goods..................................
Transportation and public utilities ..................
Wholesale and retail trade ............................
Finance and service industries ......................
Government workers ..........................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers ..................

' Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a
percent of potentially available labor force hours.

Digitized72
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2 Includes mining, not shown separately,

5.

Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted
1980

A nnual averag e

1981

S ex and age
Dec.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

A ug.

S e p t.

O c t.

7.0
18.1
19.3
17.7
11.3
5.1
5.4
3.5

7.2
18.8
20.5
17.4
11.8
5.1
5.4
3.5

7.5
19.3
21.2
18.1
12.1
5.4
5.8
3.8

8.0
20.6
21.4
19.9
12.8
5.8
6.1
3.9

7.1
19.8
24.4
18.1
12.8
5.0
5.3
3.5

6.6
18.4
19.8
17.8
11.3
4.7
4.9
3.4

7.0
19.7
21.5
18.1
12.7
4.8
5.0
3.4

7.2
19.3
21.2
18.1
12.9
5.0
5.5
3.5

7.7
19.7
20.6
19.1
13.9
5.5
5.9
3.8

7.6
18.2
20.6
16.4
11.2
5.6
6.0
3.3

7.7
17.7
18.7
17.5
11.3
5.7
6.1
3.7

7.5
17.8
19.5
16.8
10.8
5.5
5.9
3.6

7.9
19.3
21.1
18.1
11.2
5.9
6.3
4.4

8.3
21.5
22.4
20.8
11.5
6.1
6.5
4.1

June

M ay

1980

O c t.

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

5.8
16.1
18.1
14.6
9.0
3.9
4.1
3.0

7.1
17.7
20.0
16.1
11.5
5.0
5.4
3.3

7.6
18.5
20.9
16.7
12.3
5.4
5.9
3.4

7.5
18.6
21.4
16.5
12.1
5.4
5.9
3.3

7.4
17.8
19.9
16.4
11.7
5.3
5.8
3.5

7.4
19.0
21.0
17.5
11.9
5.3
5.7
3.5

7.3
19.3
21.4
17.9
11.8
5.1
5.5
3.6

7.3
19.1
21.3
17.7
11.7
5.2
5.5
3.7

7.3
19.1
22.0
17.2
12.1
5.0
5,4
3.3

7.6
19.5
21.6
18.2
12.9
5.3
5.6
3.3

7.3
19.0
22.6
17.3
12.1
5.2
5.6
3.4

Men, 16 years and over ................................
16 to 19 years........................................
16 to 17 years ................................
18 to 19 years ................................
20 to 24 years........................................
25 years and o ve r..................................
25 to 54 years ................................
55 years and over............................

5.1
15.8
17.9
14.2
8.6
3.3
3.4
2.9

6.9
18.2
20.4
16.7
12.5
4.7
5.1
3.3

7.4
19.8
21.8
18.1
13.8
5.1
5.6
3.3

7.4
19.8
22.3
17.8
13.2
5.1
5.6
3.3

7.2
19.0
20.5
17.8
12.5
4.9
5.4
3.3

7.2
20.3
23.0
18.5
12.8
4.9
5.2
3.4

7.1
20.1
22,1
18.7
12.7
4.8
5.2
3.4

7.0
19.5
21.1
18.6
13.0
4.7
5.1
3.2

6.9
19.3
22.7
17.0
13.2
4.6
4.9
3.1

7.4
20.2
22.7
18.3
14.2
4.8
5.1
3.4

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

6.8
16.4
18.3
15.0
9.6
4.8
5.2
3.2

7.4
17.2
19.5
15.6
10.3
5.5
5.9
3.2

7.7
17.0
19.8
15.1
10.6
5.9
6.4
3.4

7.7
17.2
20.3
15.1
10.8
5.8
6.2
3.4

7.7
16.5
19.3
14.8
10.8
5.9
6.3
3.9

7.7
17.5
18.7
16.4
10.8
5.8
6.3
3.6

7.6
18.4
20.5
17.0
10.8
5.6
5.9
3.9

7.7
18.7
21.6
16.5
10.1
5.9
6.2
4.5

7.7
18.9
21.1
17.4
10.9
5.6
6.0
3.7

7.9
18.7
20.4
18.2
11.4
5.9
6.4
3.3

6.

N ov.

Jan.

1979

J u ly

Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
1981

1980
R e a s o n fo r u n e m p lo y m e n t
M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

3,896
1,267
2,629
884
1,970
928

3,846
1,299
2,547
863
2,040
986

3,819
1,280
2,539
854
2,017
987

4,084
1,368
2,715
1,009
2,126
938

4,219
1,367
2,852
863
1,955
956

3,691
1,178
2,513
898
2,022
873

3,929
1,205
2,724
838
1,939
944

4,338
1,412
2,925
889
1,949
953

4,422
1,607
2,815
962
2,172
987

100.0
49.4
16.1
33.2
11.6
26.2
12.8

100.0
50.7
16.5
34.2
11.5
25.7
12.1

100.0
49.7
16.8
32.9
11.2
26.4
12.7

100.0
49.7
16.7
33.1
11.1
26.3
12.9

100.0
50.1
16.8
33.3
12.4
26.1
11.5

100.0
52.8
17.1
35.7
10.8
24.5
12.0

100.0
49.3
15.7
33.6
12.0
27.0
11.7

100.0
51.4
15.7
35.6
11.0
25.4
12.3

100.0
53.4
17.4
36.0
10.9
24.0
11.7

100.0
51.8
18.8
33.0
11.3
25.4
11.6

3.6
.9
1.9
.9

3.7
.8
1.9
.9

3.6
.8
1.9
.9

3.6
.8
1.9
.9

.3.8
.9
2.0
.9

4.0
.8
1.8
.9

3.5
.8
1.9
.8

3.7
.8
1.8
.9

4.1
.8
1.8
,9

4.1
.9
2.0
.9

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

4,240
1,692
2,548
870
2,013
880

4,229
1,453
2,776
897
1,896
890

4,226
1,470
2,756
813
1,869
868

3,847
1,258
2,590
907
2,039
1,000

100.0
53.0
21.1
31.8
10.9
25.2
11.0

100.0
53.5
18.4
35.1
11.3
24.0
11.2

100.0
54.3
18.9
35.4
10.5
24.0
11.2

4.0
.8
1.9
.8

4.0
.9
1.8
.8

4.0
.8
1.8
.8

O c t.

NUMBER OF UNEM PLOYED

Lost las: o o ........................................................................................
On layoff......................................................................................
Other job losers.................................... ........................................
Left last job ........................................................................................
Reentered labor force..........................................................................
Seeking first job ..................................................................................
P E R C E N T D IS T R IB U T IO N

Total unemployed........................................ ........................................
Job losers ..........................................................................................
On layoff......................................................................................
Other job losers............................................................................
Job leavers ........................................................................................
Reentrants...........................................................................................
New entrants ......................................................................................
UNEM PLO YED AS A PERCENT OF
T H E C IV IL IA N L A B O R F O R C E

Job osers ..........................................................................................
Job leavers ........................................................................................
Reentrants...........................................................................................
New entrants ......................................................................................

7.

Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
1981

1980

A nnual a v erag e
W e e k s o f u n e m p lo y m e n t

Less than 5 weeks ..............................................
5 to 14 weeks ....................................................
15 weeks and over..............................................
15 to 26 weeks ............................................
27 weeks and over........................................
Average (mean) duration, in weeks ......................


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

1979

1980

O c t.

2,869
1,892
1,202
684
518
10.9

3,208
2,411
1,829
1,028
802
11.9

3,186
2,500
2,292
1,256
1,036
13.3

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

3,108
2,524
2,329
1,213
1,116
13.6

3,115
2,217
2,378
1,231
1,147
13.5

3,259
2,264
2,358
1,079
1,279
14.4

3,203
2,324
2,250
992
1,257
14.4

3,209
2,356
2,192
1,013
1,179
14.0

3,074
2,462
2,105
1,001
1,104
13.7

3,369
2,581
2,168
1,022
1,146
13.2

3,172
2,360
2,315
1,205
1,110
14.2

3,187
2,196
2,100
1,068
1,032
13.9

3,161
2,345
2,194
1,059
1,135
14.5

3,383
2,489
2,212
1,151
1,061
13.7

3,652
2,605
2,251
1,156
1,095
13.7

73

EMPLOYMENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA FROM ESTABLISHMENT SURVEYS

E mployment , hours , a n d ea rn ing s data in this section are
compiled from payroll records reported monthly on a volun­
tary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperat­
ing State agencies by 166,000 establishments representing all
industries except agriculture. In most industries, the sampling
probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most
large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An estab­
lishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant,
for example, or warehouse.) Self-employed persons and others
not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the
survey because they are excluded from establishment records.
This largely accounts for the difference in employment figures
between the household and establishment surveys.
L abor turnover data in this section are compiled from per­
sonnel records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies.
A sample of 40,000 establishments represents all industries in
the manufacturing and mining sectors of the economy.

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.
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.
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
measures changes from midmonth to midmonth.

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

74


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 1981 data, published in the August 1981 issue of the R e ­
view. Consequently, data published in the R e v ie w 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 1981 and seasonally adjusted data from January
1974 through March 1981) and in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n ite d
S ta tes , 1 9 0 9 -7 8 , 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 R ev ie w . For a detailed discussion of the
recalls series, along with historical data, see “New Series on Recalls
from the Labor Turnover Survey,” E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, 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,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , December 1969, pp. 9-20. See also B L S
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau
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 1979-81, see E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s,
March 1981, 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, 1951-80

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]

Year

T o ta l

C o n s tru c ­

M a n u fa c ­

t io n

t u r in g

M in in g

T ra n s ­

W h o le ­

p o r ta tio n

s a le

and

and

G o v e rn m e n t

F in a n c e ,
W h o le s a le

R e ta il

tra d e

tra d e

in s u r ­
ance,

p u b lic

r e t a il

a n d re a l

u t ilit ie s

tra d e

e s ta te

S e rv ic e s

S ta te
T o ta l

F e d e ra l

a n d lo c a l

..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................

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

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

1956 ..........................................................
1957 ..........................................................
1958 ..........................................................
1959' ........................................................
1960 ..........................................................

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

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

1961
1962
1963
1964
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

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

1966
1967
1968
1969
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

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

1971
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

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

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................
..........................................................

79,382
82,471
86,697
89,823
90,564

779
813
851
958
1,020

3,576
3,851
4,229
4,463
4,399

18,997
19,682
20,505
21,040
20,300

4,582
4,713
4,923
5,136
5,143

17,755
18,516
19,542
20,192
20,386

4,546
4,708
4,969
5,204
5,281

13,209
13,808
14,573
14,989
15,104

4,271
4,467
4,724
4,975
5,168

14,551
15,303
16,252
17,112
17,901

14,871
15,127
15,672
15,947
16,249

2,733
2,727
2,753
2,773
2,866

12,138
12,399
12,919
13,147
13,383

1951
1952
1953
1954
1955

'Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning In 1959.

9.

Employment by State

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
State

Sept. 1980

Aug. 1981

Sept. 1981P

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

1,349.9
178.2
990.0
753.9
9,855.1

1,344.9
189.7
993.1
749.2
9,901.0

1,347.5
186.3
1,012.2
759.2
9,986.1

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

1,256.5
1,422.1
259.3
613.4
3,557.9

1,275.3
1,419.3
259.2
623.9
3,705.5

1,278.4
1,432.3
259.7
604.4
3,737.2

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

2,147.9
388.7
336.7
4,884.3
2,141.3

2,156.1
404.3
324.6
4,843.4
2,115.7

2,160.3
394.4
—
4,850.6
2,130.5

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

1,099.3
948.2
1,206.7
1,588.4
427.6

1,060.0
944.6
1,188.4
1,635.0
431.8

1,082.7
958.3
1,196.3
1,648.4
423.6

Maryland ......................................................................
Massachusetts..............................................................
Michigan ......................................................................
M.nnesota ....................................................................
Mississippi ....................................................................
Missouri........................................................................

1,687.5
2,641.1
3,435.1
1,781.4
829.3
1,975.4

1,680,1
2,658.4
3,418.0
1,767.3
811.3
1,967.0

1,694.4
2,6550
3,485.8
1,780.2
824.3
1,980.6


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

State

Sept. 1980

Aug. 1981

Sept. 1981P

Mortana..................................................................
Nebraska................................................................
Nevaoa ..................................................................
New Hampshire ......................................................
New Jersey ............................................................

284.9
632.7
406.1
388.8
3,057.3

286.4
628.5
423.5
392.7
3,132.6

2863
637.2
425.3
391.6
3,104.0

New Mexico............................................................
New York................................................................
North Carolina ........................................................
North Dakota ..........................................................
Ohio ......................................................................

464.0
7,196.5
2,398.5
247.3
4,390.6

469.0
7,263.1
2,356.0
249.0
4,355.0

471.4
7,236.5
2,408.4
250.5
4,396.2

Oklahoma ..............................................................
Oregon ..................................................................
Pennsylvania ..........................................................
Rhode Island ..........................................................
South Carolina ........................................................

1,145.2
1,042.1
4,703.7
402.4
1,181.4

1,182.2
1,012.8
4,689.0
399.1
1,176.8

1,190.3
1,020.1
4,674.0
403.8
1,189.3

South Dakota..........................................................
Tennessee ..............................................................
Texas ....................................................................
Utah ......................................................................
Vermont..................................................................

238.1
1,727.2
5,936.3
554.6
201.3

234.3
1,719.9
6,151.0
550.1
201.3

233.5
1,731.3
6,180.5
555.5
203.1

Virginia....................................................................
Washington ............................................................
West Virginia ..........................................................
Wisconsin................................................................
Wyoming ................................................................

2,136.2
1,615.3
645.9
1,962.6
211.8

2,147.5
1,575.1
629.1
1,962.9
213.6

2,163.8
1,590.7
633.1
1,979.4
212.7

Virgin Islands ..........................................................

35.1

366

35.2

75

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
10.

Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]

Annual average

1980

1981

Industry division and group

TOTAL ..........................................................
MINING ............................................................

1979

1980

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept»

Oct.p

89,823

90,564

91,244

91,599

91,750

89,988

90,138

90,720

91,337

91,848

92,481

91,600

91,598

92,079

92,332

958

1,020

1,034

1,051

1,060

1,066

1,071

1,084

941

957

1,132

1,155

1,169

1,164

1,160

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

4,463

4,399

4,619

4,533

4,343

3,995

3,901

4,048

4,246

4,356

4,477

4,554

4,579

4,511

4,483

MANUFACTURING ..............................................
Production workers..................................

21,040
15,068

20,300
14,223

20,235
14,141

20,293
14,190

20,238
14,126

20,075
13,975

20,065
13,971

20,160
14,049

20,253
14,127

20,342
14,195

20,531
14,325

20,337
14,108

20,473
14,230

20,608
14,391

20,350
14,150

Durable goods ................................................
Production workers..................................

12,760
9,110

12,181
8,438

12,061
8,304

12,156
8,391

12,147
8,374

12,072
8,305

12,042
8,279

12,120
8,345

12,197
8,412

12,235
8,438

12,334
8,500

12,198
8,347

12,188
8,323

12,294
8,446

12,174
8,331

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 ..........................

766.9
497.8
708.7
1,253.9
1,717.7
2,484.8
2,116.9
2,077.2
691.2
444.8

690.3
468.8
665.6
1,144,1
1,609.0
2,497.0
2,103.2
1,875.3
708.5
419.3

691.4
465.0
663.5
1,103.7
1,586.6
2,461.2
2,094.8
1,869.0
706.3
419.2

687.9
468.6
665.2
1,123.3
1,597.6
2,479.6
2,109.6
1,894.6
711.2
417.9

685.9
470.5
652.3
1,136.3
1,596.4
2,496.8
2,118.0
1,871.4
713.8
405.9

674.6
469.6
635.0
1,136.7
1,580.2
2,496.9
2,114.0
1,854.9
712.4
398.0

674.5
471.7
630.6
1,137.7
1,578.1
2,498.4
2,112.3
1,824.8
710.1
403.3

678.3
472.1
639.5
1,141.3
1,585.4
2,504.3
2,119.5
1,860.4
712.1
406.7

686.9
478.0
652.6
1,149.9
1,593.7
2,506.1
2,129.7
1,874.3
714.4
411.3

703.4
479.0
659.7
1,147.5
1,596.1
2,508.6
2,134.7
1,877.4
715.2
413.4

711.0
480.5
671.0
1,155.5
1,606.8
2,531.3
2,152.7
1,882.7
723.2
419.5

708.6
472.0
666.7
1,135.5
1,584.5
2,517.4
2,138.9
1,840.3
722.1
412.3

701.5
480.6
669.1
1,140.3
1,590.9
2,511.4
2,146.1
1,799.6
726.2
421.8

690.2
483.7
664.7
1,141.5
1,609.7
2,539.1
2,164.8
1,850.2
723.4
426.5

673.2
481.4
654.3
1,117.4
1,590.3
2,529.7
2,157.2
1,822.5
719.7
428.2

Nondurable goods ..........................................
Production workers..................................

8,280
5,958

8,118
5,786

8,174
5,837

8,137
5,799

8,091
5,752

8,003
5,670

8,023
5,692

8,040
5,704

8,056
5,715

8,107
5,757

8,197
5,825

8,139
5,761

8,285
5,907

8,314
5,945

8,176
5,819

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 ..........................

1,732.5
70.0
885.1
1,304.3
706.8
1,235.1
1,109.3
209.8
781.6
245.7

1,710.8
69.2
852.7
1,265.8
694.0
1,258.3
1,107.4
196.6
730.7
232.6

1,765.2
75.9
845.4
1,270.5
690.6
1,259.1
1,099.5
209.7
725.7
232.1

1,719.3
75.3
847.8
1,262.3
691.4
1,268.2
1,100.1
209.5
730.6
232.5

1,688.5
74.4
846.1
1,241.1
691.5
1,278.3
1,101.2
206.8
733.2
229.4

1,645.2
72.0
841.0
1,222.8
687.7
1,269.0
1,100.1
206.5
731.8
226.9

1,639.2
70.6
841.1
1,238.7
687.7
1,273.6
1,102.9
205.7
734.2
229.5

1,632.5
68.3
840.9
1,250.2
688.6
1,278.2
1,106.8
207.0
737.2
230.4

1,631.0
66.2
841.6
1,255.2
690.9
1,2804
1,106.2
209.5
743.5
231.7

1,648.1
65.2
844.3
1,265.9
693.1
1,281.8
1,110.3
212.9
749.2
235.9

1,673.4
66.4
851.0
1,283.9
701.0
1,286.2
1,121.1
215.4
759.0
239.1

1,714.8
66.3
836.5
1,231.1
696.4
1,286.5
1,116.6
216.1
747.0
227.5

1,773.2
75.6
847.3
1,276.8
700.3
1,289.4
1,112.0
215.4
756.8
238.6

1,775.0
77.2
850.6
1,292.3
701.5
1,293 4
1,111.6
213.0
762.3
236.6

1,700.4
76.9
834.6
1,277.3
691.2
1,294.5
1,102.0
213.5
749.4
235.7

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES . . , .

5,136

5,143

5,166

5,147

5,150

5,063

5,076

5,095

5,120

5,148

5,195

5,177

5,175

5,227

5,230

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE......................

20,192

20,386

20,533

20,761

21,138

20,366

20,196

20,290

20,513

20,672

20,795

20,735

20,811

20,926

20,993

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

5,204

5,281

5,315

5,312

5,315

5,276

5,273

5,293

5,317

5,335

5,381

5,376

5,386

5,369

5,375

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

14,989

15,104

15,218

15,449

15,823

15,090

14,923

14,997

15,196

15,337

15,414

15,359

15,425

15,557

15,618

4,975

5,168

5,211

5,223

5,237

5,235

5,245

5,263

5,295

5,326

5,384

5,408

5,408

5,353

5,337

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

17,112

17,901

18,115

18,118

18,149

17,972

18,126

18,287

18,512

18,633

18,764

18,847

18,835

18,829

18,877

GOVERNMENT ....................................................
Federal..........................................................
State and local ..............................................

15,947
2,773
13,174

16,249
2,866
13,383

16,331
2,774
13,557

16,473
2,776
13,697

16,435
2,782
13,653

16,216
2,773
13,443

16,458
2,774
13,684

16,493
2,769
13,724

16,457
2,773
13,684

16,414
2,782
13,632

16,203
2,825
13,378

15,387
2,833
12,554

15,148
2,803
12,345

15,461
2,741
12,720

15,902
2,744
13,158

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE . .

76


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

11.

Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
1980

1981

Industry division and group
Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.p

Oct.p

TOTAL ........................................................................................

90,668

90,844

90,949

91,091

91,258

91,347

91,458

91,564

91,615

91,880

91,901

91,948

91,743

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

1,032

1,052

1,069

1,083

1,091

1,098

950

957

1,110

1,132

1,151

1,157

1,158

4,334

4,284

4,272

4,275

4,268

4,249

4,379

4,389

4,387

4,390

4,389

4,416

4,418

MANUFACTURING..............................................................................
Production workers ................................................................

20,110
14,024

20,188
14,081

20,175
14,059

20,174
14,053

20,177
14,053

20,191
14,074

20,332
14,187

20,414
14,247

20,424
14,245

20,535
14,327

20,505
14,294

20,500
14,293

20,225
14,033

Durable goods................................................................................
Production workers ................................................................

12,013
8,259

12,090
8,320

12,077
8,301

12,084
8,306

12,074
8,297

12,099
8,325

12,207
8,412

12,254
8,442

12,278
8,455

12,333
8,491

12,332
8,485

12,309
8,468

12,126
8,286

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..........................................................

679
462
655
1,108
1,578
2,481
2,087
1,848
709
406

683
463
658
1,126
1,582
2,489
2,096
1,874
712
407

687
464
655
1,137
1,581
2,490
2,103
1,839
712
409

689
464
654
1,137
1,579
2,487
2,110
1,840
713
411

691
466
654
1,140
1,577
2,481
2,110
1,833
711
411

692
467
651
1,141
1,581
2,480
2,117
1,849
712
409

702
478
656
1,145
1,595
2,491
2,134
1,878
714
414

710
484
658
1,142
1,604
2,511
2,143
1,872
716
414

699
486
658
1,144
1,604
2,521
2,148
1,886
717
415

702
488
658
1,140
1,614
2,533
2,163
1,886
723
426

686
487
660
1,148
1,610
2,542
2,166
1,889
727
417

677
484
655
1,142
1,608
2,549
2,163
1,887
727
417

661
478
646
1,122
1,581
2,550
2,149
1,801
723
415

Nondurable goods..........................................................................
Production workers ................................................................

8,097
5,765

8,098
5,761

8,098
5,758

8,090
5,747

8,103
5,756

8,092
5,749

8,125
5,775

8,160
5,805

8,146
5,790

8,202
5,836

8,173
5,809

8,191
5,825

8,099
5,747

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..........................................................

1,711
69
845
1,256
691
1,262
1,102
208
722
231

1,705
71
844
1,253
692
1,265
1,103
209
725
231

1,701
71
842
1,250
692
1,269
1,105
209
729
230

1,696
71
841
1,244
691
1,269
1,106
211
730
231

1,705
72
839
1,243
691
1,272
1,109
210
731
231

1,691
72
838
1,243
689
1,276
1,108
210
734
231

1,697
72
842
1,250
691
1,280
1,107
211
744
231

1,703
71
843
1,258
694
1,283
1,109
213
753
233

1,673
71
846
1,264
695
1,284
1,111
212
757
232

1,691
71
856
1,278
696
1,290
1,110
212
760
238

1,668
73
849
1,272
698
1,295
1,106
212
764
236

1,668
71
850
1,278
702
1,300
1,113
211
762
236

1,648
70
834
1,262
691
1,297
1,105
212
746
234

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

5,129

5,114

5,118

5,124

5,135

5,139

5,161

5,148

5,149

5,167

5,170

5,191

5,194

20,461

20,464

20,470

20,529

20,600

20,635

20,636

20,714

20,717

20,796

20,862

20,879

20,910

5,349

5,360

5,375

5,369

5,354

CONSTRUCTION

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE
WHOLESALE TRADE
RETAIL TRADE

5,296

5,296

5,300

5,305

5,313

5,316

5,333

5,346

15,165

15,168

15,170

15,224

15,287

15,319

15,303

15,368

15,368

15,436

15,487

15,510

15,556

5,283

5,293

5,316

5,326

5,331

5,344

5,354

5,358

5,348

5,254

5,268

18,160

18,240

18,300

18,343

18,371

18,475

18,540

18,560

18,642

18,667

18,791

18,839

16,242
2,796
13,446

16,236
2,800
13,436

16,223
2,799
13,424

16,240
2,795
13,445

16,204
2,781
13,423

16,170
2,767
13,403

16,131
2,779
13,352

16,040
2,781
13,259

15,992
2,777
13,215

15,917
2,770
13,147

15,804
2,771
13,033

15,820
2,766
13,054

5,221

5,235

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

18,087

GOVERNMENT ..................................................................................
Federal .........................................................................................
State and local..............................................................................

16,249
2,795
13,454

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE


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

77

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
12.

Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, 1977 to date

[Per 100 employees]
Y ear

A nnual
av erag e

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

4.3
4.4
4.3
3.8
3.6

5.3
5.4
5.0
4.5
4.0

3.0
3.3
3.1
2.1
2.4

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

D ec.

4.6
4.9
4.5
4.3
p3.5

3.9
4.3
4.1
3.6

3.1
3.3
3.0
2.7

2.4
2.4
2.2
2.2

4.0
4.2
3.7
2.5
2.7

3.5
3.9
3.4
2.6
p2.3

3.0
3.5
3.1
2.2

2.2
2.6
2.2
1.6

1.6
1.7
1.5
1.2

.9
.8
.9
1.5
1.0

1.0
.9
.9
1.7
1.0

.8
.7
.8
1.4
p.9

.6
.6
.7
1.1

.6
.5
.6
.9

.6
.5
.5
.8

4.3
4.1
4.3
4.2
3.6

5.1
5.3
5.7
4.8
4.4

4.9
4.9
4.7
4.1
p4.1

3.8
4.1
4.2
3.8

3.4
3.5
3.8
3.0

3.4
3.4
3.5
3.1

1.9
2.1
2.0
1.4
1.5

3.1
3.5
3.3
2.2
2.1

2.8
3.1
2.7
1.9
p1.8

1.9
2.3
2.1
1.4

1.5
1.7
1.6
1.1

1.2
1.3
1.1
.9

1.5
1.1
1.4
2.0
1.3

1.0
.8
1.3
1.7
1.3

1.1
.8
1.1
1.4
p1.5

1.1
.9
1.2
1.5

1.1
1.0
1.5
1.3

1.5
1.4
1.7
1.6

T o ta l a c c e s s io n s

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

4.0
4.1
4.0
3.5

3.7
3.8
4.0
3.8
3.4

3.7
3.2
3.4
3.3
3.0

4.0
3.8
3.8
3.5
3.4

3.8
4.0
3.9
3.1
3.3

4.6
4.7
4.7
3.4
3.5

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

2.8
3.1
2.9
2.1

2.2
2.5
2.8
2.4
1.8

2.1
2.2
2.5
2.2
1.8

2.6
2.7
2.8
2.3
2.0

2.7
2.9
2.9
2.0
2.0

3.5
3.6
3.6
2.1
2.3

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

.9
.7
.7
1.1

1.2
1.0
.9
1.1
1.3

1.3
.7
.7
.9
1.0

1.1
.8
.7
.9
1.1

.9
.8
.7
.8
1.1

.8
.8
.8
1.0
1.0

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

3.8
3.9
4.0
4.0

3.9
3.6
3.8
4.1
3.6

3.4
3.1
3.2
3.5
3.1

3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.2

3.4
3.6
3.7
4.7
3.1

3.5
3.7
3.8
4.8
3.1

4.9
4.9
4.8
3.9
4.0
N e w h ir e s

3.7
3.9
3.8
2.4
2.8
R e c a ll s

.8
.7
.7
1.2
.9
T o ta l s e p a r a tio n s

3.5
3.8
3.9
4.4
3.2
Q u it s

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

1.8
2.1
2.0
1.5

1.4
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.2

1.3
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.1

1.6
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.2

1.7
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.3

1.9
2.1
2.1
1.5
1.3

1.9
2.2
2.1
1.4
1.4
L a y o ffs

1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

13.

..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................

1.1
.9
1.1
1.7

1.7
1.2
1.1
1.6
1.6

1.4
.9
.8
1.2
1.2

1.0
.9
.8
1.3
1.2

.9
.8
.9
2.3
1.0

.8
.7
.7
2.5
1.0

.8
.7
.9
2.2
1.1

Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by major industry group

[Per 100 employees]
A c c e s s io n r a te s

M a jo r in d u s try g ro u p

M A N U F A C T U R I N G ......................................................

Seasonally adjusted..............
D u r a b le g o o d s

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........
N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s ............................................

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........


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
78
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T o ta l

S e p a r a tio n r a te s

N e w h ir e s

R e c a ll s

T o ta l

Q u it s

L a y o ffs

S e p t.

A ug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A ug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A ug.

S e p t.

1980

1981

1981 P

1980

1981

1981 P

1980

1981

1981 P

1980

1981

1981 p

1980

1981

1981»

1980

1981

1981»

4.3
3.7

4.0
3.2

3.5
2.9

2.6
2.1

2.7
2.1

2.3
1.8

1.4
1.4

1.0
.8

0 .9

4.1
3.5

4.4
3.6

4.1
3.7

1.9
1.3

2.1
1.3

1.8
1.3

1.4
1.5

1.3
1.4

1.5
1.7

4.0
5.3
5.5
3.8
4.2
4.6
2.9
3.3
5.0
2.8
5.8

3.3
4.3
4.9
3.7
2.6
3.8
2.8
3.0
2.7
2.6
6.0

3.0
3.9
3.9
2.7
2.4
3.2
2.4
3.0

2.1
3.6
3.9
2.2
.9
2.4
1.7
1.9
1.6
2.1
4.0

2.1
3.4
3.7
2.2
1.2
2.3
1.8
2.0
1.4
2.1
4.4

1.8
2.4
3.2
1.6
1.0
2.0
1.6
1.9

1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
2.9
1.9
.8
8
2.8
.4
1.6

.9
.7
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.1
.7
.6
.9
.4
1.4

.9
1.4
.6
.9
1.1
.9
6
.7

3.5
5.8
4.4
4.0
3.7
3.8
2.9
3.0
3.2
2.9
5.0

4.1
6.5
4.8
4.7
3.6
4.4
3.3
3.5
4.5
2.9
5.4

3.6
6.7
4.3
4.0
3.8
4.0
2.7
3.2

1.4
2.7
2.5
1.6
.7
1.6
1.2
1.4
1.0
1.9
2.7

1.7
3.1
2.8
2.0
1.1
1.9
1.4
1.6
1.2
1.8
3.0

1.4
2.4
2.3
1.3
.8
1.5
1.1
1.3

1.2
2.0
.8
1.4
2.1
1.5
1.0
.8
1.4
.4
1.3

1.5
2.3
1.0
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.1
1.0
2.5
.5
1.3

1.5
3.4
1.1
1.8
2.3
1.8
.9
1.0

4.7
7.4
5.6
3.7
6.0
2.8
3.6
1.7
2.1

5.0
8.5
10.0
4.1
6.8
2.6
3.6
1.7
1.9

4.2
6.6

3.5
5.5
4.6
3.2
4.6
1.8
3.0
1.3
1.7

1.2
2.7
4.6
.6
1.9
.6
.4
.3
.2

4.8
6.6
2.9
4.4
6.1
3.6
3.9
2.6
3.3

2.8
3.7
1.6
2.7
3.8
1.9
2.6
1.4
1.3

2.3
3.2
1.5
2.3
,9
.8

1.6
3.7
.5
.7
1.7
1.2
.7
.5
.6

1.1
2.0
.3
.7
1.3
.9
.6
.5
1.1

1.5
3.3

4.0
5.3
3.4
3.5
2.0
3.1

2.5
3.9
1.5
2.3
3.2
1.5
2.3
1.0
.9

2.3
3.3

.5
1.3
.6
.5
.2
.3

5.0
8.5
3.0
3.8
5.8
3.4
3.6
2.1
2.3

4.7
7.6

2.7
4.2
1.6
2.9
1.1
1.6

1.3
2.3
1.9
.8
1.8
.8
.5
.4
.3

1.0
2.2

3.4
5.7
2.3
3.5
1.4
2.0

3.2
4.9
3.2
2.7
3.9
1.8
3.0
1.2
1.7

5.5
6.5

4.4
7.2

3.7
5.1

3.2
5.1

3.2
5.2

2.8
4.1

1.9
1.1

.9
1.7

.6
.8

4.5
6.9

4.7
7.2

4.5
6.5

2.3
4.1

2.6
4.2

2.0
3.5

1.3
1.7

1.0
1.8

1.5
2.2

2.4
4.9

1.9
3.8
3.0
4.2

.9

.2
.9

3.2
5.1

1.9
2.3

.7
1.7

.9
1.3
1.1
.6
.5
1.1

14.

Hours and earnings, by industry division, 1950-80

[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

$53.13

39.8

$1.335

$67.16

37.9

$1.772

$69 68

37.4

$1.863

$58.32

40.5

$1.440

..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

57.86
60.65
63.76
64.52
67.72

39.9
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

38.4
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
38.8
38.5
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
85.91
88.46
91.33
95.45

38.6
38.7
38.8
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

36.9
37.0
36.9
36.5
36.1

3.45
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
1980

..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

175.45
189.00
203.70
219.91
235.10

36.1
36.0
35.8
35.7
35.3

4.86
5.25
5.69
6.16
6.66

273.90
301.20
332.88
365.07
396.14

42.4
43.4
43.4
43.0
43.2

6.46
6.94
7.67
8.49
9.17

283.73
295.65
318.69
342.99
367.04

36.8
36.5
36.8
37.0
37.0

7.71
8.10
8.66
9.27
9.92

209.32
228.90
249.27
269.34
288.62

40.1
40.3
40.4
40.2
39.7

5.22
5.68
6.17
6.70
7.27

1950 ..................
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955

Transportation and public
utilities

Finance, insurance, and
real estate

Wholesale and retail trade

Services

$44.55

40.5

$1.100

$50.52

37.7

$1.340

1951 . .
1952
1953 . .
1954 . .
1955

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

1956
1957 ............
1958
1959'
1960

57.48
59.60
61.76
64 41
66 01

391
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

1961
1962 . . .
1963
1964 ..................
1965 ..................

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

1950

$118.78
125.14

41.1
41.3

$2.89
3.03

67.41
69.91
72.01
74.66
76.91

..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

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
2.93
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
1980

256.71
278.90
302.80
325.58
351.25

39.8
39.9
40.0
39.9
39.6

6.45
6.99
7.57
8.16
8.87

133.79
142.52
153.64
164.96
176.46

33.7
33.3
32.9
32.6
32.2

3.97
4.28
4.67
5.06
5.48

155.43
165.26
178,00
190.77
209.24

36.4
36.4
36.4
36.2
36.2

4.27
4.54
4.89
5.27
5.78

143.52
153.45
163.67
175.27
190.71

33.3
33.0
32.8
32.7
32.6

4.31
4.65
4.99
5.36
5.85

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

1Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.


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

79

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • 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

1980

1981

Industry division and group
1979

1980

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

35.7

35.3

35.3

35.3

35.6

35.1

35.0

35.2

35.2

35.2

35.4

35.6

35.6

35.0

35.0

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

43.0

43.2

43.6

43.6

44.1

43.6

42.8

42.3

43.6

43.8

42.1

43.5

44.1

43.8

44.5

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

37.0

37.0

37.9

36.8

37.2

36.4

35.0

37.2

36.9

36.9

37.2

37.7

37.3

35.7

37.1

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

40.2
3.3

39.7
2.8

39.8
2.9

40.2
3.1

40.8
3.3

39.9
2.9

39.5
2.8

39.9
2.8

39.7
2.6

40.1
2.9

40.2
3.0

39.6
2.8

39.8
3.0

39.5
2.9

39.5
2.8

Durable goods
Overtime hours......................................

40.8
3.5

40.1
2.8

40.3
2.9

40.7
3.1

41.5
3.4

40.4
2.9

39.9
2.8

40.5
2.9

40.3
2.7

40.6
3.0

40.6
3.0

39.9
2.8

40.2
2.9

39.7
2.7

39.8
2.7

Lumber and wood products ..........................
Furniture and fixtures....................................
Stone, clay, and glass products......................
Primary metal industries................................
Fabricated metal products ............................

39.4
38.7
41.5
41.4
40.7

38.6
38.1
40.8
40.1
40.4

39.2
38.5
41.3
39.9
40.5

39.2
38.4
41.4
40.8
40.9

39.7
39.6
41.6
41.6
41.6

38.8
38.1
40.3
41.1
40.4

38.5
38.3
39.6
40.7
40.0

390
38.8
40.6
41.1
40.6

39.1
38.2
40.9
41.2
40.2

39.6
38.5
41.1
40.9
40.7

39.5
38.9
41.2
40.9
40.8

38.7
37.8
40.8
40.3
39.9

39.0
38.6
41.0
40.3
40.3

38.1
37.6
40.6
40.6
39.5

37.8
37.8
40.6
39.6
40.0

Machinery except electrical............................
Electric and electronic equipment ..................
Transportation equipment..............................
Instruments and related products ..................
Miscellaneous manufacturing ........................

41.8
40.3
41.1
40.8
38.8

41.0
39.8
40.6
40.5
38.7

40.7
39.8
41.1
40.3
38.9

41.3
40.4
41.7
40.9
39.1

42.2
41.0
43.1
41.2
39.5

41.2
40.1
40.9
40.6
38.6

40.8
39.6
40.1
40.5
38.4

41.2
40.2
41.1
40.6
38.9

40.8
39.8
41.0
39.9
38.6

41.2
40.1
41.6
40.3
38.9

41.1
40.2
41.3
40.4
39.0

40.4
39.7
40.7
39.9
38.5

40.7
40.0
40.5
40.4
39.0

40.3
39.6
39.8
40.4
38.8

40.4
39.7
40.2
40.4
39.2

Nondurable goods ........................................
Overtime hours......................................

39.3
3.1

39.0
2.8

39.1
2.9

39.4
3.0

39.9
3.1

39.2
2.9

38.9
2.8

39.1
2.7

38.9
2.6

39.4
2.9

39.5
2.9

39.1
2.8

39.4
3.0

39.1
3.1

39.0
2.9

Food and kindred products............................
Tobacco manufactures..................................
Textile mill products......................................
Apparel and other textile products..................
Paper and allied products..............................

39.9
38.0
40.4
35.3
42.6

39.7
38.1
40.1
35.4
42.3

39.7
40.0
39.9
35.5
42.2

40.1
40.1
40.3
35.4
42.8

40.3
38.1
40.9
35.9
43.7

40.0
38.6
39.9
35.2
42.7

39.3
38.5
39.9
35.3
42.2

39.2
37.2
40.1
35.8
42.4

39.3
37.2
39.4
35.2
42.3

39.8
38.6
40.3
36.0
42.5

39.8
38.5
40.4
36.4
42.7

39.6
38.6
39.7
36.0
42.4

40.0
40.7
40.0
36.3
42.5

39.8
40.1
39.0
35.2
43.3

39.4
39.2
39.4
35.7
42.3

Printing and publishing ..................................
Chemicals and allied products........................
Petroleum and coal products ........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ..
Leather and leather products ........................

37.5
41.9
43.8
40.5
36.5

37.1
41.5
41.8
40.1
36.7

37.2
41.5
43.7
40.7
36.6

37.2
42.0
43.6
41.1
36.3

38.1
42.1
43.3
41.6
36.9

37.1
41.6
42.6
41.0
36.5

36.9
41.5
42.5
40.2
36.7

37.1
41.6
42.6
40.7
36.8

37.0
41.6
43.9
40.4
36.3

37.3
41.6
43.6
40.9
37.4

37.2
41.6
43.5
40.9
38.1

37.2
41.5
43.7
40.0
36.6

37.5
41.4
43.0
40.4
36.9

37.5
42.3
44.0
39.8
36.1

37.2
41.3
43.6
40.4
36.8

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES . . . .

39.9

39.6

39.8

39.7

40.0

39.4

39.5

39.4

39.3

39.3

39.8

39.8

39.5

39.1

39.1

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ....................

32.6

32.2

32.1

32.1

32.5

31.7

31.7

31.9

32.1

32.0

32.3

32.8

32.8

32.2

31.9

WHOLESALE TRADE

38.8

38.5

38.7

38.5

38.9

38.5

38.3

38.5

38.5

38.5

38.6

38.8

38.7

38.5

38.5

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

30.6

30.2

30.0

30.0

30.5

29.5

29.6

29.8

30.0

29.9

30.4

30.9

30.9

30.2

29.8

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL
ESTATE ..........................................................

36.2

36.2

36.3

36.3

36.3

36.4

36.4

36.4

36.3

36.1

36.1

36.3

36.3

36.0

36.2

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

32.7

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.5

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.5

32.7

33.0

32.9

32.4

32.5

TOTAL PRIVATE..........................................

80

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

Aug.

Sept.p

Oct.p

16.

Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1981

1980
Industry division and group

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.p

Oct.p

TOTAL PRIVATE................................................

35.3

35.3

35.3

35.3

35.2

35.3

35.4

35.3

35.2

35.3

35.2

34.9

34.9

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

39.7
2.8

39.8
3.0

39.9
3.0

40.1
3.0

39.8
2.8

39.9
2.8

40.2
2.9

40.3
3.2

40.1
3.0

40.0
3.0

40.0
3.0

39.3
2.6

39.4
2.7

Durable goods
Overtime hours............................................

40.1
2.8

40.4
3.0

40.4
3.1

40.6
3.0

40.1
2.8

40.4
2.8

40.8
3.0

40.8
3.2

40.5
3.0

40.5
3.0

40.5
3.0

39.6
2.5

39.7
2.6

Lumber and wood products ................................
Furniture and fixtures ..........................................
Stone, clay, and glass products ..........................
Primary metal industries......................................
Fabricated metal products ..................................

38.6
38.0
40.8
40.1
40.4

39.1
38.0
40.9
40.8
40.5

39.3
38.4
41.0
41.2
40.4

39.8
38.5
41.3
41.1
40.5

39.1
38.6
40.6
40.7
40.2

39.1
38.6
40.7
41.0
40.4

39.6
38.8
41.2
41.2
40.9

39.8
39.0
41.0
41.0
40.9

39.0
38.9
40.8
40.8
40.7

38.8
38.5
40.9
40.5
40.5

38.6
38.6
40.8
40.7
40.5

37.5
37.4
40.3
40.4
39.4

37.2
37.4
40.1
39.8
39.9

Machinery, except electrical ................................
Electric and electronic equipment ........................
Transportation equipment....................................
Instruments and related products ........................
Miscellaneous manufacturing ..............................

40.8
39.8
40.7
40.3
38.6

41.0
39.9
41.2
40.4
38.6

40.9
40.0
41.0
40.4
38.9

41.1
40.1
41.3
40.6
38.8

40.8
39.6
40.5
40.5
38.6

40.9
40.0
40.9
40.5
38.7

41.3
40.2
42.0
40.1
38.9

41.4
40.4
41.8
40.4
39.2

41.1
40.2
41.4
40.4
39.1

41.1
40.5
41.2
40.5
39.2

41.2
40.4
41.3
40.8
39.1

40.2
39.5
39.8
40.5
38.5

40.5
39.7
39.8
40.4
38.9

Nondurable goods
Overtime hours............................................

39.0
2.8

39.1
2.9

39.2
2.9

39.5
3.0

39.2
2.9

39.2
2.8

39.3
2.9

39.6
3.1

39.4
3.0

39.3
2.9

39.3
2.9

38.9
2.8

38.9
2.8

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

39.6
39.8
35.4
42.2

39.8
39.9
35.2
42.4

39.7
40.1
35.5
42.8

40.3
40.0
36.1
42.6

39.9
40.0
35.6
42.4

39.7
39.9
35.7
42.4

40.1
39.8
35.5
42.6

40.0
40.5
36.0
42.8

39.8
40.2
36.1
42.7

39.4
40.4
35.9
42.7

39.4
40.3
36.1
42.7

39.2
39.0
35.2
43.2

39.3
39.3
35.6
42.3

Printing and publishing ........................................
Chemicals and allied products..............................
Petroleum and coal products ..............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ........
Leather and leather products ..............................

37.1
41.5
42.8
40.5
36.7

36.8
41.6
42.9
40.8
36.3

37.4
41.6
43.2
40.8
36.6

37.5
41.6
43.8
40.9
36.8

37.3
41.6
43.8
40.3
37.0

37.1
41.5
43.5
40.5
37.1

37.3
41.5
44.1
40.7
36.6

37.6
41.7
43.8
41.3
37.1

37.4
41.7
43.4
41.0
37.1

37.3
41.8
43.1 40.5
36.5

37.3
41.7
42.8
40.6
36.9

37.2
42.4
42.9
39.6
36.2

37.1
41.3
42.6
40.2
36.9

32.1

32.2

32.1

32.2

32.2

32.2

32.3

32.1

32.1

32.2

32.1

32.1

31.9

WHOLESALE TRADE

38.5

38.5

38.6

38.8

38.6

38.6

38.6

38.5

38.5

38.7

38.6

38.5

38.3

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

30.1

30.2

30.0

30.1

30.2

30.2

30.3

30.1

30.1

30.1

30.1

30.1

29.9

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

32.6

32.7

32.7

32.7

32.8

32.8

32.8

32.7

32.5

32.5

32.4

32.4

32.5

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE

N ote : The industry divisions of mining; construction; tobacco manufactures (a major
manufacturing group, nondurable goods); transportation and public utilities; and finance, insurance,
and real estate are not shown. This is because the seasonal component in these is small


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

relative to the trend-cycle, or irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be precisely
separated,

81

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • 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]

1981

1980

Annual average
Industry division and group

1979

1980

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept, p

Oct.p

$6.16

$6.66

$6.85

$6.92

$6.94

$7.03

$7.06

$7.10

$7.13

$7.17

$7.20

$7.24

$7.30

$7.39

$7.41

MINING

8.49

9.17

9.36

9.49

9.57

9.77

9.86

985

9.70

9.68

9.94

10.11

10.15

10.29

10.24

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

9.27

9.92

10.24

10.24

10.33

10.42

10.41

10.44

10.43

10.53

1060

10.74

10.87

11.01

11.07

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

6.70

7.27

7.49

7.60

7.70

7.73

7.75

7.80

788

7.92

7.97

8.02

8.02

8.14

8.14

Durable goods
Lumber and wood products ....................
Furniture and fixtures..............................
Stone, clay, and glass products ..............
Primary metal industries..........................
Fabricated metal products ......................

7.13
6.07
5.06
6.85
8.98
6.85

7.75
6.53
5.49
7.50
9.77
7.45

8.01
6.73
560
7.74
10.10
7.69

8.11
6.76
5.63
7.81
10.29
7.77

8.23
6.74
570
7.83
10.36
7,88

8.23
6.79
5.71
7.87
10.36
7.89

8.26
6.81
5.74
7.89
10.56
7.91

8.32
6.79
5.76
7.94
10.52
8.01

8.40
6.83
5.78
8.11
10.76
8.05

8.45
6.92
5.83
8.20
10.68
8.17

8.52
7.10
5.89
8.31
10.76
8.23

8.55
7.16
5.91
8.39
10.79
8.22

8.57
7.13
5.98
8.41
10.99
8.27

8.68
7.16
6.00
8.53
11.25
8.33

8.69
7.19
6.07
8.50
11.06
8.37

Machinery, except electrical....................
Electric and electronic equipment............
Transportation equipment........................
Instruments and related products ............
Miscellaneous manufacturing ..................

7.32
6.32
8.53
6.17
5.03

8.00
6.95
9.32
6.80
5.47

8.30
7.18
975
6.94
5.56

8.38
7.27
9.87
7.01
5.62

8.50
7.38
10.09
7.13
5.73

8.53
7.41
9.96
7.19
5.82

8.56
7.43
9.93
7.20
5.83

8.62
7.47
10.08
7.23
5.85

8.67
7.51
10.14
7.25
5.91

8.75
7.55
10.25
7.31
5.93

8.81
7.60
10.36
7.34
5.93

8.85
7.69
10.35
7.44
5.98

8.86
7.76
10.30
7.56
5.97

8.98
7.79
10.41
7.61
6.06

9.06
7.78
10.55
7.59
6.07

Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products......................
Tobacco manufactures............................
Textile mill products................................
Apparel and other textile products ..........
Paper and allied products........................

6.01
6.27
6.67
4,66
4.23
7.13

6.56
6.86
7.73
5.08
4.57
7.84

6.74
6.95
769
5.27
473
8.09

6.82
709
7.86
5.31
4.75
8.18

6.89
7.13
8.10
5.34
4.81
8.27

6.97
7.21
8.50
5.35
4.89
8.27

6.98
724
8.56
5.35
4.87
8.28

7.01
7.29
8.61
5.36
4.94
8.30

7.08
7.37
8.90
5.36
4.96
8.37

7.11
7.43
9.03
5.40
4.98
8.42

7.14
7.43
9.33
5.42
5.00
8.55

7.23
7.47
9.43
5.51
4.94
8.73

724
7.50
8.61
5.66
4.98
8.67

7.37
7.57
8.71
5.68
5.05
8.92

7.33
7.58
868
5.72
5.04
8.73

Printing and publishing............................
Chemicals and allied products ................
Petroleum and coal products ..................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products ..................

6.94
7.60
9.36
5.97
4.22

7.53
8.30
10.09
6.56
4.58

7.74
8.53
10.38
6.79
465

7.79
860
10.52
6.88
4.69

7.88
8.69
10.38
6.97
4.74

7.92
8.74
11.06
7.06
4.86

7.96
8.80
11.33
7.04
4.88

8.02
8.84
11.23
7.07
4.90

8.04
8.94
11.40
7.15
4.93

8.10
8.99
11.28
7.22
4.95

8.13
9.07
11.29
7.23
4.98

8.22
9.16
11.41
7.28
4.96

8.27
9.19
11.31
7.32
4.97

8.39
9.38
11.48
7.40
5.07

8.40
9.32
11.34
7.43
5.07

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES . . . .

8.16

8.87

9.19

9.27

9.30

9.33

9.45

9.42

9.54

9.59

9.63

9.69

9.89

9.98

10.01

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ....................

5.06

5.48

5.59

5.64

5.62

580

5.84

5.85

5.87

5.89

5.89

5.91

5.94

6.03

600

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

6.39

6.96

7.09

7.19

7.23

7.32

7.38

7.42

7.47

7.51

7.51

7.59

767

7.71

7.73

4.98

5.02

4.99

5.18

5.20

5.20

5.22

5.23

5.23

5.24

5.26

5.36

5.30

TOTAL PRIVATE..........................................

RETAIL TRADE

4.53

4.88

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL
ESTATE ..........................................................

5.27

5.78

5.91

6.02

6.00

6.10

6.21

6.19

6.20

6.24

6.24

6.27

6.37

6.36

6.41

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

5.36

5.85

6.00

6.09

6.12

6.21

6.27

6.29

6.30

6.33

6.33

6.34

6.41

6.50

6.55

18.

Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry division

[Seasonally adjusted data: 1977 = 100]

1981

1980

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.p

Oct.p

Sept. 1981
to
Oct. 1981

Oct. 1980
to
Oct. 1981

130.6

132.1

132.6

133.8

135.0

135.8

136.7

137.7

138.4

139.0

140.7

141.3

141.6

0.2

8.4

137.5
124.4
133.5
130.9
130.8
129.9
128.5

139.2
125.2
134.6
132.6
132.3
132.4
130.5

139.8
126.2
135.4
132.8
132.4
131.9
131.1

142.1
127.6
136.5
133.7
133.7
133.2
132.0

143.2
128.0
137.5
135.4
135.0
135.0
133.2

144.0
128.6
138.5
136.1
135.8
136.0
134.0

145.7
129.0
139.9
137.3
136.4
135.4
134.8

145.6
129.4
140.7
138.9
137.4
136.8
136.0

147.2
130.4
141.6
139.8
137.8
137.1
136.6

148.9
131.8
142.5
139.3
138.4
137.4
136.9

149.4
132.5
143.6
141.8
140.0
140.4
139.4

151.5
132.8
144.8
141.8
141.0
139.9
139.7

150.4
133.9
145.2
142.5
140.5
140.8
140.0

-.8
.8
.3
-.5
-.3
.6
.2

9.4
7.6
8.8
8.8
7.4
8.4
8.9

93.2

93.3

92.7

92.8

92.7

92.8

93.0

93.1

92.9

92.2

92.7

92.0

Industry

TOTAL PRIVATE (In current dollars)
Mining1 ........................................
Construction ................................
Manufacturing ..............................
Transportation and public utilities . . .
Wholesale and retail trade ............
Finance, insurance, and real estate .
Services ......................................
TOTAL PRIVATE (in constant dollars)

1
The unadjusted data are shown because the seasonal component Is small relative to the
trend-cycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be separated with sufficient
precision.


82
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]
Annual average

1981

1980

Industry division and group
1979

1980

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.p

Oct.p

$219.91

$235.10

$241.81

$244.28

$247.06

$246.75

$247.10

$249.92

$250.98

$252.38

$254.88

$25774

$259.88

MINING

365.07

396.14

408.10

413.76

422.04

425.97

422.01

416.66

422.92

423.98

418.47

439.79

447.62

450.70

455.68

CONSTRUCTION

342.99

367.04

388.10

376.83

384.28

379.29

364.35

388.37

384.87

388.56

394.32

404.90

405.45

393.06

410.70

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

269.34

288.62

298.10

305.52

314.16

308.43

306.13

311.22

312.84

317.59

320.39

317.59

319.20

321.53

321.53

Durable goods
Lumber and wood products........................
Furniture and fixtures ................................
Stone, clay, and glass products..................
Primary metal industries ............................
Fabricated metal products..........................

290.90
239.16
195.82
284.28
371.77
278.80

310.78
252.06
209.17
306.00
391.78
300.98

322.80
263.82
215.60
319.66
402.99
311.45

330.08
264.99
216.19
323.33
419.83
317.79

341.55
267.58
225.72
325.73
430.98
327.81

332.49
263.45
217.55
317.16
425.80
318.76

329.57
262.19
219.84
312.44
429.79
316.40

336.96
264.81
223.49
322.36
432.37
325.21

338.52
267.05
220.80
331.70
443.31
323.61

343.07
274.03
224.46
337.02
436.81
332.52

345.91
280.45
229.12
342.37
440.08
335.78

341.15
277.09
223.40
342.31
434.84
327.98

344.51
278.07
230.83
344.81
442.90
333.28

344.60
272.80
225.60
346.32
456.75
329.04

345.86
271.78
229.45
345.10
437.98
334.80

Machinery except electrical........................
Electric and electronic equipment................
Transportation equipment ..........................
Instruments and related products................
Miscellaneous manufacturing......................

305.98
254.70
350.58
251.74
195.16

328.00
276.61
378.39
275.40
211.69

337.81
285.76
400.73
279.68
216.28

346.09
293.71
411.58
286.71
219.74

358.70
302.58
434.88
293.76
226.34

351.44
297.14
407.36
291.91
224.65

349.25
294.23
398.19
291.60
223.87

355.14
300.29
414.29
293.54
227.57

353.74
298.90
415.74
289.28
228.13

360.50
302.76
426.40
294.59
230.68

362.09
305.52
427.87
296.54
231.27

357.54
305.29
421.25
296.86
230.23

360.60
310.40
417.15
305.42
232.83

361.89
308.48
414.32
307.44
235.13

366.02
308.87
424.11
306.64
237.94

Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products ........................
Tobacco manufactures ..............................
Textile mill products ..................................
Apparel and other textile products..............
Paper and allied products ..........................

236.19
250.17
253.46
188.26
149.32
303.74

255.84
272.34
294.51
203.71
161.78
331.63

263.53
275.92
307.60
210.27
167.92
341.40

268.71
284.31
315.19
213.99
168.15
350.10

274.91
287 34
308.61
218.41
172.68
361.40

273.22
288.40
328.10
213.47
172.13
353.13

271.52
284.53
329.56
213.47
171.91
349.42

274.09
285.77
320.29
214.94
176.85
351.92

275.41
289.64
331.08
211.18
174.59
354.05

280.13
295.71
348.56
217.62
179.28
357.85

282.03
295.71
359.21
218.97
182.00
365.09

282.69
295.81
364.00
218.75
177.84
370.15

285.26
300.00
350.43
226.40
180.77
368.48

288.17
301.29
349.27
221.52
177.76
386.24

285.87
298.65
340.26
225.37
179.93
369.28

Printing and publishing................................
Chemicals and allied products....................
Petroleum and coal products......................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products....................................
Leather and leather products......................

260.25
318.44
409.97

279.36
344.45
421.76

287.93
354.00
453.61

289.79
361.20
458.67

300.23
365.85
449.45

293.83
363.58
471.16

293.72
365.20
481.53

297.54
367.74
478.40

297.48
371.90
500.46

302.13
373.98
491.81

302.44
377.31
491.12

305.78
380.14
498.62

310.13
380.47
486.33

314.63
396.77
505.12

312.48
384.92
494.42

241.79
154.03

263.06
168.09

276.35
170.19

282.77
170.25

289.95
174.91

28946
177.39

283.01
179.10

287.75
180.32

288.86
178.96

295.30
185.13

295.71
189.74

291.20
181.54

295.73
183.39

294.52
183.03

300.17
186.58

325.58

351.25

365.76

368.02

372.00

367.60

373.28

371.15

374.92

376.89

383.27

385.66

390.66

390.22

391.39
191.40

TOTAL PRIVATE..................................

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES

$258.65 $259.35

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE

164.96

176.46

179.44

181.04

182.65

183.86

185.13

186.62

188.43

188.48

190.25

193.85

194.83

194.17

WHOLESALE TRADE

247.93

267.96

274.38

276.82

281.25

281.82

282.65

285.67

287.60

289.14

289.89

294.49

296.83

296.84

297.61

156.38

158.99

161.92

162.53

161.87

157.94

156.60

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

138.62

147.38

149.40

150.60

152.20

152.81

153.92

154.96

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE

190.77

209.24

214.53

218.53

217.80

222.04

226.04

225.32

225.06

225.26

225.26

227.60

231.23

228.96

232.04

205.05

205.38

206.73

206.99

209.22

210.89

210.60

212.88

SERVICES


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

175.27

190.71

195.60

198.53

199.51

201.83

204.40

83

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data

20.

Gross and spendable weekly earnings, in current and 1977 dollars, 1961 to date

[Averages for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]

Manufacturing workers

Private nonagricultural workers

Year and month

Gross average
weekly earnings

Spendable average weekly earnings
Worker with no
dependents

Married worker with
3 dependents

Gross average
weekly earnings

Spendable average weekly earnings
Worker with no
dependents

Married worker with
3 dependents

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

Current
dollars

1977
dollars

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965

..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................

$82.60
85.91
88.46
91.33
95.45

$167.21
172.16
175.17
178.38
183.21

$67.08
69.56
71.05
75.04
79.32

$135.79
139.40
140.69
146.56
152.25

$74.48
76.99
78.56
82.57
86.63

$150.77
154.29
155.56
161.27
166.28

$92.34
96.56
99.23
102.97
107.53

$186.92
193.51
196.50
201.11
206.39

$74.60
77.86
79.51
84.40
89.08

$151.01
156.03
157.45
164.84
170.98

$82.18
85.53
87.25
92.18
96.78

$166.36
171.40
172.77
180.04
185.76

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................

98.82
101.84
107.73
114.61
119.83

184.37
184.83
187.68
189.44
186.94

81.29
83.38
86.71
90.96
96.21

151.66
151.32
151.06
150.35
150.09

88.66
90.86
95.28
99.99
104.90

165.41
164.90
165.99
165.27
163.65

112.19
114.49
122.51
129.51
133.33

209.31
207.79
312.43
214.07
208.00

91.45
92.97
97.70
101.90
106.32

170.62
168.73
170.21
168.43
165.87

99.33
100.93
106.75
111.44
115.58

185.32
183.18
185.98
184.20
180.31

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975

..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................

127.31
136.90
145.39
154.76
163.53

190.58
198.41
198.35
190.12
184.16

103.80
112.19
117.51
124.37
132.49

155.39
162.59
160.31
152.79
149.20

112.43
121.68
127.38
134.61
145.65

168.31
176.35
173.78
165.37
164.02

142.44
154.71
166.46
176.80
190.79

213.23
224.22
227.09
217.20
214.85

114.97
125.34
132.57
140.19
151.61

172.11
181.65
180.86
172.22
170.73

124.24
135.57
143.50
151.56
166.29

185.99
196.48
195.77
186.19
187.26

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................

175.45
189.00
203.70
219.91
235.10

186.85
189.00
189.31
183.41
172.74

143.30
155.19
165.39
178.00
188.82

152.61
155.19
153.71
148.46
138.74

155.87
169.93
180.71
194.82
206.06

166.00
169.93
167.95
162.49
151.65

209.32
228.90
249.27
269.34
288.62

222.92
228.90
231.66
224.64
212.06

167.83
183.80
197.40
212.70
225.79

178.73
183.80
183.46
177.40
165.90

181.32
200.06
214.87
232.38
247.01

193.10
200.06
199.69
193.81
181.49

1980: October ..........................
November........................
December........................

241.81
244.28
247.06

172.72
172.88
173.38

193.51
195.24
197.18

138.22
138.17
138.37

211.49
213.37
215.47

151.06
151.00
151.21

298.10
305.52
314.16

212.93
216.22
220.46

232.22
237.26
242.86

165.87
167.91
170.43

254.20
259.83
266.14

181.57
183.89
186.76

1981: January ..........................
February..........................
March..............................
A p ril................................
May ................................
June................................
July ................................
August ............................
September13 ....................
Octoberp ........................

246.75
247.10
249.92
250.98
252.38
254.88
257.74
259.88
258.65
259.35

171.83
170.18
171.06
170.73
170.18
170.49
170.35
170.64
168.17
( 1)

195.68
195.92
197.88
198.61
199.59
201.32
203.30
204.79
203.93
206.30

136.27
134.93
135.44
135.11
134.59
134.66
134.37
134.46
132.59
(’ )

213.96
214.22
216.34
217.14
218.20
220.08
222.24
223.85
222.92
224.39

149.00
147.53
148.08
147.71
147.13
147.21
146.89
146.98
144.94
f)

308.43
306.13
311.22
312.84
317.59
320.39
317.59
319.20
321.53
321.53

214.78
210.83
213.02
212.82
214.15
214.31
209.91
209.59
209.06
<’ )

237.60
236.08
239.37
240.39
243.40
245.18
243.40
244.42
245.90
248.61

165.46
162.59
163.84
163.53
164.13
164.00
160.87
160.49
159.88
(’ )

260.36
258.70
262.38
263.55
266.99
269.01
266.99
268.15
269.84
271.35

181.31
178.17
179.59
179.29
180.03
179.94
176.46
176.07
175.45
( ')

1Not available.
note : The earnings expressed in 1977 dollars have been adjusted for changes in price «vel
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-

Digitized84
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

culation,” Employment and Earnings and Monthly Report on the Labor Force, February 1969,
pp. 6-13. See also “ Spendable Earnings Formulas, 1979-81,” Employment and Earnings, March
1981, pp. 10-11.

UNEM PLOYM ENT INSURANCE DATA

N ational unemployment insurance data are compiled
monthly by the Employment and Training Administration of
the U.S. Department of Labor from monthly records of unem­
ployment insurance activity prepared by State agencies. Rail­
road unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S.
Railroad Retirement Board.

ployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about 10
percent of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet
earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. I n i ­
t i a l c l a i m s 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
r a t e o f i n s u r e d u n e m p l o y m e n t expresses the number of insured unem­
ployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a
12-month period.

Definitions

An a p p l i c a t i o n 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. N u m ­
b e r o f p a y m e n t s are payments made in 14-day registration periods.
The a v e r a g e a m o u n t o f b e n e f i t p a y m e n t is an average for all com­
pensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or set­
tlement of underpayments. However, t o t a l b e n e f i t s paid have been
adjusted.

Data for a l l p r o g r a m s 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.
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 in thousands]
1981

1980
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 claims1 ....................................
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.

3,961

Oct.

Dec.

Nov.

3,661

Feb.

Jan.

3,726

4,085

4,621

Apr.

Mar.

4,264

3,948

May

3,453

July

June

3,111

2,949

3,012

2,874

1,702

1,808

1,673

2,544

2,653

1,806

1,684

1,647

1,417

1,741

’ 2,114

p1,664

3,087
3.6

2,903
3.3

2,983
3.4

3,321
3.8

3,844
4.4

3,669
4.2

3,382
3.9

2,988
3.4

2,691
3.1

2,596
3.0

2,743
3.1

2,656
3.0

11,689

11,443

9,524

12,603

14,228

12,882

13,504

11,871

9,790

9,928

’ 10,494

o 14,563

$105.96
$105.49
$105.63
$102.34
$101.89
$92.32
$101.96
$101.43
$99,86
$1,144,885 $1,125,416 $1,055,065 $1,242,957 $1,416,513 $1,313,507 $1,393,612 $1,226,815 $1,006,341

18

15

22

19

23

17

21

19

17

56

56

54

55

57

54

51

46

43

42

44

44

214
$23,048

183
$19,965

192
$21,145

203
$22,762

P190
$21,451

12

11

13

15

p17

245
$24,804

255
$25,880

216
$21,024

261
$27,015

257
$26,646

221
$22,517

19

21

14

18

22

13

12

29

32

35

37

41

40

36

31

27

25

25

25

105
$9,699

130
$11,917

118
$11,365

150
$14,184

160
$15,432

148
$14,573

156
$15,561

135
$13,701

107
$11,023

105
$10,705

’ 105
$10,788

p93
$9,662

10

9

7

11

13

5

5

6

6

26

41

13

28
32

29
63

$199.63
$11,541

$202.53
$7,071

40
89

38
84

38
70

39
83

53
118

50
104

44
115

41
94

35
79

30
86

$211.99
$18,809

$208.49
$17,789

$209.00
$14,269

$212.27
$18,046

$209.38
$20,303

$214.56
$22,049

$214.93
$23,233

$201.12
$19,239

$199.43
$15,428

$201.06
$16,206

Employment service:5
New applications and renewals ..........
Nonfarm placements..........................

16,831
3,896

'8,778
r 1,595

4,476
871

' Initial 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.

2,681

2,489
2.9

p19

25

234
$24,668

16

Sept.

$99.02
$103.47 P$105.41
$1,012,764 r$1,061,743 p$987,262

Railroad unemployment insurance:
Applications ......................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)..............................
Number of payments ........................
Average amount of benefit
payment........................................
Total benefits paid ............................


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

Aug.

34

29

12,868
2,446

4 Includes the Virgin islands, Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs.
5Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1-September 30). Data computed quarterly.
N ote : Data for Puerto Rico included.

Dashes indicate data not available.

r = revised.

85

PRICE DATA

PRICE d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
from retail and primary markets in the United States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100,
unless otherwise noted).

Definitions
The C o n s u m e r P r i c e I n d e x 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 meas­
ures 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.
P r o d u c e r P r i c e I n d e x e s 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.

86

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.
P r i c e i n d e x e s f o r t h e o u t p u t o f s e l e c t e d S I C i n d u s t r i e s measure av­
erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries,
as defined in the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la ssifica tio n M a n u a l 1 9 7 2
(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 R eview , 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 F a cts A b o u t th e R e v is e d C o n s u m e r P rice In d e x , a pamphlet in
the Consumer Price Index Revision 1978 series. See also Th e
C o n s u m e r P r ic e In d e x : C o n c ep ts a n d C o n te n t O v e r th e Years, Report
517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978).
For interarea comparisons of living costs at three hypothetical stand­
ards of living, see the family budget data published in the H a n d b o o k
o f L a b o r S ta tistic s, 1977, Bulletin 1966 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1977), tables 122-133. Additional data and analysis on price changes
are provided in the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P rices a n d P rice
I n d e x es, 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 B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s
f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1976), chapters 13-15. See also John F. Early, “Improving the meas­
urement of producer price change,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , April
1978, pp. 7-15. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “In­
dustry and Sector Price Indexes,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , August
1965, pp. 974-82.

22.

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-80

[1967 = 100]
F o o d and

A p p a re l an d

M o u s in g

A ll i t e m s

T ra n s p o rta tio n

Y ear
change

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t
In d e x

In d e x

O th e r g o o d s

E n te r ta in m e n t

M e d ic a l c a re

a n d s e r v ic e s

upkeep

b e v e ra g e s

change

In d e x

In d e x
change

change

In d e x

change

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t
In d e x

change

In d e x

In d e x
change

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
104.0
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
1980

..................
..................
..................
..................
..................

170.5
181.5
195.3
217.7
247.0

5.8
6.5
7.6
11.5
13.5

177.4
188.0
206.2
228.7
248.7

3.1
6.0
9.7
10.9
8.7

174.6
186.5
202.6
227.5
263.2

6.1
6.8
8.6
12.3
15.7

147.6
154.2
159.5
166.4
177.4

3.7
4.5
3.4
4.3
6.6

165.5
177.2
185.8
212.8
250.5

9.9
7.1
4.9
14.5
17.7

184.7
202.4
219.4
240,1
267.2

9.5
9.6
8.4
9.4
11.3

159.8
167.7
176.2
187.6
203.7

5.0
4.9
5.1
6.5
8.5

162.7
172.2
183.2
196.3
213.6

5.7
5.8
6.4
7.2
8.8

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]
U rb a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v is e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

A ll i t e m s

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

251.7

266.8

269.0

271.3

1981

1980

1981

1980

J u ly

274.4

S e p t.

J u ly

Aug.

271.4

274.6

276.5

279.1

270.6
299.6
187.9
285.1
298.6
219.9
233.5

271.0
303.6
190.5
286.6
300.9
221.5
239.3

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

276.5

279.3

251.9

266.8

269.1

Food and beverages ....................................................................
Housing........................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep......................................................................
Transportation ..............................................................................
Medical care ................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services..............................................................

254.2
267.7
182.2
254.7
270.6
209.8
220.6

265.7
284.8
186.4
275.3
287.0
219.2
229.9

265.4
288.5
186.4
277.8
289.0
220.3
232.2

266.5
292.2
185.8
279.9
291.5
220.8
233.4

268.9
297.0
184.7
282.6
295.6
221.1
234.4

270.1
299.7
187.4
283.7
299.3
222.3
235.6

270.7
303.7
190.7
285.2
301.7
224.0
243.0

255.1
267.6
181.4
255.2
272.2
208.1
219.0

266.1
284.3
186.0
276.3
289.1
217.0
227.9

265.9
288.1
1862
278.9
290,8
217.7
230.4

267.0
291.9
185.8
281.0
292.9
218.3
231.4

269.4
297.0
185.5
283.9
295.4
218.7
232.4

Commodities................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ....................................
Nondurables less food and beverages..................................
Durables ............................................................................

239.0
228.4
244.1
215.3

250.8
240.0
263.8
221.1

251.9
241.7
263.8
223.9

253.2
243.1
263.5
226.6

255.0
244.7
262.9
229.6

256.2
245.8
263.9
230.9

257.7
247.6
265.8
232.6

239.2
228.4
246.0
213.5

251.2
240.5
266.5
219,3

252.4
242.3
266.6
222.4

253.8
243.8
266.3
225.2

255.7
245.5
266.0
228.4

256.9
246.7
266.8
229.9

258.2
248.4
268.5
231.5

Services ......................................................................................
Rent, residential..................................................................
Household services less rent ..............................................
Transportation services........................................................
Medical care services..........................................................
Other services....................................................................

274.8
195.1
322.6
249,4
292.3
2253

295.4
204.2
353,3
264.4
309.8
234.4

299.6
205.9
360.4
266.6
311.7
235.3

303.5
206.8
366.7
269.6
314.4
236.3

308.8
207.8
374.8
275.0
319.2
237 6

312.2
210.3
379.9
275.7
323.4
239.1

317.3
211.9
387.4
277.7
326.1
245.8

275.4
194.8
325.3
248.2
294.3
225.4

295.9
203.9
356.2
263.1
312.2
233.8

300.0
205.5
363.5
265.5
313.6
234.5

303.9
206.4
370.1
268.2
315.8
235.6

309,6
207,4
379.4
273.8
318.5
236.8

312.7
209.9
384.2
274.3
322.1
238.3

317.7
211.5
392.2
276.3
324.7
243.6

All items less food ........................................................................
All items less mortgage interest costs ............................................
Commodities less fo o d ..................................................................
Nondurables less food ..................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel................................................
Nondurables ................................................................................
Services less rent ........................................................................
Services less medical ca re ............................................................
Domestically produced farm foods ................................................
Selected beef cuts........................................................................
Energy ........................................................................................
All items less energy ....................................................................
All items less food and energy ............................................
Commodities less food and energy....................................
Energy commodities ........................................................
Services less energy........................................................

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

264.2
253.6
238.0
258.1
297.7
265.9
312.8
291.8
255.3
267.7
409.8
255.6
250.1
213.5
458.4
292.7

267.0
255.2
239.6
258.2
298.0
265.8
317.4
296.2
254.7
270.9
411.3
257.9
253.0
215.7
455.4
296.5

269.5
256.9
241.1
258.0
298.0
266.2
321.9
300.1
255.9
271.6
414.0
260,2
255.6
217.5
453.1
299.8

272.7
259.3
242.6
257.5
297.8
267.1
328.1
305.4
259.5
275.3
415.7
263.5
259.0
219.4
451.3
304.9

274.9
260.9
243.8
258.4
298.0
268.1
331.7
308.8
260.6
276.7
416.1
265.6
261.3
220.9
449.9
308,3

278.2
262.9
245.5
260.3
299.1
269.5
337.5
314.1
260.8
277.9
417.1
268.6
264.8
222.9
449.3
313.6

248.7
242.0
226.5
241.1
273.0
251.5
290.7
271.4
246.1
280.8
373.1
242.0
235.9
205.7
402.7
271.9

264.4
254.2
238.6
260.7
299.9
267.3
313.5
292.0
255.0
270.7
414.0
254.7
248.9
212.2
459.3
293.2

267.2
255.8
240.3
260.9
300.1
267.2
318.2
296.4
254.2
273.8
414.9
257.0
251.9
214.6
456.0
297.0

269.7
257.5
241.8
260.7
300.0
267.6
322.6
300.4
255.3
274.3
417.3
259.3
254.5
216.6
453.7
300.2

273.1
260.0
243.5
260.4
299.8
268.7
329.3
306,3
259.0
277.9
418.9
262.7
258.1
218.7
451.9
305.7

275.2
261,5
244.7
261.2
300.0
269.7
332.6
309.4
259.9
277.2
418.9
264.7
260.3
220.2
450.6
308.9

278.2
263.3
246.3
262.9
301.3
270.7
338.3
314,6
259.9
279.7
420.1
267.5
263.6
222.1
450.0
314.0

Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 -- $1 ....................

$0.397

$0.375

$0.372

$0.369

$0.364

$0.362

$0.358

$0.397

$0.375

$0.372

$0.368

$0.364

$0.362

$0.358

S p e c ia l i n d e x e s :


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

87

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
23.

Continued

Consumer Price Index

U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

FO O D A N D B EVERAG ES

1980

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

270.7

255.1

266.1

265.9

278.0

261.9

273.2

272.9

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

266.5

268.9

270.1
277.4

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

254.2

265.7

265.4

1981

1980

1981

J u ly

Aug.

267.0

269.4

270.6

271.0

274.0

276,6

277.7

278.1

June

S e p t.

261.1

272.9

272.5

273.6

276.2

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) ..........

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

268.7
268.3
145.4
137.1
147.8
149.5
140.8
233.2
139.5
140.4
142.1
141.2
130.9
141.7

267.7
270.0
146.8
138.8
149.8
149,8
141.5
235.1
139.3
141.5
142.3
141.8
128,2
142.8

268.7
271.5
148.3
139.0
152.4
150.9
142.1
236.0
140.2
141.7
142.3
143.3
130.7
142.9

271.6
272.4
149.0
139.5
153.4
151.2
142.5
236.4
140.6
142.4
142.7
143.0
131.6
143.9

272.8
272.6
149.5
139.6
154.6
151.4
142.4
235.6
140.8
143.4
142.7
143.1
130.6
143.9

273.2
274.3
150.1
139.5
155.7
151.6
143.5
238.2
141.5
143.3
144.4
143.9
132.0144.3

258.6
251.1
137.8
134.1
,138.6
140.2
131.2
219.3
134.3
128.1
129.7
131.7
124.5
132.0

268,2
268.0
146.9
139.2
148.9
151.4
140.1
232.1
141.2
138.7
140.8
141.8
131.1
141.7

267.2
269,4
148.4
140.3
151.3
152.0
140.6
233.2
141.7
139.6
141.2
142.1
128.9
142.5

268.2
270.7
150.0
141.4
154.0
152.7
141.0
233 1
142.5
139.7
141.2
143.3
131.5
142.3

271.1
271.5
150.6
141.9
154.8
153.2
141.4
233.9
142.9
141.7
141.4
142.6
131.2
142.8

272.2
272.0
151.3
142.0
156.4
153.1
141.5
233.0
143.4
141.0
141.2
144.1
130.9
143.4

272.3
273.2
151.2
141.1
157.2
152.6
142.4
235.9
143.4
140.1
142.3
144.6
132.2
144.8

132.1

144.0

147.0

146.1

147.2

147.1

148.0

129.9

139.0

140.1

140.3

140.9

141.5

142.1

Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ..........................................................
Meats, poultry, and fish ............................................................
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 ........................................................................
Chops ........................................................................
Ham other than canned (12/77 - 100)........................
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 ......................................................................................

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
1340
122.9
335.8
133.2
124.8
179.9

247.7
253.0
251.0
267.4
264.8
281.4
242.8
252.9
261.5
156.1
217.4
209.0
209,2
95.2
277.4
230.1
123.4
255.4
253.5
143.5
127.9
143.1
196.8
198.0
127.5
125.9
359.7
138.8
135.9
184.3

247.0
253.2
252.3
270.3
264.1
280.3
246.8
256.0
271.4
159.2
217.3
212.7
203.7
97.2
277.7
230.5
122.7
253.9
247.6
143.0
126.9
145.3
194,7
190,3
127.5
128.3
353.2
139.2
131,8
170.5

248.7
255.0
254.2
271.1
264.6
281.0
246.2
255.1
274.6
159.9
221.2
216.5
209.8
98.0
278.9
229.8
126.7
255.9
250.7
143.9
127.6
146.5
196.8
193.8
128.3
128.9
352.1
139.3
131.0
172.1

254.1
260.7
259.6
274.5
264.5
283.5
245.6
258.9
284.3
163.5
231.5
228.1
221.8
102.0
289.7
233.0
133.6
258.4
251.8
145.9
129.1
147.6
204.8
206.9
133.0
130.0
356.9
140.6
133.1
174.2

255.8
262.2
262.0
275.9
267.4
285.3
247.2
256,0
282.2
164.3
235.3
231.1
224.1
105.3
297.2
234.9
135.0
261.4
259.8
147.0
130.6
146,8
202.0
201.4
131.8
129.7
356.8
139.8
133.6
177.6

257.7
263.4
263.4
277.1
270.3
289.4
244.1
255.9
281.9
164.9
238.1
237.1
225.1
106.8
300.7
239.5
135.4
260.7
256.4
147.5
131.8
144.4
199.7
197.3
130.5
129.9
362.6
140.9
136.5
188.8

251.2
257.1
257.2
279.1
279.9
295.4
249.0
261.4
2822
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

247.1
252.2
250.7
269,5
269.0
291.8
247.5
251.3
262.7
154.9
216.7
210.0
206.3
92.6
280.1
230.8
123.8
253.4
252.8
142.6
126.4
143,8
194.6
194.1
125.8
126.3
353.7
136.6
133.6
185.5

246.3
252.4
251.7
272.5
267.8
290.9
249.4
253.7
275.3
158.5
216.3
215.2
201.5
93.8
278.5
231.4
122.4
250.6
247.0
140.6
124.8
145.9
192.5
187.0
126.6
127.5
349.9
137.8
130.5
171.5

248.4
254.5
253.9
273.0
267.9
288.9
249.5
253.6
278.7
159.2
221.3
220.5
209,8
95.1
278.7
230.1
127.7
253.1
249.8
141.9
126.0
147.1
194.4
190.3
127.0
128.2
349.8
137.9
130.4
173.0

254.1
260.5
259.7
276.5
267.9
295.5
249.8
257.0
285.6
162.4
232.6
230.5
222.4
100.4
293.4
234.4
134.5
255.6
251.9
144.6
126.5
148.9
203.1
202.9
133.3
129.3
353.5
139.0
131.9
175.0

255.5
261.8
261.3
275.9
269.4
295.5
247.3
251.5
279,2
162.6
236,5
234.5
224.4
103.7
298.6
238.0
136.3
259.6
260.4
145.7
128.8
148.3
201.2
199.6
131.6
129.9
356.4
138.5
134.1
177.7

257.5
263.2
263.3
278.3
273.8
299.9
249.1
252.5
281.9
162.8
239.4
241.1
224.7
105.6
302.3
242.9
136.7
258.7
259.1
144.8
129.5
146.0
198.1
194.0
130.1
129.6
358.6
139.4
134.9
189.5

Dairy products..........................................................................
Fresh milk and cream (12/77 - 100) ................................
Fresh whole m ilk............................................................
Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100)......................
Processed dairy products (12/77 - 100)............................
Butter............................................................................
Cheese (12777 = 100) ..................................................
Ice cream and related products (12/77 - 100)................
Other dairy products (12/77 - 100)................................

230.6
128.0
209.7
127.7
133.6
236.2
132.3
135.7
128.9

243.5
134,6
220.4
134.5
142,0
244.3
140.6
146.7
135.7

243.8
134.9
220.8
134.7
141.9
245.2
140.5
146.2
136.1

243.8
134.8
220.7
134.6
142.0
245,1
140.5
146.4
136.3

244.2
134.9
220.7
134.9
142.5
245.8
140.7
147.6
136,6

243.8
134.5
220.2
134.2
142.5
246.2
140.8
147.9
135.6

244.3
134.7
220.0
135.4
143.0
247.1
140.8
148.7
137.3

230.9
128.2
209.8
128.3
134.1
238.8
132.7
135.4
129.3

243.8
134.7
220.2
135.2
142.6
247.7
140.5
147.8
136.1

243.9
134,7
220.4
134.8
142.6
247.6
140,6
147.8
136.4

243.9
134.5
220.0
135.1
142.9
248.7
140.9
147.8
136.8

243.9
134.4
219.9
134,5
143.1
247.7
141.3
148.0
137.2

243.9
134.3
219.8
134.4
143.3
248.5
141.5
147.9
137.2

244.1
134.3
219.4
135.3
143.4
249.9
140.9
149.1
137.6

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) ........................

257,4
269.6
286.3
295.2
238.0
296.5
150.8
253,9
313.2
265.9
214.2
127.1

281.9
296.4
271.6
231.1
266.8
287.5
147.1
319.6
378.1
226.9
375.3
170.0

276.8
284.4
276.6
235.4
266.3
274.1
154.9
291.7
384.4
252.5
200.2
158.6

278.1
285.2
278.9
239.9
260.5
287.1
154.4
291.1
414.3
238.7
205.2
151.8

284.4
294.0
292.1
251.9
240,6
327.8
160.4
295.9
414.9
261.3
194.0
154.5

286,1
295.8
306.9
282.1
245.2
353.7
163.5
285.5
375.1
290.6
209.9
143.6

281.6
286.9
306.4
262.9
250.7
346.2
168.4
268.6
329.1
293.5
193.9
137.9

255.8
267,8
284,9
295.3
234.3
284.2
151.9
252.4
309.2
262.5
210.8
127.6

280.0
294.5
268.6
232.1
262.2
274.3
147.6
318.0
369.8
231.5
370.7
170.0

274.3
281.8
271.5
232.7
264.2
261.1
153.3
291.1
378.1
255.6
193.8
160.1

275.3
281.0
272.1
241.0
259.0
274.0
149.9
289.0
402.7
237.1
200.8
153.6

281.7
290.2
285.5
253.1
233.8
307.0
158.9
294.4
404.2
259.2
195.5
155.8

282.5
290.4
298.4
284.6
239.9
325.1
160.5
283.2
362.8
290.0
211.0
144.1

276.3
278.2
293.7
261.8
251.3
314.6
161.5
264.4
316.8
292.9
191.3
136.6

Processed fruits and vegetables ........................................
Processed fruits (12/77 - 100) ......................................
Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 - 100)....................
Fruit juices other than frozen (12/77
100) ................
Canned and dried fruits (12/77
100) ........................
Processed vegetables (12/77 , 100)..............................
Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100)................................

246.3
127.4
119.3
130.8
130.7
120.1
119.7

268.5
141.0
142.8
144.5
135.6
128.9
128.3

270.9
142.1
144.2
145.3
136.7
130.2
129.8

272.8
142.0
143.4
145.5
137.1
132.1
130.8

276.4
143.1
144.0
146.8
138.4
134.6
133.2

277.9
143.4
143.5
147.4
139.1
135.7
134.9

278.3
143.7
143.6
147.5
139.8
135.9
135.7

244.6
127.6
118.5
131.0
131.5
118.7
119.4

266.1
140.1
140.2
143.2
136.6
128.1
129.1

268.4
141.6
142.0
145.1
137.4
128.9
129.6

271.4
142.1
142.3
145.8
137.9
131.2
131.9

274.6
142.8
142.9
146.1
139.1
133.6
134.1

276.2
143.4
142.8
147.1
139.8
134.6
135.7

276.7
143.7
142.8
147.8
140.1
134.8
136.6

F o o d ...............................................................................................................................................................

Digitized88
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

23.

Continued

Consumer Price Index

U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1980

U rb a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s (re v is e d )

1981

1980

1981

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

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

130.2
128.7
324.7
375.8
144.1
195.5
139.8
270.1
256.1
182.4
129.8
414,4
298.0
141.8
356.7
339.5
133.5
251.2
129.3
142.3
145.6
139.9
139.2
136.7
135.1

131.5
129.8
323.7
367.1
145.1
178.4
141.4
270.7
256.1
182.7
130.4
412.3
295.7
140.6
354.4
339.1
134.0
252.9
131.5
141.6
145.9
140.0
141.1
138.6
136.6

134.6
131.4
323.6
361.3
145.2
168.2
142.6
269.6
256.1
181.8
129.6
412.8
297.0
140,8
353.1
335.2
134.5
254.4
132.6
142.2
147.2
141.1
140.8
139.3
137.7

136.0
134.6
323.3
360.0
145.9
164.6
142.9
269.0
255.9
181.0
129.4
410,3
294,7
139.6
351.4
334.3
134.2
256.3
133.2
143.7
147.5
142.0
142.3
140.7
139,0

137.4
135.4
325.1
361.3
146.1
164.3
145.0
269.2
258.2
179.8
129.4
413.1
298.2
141.5
346.0
333.3
134.9
257.9
133.6
143.5
148.8
144.4
142.9
142.0
139.5

136.8
135.6
325.7
361.4
146.8
163.0
145.3
268.5
256.7
178.5
129.6
413.7
298.9
142.4
345.1
330.8
134.9
259.0
134.9
144.8
149.6
144.4
143.3
142.3
139.9

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

129.0
127.1
325.4
377.8
145.1
196.0
138.7
270.4
256.1
182,3
129.7
415.8
294.9
139.8
352.5
340.9
133.5
252.4
129.8
139.8
148.1
138.7
141.7
137.7
135.9

130.1
128.0
324,8
368.1
145.8
179.2
139,7
270.9
256.7
181.6
130.4
414.6
293.7
139.4
350.5
340.2
133.9
254.7
132.1
139.6
149.1
139.3
143.6
139.6
137.2

133.6
129.7
324,5
363.0
146.5
169.3
140.8
269.5
256.0
180.5
129.6
414.6
294.1
139.3
348.5
337,1
134.4
255.8
133.5
140.8
149.1
140.3
143.2
139.9
138.5

134.8
132.8
324.2
362.8
147.3
166.6
141.8
269,0
256.6
179.4
129.4
411.3
290.8
138.3
346.6
334.9
134.0
257.9
134.5
142.3
150.0
141.4
144.4
141.0
139.8

135.4
133.7
326.1
362.7
147.4
165.3
142.9
268.7
255.7
178.8
129.6
415.2
296.6
138.9
342.8
333.8
135,0
259.7
134.8
142.5
151.5
142.8
145.6
142.1
140.8

135.1
133.8
326.2
363.1
147.6
164.9
143.8
267.4
254.5
177.2
129.2
414.7
295.6
140.3
340.5
331.4
134.6
260.5
136.4
142.7
152.6
142.7
145.3
142.8
141.1

Food away from home..........................................................................
Lunch (12/77 = 100) ......................................................................
Dinner (12/77 = 100) ......................................................................
Other meals and snacks (12/77=100)............................................

271.4
132.1
131.9
130.4

288.2
140.7
139.4
138.8

289.3
141.0
139.9
139.9

290.6
141.5
140.7
140.3

292.4
142.6
141.3
141.6

293.7
143.2
141.9
142.1

294.8
143.6
142.4
143.1

274.9
132.9
133.8
133.3

290.7
141.4
141.1
140.1

291.9
141.8
141.7
141.1

293.5
142.8
142.6
141.3

295.2
143.6
143.0
142.7

296.4
144.2
143.7
143.1

297.6
144.6
144.3
143.9

A lc o h o lic b e v e r a g e s

189.6

197.8

199.1

199.8

200.5

201.4

202.5

191.7

199.4

201.2

202.1

202.8

203.8

204.6

Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77=100)............................................
Beer and a le ..................................................................................
Whiskey ................................................................................
Wine....................................................................
Other alcoholic beverages (12/77 -1 0 0 )........................................
Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77=100)................................

123.6
190.8
137.6
214.7
111.7
124.5

128.5
199.7
141.3
224.7
114.9
131.6

129.3
201.4
142.5
223.9
115.5
132.6

129.7
202.0
143.0
224.6
116.1
133.1

130.1
201.8
143.7
227.5
116.3
134.1

130.6
202.6
144.7
227.4
117.0
134.7

131.4
203.6
145.4
229.7
117.5
135.4

125.1
191.9
138.5
219.8
111.2
124.8

130.0
199.8
142.3
233,2
114.1
130.6

131,1
201.8
143.2
234.3
114.6
132.0

131.5
202.4
144.0
233.4
115.7
133.4

131.9
202.4
144.7
236,9
155.9
134.0

132.4
203.2
145.6
235.5
117.0
135.4

132.8
203.5
146.2
237.6
117.1
136.2

FOOD AND BEVERAG ES

Food

C o n tin u e d

C o n tin u e d

Food at home

Continued

Fruits and vegetables Continued
Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77 100) . . .
Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77 1 0 0 )............
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) . .

H O U S I N G ...............................................................................................................................................

267.7

284.8

288.5

292.2

297.0

299.7

303.7

267,6

284.3

288.1

291,9

297.0

2996

303.6

S h e lte r

285.3

303.8

308.4

312.6

318.5

322.0

326.9

286.8

304.6

309.4

313.7

320.2

323.6

328.6

Rent, residential....................................................................................

195.1

204.2

205.9

206.8

207.8

210.3

211.9

194.8

203.9

205.5

206.4

207.4

209.9

211.5

Other rental costs ................................................................................
Lodging while out of town................................................................
Tenants’ insurance (12/77 = 100) ....................................................

268.9
287.0
124.7

2859
307.5
131.2

286.4
307.2
131,9

289.5
311.8
133.1

293.6
318.3
133.3

298.5
325.7
133.9

308.1
326.3
135.9

268.6
285.6
125.2

285.8
306.0
131.6

286.1
305.5
132.3

289.7
310.6
133.4

293.3
316,3
133.7

299.0
3244
134.5

308.0
325.3
136.4

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) ..........

317.6
261.5
393.5
359.8
191.2
500,9
188.9
291.6
315.9
234.9

339.3
260.7
447.1
378.5
199.9
579.8
219.5
309.3
337.0
244.4

345.0
263.0
458.3
383,7
199.8
596.9
224.0
312.9
341.2
246,3

350.4
266.6
467.2
386.6
200.3
610.4
226.4
315.5
344.4
247.6

358.0
271.4
480.0
387.1
201.4
630.1
299.4
319.3
349.0
249.3

361.8
272.6
488.3
389.0
205.2
641.3
232.4
320.5
350.6
249.5

367.8
274.5
501.8
389.7
206.2
662.0
238.2
321.6
352.5
248.7

320.2
262.1
398.9
3629
193.0
503.6
189.5
290.3
315.6
233.9

341.1
259.7
452.6
382.5
201.7
580.9
220.3
304.5
334.1
239.7

347.1
262.2
464.3
387.1
201.7
598.6
224.9
307.3
337.6
241.1

352.7
266.2
473.8
388.1
202.2
612.9
227.2
308.2
338.7
241.5

361.2
271.2
486.9
388.3
203.2
632.6
230.3
316.2
350.5
242.4

364.8
272.3
495.3
390.5
207.1
643.8
233.3
315.8
349.5
243.1

371.0
273.8
509.0
391.9
208.0
664.4
239.2
318.1
352.5
244.1

135.6
122.2

143.4
124.3

143.9
125.1

145,3
124.7

146.7
125.0

146.9
124.2

146,2
125.0

132.7
121.8

136.8
123.1

137.7
123,7

138.4
122.7

138.2
123.0

139.2
122.0

139.1
123.2

123.2
122.7

127.9
126.4

130.7
127.6

131.2
128.5

132.7
129.2

132.0
130.5

131.2
131.2

126.1
125.2

127.9
129.9

128.1
130.8

128.5
131.7

130.1
132.5

130.6
133.3

131.7
134.3

F u e l a n d o t h e r u t ilit ie s

288.2

310.5

314.9

320.2

325.1

3278

331.1

288.7

311.4

315.7

321.2

326.4

328.7

332.3

Fuels ...................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas..........................................................
Fuel o il....................................................................................
Other fuels (6/78 = 100) ........................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ..............................................................
Electricity................................................................................
Utility (piped) gas ....................................................................

364.5
561.5
585.4
142.1
318.4
269.2
380.2

396.5
690.6
727.0
162.5
330.6
277.3
399.4

403.3
685.8
720.6
163.6
339.6
281.9
416.5

411.7
682.0
715.7
164.3
350.2
296.7
416.9

417.2
677.9
711.0
164.0
357.6
306.2
418.6

419.5
674.6
707.3
163.6
360.8
311.9
.416.2

422.4
673.4
705.7
163.8
364.5
■309.8
431.7.

363.8
562.9
585.9
'143.8
317.4
269.6
376.1

396.2
693.7
729.4
164.2
329.6
276.8
397.2

402.5
688,6
723.1
164.7
338 1
281.2
413.0

411.2
685.1
718.4
165.5
349.0
296.6
413.2

417.0
681.1
713.8
165.4
356.7
306.2
415.8

418.7
677.9
710.2
165.1
359.4
312.1
411.2

422.2
677.0
709.0
165.3
363.6
309.9
428.5


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

89

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
23.

Continued

[1967

Consumer Price Index

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: C o n su m er Prices

U.S. city average

100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1980

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1981

1980

1981

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

Other utilities and oublic services ......................
Telephone services ................
Local charges (12/77
100) ................
Interstate toll calls (12/77
100) ........
Intrastate toll calls (12/77
100) ..................
Water and sewerage maintenance................

167.1
137.0
106 0
102.1
1001
264.5

175.1
143.4
114 8
101.8
101.4
278.4

176.2
144.0
115.5
101.8
101.7
282.3

177.1
143.5
114.9
101.8
101.5
291.2

180.8
147.2
116.7
109.1
101.5
294.0

183.7
149.2
117.3
113.4
101.8
299.2

187.4
152.5
120.5
114.9
103.9
304.1

167.1
136.9
105.9
102.1
100 0
265.5

175.4
143.4
114.9
101.9
101.2
280.3

176.6
144.1
115.7
101.9
101.5
284.7

177.3
143.6
115.1
101.9
101.3
292.5

181.3
147.5
116.9
109.6
101.3
295.8

184.3
149.5
117.6
113.8
101.6
301.4

187.8
152.7
120.7
115.1
103.7
306.0

H o u s e h o l d f u r n is h in g s a n d o p e r a t i o n s

209.2

219.2

220.1

221.1

222.4

222.9

224.5

206.0

215.9

216.8

217.8

219.1

219.8

221 2

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 freezers..................
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) ,

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

183.9
200.5
123.0
127.1
203.7
1345
116.5
1166
133.4
145.3
108.6
106.0
112.1
170.4
170.6
126.1
116.6

184,2
198.3
122.3
125.0
204.2
133.4
117.0
117.5
134,7
145.5
108.3
105.4
112.1
171.3
170.9
126.2
117.6

185.2
202.5
125.1
127.4
204 6
134.6
116.2
116.9
135.4
146.3
108.2
105.3
111.9
173.2
172.4
128 0
118.9

186.0
202 9
123.3
129.8
206.0
135.0
117.6
117.9
136.2
147.1
108.8
105.6
112.7
174.2
174.2
128.1
119.6

186.2
203.4
124.6
129 1
205.4
135.9
116.0
116.7
135.9
147.3
108.6
105.0
112.8
1749
175.8
129.2
119.5

187.9
207.7
127.7
131.4
207.7
137.6
118.6
116.8
137.3
147.7
108.7
104.6
113.4
175.7
177.5
129.7
119.7

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

181.6
202.9
125.0
128.2
200.0
130.7
114.9
117.6
130.1
144.2
107.1
104.7
110.2
169.9
174.7
125.7
114.4

182.1
202.3
124.7
127.7
200.6
129.2
115.8
119.1
131.2
144 4
106.9
104.4
110.1
170.6
175.8
125.3
115.2

182.8
204.4
125.7
129.5
200.1
129.2
116.0
118.2
130.5
145.6
107.3
104.3
110.9
172.6
177.1
127.1
116.6

184.1
206.2
126.0
131.5
202.3
130.7
116.2
119.5
132.9
146.3
107.7
104.5
111.4
173.6
178.1
128.3
117.1

184.5
207.3
126.8
132.1
201.4
132.2
115.0
116.9
132.2
146.6
107.8
104.2
111.9
174.1
178.9
129.1
117.0

185.7
213.0
129.7
136.3
202.7
132.9
117.4
117.2
132.3
146.7
107.8
103.6
112.4
174 4
180.6
128.8
117.1

1118

115.8

117.2

118.4

119.2

118.5

118.8

111.8

113.9

115.1

116.5

117.1

116.4

116.0

117.0
123.0

117.4
130.0

118.0
130.7

119.4
131.0

120.1
131.2

120.6
131.7

120.8
133.1

113.4
121.6

115.0
127.9

115.3
129.0

116.7
129.3

117.1
129.8

117.7
131.0

118.3
131.6

123.0
120.6

131.4
125.6

132.2
124 4

132.1
124.6

132.4
125.0

133.4
125.8

134 8
128.2

116.8
118.2

124.4
120.9

125.1
120.9

125.3
121.9

127.1
122.9

129.3
122.5

129.6
123.8

128.2
117.2

137.1
121.5

138.8
122.5

139.5
122.6

139.5
122.7

138.9
124.0

140.4
124.5

126.3
120.3

134,1
125.9

136.0
127.0

136.0
127.1

136.4
126.7

137.0
128.8

137.8
129.2

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
1 0 0 ) ........
Miscellaneous household products (12/77
100)............
Lawn and garden supplies (12/77
100)..............

252.0
243.7
125.6
133.8
118.0
129.0
127.1

266.9
259.4
131.0
138.4
123.1
138.1
139.1

269.0
262.6
132.8
137.8
125.1
138.4
140.6

269.8
2660
133.4
137.6
125.8
139.5
138.4

271,5
266.5
134.8
138.8
126.6
140.5
1388

272.0
267.0
134.8
138.4
126.6
141.7
139.2

273.3
268.9
135.7
139.9
127.2
142.8
137.8

249.6
241.1
125.0
135.8
116.9
126.6
120.5

263.4
256.7
130.4
138.5
124.8
134,5
131.1

265.5
260.2
131.5
137.9
126.8
135.0
132.4

266.9
263.6
132.3
138.2
127.2
136.1
131.3

267.9
263.1
133.6
139.0
127.9
136.6
131.7

268.6
263.6
134.7
138.7
128.2
136.9
131.8

270.4
265.6
135.8
140.4
128.7
138.1
131.1

Housekeeping services............................
Postage ..............................................
Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and
drycleaning services (12/77
100) ..........
Appliance and furniture repair (12/77
100) , ..

273.3
257.3

289.9
308.0

291.6
308.0

292.9
308.0

295.3
308.0

296.9
308.0

298.3
308.0

270.2
257.3

2886
308.1

289.9
308.1

291.7
308.1

293.4
308.1

295.1
308.1

296.9
308.1

132.8
119.8

140.7
125.2

141.6
125.9

141.9
126.3

143.1
127.8

143.9
128.5

144.7
129.0

130.3
118.7

140.2
124.3

140.7
124.6

141.8
125.4

142.8
126.4

143.8
127.2

144.9
128.3

185.8

185.5

187.9

190.5

H O U S IN G

C o n t in u e d

F u e l a n d o t h e r u t ilit ie s

C o n t in u e d

APPAREL AND UPKEEP

182.2

186.4

186.4

185.8

184.7

187.4

190.7

181.4

186.0

186.2

A p p a r e l c o m m o d i t i e s ................................................

174,9

177.6

177.2

176.4

175.1

178.0

181.4

174.4

177.5

177.6

177.0

176 6

179.0

181.6

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

174.0
175,6
110.5
104,1
98.1
127.5
117.0
105.4
114.5
107.2
121.5
117.4
158.8
105.0
157.6
1678
100.2
119.3
91.6
108.6
106.4
106.8

173.3
176.8
111.2
104.7
97.9
129.2
118.3
105.5
115.1
108.8
121.4
117.5
157.2
103.9
152.8
164.8
99.0
119.7
90.7
107.9
104.1
106.9

172.5
176.6
111.0
104.3
98.1
129.7
117.9
105.0
115.4
108.7
123.9
117.3
155.4
102.7
149.5
163.7
98.0
119.8
86.3
106.4
100.4
105.9

171.2
175.6
110.3
102.5
96.7
129.6
115.5
106.5
115.1
107.0
124.5
117.7
153.5
101.2
153.9
162.2
95.1
120.0
78.6
106.5
100.0
106.1

174.3
177.6
111.7
105.6
97.7
129.5
117.9
106.6
115.8
109.2
124.3
117,5
157.8
104.4
162.1
166.2
97.4
121.2
87.0
107.9
101.6
108.7

178.0
181.1
114.3
108.8
101.0
132.7
120 6
107.8
116.4
111.3
125.0
117.0
162.9
108.1
170.8
170.8
101.1
122.8
95.4
109.7
103.3
111.0

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
156.8
104.6
114.8
105.7
103.3
97.3
104.2
111.3

173.9
176.1
110.9
98.3
99.6
122.7
119.5
111.5
113.9
110.9
118.2
114.8
160.7
106.7
156.8
159.8
102.6
119.1
108.0
107.8
101.3
109.5

173.8
177.3
111.8
99.3
100.5
123.9
120.3
112.2
114.2
111.8
117.4
114.8
160.0
106.2
155.8
159.7
101.5
119.5
106.9
107.1
988
109.6

173.0
177.2
111.6
98.4
101.2
124.1
120.4
111,8
114,3
109.8
119.5
115.9
158.1
104.9
148.9
156.6
101.0
120.0
103.6
106.2
98.1
108.1

172.8
176.9
111.6
97.4
100.8
1248
118.8
113.2
113.6
1076
120.6
115.6
157.9
104.5
159.0
154,1
99.1
120.1
100.6
106.9
98.9
108.9

175.2
178.4
112.8
99.7
102.4
125.3
122.1
112.5
113.8
109.5
120.3
114.7
161.2
107.1
168.7
153.4
101.1
121.0
109.8
107.6
101.5
108.9

178.1
181.4
115.0
102.1
106.1
128.5
123.9
113.5
114.8
112.3
120.9
114.4
164,9
109.8
177.8
155.5
103.3
122.7
115.0
1088
103.3
110.0

113.0 | 115.5

116.1

117.2

117.6

117.0

117.9

248.3

115.4

115.9

116.2

116.3

115.1

115.5

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
1 0 0 ) ..........
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’ ..........................
Womens (12/77
100)................
Coats and jackets .......... ............................
Dresses ..........................................
Separates and sportswear (12/77
100)....................
Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77
1 0 0 ) ..........
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)....................................

90for FRASER
Digitized
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

23.

Continued

Consumer Price Index

U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1980

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1981

1980

1981

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

Apparel commodities less footwear Continued
Infants’ and toddlers’ ......................................................................
Other apparel commodities ............................................................
Sewing materials and notions (12/77 = 100) ............................
Jewelry and luggage (12/77
100) ........................................

242.4
210.5
110.9
146.8

259.2
214.1
114.8
148.4

256.9
212.1
114.3
146.8

260.0
212.2
114.5
146.8

259.8
212.4
115.3
146.6

263,6
214.0
117.5
147.2

266.4
213.3
118.3
146.2

248.3
204.4
110.7
142.0

269.3
205.6
114.3
141.4

269.9
204.1
113.4
140.5

273.0
204.8
113.2
141.2

272.9
204.8
113.6
141.0

279,3
2Û6.1
115.3
141.4

279.8
206.0
116.4
140.9

Footwear...............................................................................................
Men’s (12/77
100) ....................................................................
Boys’ and girls'(12/77
100) ......................................................
Women’s (12/77
100)................................................................

193.2
123.6
123.3
117.7

199.3
126,8
128.2
121.3

201.0
127.8
129.3
122.4

200.4
127,7
129.1
121.6

199.0
128.0
130,1
118.7

200.0
128.3
129.1
120.6

202.4
128.8
129.7
123.5

193.3
124.9
124.6
115.1

198.4
128.0
126.7
119.3

200.0
128,7
127.7
120.5

200.6
129.5
128.6
120.2

199.2
129.5
128,7
117.8

200.8
129.8
130.4
118.9

202.3
129.7
130.7
121.2

A p p a re l s e r v ic e s

237.3
140.0
126.9

254.3
150.9
134.5

256.4
152.2
135,6

257.8
153.2
136.0

258.9
153.8
136.7

260.2
154.7
137.2

262.0
155.7
138.2

234,5
139.1
125.1

252.7
150.4
134,0

254.2
151.5
134.5

255.7
152.5
135.0

256.3
153.1
135.1

258.2
153.9
136.5

260.0
155.0
137.4

APPAREL A N D UPKEEP

A p p a r e l c o m m o d itie s

C o n t in u e d

C o n t in u e d

Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77
100)............
Other apparel services (12/77 - 100) ..................................................
T R A N S P O R T A T IO N

254.7

275.3

277.8

279.9

282.6

283.7

285.2

255.2

276.3

278.9

281.0

283.9

285.1

286.6

P r i v a t e ........................................................................................................................................................

253.2

273.4

276.0

277.9

279.6

280.5

281.9

254.1

275.1

277.7

279,7

281.6

282.6

284.1

New cars ................................................................................ ............
Used cars .............................................................................................
Gasoline ..............................................................................................
Automobile maintenance and repair........................................................
Bodywork (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)........................
Tires ................................................................................
Other parts and equipment (12/77 = 100) ........................
Other private transportation services................................................
Automobile insurance ..............................................................
Automobile finance charges (12/77 = 100) ..............................
Automobile rental, registration, and other tees (12/77
100) . . .
State registration ..............................................................
Drivers’ licenses (12/77 - 100) ........................................
Vehicle inspection (12/77 = 100) ......................................
Other vehicle-related fees (12/77 - 100) ..........................

181.7
214.6
373.0
273.8
133.8

186.1
239.1
419.3
289.0
140.8

190.9
245.2
416.5
290.8
141.5

192.2
252.9
414.4
291.9
142.3

192.5
260.3
412.9
293.5
144.1

191.9
266.9
411.7
295.5
145.8

191.3
272,8
411.2
298.7
147.4

182.3
214.6
373.9
273.9
133.0

186.2
239.1
420.8
289.7
140.7

191.2
245.2
417.7
291.3
141.3

192.5
252.9
415.6
292.6
142.2

192,9
260.3
414.0
293.4
143.3

192.1
266.9
412,9
296,1
145.4

191.4
272.8
412.4
299,3
146.1

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

138.0
135.5
137.8
236.3
208.1
143.5
133.2
185.8
130.1
246.2
255.7
166.5
118.2
146.9
105.5
126.0
138.4

138.7
136.5
138.6
238.9
208.6
143.1
133.6
186.4
130.4
249.4
256.8
172.9
117.7
147.5
105.5
125.8
136.3

138.9
137.1
139.2
241.0
208.5
144.5
133.4
186.1
130.2
252.0
257.4
178.5
117.8
148.0
105.8
125.7
136.3

139.9
137.4
139.9
242.9
208.8
144.8
133.6
185.6
131.7
254.3
259.8
180.9
118.0
147.9
105.9
128.6
136.6

140,9
137.8
141.2
243.0
212.1
146.8
135.7
189.3
132.4
253.6
260.3
177.3
119.5
147.9
106.2

143.1
138.9
142.6
244.2
212.6
147.7
136.0
189.7
132.8
255.0
262.0
178.0
120.1
147.9
109.6

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

140.5
135,7
136.7
239.2
210.4
140.5
135.4
189.6
130.8
249.2
255.2
166.3
119.3
147.0
105.2
126.6
147.1

141.2
136.4
137.7
241.9
211.7
141.4
136,1
191.1
130.7
252.4
256.3
172.5
118.1
147.7
105,2
126.5
142.8

141.7
136.9
138.3
243.9
211.1
142.7
135.5
189.9
130.7
255.0
256.9
177.2
118.2
148.1
105.6
126.5
142.6

141.4
137.3
139.1
246.0
210.8
143.4
135.2
188.4
132.2
257.7
259.6
179.9
118.4
147.9
105.6
129.3
143.1

142.6
138.2
140.5
245.6
213.4
144.1
137,0
191.5
132.9
256.6
260 1
176.3
119.5
148.0
105.9

145.5
139.2
141.9
246.9
215.5
145.3
138.4
194.1
133.2
257.7
261.8
176.5
119.8
148.0
109.5

P u b l i c ..................................................................................................................................................

271.0

297.2

297.7

303.9

323.1

326.5

329.1

264.4

287.7

288.2

293.6

317.7

320.9

324.5

Airline fare............................................................................................
Intercity bus ‘are ..................................................................................
Intracity mass transit ............................................................................
Taxi fare ..............................................................................................
Intercity train fare..................................................................................

310.3
304.7
234.8
266.8
255.5

348.6
329.1
251.7
279.9
277.2

348.8
333.4
251.9
280.4
296.7

360.7
337.6
253.5
281.7
304,1

367.3
343.5
290.7
287.1
304.6

371.4
347.5
294.0
288.1
304.6

372.5
351.4
298.6
288.6
305.0

308.6
304.5
234.4
273.6
255.6

346.6
329.2
249.8
287.4
277.5

346.7
333.0
249.9
287.9
298.5

359.3
336.8
251.5
289.2
304.6

365.6
343.6
291.0
295.7
304.9

370.0
347.3
2939
296.7
305.0

371.8
351.7
299.2
297.1
305.2

n

140.0

( ’)
140.9

(')

(’)

145.8

145.9

M E D IC A L C A R E ............................................................................................................................

270.6

287.0

289.0

291.5

295.6

299.3

301.7

272.2

289.1

290.8

292.9

295.4

298.6

300.9

M e d ic a l c a r e c o m m o d itie s

171.3

182.4

184.7

186.3

187.7

189.4

190.8

171.8

183,4

185.9

187.3

189.2

190.6

191.9

Prescription drugs . ..........................................................................
Anti-infective drugs (12/77
100)..................................................
Tranquilizers and sedatives (12/77
100) ......................................
Circulatories and diuretics (12/77
100)........................................
Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and
prescription medical supplies (12/77
100) ................................
Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77
100) ..............................
Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and
respiratory agents (12/77
100)................................................

157.5
122.4
126.3
116.9

168.5
130.2
134.4
123.9

170.4
130.3
136.0
124.9

172.3
132.2
137,3
125.5

173.7
133.9
138.4
126.5

175.4
134.8
139.6
127.6

176.5
136.5
140.0
127.8

158.5
123.4
125.4
118.9

169.2
132.4
133.3
125.3

171.6
132.7
135.2
126.1

173.5
134.3
136.5
126.8

175,0
135.8
137.6
127.9

176.5
137.0
138.8
128.6

178.0
139.2
139.7
129.0

138,9
125.6

151.2
134.5

154.6
136.5

157.2
137.7

158.1
139,1

160.4
140.2

160.6
141.7

138.1
128.1

150.9
135 8

154,5
138.2

158.1
138.9

158.2
141.8

160.3
142.7

161.4
143.8

120.5

128.6

130.2

131.1

131.8

133.1

134.1

121.8

128.8

131.2

132.0

132.5

133.9

134.6

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)........

123.3
120.5
191.2
120.8

130,9
125.1
205.9
126.2

132.6
125.3
209.1
128.6

133.5
125.3
211.5
128.6

134.5
125.8
213.1
129.9

135.6
126.3
215.5
130.4

136.7
126.9
217.8
131.4

123.6
119.0
192.4
121.2

131.9
123.4
208.0
128.2

133.6
124.1
211.0
130.5

134.4
124.7
212.6
130.7

135.8
125.0
215.4
132.2

136.7
125.3
217.5
132.3

137,4
126.0
218.9
132.6

M e d ic a l c a r e s e r v ic e s

292.3

309.8

311.7

314,4

319.2

323.4

326.1

294.3

312.2

313.6

315.8

318.5

322.1

324.7

Professional services ............................................................................
Physicians’ services........................................................................
Dental services..............................................................................
Other professional services (12/77
100)......................................

257.3
274.2
245.8
126.7

271.7
292.2
257.1
132.6

273.8
295.5
257.7
133.7

275.8
297,5
260.2
134 2

280.4
300.7
266.5
136.8

282.9
302.7
269.9
137.3

284.3
304.9
270.8
137.7

260.4
280.5
247.3
124,5

276.2
297.9
262.2
131.3

278.0
300.3
263.3
132.1

279.4
302.4
264.0
132.6

280.8
304.7
264.6
132.7

282.7
306.7
266.6
133.6

284.5
308.6
268.4
134.3

Other medical care services..................................................................
Hospital and other medical services (12/77
100)..........................
Hospital room..........................................................................
Other hospital and medical care services (12/77
100)............

334.7
137.1
428.4
137.0

355.9
148.1
465.0
147.3

357.6
148.3
465.1
147.6

361.1
149.6
470.4
148.7

366.1
151.7
478.0
150.4

372.5
154,7
489.4
152.9

376.5
156.6
494.6
155.0

335.6
136.4
427.2
136.0

356.2
147.3
461.4
146.8

357.1
147.3
461.3
146.8

360.3
148.6
467.1
147.6

364,6
150.3
472.2
149.4

370.6
153.1
482.6
151.8

374.1
154.8
488.5
153.4


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

91

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
23.

Continued

[1967

100 unless otherwise specified]

Consumer Price Index

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: C o n su m er Prices

U.S. city average
U rb a n W a g e E a rn e rs a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s (re v is e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

E N T E R T A IN M E N T

1980

1981

1980
S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

209.8

219.2

220.3

220,8

221.1

1981
Aug.

S e p t.

218,7

219.9

221.5

221.1

222.2

224.0

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

222.3

224.0

208.1

217.0

217.7

218.3

220.4

220.8

E n te r ta in m e n t c o m m o d itie s

212.8

223,6

225,0

225.4

225.5

226.5

227.9

208,6

219.4

Reading materials (12/77
100)..........................................................
Newspapers ..................................................................................
Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77
100)............................

126.1
242.3
129.3

134.1
262.5
134.8

135.6
264.1
137.1

136.2
264.9
137.9

136.0
265,0
137.3

136.0
265.5
137.2

138.1
266.3
141.1

125.5
241.5
129.3

134.1
262.5
134.8

135.6
264.0
137.3

136.1
264.8
138.2

135.9
265,0
137 4

135.9
265.4
137.1

137.8
266.2
141.2

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) ........................

121.1
122.2
113.8
184.7
117.2

127.5
130.4
116.7
188.3
122.6

127.2
129.5
117.4
190,4
122.4

126.8
128.7
116.9
191.0
122.7

127.0
129.0
117.7
191.0
122.7

127.2
128.6
118.2
192.2
124.1

127.3
128.4
119.1
193,2
125.0

115,8
113.9
112.1
184.9
117.4

120.9
120,0
115.4
189.7
121.1

120.8
119.3
116.4
191.6
121.5

120.4
118.4
116.9
192.0
122.2

120.6
118.5
117.0
192.1
122.9

120.8
118.3
116.7
193.5
124.9

121.3
118.7
117.2
193.9
125.8

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 expenses (12/77
100) ......................................

122.6
121.4
123.1
124.4

127.8
126.2
125.4
132.4

128.8
127.6
125.8
133.3

129.3
127.9
126.2
134.2

129,3
127.9
125.7
134.5

130.5
129,3
126.0
136.2

131.0
129.4
126.4
137.2

121.3
119.0
121.8
125.2

127,2
124,0
126.7
133.2

127.7
125.0
126.1
133.6

128.1
125.3
126.5
134.3

128.5
125.3
127,0
135.1

129.6
126.6
127.1
136.6

130.6
127.1
127.7
138.8

E n te r ta in m e n t s e r v ic e s

206.1

213.4

214.0

214.7

215.2

216.7

218.9

208.4

213.9

214.2

215.1

215.8

217.0

218.3

Fees for participant sports (12/77
100)..............................................
Admissions (12/77 : 100)....................................................................
Other entertainment services (12/77 - 100)..........................................

124.5
122.6
118.3

130.7
124.5
121.1

130.7
125.1
121.7

131.3
124.9
122.2

131.6
125.9
121.7

132.0
128.1
121.7

134.3
128.0

124.7
124.1
120.8

130.2
124.7
122.4

130.5
125.0
122.5

131.4
124.8
123.4

131.6
125.7
123.2

132.4
126.9
123.1

134.0
127.3
122.7

O T H E R G O O D S A N D S E R V IC E S

220.6

229.9

232.2

233.4

234.4

235.6

243.0

219.0

227.9

230.4

231.4

232.4

233.5

239.3

T o b a c c o p ro d u c ts

204.5

213.3

218.2

219,1

219.3

219.9

221.7

204.3

213.2

217.8

218.4

218.4

219.1

220.9

Cigarettes.............................................................................................
Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77
100)............

206.8
122.8

215.5
129.6

220.8
130.4

221.4
132.3

221.6
132.5

222.2
132.9

224.2
133.1

206.8
122.7

215.5
130.0

220.3
131.3

220.8
132.7

220.7
133.4

221.4
133.9

223.4
134.4

P e rs o n a l c a re

216.7

228.7

230.5

232.1

233.4

235.1

236.3

216.6

226.4

228.4

229.7

231.2

232.4

233.6

229.4
132.5
137.6

231.1
133.3
138.0

.....................................................................................................................................

1 2 2 .5

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)

210.3
121.8
125.3

223.9
131.9
136.6

226.6
132.4
138.6

228.6
132.8
139.4

228.7
133.9
139.0

230.1
134.1
140.0

231.2
134.1
140.0

210.4
123.6
124.0

222.5
128.8
135.1

225.5
130.1
136.1

227.2
130.4
136.6

228.4
131.7
137.1

121.3
120.8

125.3
128.4

127.8
129.8

129.0
132.0

127.7
133.0

128.9
133,9

130.7
134.2

119.7
122.1

124.4
131.3

126.2
134.0

128.0
135.4

128.3
135.9

128.9
136.4

130.4
137.4

Personal care services..........................................................................
Beauty parlor services for women....................................................
Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100) . . . .

223.1
224.5
124.8

233.7
236.0
129.9

234.7
236.4
131.1

236.0
237.7
131.9

238.4
240.5
132.7

240.3
241.9
134.4

241.5
243.0
135.3

222.9
225.0
123.9

230.5
231.7
129.1

231.5
232.0
130.5

232.5
232.7
131.3

234.4
235.1
131.8

235.7
235.7
133.3

236.3
236.1
133.9

P e rs o n a l a n d e d u c a tio n a l e x p e n s e s

249.5

256.2

256.8

257.8

259.2

260.4

281.5

249.8

257.1

257.7

258.5

260.1

261.7

281.8

Schoolbooks and supplies ....................................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................................
Tuition and other school fees ..........................................................
College tuition (12/77
'00) ..................................................
Elementary and high school tuition (12/77
100) ....................
Personal expenses (12/77 - 100)..................................................

221.0
256.2
131.6
130.7
134.4
130.5

230,8
262,4
132.8
132.3
134.4
141.8

230.8
263.0
132.8
132.3
134,4
143.6

230.9
264.2
132.9
132.4
134.4
146.3

231.3
265.8
133.5
133.0
135.3
147.9

231.4
267.2
134.2
133.2
137.8
148.7

252.1
288,5
147.4
146.3
151.5
150.0

224.8
256.1
131.8
130.7
134.3
129.7

234.6
262.9
133.0
132.3
134.4
141.1

234.7
263.6
133.0
132.3
134.4
142.8

234.7
264.6
133.1
132.4
134.4
144,8

235.2
266.4
133.7
132.9
135.4
146.6

235.2
268.4
134.7
133.1
138 7
147.6

255.9
288.5
147.7
146.1
152.1
148.5

367.9
338.6
254.8
303,6

413.2
378.1
267.9
323.1

410.4
386.6
272.4
326.2

408.4
393.4
278.5
328.6

407.1
402.7
286.5
332.3

405.9
408.1
289.7
334.0

405.4
417.6
293.3
335.7

368.7
339.0
253.6
302.3

414.5
377,6
266.1
321.1

411.5
386.1
270.6
323.8

409.5
393.1
276.7
325.1

408.0
402.4
285.6
322.8

406.9
407.3
288.5
333.0

406.5
416.4
292.4
335.5

S p e c ia l In d e x e s :

Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products......................................
Insurance and finance ..........................................................................
Utilities and public transportation............................................................
Housekeeping and home maintenance services ......................................
' Not available.

92for FRASER
Digitized
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]
S iz e c la s s C

S iz e c la s s D

( 7 5 ,0 0 0 3 8 5 , 0 0 0 )

( 7 5 ,0 0 0 o r le s s )

S iz e c la s s B

S iz e c la s s A
( 1 . 2 5 m il lio n o r m o r e )

( 3 8 5 ,0 0 0

1 . 2 5 0 m il lio n )

C a te g o ry a n d g ro u p

June

1981

1981

1981
A p r.

Aug.

A p r.

June

Aug.

A p r.

1981

June

Aug.

A p r.

June

Aug.

N o rth e a s t

E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

All items .............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................

137.3
136,8
139.1
116.9
149,7
132.9
126.3
124.5

139.1
137.5
142.1
116.2
151.5
134.8
127.9
125.9

142.1
139.4
146.2
117.6
154.5
137.6
129.3
127.2

144.4
138.3
149.1
118.2
157.3
132.9
130.2
130.4

146.8
139.2
153.2
118.9
159,1
134.0
129.6
132.1

150.5
139.9
160.4
118.3
161.3
139.2
129.1
132.2

149.8
141.4
161.5
121.7
154.9
133.8
125.8
132.6

152.5
141.1
166.0
123,1
158.4
137.8
125.9
134,1

155.3
142.3
170.4
123.5
160.5
140.8
127.8
135.8

143.4
135.2
149.7
123.3
153.0
135.9
128.5
127.1

146.3
136.1
154.0
122.9
156.6
137.2
130.2
128.8

147.7
137.6
155.2
125.7
158.3
138.9
131.7
129.5

137.9
138.7
136.4

139.0
139.9
139.4

141.0
142.0
143.5

145.0
148.3
143.4

146.5
150.0
147.2

148.6
152.7
153.6

147.1
149.7
154.1

148.1
151.4
159.7

149.1
152.3
165.4

143.3
147.1
143.6

145.0
149.3
148.3

146.0
150.0
150.5

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Commodities......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................

N o r th C e n tr a l r e g io n
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

All items ............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................

145.9
137.5
155.0
112.3
153.9
137.1
130.2
127.9

150.0
138.1
162.9
110.8
156.4
139.1
130 6
130.1

152.3
139.4
165.9
112.9
158.9
141.3
130.9
131.2

143.5
136.6
147.4
119.8
154.3
138.1
125.3
134.0

146.6
137.5
152.6
118.9
157.3
139.9
124.4
136.0

148.1
139.2
154.7
120.2
158.4
144.5
188.4
136.5

140.2
137.8
140.5
116.4
155.1
138.6
129.2
127.9

142.3
139.6
143.5
115.3
157.0
140.4
129.8
129.3

145.4
140.8
148,5
116.9
159.3
143.9
129.8
131.5

141.1
140.5
142.1
115.6
152.6
142.1
125.7
131.7

143.1
140.7
144.0
118.6
155.9
144.0
126.9
134.3

145.3
142.4
147.0
121.6
157.6
146.9
128.1
133.6

141.7
143.7
152.1

144.4
147.4
158.3

145.7
148.7
162.1

140.1
141.5
149.0

142.5
144.6
153.2

142.9
144.5
156.4

138.6
139.0
142.7

139.9
140.0
146.2

141.7
142.1
151.6

136.9
135.4
147.8

138.0
136.8
151.1

139.4
138.1
154.8

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Commodities......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................

S o u th
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

All items .............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care ................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................

144.1
139.0
148.7
121.1
155.7
132.5
123.2
131.3

146.2
138.2
152.3
121.1
158.1
135.0
124.9
133.1

148.2
140.2
154.9
121.9
158.9
138.3
125.3
135.3

146.7
139.8
153.0
121.3
155,9
136.5
130.0
132.0

148.7
139.4
156.4
119.9
158.3
138.8
130.7
134.1

151.6
141.7
160.5
120.6
160.3
141.6
132.2
134.6

143.7
139.0
148.3
115.5
153.8
140.0
130.5
129.7

145.9
138.7
151.9
115.3
156.6
142.1
132.1
131.5

148.5
141.6
155.3
115.1
158.6
145.6
132.1
132.7

141.8
142.3
142.4
109.4
154.3
146.4
131.2
131.6

144.8
141.9
147.5
109.5
157.7
148.1
133.5
134.1

147.2
143.9
150.9
108.6
159.1
149.9
138.6
134.8

141.5
142.6
147.6

142.1
143.8
152.1

143.5
144.9
154.9

142.3
143.4
153.3

143.2
144.8
157.0

144.7
146.0
161.9

140.1
140.6
149.2

141.3
142.4
153.1

143.1
143.8
156,9

140.7
140.0
143.6

142.1
142.2
149.0

143.2
143.0
153.1

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Commodities ......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................

W est
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

All items .............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care ................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................

145.7
138.2
151.2
119.9
154.2
139.5
127.0
131.8

147.5
138.3
153.2
120.7
157.4
141.0
127.7
134.8

152.4
140.3
160.6
121.2
159.3
149.2
130.2
136.4

146.7
141.4
151.8
125.2
154.9
137.5
128.9
133.3

149.1
142.6
155.1
123.1
157.5
141.2
128.9
134.7

151.2
144.6
156.6
124.5
161.1
146.1
130.1
137.3

142.1
136.2
144.8
114.9
155.6
139.0
128.9
128.6

143.9
137.5
146.7
113.4
158.7
141.5
130.8
130.2

146.4
141.2
148.9
114.6
160.8
147.0
130.8
131.3

143.6
141.3
142.0
133.7
156.0
140.8
142.1
133.0

146.9
143.2
146.1
133.5
159.3
146.2
143.7
137.8

147.7
145,2
145.6
134.4
161.0
149.9
145.4
141.0

139.5
140.1
154.0

140.5
141.4
156.8

143.4
144.7
164,3

142.2
142.6
152.9

143.4
143.8
156.8

145.2
145.5
159.4

139.1
140.2
146.4

140.2
141.3
149.2

142.6
143.2
151.7

141.6
141.6
146.5

144.7
145.3
150.1

144.5
144.2
152.5

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Commodities ......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services .............................................................................................................


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

93

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
25.

Consumer Price Index

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: C o n su m er Prices

U.S. city average, and selected areas

[1967 =100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
A re a 1

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1981

1980

1980

1981

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

S e p t.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

U.S. city average2 ..............................................................

251.7

266.8

269.0

271.3

274.4

276.5

279.3

251.9

266.8

269.1

271.4

274.6

276.5

279.1

Anchorage, Alaska (10/67 = 100) ........................................
Atlanta, Ga.......................................................................
Baltimore, Md.....................................................
Boston, Mass......................................................
Buffalo, N.Y..........................................................

230.9

250.5

226.7

244 6
265.9

255.0
244.4
254.6

Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind................................................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind........................................................
Cleveland, O hio............................................................
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex........................................
Denver-Boulder, Colo............................................................

250.1
259.9

Detroit, Mich.........................................................................
Honolulu, Hawaii ..............................................................
Houston, Tex....................................................
Kansas City, Mo -Kansas ....................................................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif................................

259.5

Miami, Fla. (11/77- 100) ..................................................
Milwaukee, Wis.....................................................................
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis..............................................
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J...........................................
Northeast, Pa. (Scranton)....................................................

133.1
258.4
241.8
243.1

Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J..............................................................
Pittsburgh, Pa.......................................................................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash............................................................
St. Louis, Mo - II....................................................................
San Diego, Calif....................................................................

256.9
252.4
271.8

San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.................................................
Seattle-Everett, Wash.........................................................
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.......................................................

258.1
249.2

263.7

267.3

247.2

272.5
266.3

264.5
271.7

269.1

275.2

267.3

261.0
265.7

256.7
259.9
261.9

265,4
271.3

283.1

272.2

262.5
266.0
267.8

274.0

'The areas listed include not only the central city but the entire portion of the Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated

94 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

275.8

283.5
256.6
294.7
271.3
274.8

286.6
264.8

270.5
277.7

280.8
269.4
305.4

274.7
264.7

253.2
244.5

276.9
275.2

249,5
261.7

298.9

271.6
257.7

279.3

252.0

150.2
286.9

134.9
263.2

268.8
271.5

241.5
246.9

274.4

248.3

291.1
273.4
313.9

255.4
252.7
267.7

288.6
271.8

254.6
251.8

287.9
282.3
267.1

268.6
263.6

263.0

263.9
273.3

267.9

271.3

270.7

261.5
267.3

271.7
276.3

255.9
263.3
262.9

278.9

265.6
273.0

275.8
277.1

276.3

304.2
279.1
256.6
291.8
270.2
278.6

143.7
291.2
276.6
257.9

276 1
268.4
292,5

262.3
269.0
268.5

280.2

282.9
151.0
292.1

287.0
264.0

271.6
278.1

279.2
269.2
300.5
274.3

271.5
267.7

274.6
283.0
285.1

299.9
275.9
253.8
289.4
269.1
271.7

144.8
283.5
267.3
254.8

281.6
273.6
259.4

283.8
284.0

270.9

Area is used for New York and Chicago
2Average of 85 cities.

273.7
266.5

293.4
268.0
250.2
283.1
264,3
269.1

245.9
278.1

256.1

272.1
276.9

284,2

241.7
272.8

252.7

284 4
288.2

146.1
285.6
276.1
258.6

278.5
268.0
297.5
270,3

279.9
272.8

294.2
280.5
252.8
292.9
270.5
267.9

143.2
278.5
266.5
255.4

272.7
273.3

240.1
268 8

260.3

285.3
286.0
288.2

272.4
250.0
286.4
265.4
265.5

276.1

257.2

272.0
279.6

249.6

246.1
269.2

269.3
263.6

267.8
275.0
274.5
288.8
273.0
308.0

287.2
277.8
271.4

284.3
275,7

26.

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

[1967-100]
1981

1980

Annual
C o m m o d i t y g r o u p in g

av erag e
J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

r 270.5

271.3

271.2

271.1

274.0

271.5
252.8
263.1
249.8
321.0
218.1
207.7
262.5

r 272.3
r 253.8
r 258.9
'251.3
'322.0
'218.2
'208.4
'263.8

272.8
256.9
262.4
254.4
321.2
217.9
208.9
265.7

272.6
255.5
256.5
253.4
321.8
218.1
209.9
265.9

272.6
255.5
253.0
253.7
323.5
215.6
211.0
265.6

274.7
253.7
253.3
251.7
323.8
224.3
212.2
271.4

305.8

306.7

'307.2

308.6

309.9

309.6

309.3

281.6
267.5
279.4
306.9
254.2

284.1
263.1
284.3
310.6
255.4

285.1
259.0
287.0
311.2
256.3

285.8
'262.4
'287.7
'310.7
'257.3

288.0
262.6
288.8
314.4
259.5

289.6
261.7
290.7
316.1
261.5

290.2
254.7
291.2
317.4
263.4

290.3
252.7
290.8
317.1
264.7

280.3

282.7

288.0

288.5

'289.6

290.2

290.6

289.9

289.8

551.9
469.5
624.7

569.8
482.8
646.7

598,3
503.9
681.6

608.5
509.0
696.2

608.7
510.7
695.2

605.7
'505.4
'694.3

604.3
503.7
693.1

606.7
507.4
694.3

600.1
499.3
689.3

595.1
495.6
683.1

260.6

264.6

268.2

270.9

274.3

276.4

277.2

278.2

280.3

280.8

281.1

255.0
239.5
263.0
251.5
262.4

257.8
242.5
265.7
252.0
265.6

257.8
244.8
264.6
237.5
268.3

258.9
246.8
265.2
231.7
270.6

262.4
250.6
268.7
239.2
272.9

264.0
252.3
270.2
242.9
273.8

264.6
253.4
270.5
'235.4
'276.3

266.2
255.3
272.1
232.8
278.9

266.1
256.0
271.5
228.9
279.2

266.1
256.7
271.1
221.7
280.6

267.1
258.9
271.5
216.3
282.5

324.6

323.5

328.0

336.5

334.2

336.3

334.4

'335.4

336.2

333.2

327.7

320.3

1980

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

Finished goods....................................................................

247.0

255.4

256.2

257.2

260.9

263.3

266.0

268.5

269.6

Finished consumer goods..............................................
Finished consumer foods ..........................................
Crude ..................................................................
Processed ............................................................
Nondurable goods less foods ....................................
Durable goods..........................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy . . . .
Capital equipment ........................................................

248.9
239.5
237.2
237.8
283.9
206.2
191.2
239.8

257.0
248.0
237.8
246.9
291.7
214.0
195.6
249.2

257.9
248.9
250.5
246.7
293.9
213.1
196.9
250.2

258.9
249.3
254.8
246.7
296.2
213.5
197.6
250.9

262.5
251.0
257,9
248.4
302.7
214.9
201.9
254,6

265.0
251.3
265.6
247.9
308.4
215.1
203.5
256.7

268.2
252.6
279.7
248.1
316.0
214.0
204.8
258.1

270.6
251.9
279.3
247.4
320.4
216.6
207.3
260.8

Intermediate materials, supplies, and components..................

280.3

287.7

289.1

291.9

296 1

298.3

302.0

Materials and components for manufacturing..................
Materials for food manufacturing................................
Materials for nondurable manufacturing ......................
Materials for durable manufacturing............................
Components for manufacturing ..................................

265.7
264.4
259.5
301.0
231.8

273.3
295.1
265.0
304.7
238.4

273.9
299.0
266.7
303.8
238.3

275.7
279.6
268.5
304.3
246.3

279.6
280.7
274.0
306.9
250.3

280.3
273.2
276.5
305.4
253.0

Materials and components for construction ....................

268.3

272.4

274.0

276.6

279.2

Processed fuels and lubricants......................................
Manufacturing industries............................................
Nonmanufacturing industries......................................

503.0
425.7
570.9

516.2
440.6
583.7

521.3
445.2
589.3

539.4
457.9
611.4

Containers ..................................................................

254.5

260.1

259.5

Supplies ......................................................................
Manufacturing industries............................................
Nonmanufacturing industries......................................
Feeds ..................................................................
Other supplies ......................................................

244,5
231.9
251.1
229.0
253.6

252.3
237.5
259.9
250.3
258.8

255.2
238.7
263.8
259.2
261.3

304.6

322 8

June 1

F IN IS H E D G O O D S

IN T E R M E D IA T E M A T E R IA L S

C R U D E M A T E R IA L S

Crude materials for further processing................................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs..............................................

259.2

279.1

277.3

271.6

270.7

267.1

262.1

263.5

260.6

'264.3

267.0

261.8

253.4

245.6

Nonfood materials........................................................

401.0

415.4

424.9

433.8

450.1

484.9

488.4

492.1

492.4

'487.4

484.2

485.9

486.8

480.5

Nonfood materials except fu e l....................................
Manufacturing industries ........................................
Construction..........................................................

346.1
357.4
237.6

355.6
367.1
245.3

363.9
376.1
246.5

373.3
386.5
247.4

391.0
405.1
254.8

427.9
445.5
257.2

430.9
448.6
259.2

432.5
450.2
261.5

428.3
445.5
261.7

r 418.1
'434.2
'262.6

413.5
429.0
264.7

414.2
429.7
265.2

410.7
425.8
265.7

405.5
420.0
266,7

Crude fu e l................................................................
Manufacturing industries ........................................
Nonmanufacturing industries ..................................

615.0
690.5
567.0

650.9
738.1
593.8

664.9
755.8
605.2

670.2
762.9
608.9

' 677.4
771.9
614.9

697.7
798.1
630.6

703.6
805.8
635.0

716.6
821.9
645.8

738.4
850.6
662.2

'759.2
'877.2
'678.5

762.2
877.2
684.1

768.6
885.4
689.3

790.6
913.8
706.3

779.7
899.1
698.4

Finished goods excluding foods............................................
Finished consumer goods excluding foods......................
Finished consumer goods less energy............................

247.8
250.8
218.0

256.2
258.7
225.0

257.0
259.5
225.5

258.2
260.9
226.0

262.4
265.1
233.8

265.5
268.5
229.6

268.7
272.5
230.2

272.1
276.1
231.8

273.3
277.0
232.8

'274,1
'277.7
'233.4

274.1
277.1
234.5

274.5
277.5
234.5

274.4
277.4
234.2

278.7
281.3
236.8

Intermediate materials less foods and feeds..........................
Intermediate materials less energy ................................

282.3
265.3

288.2
272.2

289.3
273.3

293.5
274.9

298.0
278.3

301.0
279.1

305.4
280.5

309.5
283.7

310.7
284.7

'311.2
'285,5

312.8
287.2

314.3
288.4

314.5
288.7

314.5
288.9

Intermediate foods and feeds ..............................................

252.6

280.3

285.7

270.0

270.9

261.3

255.6

254.9

253.1

'253.2

252.5

250.7

243.7

240.6

Crude materials less agricultural products ............................
Crude materials less energy..........................................

446.4
256.1

463,2
272.4

473,8
271.7

482.8
267.5

504.0
266.0

547.6
262.6

551.8
259.6

556.0
261.1

557.5
257.9

'551.3
'259.7

546.9
261.8

549.9
258.1

552.4
250.5

544.3
243.6

S P E C IA L G R O U P IN G S

' Data for June 1981 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 Not available,
r= revised.


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

N ote : Figures in this table may differ from those previously reported because stage-of-processing
indexes from January 1976 through December 1980 have been revised to reflect 1972 input-output
relationships.

95

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
27.

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: P ro d u cer Prices

Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
A nnual
Code

C o m m o d ity g ro u p a n d s u b g ro u p

A ll c o m m o d i t i e s
100)

F a rm p ro d u c ts a n d p ro c e s s e d fo o d s a n d fe e d s
In d u s t r ia l c o m m o d i t i e s

1981

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June’

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

268.8
285.2

277.8
294.7

279.1
296.1

280.8
297.9

264.8
302.2

287.6
305.1

290.3
308.0

293,4
311.3

294.1
312.0

' 294.8
' 312.8

296.0
314.1

296.2
314.3

295.5
313.5

296.0
314.1

244.7
274,8

259.4
282.0

260.5
283.4

257.0
2866

257.9
291.5

255.1
295.7

253.5
299.6

253.8
303.5

252.9
304.7

'254.3
'305.1

256.6
306.0

253.9
307.0

250.0
307.2

246.1
308.8

1980

A ll c o m m o d i t i e s ( 1 9 5 7 5 9

1980

averag e

FARM PRO DUCTS AN D PROCESSED FOODS
A N D FEEDS

01
01-1
01-2
01-3
01-4
01-5
01-6
01-7
01-8
01-9

Farm products ............................................................................
Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables ........................................
Grains......................................................................................
Livestock ................................................................................
Live poultry..............................................................................
Plant and animal fibers..............................................................
Fluid milk ................................................................................
Eggs........................................................................................
Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ....................................................
Other farm products ................................................................

249.4
238.6
239.0
252.7
202.1
271.1
271.2
171.0
247.1
299.0

263.6
240.9
269.2
263.0
222.9
278.5
280.9
175.2
284.4
285.8

264.9
246.6
270.9
254.8
221.0
287.2
284.7
194.0
298.3
296.6

265.3
245.1
265.2
251.4
218.9
294.1
290.5
217.5
310.2
296,0

264.5
258.7
277.7
244.3
213.1
284.1
288.4
185.7
311.8
296.1

262.4
271.5
267.5
244.6
220.8
268.4
289.5
184.8
295,0
295.1

260.7
292.8
261.8
2393
213.5
270.1
289.5
180.4
289.5
295.9

263.3
286.1
264.7
246.6
195.4
274.2
287.2
196.2
296.3
295.9

259.6
275.3
257.7
251.8
207.2
258.3
283.6
165.0
299.0
259.7

' 260.7
'263.3
257.1
263,0
210.0
259.6
285.0
174.6
285.3
242.7

263.1
265.0
257.4
266.5
215,3
251.3
284
185.1
288.3
250.2

257.8
257.3
242.7
262.0
210.3
232.5
285.0
180.7
284.3
263.9

251.0
251.9
227.0
257.3
196,7
206.5
287.3
193.2
267.2
268.9

243.3
247.9
227.6
244.4
185.7
211.7
294,3
193.8
230.4
267.8

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 i s ............................................................................
Miscellaneous processed foods ................................................
Manufactured animal feeds ......................................................

241.2
236.0
243.1
230.6
228.7
322.5
233,0
226.8
227.2
226.8

256.1
241.5
256.0
238.0
233.8
404.7
239.5
231.0
230.6
246.9

257.2
245.3
250.9
240.2
234.7
409.0
240.6
238.0
235.0
254.5

251.5
248.7
248.1
242.3
236.6
339.8
240.5
234.1
240.5
247.1

253.3
251.5
248.1
244.7
238.4
344.6
243.0
230.2
244.2
248.9

250.2
252.1
243.6
245.0
243.7
323.7
244.8
228.2
248.0
235.9

248.5
252.2
242.0
245.1
255.2
302.0
245.4
229.8
249,2
231.1

247.6
253.9
239.1
245.4
258.0
284.5
246.0
232.4
249.9
237.7

248.2
256.3
245.2
244.6
259.4
262.8
247.6
228.2
251.1
241.0

'249.9
'256.4
'248.6
'245.2
'262,5
'274.8
'248.1
' 227.3
251.5
'234.3

252.1
257.2
257.1
245.5
266.5
269.8
246.3
235.1
2522
232.2

250.7
256,6
254.2
245.6
267.6
269.1
246.3
228.4
252.0
228,8

248.4
258.0
253.3
246.0
270.3
246.8
245.6
224.6
253.0
223.2

246.6
256,6
246.6
247.4
271.3
250.0
248.3
223.6
249.8
218.4

IN D U S T R IA L C O M M O D IT IE S

03
03-1
03-2
03-3
03-4
03-81
03-82

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....................................................................................
Textile housefurnishings............................................................

183.5
134.7
122.5
138.1
115.7
172.4
206,9

188.1
140.2
125.1
143.5
118,3
176.2
213.8

189.6
140.7
125.8
145.0
119.1
176,8
213.8

190.4
140.8
128.2
144.0
120.1
177.5
214.3

193.1
146.5
129.8
143.6
122.2
179.9
219.8

193.9
147.1
130.3
144.0
122.9
180.7
221.3

195.2
148.9
134.6
144.7
123.2
181.4
221.3

197.6
151.5
135.0
146.6
124.9
184.3
222.1

199.2
156.4
138.6
145.8
125.7
185.2
224.0

'200.1
'157.9
'139.3
'147.4
'125.6
'186.2
'223.9

200.5
158.6
139.0
147.4
125.2
186.2
231.6

201.4
162.0
139.3
148.2
125.9
186.5
231.6

202.5
162.3
141.8
148.1
126.2
187.2
236.6

203.0
163.5
142.0
147,8
126.1
187.9
237.4

04
04-1
04-2
04-3
04-4

Hides, skins, leather, and related products ....................................
Hides and skins........................................................................
Leather....................................................................................
Footwear ................................................................................
Other leather and related products............................................

248.9
370.9
310.6
233.1
218.3

251.2
381.5
301.9
236.6
221.8

255.4
409.1
317.3
237,5
222.6

256.9
392.8
332.4
236.9
225.3

258.2
377.5
332.6
238.4
230.1

257.7
367,4
310.0
240.7
236.9

261.2

263.5
(2)
337.8
241.1
238.5

263.7
n
330.0
241.4
244.2

'261.6
( 2)
321.0
'241.5
'244,3

262.1
( 2)
317.4
241.9
247,8

261.7
<2)
312.2
242.3
247.8

263.0
(2)
311.7
242.0
250.1

262.7

322.5
240.4
238.4

312.1
241.6
250.1

05
05-1
05-2
05 3
05-4
05-61
05-7

Fuels and related products and power ..........................................
Coal........................................................................................
Coke ......................................................................................
Gas fuels3 ..............................................................................
Electric power..........................................................................
Crude petroleum4 ....................................................................
Petroleum products, refined5 ....................................................

574.0
467.3
430.6
760,7
321.6
556.4
674.7

592.9
470.7
430.6
802,2
337.4
579,6
690.4

600.2
475.4
430,6
825.5
333.8
600.6
697.6

615.7
475.3
430,1
844.3
337.6
632.8
717.0

634.6
477.8
430.1
857.1
341.4
704.4
736.9

667.5
480.8
430.1
881.6
346.2
842.7
769.6

696.5
481.1
430.1
889.9
351.2
842.8
825.5

707.2
486.1
430.1
907.8
355.5
842.5
840.9

709.0
487.3
467.9
933.9
360.4
839.9
835.3

'707.6
'491.7
' 469.7
'954.6
'366.6
'815.9
'828.1

703.4
505.7
470.3
946.6
374.9
799.0
818.4

704.1
507.3
470.3
952.4
383.6
797.0
813.4

703.2
510.6
470.3
979.7
382.0
797,0
805.7

697.2
511.1
470.3
964.7
375.9
788.4
802.0

06
06-1
06-21
06-22
06-3
06-4
06-5
06-6
06-7

Chemicals and allied products......................................................
Industrial chemicals 6 ................................................................
Prepared paint..........................................................................
Paint materials ........................................................................
Drugs and pharmaceuticals ......................................................
Fats and oils, inedible ..............................................................
Agricultural chemicals and chemical products ............................
Plastic resins and materials ......................................................
Other chemicals and allied products ..........................................

260.3
324.0
235.3
273.9
174.5
298.0
257.1
279.2
224,5

264.8
330.0
239.3
279.6
178.4
302.0
260.6
276.1
230.9

266.7
332.7
241.4
279.8
181.1
308.2
261.1
276.2
232.4

268.1
334.6
241.4
281.0
182.6
317.1
263.3
274.1
234.1

274.3
344.5
242.9
284.0
184.7
310.7
267.6
214.7
244.4

277.6
352.1
246.6
287.0
187,3
289.7
271.6
276.1
245.1

280.4
354.5
246,6
290.5
189.3
295.7
275.8
279.4
248.3

286,0
362.4
248.1
295.4
191.0
312.7
277.8
285.1
255.3

288.6
368.5
250.0
300.3
192.4
312.1
279.1
287.9
254.8

'290.5
'369.7
'250.0
300.8
193.2
303.1
288.9
'290.0
'256.3

291.4
370.4
251.0
304.4
195.4
290.9
288.9
295.9
254.8

293.2
371.9
251.0
308.4
195,6
305.6
293.8
295.6
256.7

293,3
372.0
251.0
307.8
197.1
285.6
292.3
298.5
257.0

292.8
369.4
251.0
308.0
198.1
277.7
292.3
297.6
258.0

07
07-1
07-11
07-12
07-13
07-2

Rubber and plastic products ........................................................
Rubber and rubber products......................................................
Crude rubber ..........................................................................
Tires and tubes........................................................................
Miscellaneous rubber products..................................................
Plastic products (6/78 = 100) ..................................................

217.4
237.5
264.3
236.9
2266
121.1

222.8
244.6
271.7
245.2
232.0
123.6

223.4
245.0
271.0
245.2
233.3
124.0

223.3
244.9
268.5
245.2
234.0
123.9

224.8
246.2
279.1
240.9
238.6
125.0

226.4
248.5
281.9
243.5
240.4
125.5

228.4
252.1
281.2
248.6
243.5
126.0

230.8
253.0
279.8
250.7
243.8
128.2

231.8
254.4
283.2
251.2
245.7
128.6

'233.4
'256.8
'285.2
'251.2
'250.9
'129.1

233.5
258.0
283.8
251.0
254.7
128.5

234.4
258.4
282.0
251.0
256.4
129.3

236.0
261.3
280.6
256.5
257.1
129.6

237.7
264.3
280.5
257.7
263.4
130.0

08
08-1
08-2
08-3
08 4

Lumber and wood products..........................................................
Lumber....................................................................................
Millwork ..................................................................................
Plywood ..................................................................................
Other wood products................................................................

288.9
325.8
260.4
246.5
239.1

289.0
320.6
264.5
252.9
236.7

293.4
324.9
270.0
256.6
236.6

299.4
333.0
273.3
263,5
236.2

296.5
331.3
273.6
251.1
2385

294.7
326.9
273.8
251.2
238.1

294.4
326,2
275.7
248.8
236.9

299.4
333.6
276.5
256.0
238.3

r 298.4
'336.3
274.8
'248.3
'238.2

'298.1
'335.8
'272.2
'251.5
'239.8

295.5
330.1
273.6
248.1
240.5

294.3
329,2
272.4
245.9
2399

289.1
319.7
271.3
241.2
240.6

284.4
312.0
271.2
234.4
240.0

See footnotes at end of table.

Digitized96
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

<2)

<2)

27.

Continued

Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967^-100 unless otherwise specified]
1981

1980

Annual
C o m m o d ity g ro u p a n d s u b g ro u p

Code

IN D U S T R IA L C O M M O D IT IE S

1980

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June1

J u ly

Aug.

Sept

O c t.

C o n t in u e d

09
09 1
09-11
09 12
09 13
09 14
09 15
09-2

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..........................................................

249.2
250.6
380.3
208.7
256.8
234.6
238.5
206.2

254.3
255.6
389.6
193.5
262.1
239.9
243.7
212.7

255.0
256.2
390.2
192.3
264.1
241.7
243.5
216.5

256.7
257,9
390.2
191.5
269.4
239.6
244.7
219.7

264.4
260.9
390.2
191.5
271.7
250.2
246.9
219.7

267.2
264.5
390.2
186.1
272.9
2528
252.1
225.7

r 269.0
266,8
390.2
185.1
273.8
255.1
255.3
227.9

271.4
268.6
394.1
184.2
275.2
255.7
257.3
232.5

272.1
269.9
394.2
182.7
275.9
258.8
258.8
237.3

' 272.9
r 271.2
'394.2
182.9
'278.5
'259.2
' 259.9
'237.4

273.8
272.5
396.6
182.1
280.0
261.4
260.8
234.6

275.7
274,3
396.6
182.1
283.8
261.2
262.5
233.8

276.9
275.5
396.6
178.5
287.1
262.5
263.0
233.7

279.1
276.5
404.7
165.1
288.6
262.6
263.9
232.5

10
10-1
10 13
10-2
10-3
10 4
10-5
10-6
10-7
10 8

Metals and metal products ..........................................................
Iron and steel ..........................................................................
Steel mill products....................................................................
Nonferrous metals....................................................................
Metal containers ......................................................................
Hardware................................................................................
Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings............................................
Heating equipment....................................................................
Fabricated structural metal products..........................................
Miscellaneous metal products....................................................

286.4
305.2
302.7
305.0
298.6
240.5
246.7
206.5
270.5
250.0

291.9
310.5
307.5
309.4
304.4
246.6
250.6
210.6
276.9
256.3

291.1
312.7
309.4
302.1
303.3
249.6
252.3
212.0
278.0
256.9

290.6
316.4
313.7
293.4
303.3
251.7
254.9
214.0
279.3
257.6

294.0
323.0
322.6
292.1
311.4
254.5
256.7
216,6
283.1
260.5

294.0
323.2
322.9
287.4
313.8
258.0
259.2
217.6
285.4
263.1

296.4
328.2
328.7
286.5
314.1
258.6
259.5
219.5
289.4
264.7

298.8
331.0
331.8
288.4
314.1
258.5
265.3
219.8
293.1
267.2

299.1
330.4
331.8
287.7
314.1
259.4
266.2
222.3
294.0
269.7

'298.4
'330.1
'332.2
'284.5
314.1
'259.7
'268.9
'223.5
'295.0
'269.4

302.5
338.7
344.9
283.3
315.7
261.7
270.3
225.7
298.3
275.0

304.3
339.7
344.9
287.7
319.4
263.2
271.0
227.2
300.0
273.8

305.1
339.7
345.3
290.0
319.6
265.7
271.4
227.9
300,5
274.5

305.5
341.5
348.7
286.8
319.0
267.5
272.8
228.4
302.2
276.2

11
11-1
11-2
11-3
11-4
11-6
11-7
11-9

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..........................................................

239.8
259.2
289.4
274,4
264.6
275.8
201.7
229.9

246.8
265.4
299.1
282.5
272.5
286.0
207.0
236.5

248.3
271.6
300.1
283.9
274.3
287.7
207.5
238.5

249.8
272.9
301.4
285.7
275.6
290.9
208.9
239.6

253.3
276.4
305.9
289.7
278.6
295.6
211.9
243.3

255.3
278.4
310.0
291.6
280.2
299.2
213.7
245.2

257.5
279.8
312.8
294.9
282.3
301.0
216.0
247.0

259.6
282.5
317.0
298.7
284.4
303.2
217.4
248.5

260.7
285.7
318.4
299.9
285.9
307.2
217.5
248.8

'262.1
'286.8
'320.1
'301.3
'287.0
'308.8
'219.2
'250.1

264.5
287.3
324.0
303.0
290.0
311.0
221.0
253.2

266.0
289,3
324.9
303.6
291.7
310.5
222.8
255.3

267.8
292.0
326.6
305.3
293.5
312.7
224.1
257.8

268.8
292.1
329.0
306.5
294.4
314.7
225.0
258.3

12
12-1
12-2
12-3
12-4
12 5
12-6

Furniture and household durables ................................................
Household furniture..................................................................
Commercial furniture................................................................
Foor coverings........................................................................
Household appliances ..............................................................
Home electronic equipment ......................................................
Other household durable goods ................................................

187.7
204,8
236.0
163.0
174.2
91.4
278.6

190.9
209.8
241.4
164.4
177.5
91.5
281.8

191.5
210.9
242.2
165.5
178.5
91.2
281 2

193.1
212.1
242.4
170.7
179.5
91.0
285.7

194.0
212.9
246.7
172.3
182.2
91.0
278.9

195.2
213.8
251.6
171.9
183.5
91.3
280.8

195.8
214.5
253.4
174.1
184.2
91.4
278.1

196.4
216.5
254.5
175.3
185.1
90.9
275.3

197.4
216.4
257.7
179.5
185.5
90.8
276.7

' 197.3
'218.6
'257.9
'180.7
'186.1
'86.7
'276.4

198.9
220.4
259.1
182.8
187.5
87.1
279.1

199.5
221.4
259.2
182.3
187.7
87.5
282.0

200.7
223.3
261.5
181.5
188.3
87.8
285.4

201.4
224.1
262.5
181.5
189.5
88.3
285.3

13
13-11
13-2
13-3
13-4
13 5
13-6
13-7
13-8
13-9

Nonmetallic mineral products........................................................
F at glass ................................................................................
Concrete ingredients ................................................................
Concrete products....................................................................
Structural clay products excluding refractories............................
Refractories ............................................................................
Asphalt roofing ........................................................................
Gypsum products ....................................................................
Glass containers ......................................................................
Other nonmetallic minerals........................................................

283.0
196.5
274,0
273.9
231.5
264.6
396.8
256.3
292.7
394,6

288,6
200.7
279.0
277.5
233.3
273.2
408.5
249.5
306.2
402.7

288.7
203.1
279.1
277.7
233.5
273.2
397.1
253.3
306.2
403.3

291.2
203.0
279.7
277.6
233.6
273.2
394.6
252.7
311.4
418.9

296.6
203.9
290.0
286.1
239.5
282.6
394.8
259.6
311.4
418.7

2979
204.3
291.4
286.6
239.8
293.5
389.5
257.3
311.4
424.7

300.9
204.8
292.6
286.9
244.6
296.1
390.5
257.6
311.4
441.7

310.8
210.2
297.4
289.9
246.0
296.4
415.9
256.8
326.7
479.1

312.0
210.2
297.5
291.2
250.1
304.0
407.4
261.1
335.3
477.6

'313.6
'210.3
'297.5
'293.5
'250.7
'307.1
'428.5
260.7
'335.3
476.8

313.9
216.2
298.1
293.0
250.3
308.0
420.3
259.7
334.7
476.3

314.0
218.8
298.4
293.0
250.4
308.0
419.2
255.3
334.8
475.2

313.1
218.8
298.4
292.9
254.8
308.0
400.0
252.9
334.8
474.2

313.1
218.5
298.3
293.3
255.6
308.8
401.3
252.4
334.8
473.2

14
14-1
14-4

Transportation equipment (12/68 - 100)......................................
Motor vehicles and equipment ..................................................
Railroad equipment ..................................................................

207.0
208.8
313.1

217.4
218.2
323.3

217.8
218.6
323.6

224.3
226.2
323.9

227.4
228.9
332.5

229.1
230.9
332.5

228.1
229.5
333.9

231.9
233.9
335.7

233.6
236.0
331.2

'234.3
'236.7
'331.4

235.3
237.5
344.3

235.8
238.1
345.0

231.7
232.6
345.0

244.4
247.5
345.0

15
15-1
15-2
15-3
15-4
15-5
15-9

Miscellaneous products................................................................
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition............................
Tobacco products ....................................................................
Notions....................................................................................
Photographic equipment and supplies ........................................
Mobile homes (12/74 - 100)....................................................
Other miscellaneous products ..................................................

258.8
198.6
245.7
217.2
202.9
150,2
363.4

266.0
202.7
249.4
224.0
200.8
153.2
383.4

263.6
202.8
254.4
224.1
206.7
152.7
367.0

265.3
205.7
254,8
225.0
206.6
153.0
370.5

264.3
208.4
254.8
227.2
207.4
153.0
363.3

264.9
210.5
256.1
247.3
209.6
153.1
358.1

264.0
211.1
256.3
247.3
211.2
155.0
351.3

266.0
211.3
268.7
248.4
212.4
( 2)
349.0

266.9
211.4
268.7
267.8
212.5
(2)
349.4

r 266.3
'211.2
'268.7
268.0
'212.5
(2)
'346.9

262.8
213.8
268.5
267.5
211.7
155.8
332.3

262.6
214.0
268.6
267.7
207.4
157.7
333.9

266.7
215.1
274.2
267.8
209.0
158.1
343.4

268.0
213.7
278,0
267.3
209.1
158,6
346.7

' Data for June 1981 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 Not available.
3 Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month.


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

4 Includes only domestic production,
5 Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month.
6 Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month.
r=revised.

97

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: P ro d u cer Prices

28.

Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings

[1967

100 unless otherwise specified]
A nnual

1980

1981

C o m m o d it y g r o u p in g
O c t.

N ov.

D ec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June1

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

269.6
244,7
246.6
243.5
124.3
123.2
185.4

278.1
258.8
261.7
249.6
127.5
126.2
189.7

279.4
259.7
261.9
250.3
128.1
126.7
190.3

281.2
254.3
255.5
252.3
129.3
126.4
190.6

285.4
255.8
257.0
255.4
131.8
129.5
199.2

288.8
253.7
253.9
257.2
132.5
130.3
200.9

291.9
253.4
252.3
258.6
132.2
130.5
202.0

295.0
251.4
250.3
261.8
134.5
134.2
202.1

296.1
250.3
250.5
262.9
135.7
134,6
202.3

1296.7
252.2
'253 1
1263.5
'135.9
’ 135.7
203.5

297,7
255.5
256.3
264.8
136.9
135.7
205.0

298.5
253.7
254.9
266.0
137.2
135.3
205.0

298.3
251.7
252.8
266.3
138.2
135.5
205.0

299.4
249.4
250.6
268.6
138.5
136.5
205.0

250.7
167.1

255.4
170.8

257.0
173.7

258.2
174.6

264,8
177.1

268.3
179.7

271.0
182.1

276.1
184.0

279.0
185.7

' 281.2
' 186.6

282.1
188 7

283.9
189.1

284.4
190.8

284.2
192.7

304.0
258.5
258.2
222.0
230.4

302.3
265.7
264.3
216.5
239.2

306.5
265.7
265.2
215.7
240.2

314.2
268.6
266.3
210.8
244.1

309.2
271.8
269.9
207.4
247.4

306.0
272.7
272.5
205.0
249.4

304.8
273.5
274 7
2048
250.2

312.3
276.8
277.0
207.7
253.1

311.5
277,9
278.5
206.6
254.4

■312.2
' 277 9
■279.0
' 203.7
■255.6

307.2
280.5
282.7
203.0
257.4

305.9
281.8
283.4
206.3
258.4

297.9
280.1
284.2
205.4
257.6

290.3
286.6
285.6
203.8
264.0

263.0
267.3
299.4
225.6
287.3
261.2
268.8
266.5
287.8
291.8

273.0
274.8
309.6
231.7
298.3
268.3
278.0
272.5
294.6
298.6
263.4
269.9

275.1
280.9
311.2
232.1
299.9
273.7
282.4
279.9
296.0
298.6
273.0
271.9

276.7
281.4
314.1
230.6
301.2
274.3
282.4
280.9
297.8
298.6
273.8
274.1

277.3
285.0
318.9
234 6
305.8
278 0
284,4
285.7
300.7
298.6
(2)
276.7

279.7
287.3
3205
235.0
311.1
280.2
287.2
287.7
305.5
296.0
(2)
277.2

281.9
288 3
323,5
235.7
311.8
281 5
287.6
289.1
310.1
298.9
( 2)
279.0

284.3
289.6
325.9
235.7
316.8
283.2
289.3
290.2
314.0
302.7
(2)
283.9

285.9
293.7
327.1
237.3
322.0
286.7
297.7
290.8
314.3
303.0
( 2)
284.2

' 287.3
■294.8
■328,3
'241.4
' 322.5
1287.9
' 298.0
' 292.5
'315.3
303.0
(2)
' 285.0

289.9
294.3
329.9
242.1
325.4
287.6
297.2
292.3
314.1
303.0
(2)
285.4

291.3
296.9
330.8
242.1
327.3
290.0
300.6
294.1
316.4
303.0
(2)
285.6

293.4
300.5
333.7
242.1
330.5
293.0
305.0
297.1
319.3
304.3
( 2)
284.4

294.4
300.4
335.6
242.1
332.9
293.1
305.0
297.0
319.0
304.1
( 2>
284.5

June1

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

1980

A ll c o m m o d i t i e s

le s s f a r m

p ro d u c ts

A ll f o o d s
P ro c e s s e d fo o d s

Industrial commodities less fu e ls......................................
Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975
100 )...........
Hosiery ............................................................................
Underwear and nightwear ...............................................
Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber
and manmade fibers and y a rn s ...................................
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 ......................................
Machinery and equipment, except electrical....................
Agricultural machinery, including tractors........................
Metalworking machinery .................................................
Numerically controlled machine tools (Dec. 1971 = 100)
Total tracto-s ...................................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment less p a r ts ...........
Farm and garden tractors less p a rts ...............................
Agricultural machinery excluding tractors less parts . . . .
Industrial valves ..............................................................
Industrial fittings ..............................................................
Abrasive grinding w h e e ls.................................................
Construction m aterials.....................................................

n

266.4

1Data for June 1981 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.

2 Not available,
r revised.

Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product

[1967 = 100]
A nnual
C o m m o d it y g r o u p in g

1980

1981

av erag e
1980

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

Total durable goods .......................................................
Total nondurable g o o d s ...................................................

251.5
282.4

258.4
293.0

258.6
295.2

261.0
296 3

262.7
302,6

263.8
306.8

264.9
310.9

267.8
314.2

268.6
314.8

' 269.1
’ 315.7

270.7
316.3

271.8
315.9

271.7
314.6

274.9
312.7

Total manufactures ..........................................................
Durable .....................................................................
Nondurable................................................................

261.5
250.8
273.0

269.6
257.8
282.1

270.5
257.9
284.0

272.0
260.4
284.3

277.3
262.3
293.5

279.3
263.4
296.4

282.3
264.4
301.7

285.3
267.2
304.9

286.2
268.2
305.7

' 286.9
' 268.9
' 306.4

288.0
270.6
306.8

288.4
271.6
306.6

288.1
271.6
305.9

289.7
274.9
305.4

Total raw or slightly processed goods.............................
Durable .....................................................................
Nondurable................................................................

305.7
278.2
306.7

319.6
282.7
321.3

322.9
285.6
324.6

326.2
284.0
328,2

322.9
275.9
325.3

330.3
275.5
333.3

331.2
281.7
333.8

334.6
286.0
337.1

334.2
280.4
337.1

' 335.4
■272.4
' 338.9

336.6
271.9
340.3

335.6
276.6
338.9

332.7
271.1
336.2

326.2
264.3
329.7

1Data for June 1981 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.

r revised,

Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972
S IC

A nnual
In d u s t r y d e s c r i p t i o n

code

1980

1981

a v erag e
O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

152.9
331.2
466.7
643.8
252.7
136.0

155.8
338.7
469.7
681.8
261.8
137.2

155.8
343.7
474.2
704.6
263.2
132.1

155.8
325.0
473.9
731.7
264.3
133.7

244.0
220.1
191.9
258.5

258.0
247.0
211.3
273.2

251.4
249.5
205.9
273.3

249.0
247.4
201.8
274.8

1980

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June'

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

155,8
297.9
476.1
786.5
270.1
137.1

168.1
324.5
478.1
897.9
272.3
137.1

168.1
335.4
478.5
901.7
275.2
137.1

168.1
354.1
483.5
908.6
278.0
137.1

168.1
347.9
484.5
919.7
278.4
137.1

168.1
352.0
■488.4
' 713.7
'278.4
137.1

168.1
358.3
502.5
898.9
278.5
137.1

168.1
365.4
503.8
901.4
278.3
137.1

168.1
364.5
506.3
914.6
279.4
137.1

168.1
354.1
506.6
901.0
279.6
143.4

244.7
235.3
201.9
273.6

237.2
232.9
208.3
273.5

236.1
230.4
203,9
273.6

237.8
227.5
186.7
273.4

243.6
230.4
196.2
273.4

' 245.9
■238.1
198.3
'273.5

252.6
245.5
203.6
273.8

250.7
252.7
201.2
273.7

252.9
253.7
188.8
275.0

244.3
252.0
175.5
279.2

M IN IN G

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

Meatpacking plants ........................................................
Sausages and other prepared meats................................
Poultry dressing plants....................................................
Creamery butter..............................................................

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

See footnotes at end of table.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
98
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

30.

Continued

Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972

1981

1980

Annual
In d u s t r y d e s c r i p t i o n

S IC
code

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

1980

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June '

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

C o n tin u e d

2022
2024
2033
2034
2041
2044
2048
2061
2063
2067

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)............................
Raw cane sugar ..........................................................
Beet sugar ..................................................................
Chewing gum ..............................................................

204.4
193.3
221.4
160.2
189.1
243.4
124.2
414.1
358.0
290.7

213.7
199.5
227.6
162,6
201.5
237.2
129.2
588.2
460.1
322.4

214.9
199.8
231.1
168.6
205.1
265.8
133.3
563.8
512.2
322,9

216.1
207.5
232.0
170.4
199.5
287.2
133.9
402.9
423.3
322.9

215.9
210.1
233.3
174.1
203.8
289.6
132.6
418.0
414.5
323.0

215.6
210.6
237.4
171.3
198.4
289.6
129.3
367.1
398.1
323.0

215.7
210.6
241.5
172.9
195.1
298.0
126.6
318,8
370.7
323.1

216.2
211.4
244,0
174.2
201.5
300.9
128.5
275.7
350.5
323.1

216.2
212.4
245.9
175.3
199.4
300.3
129.8
224.8
334.4
303.1

r 216.1
212.4
r 248.9
r 175.0
199.3
300.3
r 127.5
263.3
r 339.7
303.1

217.1
212.7
252.4
180.5
196.5
297.4
125.9
272.2
299.3
303.2

216.0
212.7
253.8
178.7
191.0
284.3
124.9
254.6
299.3
303.2

217.0
212.7
255.6
183,4
194.8
268.2
120.0
212.3
271.0
303.2

215.6
212.5
256.1
182.3
190.6
247.3
117.5
219.9
272.2
303.2

2074
2075
2077
2083
2085
2091
2092
2095
2098
2111

Cottonseed oil m ills......................................................
Soybean oil m ills..........................................................
Animal and marine fats and oils ....................................
Malt ............................................................................
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....................................................................

192.9
244.3
290.2
249.9
123.0
174.0
366.9
269.3
233.8
254.6

218.7
279.2
311.0
267.4
127.9
180.0
353.8
257.0
243.6
257.8

231.8
290.5
317.2
267.4
128.5
183.1
353.3
252.5
243.6
263.5

228.0
270.5
311,8
267.4
129.2
183.4
353.9
248.5
243.6
263.6

221.2
272.0
310.8
286.1
129.2
187.3
374.9
238.2
243.6
263.6

193.7
252.5
287.2
286.1
133.9
187.1
366.7
238.3
243,6
264.1

204,4
253.2
284.2
286.1
133.9
187.6
385.2
238.3
243.6
264.2

218.4
259.1
301.7
286.1
133.9
187.7
393.5
238.5
243.6
278.3

216.6
258.1
304.3
286.1
134.3
187.3
378,2
238.6
246.6
278.3

212,3
r 248.4
291.3
286.1
134.6
187.5
r 375.5
238.6
246.6
278.3

212.0
253.6
288.8
286.1
134.6
187.4
369.2
236.6
259.5
278.3

206.0
245.6
294.1
286.1
135.5
188.5
348.6
236.0
259.5
278.3

182.3
234.6
281.4
275.4
135.5
188.8
355.0
235.6
259.5
284.2

172.0
230.1
274.1
275.4
135.5
188.2
358.4
238.6
259.5
288.4

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) ................

158.6
279.8
215.8
124,8
106.3
190,1
104,6
135.1
113.6

163.7
295.0
223.4
130.7
108.7
194.2
106.7
139.1
117.3

164.0
295.0
224.2
133.0
109.0
194.7
107.1
139.3
117.9

165.1
298.8
225.0
132.5
108.6
195.0
107.5
140.2
120.5

165.1
298.7
227.9
131.9
109.1
205.6
109.3
142.4
121.7

165.3
320.7
230.9
132.3
109.2
208.7
109.6
144.5
123.1

167.0
320.7
232.3
133.3
108.9
209.7
109.1
144.6
124.3

168.5
320.8
235.3
134.9
114.1
209.8
110.8
146.9
125.2

168.5
320.8
233.5
135.7
114.2
210.0
110.5
147.0
126.6

r 168.5
320.8
r 234.3
r 137.1
r 115.6
r 210.0
r 110.4
r 146.2
r 126.6

166.8
320.8
234.9
137.0
115.6
210.5
109.6
146.2
127.0

166.8
321.1
236.9
137.5
115.0
210.7
110.5
146.1
127.7

171.6
325.2
235.5
138.4
115.1
210.8
111.0
145.3
129.0

171.6
327.6
236.1
139.1
115.2
210.8
112.3
144.9
129.0

2272
2281
2282
2284
2298
2311 ,
2321
2322
2323
2327

Tufted carpets and rugs................................................
Yarn 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................................

138.1
203.5
115.5
139.1
123.6
212.6
204.4
208.0
112.6
175.3

138.8
207.9
118.2
143.8
127.1
216.2
208.0
212.8
112.4
180.2

140.0
209.9
118.4
143.9
129.2
216.3
208.6
212.8
112.4
180.2

145.7
215.1
120.1
143.9
129.3
216.1
209.5
212.9
115.4
180.3

148.1
216.9
123.2
144.1
129.3
218.2
206.3
224.9
115.4
185.3

147.8
218.1
123.2
144.3
129.3
219.7
207.3
229.1
115,4
185.3

150.2
220.7
131.3
148.4
130.9
220.1
207.1
231.0
115.4
185.3

151.5
220.9
131.5
150.8
132.7
220.3
207.6
231.0
115.4
186.0

154.5
224.1
139.1
150,9
134.3
220.4
207.1
231.0
115,4
186,1

'155.6
' 225.8
'139.3
151.1
134.3
'224.6
'207.5
'230.7
115.4
'186.1

159.2
225.1
139.0
151.1
134.3
223.1
208.6
230.7
113,9
186.3

158.7
225.3
139.5
151.1
134.3
224.1
208.7
230.7
113.9
186.4

157.9
223.9
146.7
154.8
139.3
226.1
209.6
230.7
113.9
186.4

157.9
222.3
148.0
157.0
139.3
227.0
210.2
230,8
113.9
186,6

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)......................

240.5
110.3
114.7
154.4
126.5
109.9
268.6
123.8
122.4
227.7

244.3
114.0
116.3
156.0
129.0
112.7
271.1
125.1
122.3
223.2

244.3
114.0
116.3
157.1
129.1
115.1
272.1
125.1
131.0
226.8

244.4
115.4
116.3
158.1
129.1
117.4
272.1
126.1
131,0
233.5

242.2
116.3
116.5
165.5
131.7
118.1
284.9
126.8
131.0
232.3

242.2
116.3
116.9
167.5
132.8
118.9
289.1
126.8
131.0
229.6

242.3
116.4
118.5
168.8
134.9
119.2
289.1
127.8
131.0
228.6

247.0
118.3
118.4
169.0
135.0
120.7
289.1
129.3
131.0
233.3

248.2
118.4
122.3
169.2
135.0
120.5
292.1
130.0
131.0
234.8

'248.3
'118,5
'122.5
'170.5
' 136.9
'120.5
292.1
'130.1
131.0
' 234.8

250.7
119.7
121.4
171.2
139.2
120.5
289.2
130.6
131.0
231.6

251.3
119.8
121.5
171.2
139.2
120.5
289.2
133.7
131.0
231.0

251.4
120.1
122.5
171.2
139.2
120.5
289.2
135.2
131.0
224.9

252.4
123.6
122.5
171.2
139.2
120.9
289.2
138.1
131.0
219.7

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............................................
Wood office furniture....................................................
Pulp mills (12/73 - 100)..............................................

144.6
155.6
160.1
150.3
161.5
183.8
163.6
179.1
235.2
240.0

149.1
156.2
154.6
153.2
159.8
188.1
167.7
186.5
239.7
246.1

152.3
157.0
154.7
152.7
163.6
189.1
168.6
186.5
239.7
246.8

158.2
157.1
154.1
153.1
165.9
190.0
170.5
186.5
240.9
246.8

149.8
157.1
153.8
153.1
163.9
210.1
169.9
186.3
244.1
246.9

149.3
157.0
152.8
153.2
170.3
192.1
170.1
188.3
250.4
246.9

147.2
157.1
152.7
155.0
172.3
193.3
170.1
189.5
253.5
246.9

152.6
158.3
153.1
155.8
180.9
195.4
171.8
190.5
254.5
251.2

145.7
158.2
153.1
155.9
184.5
196.2
169.7
190.4
255.4
251.3

'148.1
158.2
153.0
'156.1
' 182.3
'197.5
' 173.9
' 190.5
' 254.6
'251.3

144.0
157.5
153.0
155.9
178.3
198.3
176.4
195.4
255.7
253.5

139.9
157.1
152.8
157.7
172.3
199.1
176.4
198.7
255.7
253.5

135.7
156.2
152.7
158.1
169.3
200.8
177.7
199.4
258.1
253.5

129.4
154.6
152.0
159.1
166.8
201.6
178.3
199.4
258.1
257.2

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)....................
Synthetic rubber ..........................................................
Organic fiber, nonce u io sc............................................
Nitrogenous fertilizers (12/75
100) ............................

145.5
139.0
322.0
216.0
150.6
247.5
143.0
255.8
132.5
124.4

148.2
142.3
332.6
222,3
155.5
257.9
141.5
260.9
138.0
130.3

149.2
143,2
334.7
222,3
155.5
265.1
141.5
260.4
138.7
130.0

150.7
142.4
338.2
225.3
155,0
262.3
140.9
262.5
138.9
131.8

152.0
148.2
338.3
232.0
157.7
277.9
142.4
275.9
144.0
135.0

152.6
149.2
342.5
235.2
160.6
299.2
143.5
280.7
144.7
138.1

153.3
150.8
343.0
237.9
160.7
295.6
144,8
283.9
147.4
141.7

153.9
151.0
343.2
239.2
160.8
294.4
148.1
288.1
149.9
147.1

154.3
152.1
344.3
239.2
160.9
302.2
149.7
293.3
156.2
148.5

'155.7
' 152.3
■344.4
'242.2
160.9
'309.3
'150.7
'296.3
'156.8
' 143 4

157.6
152.7
345.3
245.5
163.2
302.6
155,0
296.1
158.2
147.2

158.3
152.6
345.3
254.2
163.2
309.1
154.6
296.1
160.5
144.5

159.6
153.6
345.3
254.5
163.2
313.1
156.9
296.3
161.6
142.7

159.8
153.7
345.3
254.8
167.8
314.5
155.5
299.9
163.6
143.1

2874
2875
2892
2911
2951
2952
3011

Phosphatic fertilizers ....................................................
Fertilizers, mixing only ..................................................
Explosives ..................................................................
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) ............................

237.3
246.9
269.7
248.6
171.4
173.4
203.1

2393
250.6
273.5
254.6
176.2
178.6
209.9

239.6
252.9
272.9
256.3
176.2
173.5
209.9

245.4
252.2
282.8
261.4
181.5
172.5
210.1

247.9
255.8
288.8
268.3
183.1
172.4
207.0

248.2
266.8
295.4
279.5
185,4
170.0
209.3

253.5
270.0
303.9
299.0
189.1
169.7
213.8

251.6
271.1
3248
306.0
198.1
180.4
215.5

251.5
273.6
314.5
304.1
198,8
176.3

250.9
'273.1
' 312.6
302.6
198.4
’ 185.7
'216.2

249.9
274.2
315.7
299.3
197.4
182.2
216.1

261.0
273.1
316.7
297.5
196.2
181.7
216.2

258.8
272.5
316.4
295.8
195.8
173.7
220.5

259.0
271.2
318.3
294.5
196.1
174.2
221.3


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

2 1 5 .2

99

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
30.

Continued

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: P rodu cer Prices

Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
1972
S IC

1980

A nnual
In d u s try d e s c r ip tio n

code

1981

a v erag e

1980

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June'

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

3021
3031
3079
3111
3142
3143
3144
3171
3211
3221

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) ....................................
House 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 - 100) ................................................................
Glass containers ............................................................................

177.9
184.7
121.7
146.6
149.1
159.8
213.5
137,9
161.3
292.6

182.0
184.0
124.2
( 2)
153.5
161.6
217.1
140.9
163.8
306.1

182.4
184.1
124.6
149.3
158,2
162.4
217.1
140.9
166.4
306.1

182.3
186.7
124.5
156.6
154.9
162.4
217.1
140.9
166.3
311.4

182.8
190.4
125.4
157.0
(2)
164.8
217.8
149.5
167.1
311.4

183.4
190.4
125.4
145.5
( 2)
166.5
220.2
149.5
167.5
311.4

183.6
187.6
126.3
151.4
(2)
167.6
218.7
149.7
168.1
311.4

183.6
187.7
128.7
158.6
<2)
168.7
218.7
149.7
174.5
326.6

184.0
187.7
129.1
154.7
( 2>
168.9
219.3
158.4
174,5
335.2

184.1
r 187.7
r 129.6
150.7
( 2)
r 169.6
r 218.5
158,4
r 174.6
'335.2

184.7
190.8
129.0
150.6
(2)
169.7
218.9
158.4
177,1
334.6

185.3
198.1
129.7
147.8
(2)
170.4
219.2
158.4
180.2
334.7

185.2
198.1
130.0
147.6
<2)
169.8
217.8
158.4
180.2
334.7

185.0
198.1
130.5
147.5
(2)
169.6
217.0
158.4
180.1
334.7

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 ................................................................

310.8
277.3
122,5
273.6
202.7
234.8
317.3
295.5
152.6
257.3

311.8
282.6
120.1
280.2
204.9
241.5
327.4
297.9
155.4
259.4

310.5
282.9
120.1
280.7
205.0
242.6
327.4
297.9
155.5
259.4

310.5
282.9
120.1
280.7
205.1
245.0
327.4
297.9
155.5
259.4

324.3
286.6
127.1
291.5
209.5
244.7
327.4
298.6
155.5
264.1

324.3
286.1
127.1
305.2
212.8
248.9
327.4
298.6
155.5
265.0

r 324.4
295.3
127.1
308.1
213.0
249.4
328.0
307.9
158.5
263.2

332.4
296.0
129.6
308.6
212.7
252.0
328.2
308.2
158.6
267.4

332.3
297.4
132.1
311.0
223.9
252.5
336.6
309.6
160.6
271.2

'331.0
' 298.5
'132.1
'312.2
' 223.9
255.6
336.6
'309.6
' 160.7
271.2

3295
299.8
129.6
314.0
224.3
258.7
336.6
309.1
160.6
271.3

329.5
299,9
129.6
314.0
224.4
259.5
336.6
309.1
160.6
274.0

328.9
300,9
137.7
314.2
227.9
258.9
336.8
313.3
161.7
274.2

327.2
300.8
137.7
315.7
232 2
258.9
336.8
313.3
161.7
274.0

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) ..................................................

279.9
157.7
256.7
212.6
161.1
310.5
117.7
284.0
290.9
282.5

282.7
160.8
250.0
218.8
167.8
314.8
117.3
288.1
294.2
289.7

282.8
160.8
253.6
220.2
167.5
316.6
117.3
288.8
302.4
290.1

282.9
161,8
253.1
2206
167.6
320.7
117.3
293.3
308,4
290.7

294.8
165.7
259.9
222.8
172.4
328.7
119.9
302.8
315.5
295.2

295.4
171.7
257.6
221.7
177.5
328.9
120.0
303.1
316.3
296.1

296.0
172.6
257.9
223.1
178.9
334.0
120.0
306.1
326.1
295.6

298.5
172.4
257.1
232.7
178.9
336.7
120.8
308.2
333.1
297.0

299.4
172.6
261.4
233.2
186.6
337.3
120.6
308.2
334.1
298.4

301.7
'173.0
260.9
'234.1
'189.7
'338.2
120.7
'309.5
336.3
'298,4

300.5
173.4
261.8
234.9
189.7
349.6
121.2
325.1
348.2
299.4

299.9
174.2
258.9
234.9
189.8
349.5
121.5
325.7
350.7
299.4

299.5
173,9
257.0
235.6
189.8
350.3
121.4
326.2
350.6
301.9

299.7
173.9
251.5
237.5
189.8
353.1
125.4
326.4
362.0
304.6

3333
3334
3351
3353
3354
3355
3411
3425
3431
3465

Primary zinc....................................................................................
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 ....................................................................................
Hand saws and saw blades (12/72 = 100)......................................
Metal sanitary ware ........................................................................
Automotive stampings (12/75 - 100) ..............................................

270.5
297.9
227.5
158.2
167.7
146.2
291.6
182.1
248.3
136.9

269.9
325.6
222.0
161.5
173.2
150.7
297.9
186.8
251.5
140.2

282.0
328.5
222.9
163.3
176.3
151.2
297.2
187.2
252.2
140.9

288.7
328.0
222.8
165.1
176.4
151.1
297.3
190.5
253,8
141.2

300.3
331.7
218.7
169.3
176.8
155.3
302.1
195.4
256.0
143.0

300.0
332.3
215.3
170.7
177.1
157.1
303.0
196.3
256.4
143,9

299.7
332.2
211.8
172.1
177.3
157.2
304.7
198.0
258.5
144.2

311.9
332.8
213.1
173.8
180.6
157.3
304.7
198.1
262.8
145.0

332.7
334.2
212.6
174.4
180.7
157.4
304.7
200.2
264.8
145.0

'335.1
'332.5
'210.6
'176.1
180.8
'157.3
304.7
'200.2
' 265.2
'145.2

331.3
3362
209.5
178.2
181.1
157.6
305.6
302.8
266,9
146.6

349.5
336.5
210.9
178.2
181.3
157.6
306.9
203.8
267.1
146.8

351.5
336.4
213.7
178.7
181.2
158.1
307.4
204.2
267.5
147.2

332.9
3358
212.9
180.7
181.3
163.3
307.2
204.5
267.7
147.7

3482
3493
3494
3498
3519
3531
3532
3533
3534
3542

Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100) ............................................
Steel springs, except w ire................................................................
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)............................

145.6
230,3
230.0
315.5
275,4
141.1
258.5
338,1
239.3
279.5

145.8
233.0
235.8
325.0
285.2
146.0
266.0
352.9
248.3
286.8

146.3
233.3
236.9
3299
289.1
146.6
268.0
358.4
248.8
287.4

160.9
234.3
238.3
329.9
289.9
147.5
270.0
360.9
249.5
292.0

157.9
238.4
240.2
335.7
298.2
150.0
272.5
367.0
250.3
297.5

157.8
239.2
242.1
335.7
299.4
151.4
273.5
374.2
250.3
298.0

157.2
239.5
244.8
338.5
302.6
152.6
276.2
378.2
250.3
301.9

157.8
241.2
247.6
358.8
306.0
154.4
279,5
382.2
251.2
303.0

157.8
241.7
247.9
359.9
306.2
155.3
280.0
384.6
251.2
304.5

'157.8
'241.9
'248.5
361,6
'307.2
'156.9
'280.8
'390.3
251.2
'305.7

163.2
244.2
248.5
365.9
311.5
159.0
282.3
393.3
251.3
307.3

165.3
244.3
249.5
371.3
313.6
159.5
283.5
403.1
252.9
307.7

165.3
249.5
251.2
374.7
320.9
160.0
286.0
408.7
254.6
312.0

165.3
249.6
251.4
379.1
321.6
161.5
288.7
413.3
257.1
312.3

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 = 1 0 0 ) ..........................................
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) ..................................

132.2
216.6
212.5
215.0
156.6
184.9
209.9
133.1
121.4
162.0

136.6
223.8
217.0
226.3
164 9
193.9
214.4
134.8
124.1
166.1

136.7
224.5
217.7
226.9
165.2
193.0
214.9
135,8
125.1
166.6

137.9
226.0
221.5
217.9
167.6
193.3
215.8
137.5
125.1
167.4

142.6
235.7
222.5
220.5
168.9
194.9
218.9
140.1
127.5
169.8

144.9
235.0
223.1
221.1
170.9
197.1
220.9
141.0
127.5
170.2

145.2
240.0
224.7
224.2
171.5
204.3
222.1
141.1
127.6
170.9

146.4
240.4
225.5
230.2
172.0
206.0
224.3
140.5
129.4
173.5

147.0
241.2
219.1
230.2
172.0
207.8
225.9
140.7
129.5
173.9

147.1
'244.4
'219.7
'230.3
'176.5
209.6
'227.2
'141.0
'130.8
'173.6

148.1
245.0
233.6
226.5
180.6
212.6
227.4
140.4
134.0
174.1

148.5
245.3
224.2
226.8
181.1
215.3
228.8
141.1
134.1
174.1

148.6
247.0
225.3
226.1
181.9
215.9
230.8
141.2
135,0
176.0

148.8
248.1
226.9
226.1
185.2
216.2
231.8
141.6
136.4
176.8

3635
3636
3641
3644
3646
3648
3671
3674
3675
3676

Household vacuum cleaners............................................................
Sewing machines (12/75 = 100) ....................................................
Electric lamps ................................................................................
Noncurrent-carrylng 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) ..................................................

154.4
129.1
260.3
219.7
139.3
139.9
251.8
90.7
162.7
134.2

158.8
130.3
268.7
221.8
142.8
143.3
264.6
91.8
170.1
137.7

158.8
130.3
270.2
223.7
143.1
144.7
264.8
91.2
170,2
137.8

159.1
130.3
266.2
229.2
144.7
145.0
272.7
91.6
170.3
137.8

159.1
130.3
265.8
233.1
145.1
146.3
284.3
91.1
170.3
139.0

156.3
130.3
271.2
236.3
148.0
146.8
284.4
90.8
171.1
139.9

158.5
131.9
272.6
240.6
151.4
152.7
285.0
91.3
173,2
139.9

158.4
131.8
275.5
242.6
156.1
153.2
285.0
91.2
168.7
140.0

158.5
153.8
275.1
242.8
156,2
153.3
285.1
90.6
168.5
140.8

'158.6
'153.8
'276.5
'251.5
'156,2
153.7
'312.5
' 90.3
'171.2
141.2

152.0
153.1
275.3
254.7
154.9
153.8
327.3
90.0
168.6
141.9

152.2
153.1
280.1
256.2
155.8
161.3
327,5
89.6
168.0
142.2

152.2
153.1
283.2
261.0
157.2
161.5
327.5
89.5
168.9
142.6

154.5
155.4
285.9
261.2
156.8
161.4
327.6
89.2
172.4
142.6

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 surface floor coverings (12/75
100) ....................................

148.1
176.5
136.7
127.4
205.2
132.8
131.2
143.7

149.7
176.9
144.5
128.3
207.0
135.0
132.9
146.6

149.7
177.0
144.6
128.3
207.0
135.0
132.9
146.6

149.7
176.9
144.0
128.3
207.1
135.0
135.0
146.6

152.2
179.0
145.3
130.7
213.9
133.0
135.0
148.6

153.5
183.3
145.7
132.3
220.2
136.4
135.0
148.6

154.5
184.2
144.2
132.4
221.2
136.4
138.0
148.7

154.4
182.6
148.4
132.4
221.2
136.9
138.1
151.5

153.7
181.0
149.6
130.9
221.8
136,9
138.3
151.5

'154.3
181.0
' 150.3
' 130.9
'221.9
140.4
138.3
151.5

154.5
181.6
150.5
130.6
219.9
140.4
138.3
153.3

155.1
182.7
149.7
130.6
219.9
140.6
140.6
153.6

155.3
183.4
143.2
130.6
220.1
140.6
143.4
153.7

156.3
182.7
158.3
130.6
220.1
140.6
143.4
153.7

1Data for June 1981 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.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
100
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2 Not available,

PRODUCTIVITY DATA

P roductivity 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.

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 R ev ie w , tables 3134 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,” M o n th ly L a b o r
R ev ie w , October 1976, pages 40-42.

Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1950-80

[1977=100]

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 c o s t................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees ....................
Compensation per hour ..................................
Real compensation per hour............................
Unit labor c o s t................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
Manufacturing:
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 ......................................
1Not available.


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

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

50.3
20.0
50.4
39.8
43.5
41.0

58.2
26.3
59.6
45.2
47.8
46.1

65.1
33.9
69.4
52.1
50.8
51.7

78.2
41.7
80.0
53.3
57.8
54.8

86.1
58.2
90.8
67.6
63.4
66.2

94.8
71.3
97.3
75.2
75.6
75.3

92.7
78.0
95.9
84.2
78.9
82.4

94.8
85.5
96.3
90.2
90.7
90.4

97.9
92.9
98.8
94.8
94.4
94.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

99.8
108.4
100.7
108.6
105.1
107.4

99.5
119.3
99.6
119.9
110.9
116.9

99.3
r 131.5
r96.7
r 132.4
r 118.3
127.6

56.2
21.8
55.0
38.8
42.8
40.2

62.7
28.3
63.9
45.1
47.9
46.0

68.2
35.6
73.0
52.3
50.5
51.7

80,4
42.8
82.2
53.2
58.2
54.9

86.7
58.6
91.5
67.6
64.0
66.4

95.3
71.7
97.7
75.2
71.9
74.1

93.1
78.4
96.4
84.3
76.1
81.6

95.0
86.0
96.8
90.5
88.9
89.9

98.1
93.0
99.0
94.8
94.0
94.5

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

99.8
108.5
100.7
108.7
103.6
107.0

99.1
119.0
99.3
120.0
108.5
116.2

98.8
130.8
96.2
132.4
r 117.6
127.4

( ')
( ')
( 1)
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )

<’ )
(’ )
(' )
( ')
(’ )

66.3
36.3
742
54.7
54.6
54.7

79.9
43.0
82.6
53.8
608
56.2

85.4
58.3
91.0
68.3
63.1
66.5

94.5
70.8
96.5
74.9
70.7
73.4

91.3
77.6
95.4
85.1
75.7
81.8

94.4
85.5
96.3
90.6
90.9
90.7

97.4
92.5
98.5
95.0
95.0
95.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.4
108.2
100.5
107.8
103.8
106.4

100.4
118.7
99.1
118.2
108.3
114.8

101.0
130.7
96.2
129.4
117.3
125.2

49.5
21.5
54.1
43.4
55.1
46.8

56.5
28.8
65.2
51.0
59.4
53.4

60.1
36.7
75.1
61.1
62.0
61.3

74.6
42.9
82.3
57.4
70.3
61.2

79.2
57.6
89.9
72.7
66.0
70.7

93.1
69.1
94.2
74.2
71.6
73.4

90.9
76.4
93.9
84.1
70.4
80.1

93.5
85.5
96.3
91.4
88.5
90.6

97.7
92.4
98.3
94.6
95.1
94.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.9
108.2
100.5
107.3
104.7
106.5

102.0
118.8
99.2
116.5
105.7
113.4

101.7
131,6
r96.7
129,4
r 108.7
123.4

V)

r = revised.

101

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 •
32.

C u rren t L a b o r S tatistics: P ro d u ctivity

Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1970 80
A n n u a l ra te
Year

of change

Ite m
1970

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 ..........................................

1971

1972

1973

1974

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1 9 5 0 -8 0

1 9 6 0 -8 0

0.9
7.4
1.4
6,4
0,7
4,5

3.6
6.6
2.2
2.9
7.6
4.4

3.5
6.5
3.1
2.9
4.5
3.4

2.7
8.0
1.7
5.2
5.9
5.4

2.3
9.4
1.4
11.9
4.4
9.4

2.3
9.6
0.4
7.2
15.0
9.7

3.3
8.6
2.7
5.1
4.1
4.7

2.1
7.7
1.2
5.5
5.9
5.6

0.2
8.4
0.7
8.6
5.1
7.4

0.3
10.1
1.1
10.4
5.5
8.8

0.2
'10 2
3.0
r 10.4
'6.6
9.2

2.5
6.0
2.4
3.5
3.2
3.4

2.2
7.1
1.9
4.8
4.4
4.7

0.3
7.0
1.0
6.6
1.1
4.8

3.3
6,6
2.2
3.1
7.4
4.5

3.7
6,7
3.3
2.8
3.2
3.0

2.5
7.6
1.3
4.9
1.3
3.7

2.4
9.4
1.4
12.1
5.9
10.1

2.1
9.6
0.4
7.4
16.7
10.3

3.2
8.1
2.2
4.7
5.7
5.1

2.0
7.6
1.0
5.5
6.4
5.8

0.2
8.5
0.7
8.7
3.6
7.0

0.7
9.7
1.4
10.4
4.8
8.6

0.3
9.9
3.2
10.3
' 8.4
9.7

2.1
5.7
2.1
3.5
3.1
3.4

1.9
6.8
1.6
4,8
4.2
4.6

0.4
6.8
0.8
6.3
0.5
4.4

4.8
6.5
2.1
1.6
7.4
3.5

3.0
5.8
2.5
2.8
2.7
2.8

2.6
7.7
1.4
4.9
1.5
3.8

3.4
9.7
1.1
13.6
7.1
11.4

3.4
10.1
0.9
6.5
20.1
10.9

3.2
8.2
2.3
4.9
4.6
4.8

2,7
8.1
1.5
5.3
5.2
5.2

0.4
8,2
0.5
7.8
3.8
6.4

0.0
9.7
1.4
9.7
4.4
7.9

0.6
10.1
3.0
9.5
8.3
9.1

(' )
(' )
(' )
(' )
(' )
(' )

2.1
6.7
1.5
4.6
3.8
4.3

- 0.2
6.8
0.8
7.0
-2.5
4.3

6.1
6.1
1.8

5.0
5.4
2.0
0.3
0.8
0.5

5.4
7.2
0.9
1,7
3.3
0.3

2.4
10.6
0.3
13.3
-1.8
9.0

2.9
11.9
2.5
8.8
25.9
13.1

4.4
8.0
2.1
3.4
7,4
4.6

2.4
8.3
1.7
5.7
5.2
5.6

0.9
8.2
0.5
7.3
4.7
6.5

1.1
9.8
1.3
8.6
0.9
6.4

0.3
10.7
2.5
111.0
r2.9
8.8

2.6
5.6
2.0
2.9
'2.1
' 2.7

2.7
6.7
1.5
3.8
'2.7
'3.5

0.0
11.2
3.1

' Not available.

33.

1975

r = revised.

Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted

(1977 = 1 0 0 ]
Q u a r te r ly in d e x e s

A nnual
It e m

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.............. ......................................
' Not available.

102

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

averag e

1979

1980

1981

1979

1980

I

II

III

IV

I

II

III

99.5
119.3
99.6
119.9
110.9
116.9

99.3
'131.5
'96.7
'132.4
'118.3
127.6

99.7
115.0
100.6
115.4
109.6
113.4

99.7
118.1
100.3
118.5
110.4
115.8

99.4
120.7
99.2
121.4
111.5
118.1

99.1
123.2
98.0
124.3
112.2
120.2

99.5
126,4
96.7
127.0
115.2
123.0

99.1
130.1
96.5
131.3
116.0
126.1

99.4
133.1
96.9
133,9
119.7
129.1

99.1
135.9
96.0
137.0
122.7
132.2

100.3
139.7
96.1
139.4
127.6
135.4

'101.1
143.2
96.8
'141.6
'129.3
'137.5

p 100.7
p 146.4
p 96.3
p 145.5
p 131.5
p 140.7

99.1
119.0
99.3
120.0
108.5
116.2

98,8
130.8
96.2
132.4
'117.6
127.4

99.5
114.9
100.4
115.4
107.1
112.6

99.1
117.7
100.0
118.7
107,7
115.1

98.9
120.2
98.8
121.5
109.2
117,4

98.8
123.0
97.8
124,4
110.1
119.7

98.9
126.0
96,4
127.4
113.9
122.9

98.2
129.4
96.0
131.8
115.1
126.3

99.0
132.3
96.3
133.6
119.2
128.8

99.0
135.4
95.6
136.8
122.0
131.9

100,0
139.1
95.7
139.1
127.8
135.3

'100.4
142.4
96.3
'141.9
' 128.7
'137.5

»99.8
p 145.6
p95.7
p 145.9
p 131.3
»141.1

100.4
118.7
99.1
116.8
118.2
112.7
99.0
114.8

101.0
130.7
96.2
129.7
129.4
130.2
90.2
125.2

100.6
114.5
100.1
112.2
113.8
107.8
105.6
111.5

100.7
117.6
99.9
115.3
116.8
111.2
100.7
113.7

100.5
120.1
98.7
118.2
119.5
114.6
97.5
115.9

99.9
122.7
97.5
121.3
122.8
117.2
92.2
118.1

100.2
125,7
96.2
124,2
125.4
120.9
95.5
121.0

100.1
129.3
95.9
129.2
129.1
129.3
83.4
124.1

101.8
132.5
96.5
131,1
130.2
133.8
89.1
126.4

101.8
135.5
95.7
134.1
133.1
136.9
92.4
129.5

103.3
139.2
95.7
136.0
134.7
139.5
106,8
132.7

' 103.9
142.3
96.2
'138.7
' 137.0
'143,6
101.2
1134.7

(’ )
<’ )
(’ )

102.0
118.8
99.2
116.5

101.7
131.6
' 96.7
129.4

101.5
114.5
100.2
112.9

102.3
118.6
100.7
115.9

102.0
119.8
98.5
117.5

102.1
122.3
97.2
119.8

102.0
125.4
95.9
122.9

' 100.7
130.0
96.4
'129.1

'100.7
133.9
97,5
'133.0

'103.2
137.3
97.0
'133.0

'104.1
140.9
96,9
'135.4

'105.1
'144.6
' 97.8
'137.5

r = revised.

IV

I

II

III

(M
C )

(’ )
(’ )
(' )
p 105.5
p 148.1
»97.3
p 140.3

34. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,
seasonally adjusted at annual rate
[1977 = 100]
Percent change from same quarter a year ago

Quarterly percent change at annual rate

1Not available.


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

III 1979
to
III 1980

IV 1979
to
IV 1980

11980
to
I 1981

II 1980
to
II 1981

III 1980
to
III 1981

p -1.9
p9.3
p -2.4
p 11.4
p6.8
p9.9

-0.6
10.1
-3.8
10.8
5.1
9.0

0.0
10.3
-2.3
10.3
7.4
9.4

-0.0
10.3
-2.0
10.3
9.3
10.0

0.7
10.5
-0.7
9.7
10.8
10.1

'2.1
10.1
0.3
'7.8
'11.5
'9.0

»1.3
»10.0
p -0.7
»8.6
p9.8
»9.0

'1.4
9.6
2.4
'8.1
r3.0
'6.5

»-2.2
p9.4
p -2.2
»11.9
p8.5
p 10.8

-1.0
9.9
-4.0
11.0
6.9
9.7

0.1
10.1
-2.5
9.9
9.1
9.6

-0.1
10.1
-2.2
9.9
10.8
10.2

1.1
10.4
-0.8
9.2
12.2
10.1

'2.2
10.0
0.2
'7.6
11.8
'8.9

»0.8
»10.1
»-0.6
»9.3
»10.2
»9.6

5.6
4.8
7.9
77.9
10.4

'2.2
'9.3
2.1
'8.4
'7.0
'12.3
-13.9
'6.2

(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
n
<’ )
<’ )
n
C)

-0.5
9.9
-3.9
12.0
10.5
16.3
-17.2
9.1

1.3
10.3
-2.2
11.0
8.9
16.8
-8.6
9.1

1.9
10.4
-1.9
10.5
8.4
16.8
0.3
9.6

3.1
10.8
-0.5
9.5
7.4
15.4
11.8
9.7

'3.8
10.1
0.3
'7.4
'6.1
'11.1
'23.3
'8.6

( 1)
( 1)
( 1)
( 1)
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )

'3.3
11.1
-0.3
'7.5

'4.1
'10.8
'3.5
'6.4

»1.4
»10.0
» -1.7
p8.4

' —1.6
9.6
-4.3
11.3

'- 1 .3
11.7
'- 1 .0
13.2

'1.1
12.2
-0.3
'11.0

'2.1
12.4
1.0
r 10.2

'4.4
'11.3
'1.4
'6.6

»4.8
»10.6
»-0.2
»5.5

II 1980
to
III 1980

III 1980
to
IV 1980

IV 1980
to
1 1981

-1.8
12.3
-0.7
14.4
2.6
10.5

1.3
9.5
1.6
8.1
13.7
9.8

-1.1
8.6
-3.8
9.8
10.2
9.9

4.6
11.8
0.4
6.9
17.2
10.0

'3.5
10.4
'3.2
'6.6
r5.3
r6.2

-2.9
11.3
-1.6
14.6
4.2
11.3

3.6
9.0
1.2
5.3
15.0
8.2

-0.2
9.8
-2.7
10.1
9.9
10.0

4.3
11.6
-0.2
7.0
20.3
11.0

-0.5
12.0
-1.0
17.0
12.6
30.6
-41.9
10.5

6.7
10.2
2.2
6.2
3.2
14.7
30.3
7.9

-

0.0

6.3
11.4

' -4.9
15.5
2.1
r 21.4

12.7
4.5
'2.7

o
o

Private business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ....................
Compensation per hour ..............................
Real compensation per hour........................
Unit labor costs ..........................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..............................
Implicit price deflator ..................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ....................
Compensation per hour ..............................
Real compensation per hour........................
Unit labor costs ..........................................
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 costs ..........................................

I11979
to
II 1980

1 1981
to
II 1981

11980
to
II 1980

9.4
-3.1
9.4
9.4
9.5
15.7
9.9
r 10.4
10.5
-2.2
r0.1

-

0.0

II 1981
to
III 1981

r = revised.

103

LABOR-MANAGEMENT DATA

Major collective bargaining data are obtained from
contracts on file at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, direct
contact with the parties, and from secondary sources. Addi­
tional detail is published in Current Wage Developments, a
monthly periodical of the Bureau. Data on work stoppages
are based on confidential responses to questionnaires mailed
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to parties involved in work
stoppages. Stoppages initially come to the attention of the
Bureau from reports of Federal and State mediation agencies,
newspapers, and union and industry publications.

Definitions
Data on wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry agree­
ments covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on wage and benefit
changes c o m b in e d apply only to those agreements covering 5,000
workers or more. F i r s t - y e a r w a g e s e t t l e m e n t s refer to pay changes go­
ing into effect within the first 12 months after the effective date of

104

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

the agreement. C h a n g e s o v e r t h e l i f e o f t h e a g r e e m e n t refer to total
agreed upon settlements (exclusive of potential cost-of-living escalator
adjustments) expressed at an average annual rate. W a g e - r a t e c h a n g e s
are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earnings, while w a g e
a n d b e n e f i t c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of total compensation.
E ffe c tiv e
w a g e -r a te
a d ju stm e n ts
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.
W o r k s t o p p a g e s 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.

35.

Wage and benefit settlements in major collective bargaining units, 1976 to date

[In percent]
Annual average

Quarterly average

Sector and measure

1979
1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981 e

1980
III

IV

1

II

III

IV

r

ir

III

Wage and benefit settlements, all industries:
First-year settlements ..................................
Annual rate over life of contract ....................

8.5
6.6

9,6
6.2

8.3
6.3

9.0
6.6

10.4
7.1

9.0
6.1

8.5
6.0

8.8
6.7

10,2
7.4

11.4
7.2

8.5
6.1

10.3
7.6

11.9
10.9

12.8
9.3

Wage rate settlements, all industries:
First-year settlements ..................................
Annual rate over life of contract....................

8.4
6.4

7.8
5.8

7.6
6.4

7.4
6.0

9.5
7.1

6.8
5.1

6.3
5.3

8.2
6.5

9.1
7.3

10.5
7.4

8.3
6.5

9.2
7.8

11.9
9.7

12.1
9.4

Manufacturing:
First-year settlements..............................
Annual rate over life of contract ..............

8.9
6.0

8.4
5.5

8.3
6.6

6.9
5.4

7.4
5.4

6.3
4.7

5.6
4.2

7.2
5.7

6.7
5.1

8.4
5.6

7.8
5.8

9.4
7.0

8.0
6.5

9.8
7.6

Nonmanufacturing (excluding construction):
First-year settlements..............................
Annual rate over life of contract ..............

8.6
7.2

8.0
5.9

8.0
6.5

7.6
6.2

9.5
6.6

9.4
6.5

7.8
7.4

9.4
7.6

10.3
8.5

9.5
5.9

8.2
6.8

8.6
7.8

11.8
9.1

10.4
8.5

Construction:
First-year settlements..............................
Annual rate over life of contract ..............

6.1
6.2

6.3
6.3

6.5
6.2

8.8
8.3

13.6
11.5

9.7
8.5

7.5
7.6

10.8
9.1

12.2
10.4

15.4
13.0

14.3
12.0

11.4
10.3

13.2
11.1

17.6
12.8

•

r=revised.

36.

E ffe c tiv e w a g e a d ju s tm e n ts g o in g into e ffe c t in m a jo r c o lle c tiv e b arg ain in g units, 1976 to d a te

[In percent]
Average annual changes

Average quarterly changes

Sector and measure

1979
1976

Total effective wage rate adjustment, all industries ..........
Change resulting from —
Current settlement......................................
Prior settlement................................
Escalator provision ..................................
Manufacturing ..........................................
Nonmanufacturing ....................
N ote :

1977

1978

1980

1981 p

1980
III

IV

1

II

III

IV

I

II

III

8.1

8.0

8.2

9.1

9.9

3.3

1.6

1.6

3.3

3.5

1.3

1.2

2.8

30

3.2
3.2
1.6

3.0
3.2
1.7

2.0
3.7
2.4

3.0
3.0
3.1

3.6
3.5
2.8

1.0
1.0
1.2

.5
.4
.7

.4
.5
.7

1.0
1.4
.8

1.7
1.2
.7

.5
.3
.6

.1
.6
.6

r 1.0
r 1.3
r .6

.5
1.5
1.0

8.5
7.7

8.4
7.6

8.6
7.9

9.6
8.8

10.2
9.7

3.2
3.4

2.4
1.0

2.0
1.3

3,4
3.2

2.9
4.0

1.7
1.1

r 1.5
r 1.0

r 1.8
f 3.6

2.6
3.3

Because of rounding and compounding, the sums of individual items may not equal totals.


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

1979

r = revised.

105

37.

W ork s to p p a g e s , 1947 to d ate
Number of stoppages
Month and year

Beginning in
month or year

In effect
during month

Workers involved
Beginning in
month or year
(thousands)

Days idle

In effect
during month
(thousands)

(thousands)

Percent of
estimated
working time

1947 .................................................
1948 ...................................
1949 ......................................................................
1950 ......................................................................

3693
3419
3606
4,843

2 170
1960
3,030
2410

34 600
34 100
50 500
38800

30
28
44
33

1951 ....................................
1952 ......................................................................
1953 ......................................................................
1954 .................................................................
1955 ........................................

4737
5,117
5091
3468
4320

2220
3540
2400
1530
2650

22 900
59 100
28300
22600
28 200

18
48
22
18
22

1956 ...............................................................
1957 ....................................................
1958 ......................................................................
1959 ......................................................................
1960 ......................................................................

3,825
3.673
3,694
3,708
3,333

1900
1390
2060
1880
1,320

33 100
16500
23900
69000
19 100

24
12
18
50
14

1961 ......................................................
1962 ........................
1963 ......................................................................
1964 ......................................................................
1965 ......................................................................

3,367
3614
3,362
3,655
3963

1450
1230
941
1640
1,550

16300
18600
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
2649
2481
3305

25 400
42 100
49018
42 869
66414

15
25
28
24
37

1971 ......................................................................
1972 ....................................
1973 .......................................................
1974 ......................................................................
1975 ......................................................................

5,138
5,010
5,353
6,074
5,031

3,280
1714
2251
2,778
1746

47,589
27 066
27 948
47 991
31,237

26
15
14
24
16

1976 ......................................................................
1977 ......................................................................
1978 .................................................................
1979 ......................................................................

5,648
5.506
4230
4,827

2,420
2,040
1623
1,727

37 859
35,822
36922
34,754

19
17
17
15

3,576
2,530
1,440
1,228
614
647
1,419
5,117
5,857
3,891
2,015
' 1,775
1,468

.18
.12
09
.06
03
04
.07
.25

1980:

1981 p:

r

September....................................................
October......................................................................
November ..................................................................
December ..................................................................
January ......................................................................
February ....................................................................
March ........................................................................
April............................................................................
M ay............................................................................
June ..........................................................................
J u ly ............................................................................
August........................................................................
September..................................................................

- revised


106
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

436
349
205
90
253
347
314
371
473
421
391
310
358

813
722
532
380
297
517
545
560

153
90
53
19
50
90
271

688

152
186
127
'72
47

682
659
596
565

101

289
224
126
77
68

136
336
273
383
499
190
1148
109

.31
.19
.10

'.09
.07

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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Index of Volume 104
January 1981 through December 1981

INDEX OF VOLUME 104
JANUARY 1981 THROUGH DECEMBER 1981

ABSENTEEISM

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (See also Arbitration.)

Absences from work among full-time employees. 1981 Mar. 68-70.
Employed but not at work: a review of unpaid absences. 1981 Nov. 18
- 22.

Bargaining calendar will be heavy in 1982. 1981 Dec. 21-31.
British collective bargaining: a decade of reformation. 1981 July. 4043.
Role of arbitration in dispute settlement. 1981 May. 34-36.
Scheduled wage increases and cost-of-living provisions in 1981. 1981
Jan. 9-13.

ACCIDENTS (See Work injuries.)
AFL-CIO
Birth of a federation: Mr. Gompers endeavors ‘not to build a bubble.’
1981 Nov. 23-26.
Unions implementing managerial techniques. 1981 June. 3-13.
AGRICULTURE
Agricultural employment: has the decline ended? 1981 Nov. 10-16.
APPRENTICESHIP (See Education and training.)
ARBITRATION (See also Collective bargaining.)
Role of arbitration in dispute settlement. 1981 May. 34-36.

CONFERENCES AND CONVENTIONS
Association for Evolutionary Economics, Sept. 1980. 1981 Sept. 3437.
ILO conference focuses on bargaining, worker safety, rather than poli­
tics, June 1981. 1981 Oct. 44-46.
Key officer of new police union loses to coalition in close vote. 1981
Oct. 42^13.
Thirty-Third Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research
Association, September 1980. Papers from. 1981 Apr. 42-49. 1981
May. 28-36.

AUSTRALIA
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
AUSTRIA
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
AUTOMATION (See Technological change.)
BARGAINING (See Collective bargaining.)
BELGIUM
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
BENEFITS (See Supplemental benefits.)
BUDGETS
Autumn 1980 retired couple budgets increase is largest in 6 years.
1981 Nov. 45-46.
Taxes, transportation mark 6-year high in rise of autumn 1980 family
budgets. 1981 Aug. 56-58.
CANADA
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
CHILD LABOR
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
CIVIL SERVANTS (See Public employees.)
COAL MINING
Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new workers. 1981 Jan.
3-8.
Digitized108
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CONSTRUCTION
Employment created by construction expenditures. 1981 Dec. 38-44.
Labor and material requirements for commercial office building proj­
ects. 1981 May. 41-48.
Labor and material requirements for Federal building construction.
1981 Dec. 47-51.
Private rental housing abroad: dwindling supply stirs concern. 1981
Sept. 38-42.
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
CPI changes. 1981 Nov. 2.
Defining the rate of underlying inflation. 1981 Sept. 16-19.
Indexing benefits. 1981 Feb. 2.
Indexing Federal programs: the CPI and other indexes. 1981 Mar. 6065.
Inflation cross-currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981 June.
14-21.
Measuring prices. 1981 Sept. 2.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Reconciling the CPI and the PCE Deflator. 1981 Sept. 3-15.
Some proposals to improve the Consumer Price Index. 1981 Sept. 2025.
Two Consumer Price Index issues: weighting and homeownership.
1981 Mar. 58-59.
COST OF LIVING
Cost of living indexes for Americans living abroad. 1981 June. 54.
1981 Oct. 40—41.
Inflation cross-currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981 June.
14-21.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Scheduled wage increases and cost-of-living provisions in 1981. 1981
Jan. 9-13.
The 1978-80 pay guidelines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981
July. 16-21.

CURRENT POPULATION SURVEY

The 1978-80 pay guidelines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981
July. 16-21.

Can the Current Population Survey be used to identify the disabled?
1981 June. 37-38.
The CPS, work, and disability: a reply. 1981 June. 38-39.

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14—20.

Labor force activity among students, graduates, and dropouts in
1980. 1981 July. 31-33.
On-the-job training: differences by race and sex. 1981 July. 34-36.
Unions implementing managerial techniques. 1981 June. 3-13.

DISABILITY

EMPLOYMENT (See also Labor force.)

Can the Current Population Survey be used to identify the disabled?
1981 June. 37-38.
Disability payments stabilizing after era of accelerating growth. 1981
May. 17-22.
The CPS, work, and disability: a reply. 1981 June. 38-39.

Agricultural employment: has the decline ended? 1981 Nov. 11-17.
A new leading index of employment and unemployment. 1981 June.
44-47.
Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new workers. 1981 Jan.
3-8.
Employed but not at work: a review of unpaid absences. 1981 Nov.
18-22.
Employment and unemployment: a report on 1980. 1981 Feb. 4-14.
Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1981. 1981 Aug.
3-8.
Employment created by construction expenditures. 1981 Dec. 38-44.
Employment trends in energy extraction. 1981 May. 3-8.
Government employment: an era of slow growth. 1981 Oct. 19-25.
Have employment patterns in recessions changed? 1981 Feb. 15-28.
Involuntary part-time work: new information from the CPS. 1981
Feb. 70-74.
Labor and material requirements for commercial office building proj­
ects. 1981 May. 41-48.
Labor force activity among students, graduates, and dropouts in
1980. 1981 July. 31-33.
Labor pool for antibias program varies by occupation and job mar­
ket. 1981 Sept. 43-45.
Marital and family patterns of the labor force. 1981 Oct. 36-38.
Occupational employment growth through 1990. 1981 Aug. 42-55.
Occupational segregation and earnings differences by sex. 1981 Jan.
49-53.
The effect of shift work on the lives of employees. 1981 Oct. 31-35.
The employment-population ratio: its value in labor force analysis.
1981 Feb. 36-45.
The employment situation for military wives. 1981 Feb. 60-64.
The health services industry: a decade of expansion. 1981 May. 9-16.
The outlook for industry output and employment through 1990. 1981
Aug. 28-41.
The services industry: is it recession-proof? 1981 Oct. 12-18.
The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
Trade-sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.
Wives’ earnings as a factor in family net worth accumulation. 1981
Jan. 53-57.
Work experience of the population in 1979. 1981 June. 48-53.
Working mothers and their children. 1981 May. 49-54.
Youth labor force activity: alternative surveys compared. 1981 Mar.
3-17.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.

DENMARK

DISCOURAGED WORKERS
Employment and unemployment: a report on 1980. 1981 Feb. 4-14.
DISCRIMINATION (See Equal Employment Opportunity.)
EARNINGS AND WAGES
General
Dual-earner families: an annotated bibliography. 1981 Feb. 53-59.
Education, on-the-job training, and the black-white earnings gap.
1981 Apr. 28-34.
Husbands and wives as earners: an analysis of family data. 1981 Feb.
46-53.
Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession. 1981
Jan. 15-20.
Measuring wage dispersion: pay ranges reflect industry traits. 1981
Apr. 35-41.
Occupational segregation and earnings differences by sex. 1981 Jan.
49-53.
On-the-job training: differences by race and sex. 1981 July. 34—36.
Public and private pay levels: a comparison in large labor markets.
1981 July. 22-26.
Scheduled wage increases and cost-of-living provisions in 1981. 1981
Jan. 9-13.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
The Employment Cost Index in 1980: a first look at total compensa­
tion. 1981 June. 22-26.
The male-female pay gap: need for réévaluation. 1981 Apr. 42-44.
The 1978-80 pay guidelines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981
July. 16-21.
The puzzling lag in southern earnings. 1981 June. 27-36.
Wage increases in 1980. 1981 May. 55-57.
White-collar workers open 1980’s with record salary increases. 1981
Nov. 47-49.
Wives’ earnings as a factor in family net worth accumulation. 1981
Jan. 53-57.
Specified industries and occupations
Appliance repair, November 1978. 1981 Jan. 57-58.
Communications, December 1979. 1981 Sept. 45-46.
Drug manufacturing, September 1978. 1981 Jan. 59-60.
Glassware manufacturing, May 1980. 1981 Dec. 54-55.
Hospitals and nursing homes, September 1978. 1981 Jan. 58-59.
Iron and steel foundries, September 1979. 1981 Sept. 46-47.
Local transit industry, July 1980. 1981 Dec. 55-56.
Local transit industry, July 1979. 1981. July. 38-39.
Meatpacking and prepared meat products plants, May 1979. 1981
June. 53.
Wood household furniture plants, June 1979. 1981 July. 37-38.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH
Investment for productivity growth subject of new congressional
study. 1981 Oct. 38-39.
Reflections of America. 1981 June. 2.
ECONOMIC POLICIES
Microeconomic research ignored by government and industry. 1981
May. 32-34.

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

ENERGY
Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new workers. 1981 Jan.
3-8.
Employment trends in energy extraction. 1981 May. 3-8.
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Education, on-the-job training, and the black-white earnings gap.
1981 Apr. 28-34.
Estimating the demographic mix of the available labor force. 1981
Apr. 50-57.
Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession. 1981
Jan. 15-20.
Sexual harassment: implications for employer liability. 1981 Apr. 4547.
Social relations, productivity, and employer discrimination. 1981 Apr.
47-49.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
The male-female pay gap: need for réévaluation. 1981 Apr. 42-44.

109

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Index of Volume 104
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES (See Public employees.)
FOREIGN NATIONALS
Do foreign-owned U.S. firms practice unconventional labor relations?
1981 Jan. 44-48.
FRANCE
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14—20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981. Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
GERMANY
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.

Indexing benefits. 1981 Feb. 2.
Indexing Federal programs: the CPI and other indexes. 1981 Mar. 60
-65.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Reconciling the CPI and the PCE Deflator. 1981 Sept. 3-15.
Some proposals to improve the Consumer Price Index. 1981 Sept. 2025.
The Employment Cost Index in 1980: a first look at total compensa­
tion. 1981 June. 22-26.
Two Consumer Price Index issues: weighting and homeownership.
1981 Mar. 58-59.
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (See Labor management relations.)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION
Thirty-Third Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research
Association, September 1980. Papers from. 1981 Apr. 42^49. 1981
May. 28-36.
INFLATION (See also Prices.)

GUESTWORKERS

Defining the rate of underlying inflation. 1981 Sept. 16-19.
Inflation and early retirement: recent longitudinal findings. 1981 July.
27-30.
Inflation cross-currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981
June. 14-21.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
The 1978-80 pay guidelines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981
July. 16-21.
Two Consumer Price Index issues: weighting and homeownership.
1981 Mar. 58-59.

Estimating the propensity of guest workers to leave. 1981 May. 37^-0.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

HEALTH AND SAFETY

Trade-sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.

GOVERNMENT WORKERS (See Public employees.)
GREAT BRITAIN (See United Kingdom.)
GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT
The U.S. economy through 1990— an update. 1981 Aug. 18-27.

Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession. 1981
Jan. 15-20.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
HEALTH INSURANCE PLANS
Health insurance. 1981 Oct. 2.
Is employer-sponsored life insurance declining relative to other bene­
fits? 1981 Sept. 31-33.
Workers’ compensation insurance: recent trends in employer costs.
1981 Mar. 45-50.
HOSPITALS
The health services industry: a decade of expansion. 1981 May. 9-16.
HOURS OF WORK
Absences from work among full-time employees. 1981 Mar. 68-70.
Labor force activity among students, graduates, and dropouts in
1980. 1981 July. 31-33.
Productivity drops, output and hours rise during the fourth quarter.
1981 June. 40-43.
Response to recession: reduce hours or jobs? 1981 Oct. 3-11.

The effect of shift work on the lives of employees. 1981 Oct. 31-35.
HOUSING (See Construction.)
IMMIGRATION

INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION
ILO conferences focuses on bargaining, worker safety, rather than
politics. 1981 Oct. 44-46.
Trade Secretariats provide U.S. labor with international forum. 1981
May. 57.
ITALY
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
JAPAN
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14—20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
JOB SEEKING METHODS
BLS job cross-classification system relates information from six
sources. 1981 Nov. 40-44.
Migration of the unemployed: a relocation assistance program. 1981
Apr. 62-64.

Estimating the propensity of guestworkers to leave. 1981 May. il-AO.
What is the occupational mobility of black immigrants? 1981 Apr.
44-45.

JOB VACANCY

INCOME (See Earnings and wages.)

BLS tests feasibility of a new job openings survey. 1981 Dec.

INDEXES

LABOR COSTS (See Unit labor cost.)

A new leading index of employment and unemployment. 1981 June.
44-47.
BLS develops measure of job risk by occupation. 1981 Oct. 26-30.
Cost of living indexes for Americans living abroad. 1981 June. 54.
1981 Oct. 40-41.
CPI changes. 1981 Nov. 2.
Federal agencies updating base year of indexes to 1977. 1981 Feb.
75-76.
Digitized110
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

LABOR FORCE
Agricultural employment: has the decline ended? 1981 Nov. 11-17.
Can the Current Population Survey be used to identify the disabled?
1981 June. 37-38.
Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new workers. 1981 Jan.
3-8.
Dual-earner families: an annotated bibliography. 1981 Feb. 53-59.

Employment and unemployment: a report on 1980. 1981 Feb. 4-14.
Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1981. 1981 Aug.
3-8.
Employment created by construction expenditures. 1981 Dec. 38-44.
Estimating the demographic mix of the available labor force. 1981
Apr. 50-57.
Husbands and wives as earners: an analysis of family data. 1981 Feb.
46- 53.
Involuntary part-time work: new information from the CPS. 1981
Feb. 70-74.
Labor force activity among students, graduates, and dropouts in
1980. 1981 July. 31-33.
Marital and family patterns of the labor force. 1981 Oct. 36-38.
Occupational segregation and earnings differences by sex. 1981 Jan.
49-53.
The CPS, work, and disability: a reply. 1981 June. 38-39.
The employment-population ratio: its value in labor force analysis.
1981 Feb. 36-45.
The employment situation for military wives. 1981 Feb. 60-64.
The health services industry: a decade of expansion. 1981 May. 9-16.
The services industry: is it recession-proof? 1981 Oct. 12-18.
The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
Wives’ earnings as a factor in family net worth accumulation. 1981
Jan. 53-57.
Work experience of the population in 1979. 1981 June. 48-53.
Working mothers and their children. 1981 May. 49-54.
Working wives and mothers: what happens to family life? 1981 Sept.
26-30.
Youth labor force activity: alternative surveys compared. 1981 Mar.
3-17.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
LABOR HISTORY
Birth of a federation: Mr. Gompers endeavors ‘not to build a bubble.’
1981 Nov. 23-26.
LABOR LAW
Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1979-80. 1981
Apr. 13-22.
Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in 1980. 1981 Jan.
35-39.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
The job safety law of 1970: its passage was perilous. 1981 Mar. 1824.
Workers’ compensation in 1980: summary of major enactments. 1981
Mar. 51-57.

LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
Birth of a federation: Mr. Gompers endeavors ‘not to build a bubble.’
1981 Nov. 23-26.
Do foreign-owned U.S. firms practice unconventional labor relations?
1981 Jan. 44-48.
Key officer of new police union loses to coalition in close vote. 1981
Oct. 42-43.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
Unions implementing managerial techniques. 1981 June. 3-13.
LABOR REQUIREMENTS
Employment created by construction expenditures. 1981 Dec. 38-44.
Labor and material requirements for Federal building construction.
1981 Dec. 47-51.
MANUFACTURING
Cyclical behavior of productivity in the machine tool industry. 1981
Nov. 27-34.
Measuring wage dispersion: pay ranges reflect industry traits. 1981
Apr. 35-41.
Trade-sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.
Transformer industry productivity slows. 1981 Nov. 35-39.
MINORITY WORKERS
Education, on-the-job training, and the black-white, earnings gap.
1981 Apr. 28-34.
Estimating the demographic mix of the available labor force. 1981
Apr. 50-57.
On-the-job training: differences by race and sex. 1981 July. 34-36.
Social relations, productivity, and employer discrimination. 1981 Apr.
47-49.
The puzzling lag in southern earnings. 1981 June. 27-36.
Trade-sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.
What is the occupational mobility of black immigrants? 1981 Apr.
44-45.
MOBILITY
Migration of the unemployed: a relocation assistance program. 1981
Apr. 62-64.
What is the occupational mobility of black immigrants? 1981 Apr.
44-45.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1979-80. 1981
Apr. 13-22.

LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

NEGATIVE INCOME TAX

Bargaining calendar will be heavy in 1982. 1981 Dec. 21-31.
British collective bargaining: a decade of reformation. 1981 July. 4043.
Do foreign-owned U.S. firms practice unconventional labor relations?
1981 Jan. 44-48.
Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession. 1981
Jan. 15-20.
Microeconomic research ignored by government and industry. 1981
May. 32-34.
Social relations, productivity, and employer discrimination. 1981 Apr.
47- 49.

The negative income tax: would it discourage work? 1981 Apr. 23-27.

LABOR MARKET
Estimating the demographic mix of the available labor force. 1981
Apr. 50-57.
Labor pool for antibias program varies by occupation and job mar­
ket. 1981 Sept. 43-45.
Public and private pay levels: a comparison in large labor markets.
1981 July. 22-26.
LABOR MOVEMENT THEORY
Labor movement theory and the institutional setting. 1981 Sept. 34—
37.

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

NETHERLANDS, THE
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT
Injuries at work are fewer among older employees. 1981 Mar. 30-34.
The job safety law of 1970: its passage was perilous. 1981 Mar. 1824.
Understanding statistics on occupational illnesses. 1981 Mar. 25-29.
Using statistics to manage a State safety and health program. 1981
Mar. 42-44.
Work-related amputations by type and prevalence. 1981. Mar. 35-41.
Workers’ compensation insurance: recent trends in employer costs.
1981 Mar. 45-50.
OCCUPATIONS
BLS develops measure of job risk by occupation. 1981 Oct. 26-30.
BLS job cross-classification system relates information from six
sources. 1981 Nov. 40-44.
Dual-earner families: an annotated bibliography. 1981 Feb. 53-59.

Ill

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Index o f Volume 104
Husbands and wives as earners: an analysis of family data. 1981 Feb.
46-53.
Occupational employment growth through 1990. 1981 Aug. 42-55.
Occupational segregation and earnings differences by sex. 1981 Jan.
49-53.
OHIO
Using statistics to manage a State safety and health program. 1981
Mar. 42-44.
OLDER WORKERS

PROJECTIONS
New economic projections through 1990— an overview. 1981 Aug. 917.
Occupational employment growth through 1990. 1981 Aug. 42-55.
The U.S. economy through 1990— an update. 1981 Aug. 18-27.
The outlook for industry output and employment through 1990. 1981
Aug. 28^11.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES

Reconciling the CPI and the PCE Deflator. 1981 Sept. 3-15.

Government employment: an era of slow growth. 1981 Oct. 19-25.
Public and private pay levels: a comparison in large labor markets.
1981 July. 22-26.
Public sector data. 1981 Jan. 2.
White-collar workers open 1980’s with record salary increases. 1981
Nov. 47-49.

PENSIONS (See also Supplemental benefits.)

RECESSION

Indexing benefits. 1981 Feb. 2.
Inflation and early retirement: recent longitudinal findings. 1981 July.
27-30.

Have employment patterns in recessions changed? 1981 Feb. 15-28.
Response to recession: reduce hours or jobs? 1981 Oct. 3-11.
The services industry: is it recession-proof? 1981 Oct. 12-18.

PLANT SHUTDOWN

RETIREMENT (See also Pensions.)

Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession. 1981
Jan. 15-20.

Indexing benefits. 1981 Feb. 2.
Inflation and early retirement: recent longitudinal findings. 1981 July.
27-30.
Autumn 1980 retired couple budgets increase is largest in 6 years.
1981 Nov. 45-46.

Injuries at work are fewer among older employees. 1981 Mar. 30-34.
PCE DEFLATOR (Implicit Price Deflator for Personal Consumption
Expenditures)

POPULATION
The employment-population ratio: its value in labor force analysis.
1981 Feb. 36-45.
POVERTY
Involuntary part-time work: new information from the CPS. 1981
Feb. 70-74.
The negative income tax: would it discourage work? 1981 Apr. 23-27.
PRICES
Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation and recession.
1981 Jan. 15-20.
Inflation cross-currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981
June. 14—21.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Autumn 1980 retired couple budgets increase is largest in 6 years.
1981 Nov. 45-46.
PRODUCER PRICE INDEX
Defining the rate of underlying inflation. 1981 Sept. 16-19.
Inflation cross-currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981
June. 14—21.
Price changes in 1980: double-digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
PRODUCTIVITY
Cyclical behavior of productivity in the machine tool industry. 1981
Nov. 27-34.
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Investment for productivity growth subject of new congressional
study. 1981 Oct. 38-39.
Labor and material requirements for commercial office building proj­
ects. 1981 May. 41-48.
Long nonfarm productivity slide ends during the third quarter. 1981
Mar. 66—67.
Pilot study measures productivity of state, local electric utilities.
1981 Dec. 45—47.
Productivity drops, output and hours rise during the fourth quarter.
1981 June. 40-43.
Productivity slows or drops in 1979 in more than half of industries
measured. 1981 Apr. 58-61.
Productivity trends for intercity bus carriers. 1981 May. 23-27.
Productivity trends in the ball and roller bearing industry. 1981 Jan.
40-43.
The outlook for industry output and employment through 1990. 1981
Aug. 28-41.
Transformer industry productivity slows. 1981 Nov. 35-39.
Digitized112
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

SAFETY (See Health and safety.)
SALARIES (See Earnings and wages.)
SOCIAL SECURITY
The growth of fringe benefits: implications for social security. 1981
Nov. 3-10.
STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS (SMSA)
SMSA expansion. 1981 Aug. 2.
STATE GOVERNMENT
Government employment: an era of slow growth. 1981 Oct. 19-25.
Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in 1980. 1981 Jan.
35-39.
Pilot study measures productivity of state, local electric utilities. 1981
Dec. 45-47.
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
STATISTICS
Federal agencies updating base year of indexes to 1977. 1981 Feb.
75-76.
New benchmarks. 1981 July. 2.
Reflections of America. 1981 June. 2.
Release policy. 1981 Mar. 2.
Statistical integrity. 1981 Apr. 2.
The employment-population ratio: its value in labor force analysis.
1981 Feb. 36-45.
Understanding statistics on occupational illnesses. 1981 Mar. 25-29.
Using statistics to manage a State safety and health program. 1981
Mar. 42-44.
SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS
Is employer-sponsored life insurance declining relative to other bene­
fits? 1981 Sept. 31-33.
Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in 1980. 1981 Jan.
35-39.
Public and private pay levels: a comparison in large labor markets.
1981 July. 22-26.
The Employment Cost Index in 1980: a first look at total compensa­
tion. 1981 June. 22-26.
The growth of fringe benefits: implications for social security. 1981
Nov. 3-10.

Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1979-80. 1981
Apr. 13-22.

Do foreign-owned U.S. firms practice unconventional labor relations?
1981 Jan. 44-48.
The lack of female union leaders: a look at some reasons. 1981 May.
30-32.

SURVEY METHODS

UNION REPRESENTATION

New benchmarks. 1981 July. 2.
Release policy. 1981 Mar. 2.
SMSA expansion. 1981 Aug. 2.
Youth labor force activity: alternative surveys compared. 1981 Mar.
3-17.

British collective bargaining: a decade of reformation. 1981 July. 4043.

SUPREME COURT

SWEDEN
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.

UNIONS (See Labor organizations.)
UNIT LABOR COST
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Long nonfarm productivity slide ends during the third quarter. 1981
Mar. 66-67.
Productivity drops, output and hours rise during the fourth quarter.
1981 June. 40-43.
UNITED KINGDOM

TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE
Productivity trends in the ball and roller bearing industry. 1981 Jan.
40-43.
THE NETHERLANDS (See Netherlands, The)
TRADE READJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE
Trade sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.
TRADE UNIONISM
Labor movement theory and the institutional setting. 1981 Sept. 3437.

British collective bargaining: a decade of reformation. 1981 July. 4043.
International comparisons of trends in productivity and labor costs.
1981 Dec. 14-20.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
WAGES (See Earnings and wages.)
WELFARE REFORM
The negative income tax: would it discourage work? 1981 Apr. 23-27.
WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS

TRADE UNIONS (See Labor organizations.)

White-collar workers open 1980’s with record salary increases. 1981
Nov. 47-49.

TRAINING (See Education and training.)

WHOLESALE PRICE INDEX (See Producer Price Index.)

TRANSPORTATION

WOMEN

Productivity trends for intercity bus carriers. 1981 May. 23-27.

Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new workers. 1981 Jan.
3-8.
Dual-earner families: an annotated bibliography. 1981 Feb. 53-59.
Husbands and wives as earners: an analysis of family data. 1981 Feb.
46-53.
Occupational segregation and earnings differences by sex. 1981 Jan.
49-53.
On-the-job training: differences by race and sex. 1981 July. 34-36.
The employment situation for military wives. 1981 Feb. 60-64.
The lack of female union leaders: a look at some reasons. 1981 May.
30-32.
The male-female pay gap: need for revaluation. 1981 Apr. 42-44.
Trade-sensitive employment: who are the affected workers? 1981 Feb.
29-35.
Wives’ earnings as a factor in family net worth accumulation. 1981
Jan. 53-57.
Working mothers and their children. 1981 May. 49-54.
Working wives and mothers: what happens to family life? 1981 Sept.
26-30.

UNEMPLOYMENT (See also Employment; Labor force.)
A new leading index of employment and unemployment. 1981 June.
44-47.
Employment and unemployment: a report on 1980, 1981 Feb. 4—14.
Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1981. 1981 Aug.
3-8.
Have employment patterns in recessions changed? 1981 Feb. 15-28.
Labor force activity among students, graduates, and dropouts in
1980. 1981 July. 31-33.
Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in 1980. 1981 Jan.
35-39.
Migration of the unemployed: a relocation assistance program. 1981
Apr. 62-64.
Response to recession: reduce hours or jobs? 1981 Oct. 3-11.
The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
Unemployment, labor force trends, and layoff practices in 10
countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Work experience of the population in 1979. 1981 June. 48-53.
Youth labor force activity: alternative surveys compared. 1981 Mar.
3-17.
Youth unemployment: an international perspective. 1981 July. 3-15.
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in 1980. 1981 Jan.
35-39.
The unemployment situation for military wives. 1981 Feb. 60-64.
The unemployment insurance system: its financial structure. 1981
Dec. 32-37.
UNION MEMBERSHIP AND ELECTIONS
British collective bargaining: a decade of reformation. 1981 July. 4043.

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

WORK EXPERIENCE
Involuntary part-time work: new information from the CPS. 1981
Feb. 70-74.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
Disability payments stabilizing after era of accelerating growth. 1981
May. 17-22.
The Employment Cost Index in 1980: a first look at total compensa­
tion. 1981 June. 22-26.
The job safety law of 1970: its passage was perilous. 1981 Mar. 1824.
Workers’ compensation in 1980: summary of major enactments. 1981
Mar. 51-57.
Workers’ compensation insurance: recent trends in employer costs.
1981 Mar. 45-50.

113

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Index o f Volume 104
WORKER PRIVACY
State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan. 21-34.
WORK INJURIES AND ILLNESSES
BLS develops measure of job risk by occupation. 1981 Oct. 26-30.
Injuries at work are fewer among older employees. 1981 Mar. 30-34.
Understanding statistics on occupational illnesses. 1981 Mar. 25-29.
Using statistics to manage a State safety and health program. 1981
Mar. 42-44.
Work-related amputations by type and prevalence. 1981 Mar. 35-41.
Work, stress, and individual well-being. 1981 May. 28-30.
Workers’ compensation insurance: recent trends in employer costs.
1981 Mar. 45-50.
WORK LIFE
The effect of shift work on the lives of employees. 1981 Oct. 31-35.
YOUTH (See Labor force.)
DEPARTMENTS
Anatomy of Price Change. March issue.
Book Reviews. Each issue.
Communications. January, April, June, July issues.
Conference Papers. April, May, July, September issues.
Conventions. October issue.
Current Labor Statistics. Each issue.
Developments in Industrial Relations. Each issue.
Family Budgets. August, November issues.
Foreign Labor Developments. July, September, October issues.
Labor Month in Review. Each issue.
Major Agreements Expiring. Each issue.
Productivity Reports. March, April, May, June, December issues.
Research Summaries. Each issue except February, March, August.
Special Labor Force Reports— Summaries. March, May, June issues.
Technical Note. February, June, November issues.
BOOK REVIEWS (listed by author of book)
Angelini, Anthony, Maximo Eng, Francis A. Lees. International
Lending and the Euromarkets. 1981 Nov. 57.
Aronson, Jonathan David, ed. Debt and the Less Developed Countries.
1981 Nov. 57.
Break, George F. Financing Government in a Federal System. 1981
Dec. 62.
Cagan, Phillip. Persistent Inflation: Historical and Policy Essays. 1981
Jan. 62-63.
Chen, Yung-Ping. Social Security in a Changing Society: An Introduc­
tion to Programs, Concepts and Issues. 1981 Sept. 54.
Davidson, James Dale. The Squeeze. 1981 Aug. 64-65.
Degler, Carl N. At Odds: Women and the Family in America from the
Revolution to the Present. 1981 Oct. 52-54.
Derthick, Martha. Policymaking for Social Security. 1981 Feb. 81-82.
Destler, I. M. Making Foreign Economic Policy. 1981 Apr. 72-73.
Dublin, Thomas. Women at Work: The Transformation o f Work and
Community in Lowell, Massachusetts, 1826-1860. 1981 Apr. 70-72.
Dunlop, John T., ed. Business and Public Policy. 1981 July. 50-51.
Eng, Maximo, Anthony Angelini, Francis A. Lees. International
Lending and the Euromarkets. 1981 Nov. 57.
Eichner, Alfred S. A Guide to Post-Keynesian Economics. 1981 Mar.
76-77.
Foner, Philip S. History o f the Labor Movement in the United States:
Vol. V, The AFL in the Progressive Era, 1910-1915. 1981 Mar. 7778.
Handy, L. J. Wages policy in the British Coalmining Industry: A Study
of National Wage Bargaining. 1981 Dec.
Herman, E. Edward and Alfred Kuhn. Collective Bargaining and La­
bor Relations. 1981 Nov. 56-57.
Jones, Landon Y. Great Expectations: America and the Baby Boom
Generation. 1981 June. 61-62.
Kahn, Alfred J. and Shelia B. Kamerman. Child Care, Family Bene­
fits, and Working Parents: A Study o f Comparative Policy. 1981 Sept.
53-54.
Kamerman, Shelia B. and Alfred J. Kahn. Child Care, Family Bene­

114FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

fits, and Working Parents: A Study o f Comparative Policy. 1981 Sept.
53-54.
Kochan, Thomas A. Collective Bargaining and Industrial Relations:
From Theory to Policy and Practice. 1981 Aug. 63-64.
Kuhn, Alfred and E. Edward Herman. Collective Bargaining and La­
bor Relations. 1981 Nov. 56-57.
Lees, Francis A., Anthony Angelini, Maximo Eng. International
Lending and the Euromarkets. 1981 Nov. 57.
Levison, Andrew. The Full Employment Alternative. 1981 July. 51.
Lewin, Leif. Governing Trade Unions in Sweden. 1981 Apr. 73-74.
Newton, Jan M. and John A. Young. Capitalism and Human Obsoles­
cence: Corporate Control Versus Individual Survival in Rural Ameri­
ca. 1981 Nov. 55.
Osterman, Paul. Getting Started: The Youth Labor Market. 1981 July.
52-53.
Owen, John D. Working Hours: An Economic Analysis. 1981 Feb. 8081.
Schlozman, Kay Lehman and Sidney Verba. Injury to Insult: Unem­
ployment, Class, and Political Response. 1981 Jan. 63-64.
Sheppard, C. Stewart and Donald C. Carroll, eds. Working in the
Twenty-First Century. 1981 Dec. 63.
Stein, Bruno. Social Security and Pensions in Transition: Understanding
the Americ'an Retirement System. 1981 Jan. 64-65.
Taft, Philip. Organizing Dixie: Alabama Workers in the Industrial Era.
Edited by Gary M. Fink. 1981 Oct. 51-52.
Task Force on Education and Employment. Education for Employ­
ment: Knowledge for Action. 1981 May. 63-65.
Tentler, Leslie Woodcock. Wage-Earning Women: Industrial Work
and Family Life in the United States, 1900-1930. 1981 Apr. 70-72.
Thurow, Lester. The Zero-Sum Society. 1981 June. 59-61.
Verba, Sidney and Kay Lehman Schlozman. Injury to Insult: Unem­
ployment, Class, and Political Response. 1981 Jan. 63-64.
Wallace, Phillis A. Black Women in the Labor Force. 1981 May. 6263.
Young, John A. and Jan M. Newton. Capitalism and Human Obsoles­
cence: Corporate Control Versus Individual Survival in Rural Ameri­
ca. 1981 Nov. 55.
AUTHORS
Aho, C. Michael and James A. Orr. Trade-sensitive employment: who
are the affected workers? 1981 Feb. 29-35.
Alderman, Karen Cleary. Book review. 1981 Sept. 53-54.
Alvarez, Donato and Patricia Capdevielle. International comparisons
of trends in productivity and labor costs. 1981 Dec. 14-20.
Andrews, Mary Anne and David J. Schlein. Bargaining calendar will
be heavy in 1982. 1981 Dec. 21-31.
Atwater, Donald M., Richard J. Niehaus, James A. Sheridan. Labor
pool for anti-bias program varies by occupation and job market.
1981 Sept. 43-45.
Ayres, Mary Ellen. Book review. 1981 Oct. 52-54.
Ayres, Ronald M. Book review. 1981 Nov. 55.
Ball, Robert. Employment created by construction expenditures. 1981
Dec. 38-44.
Bannon, Robert. Dual-earner families: an annotated bibliography.
1981 Feb. 53-59.
Barbash, Jack. Labor movement theory and the institutional setting.
1981 Sept. 34-37.
Barsky. Carl B. Occupational wage variation in wood household fur­
niture plants. 1981 July. 37-39.
-------- and Martin E. Personick. Measuring wage dispersion: pay
ranges reflect industry traits. 1981 Apr. 35-41.
Baxter, Neale. Book review. 1981 May. 63-65.
Bednarzik, Robert W. Book review. 1981 Feb. 80-81.
-------- and Diane N. Westcott. Employment and unemployment: a
report on 1980. 1981 Feb. 4—14.
Belous, Richard S. and Sar A. Levitan. Working wives and mothers:
what happens to family life? 1981 Sept. 26-30.
Bergmann, Barbara R. and William Darity, Jr. Social relations, pro­
ductivity, and employer discrimination. 1981 Apr. 47-49.
Bingham, Barbara. Labor and material requirements for commercial
office building projects. 1981 May. 41-48.

Blostin, Allan P. Is employer-sponsored life insurance declining rela­
tive to other benefits? 1981 Sept. 31-33.
Bohning, W. R. Estimating the propensity of guestworkers to leave.
1981 May. 37-40.
Borum, Joan D. Wage increases in 1980 outpaced by inflation. 1981
May. 55-57.
Bowers, Norman. Have employment patterns in recessions changed?
1981 Feb. 15-28.
------- -Y outh labor force activity: alternative surveys compared. 1981
Mar. 3-17.
Brand, Horst and John Duke. Cyclical behavior of productivity in the
machine tool industry. 1981 Nov. 27-34.
Brown, William A. British collective bargaining: a decade of reforma­
tion. 1981 July. 40-43.
Burdetsky, Ben. Book review. 1981 Nov. 56-57.
Burton, John F., Jr. and Martin W. Elson. Workers’ compensation in­
surance: recent trends in employer costs. 1981 Mar. 45-50.
Cagan, Phillip and Geoffrey H. Moore. Some proposals to improve
the Consumer Price Index. 1981 Sept. 20-25.
Callahan, David W. Defining the rate of underlying inflation. 1981
Sept. 16-19.
-------- Andrew Clem, John Wetmore. Inflation cross-currents: energy,
food, and homeownership. 1981 June. 14-21.
-------- and Craig Howell. Price changes in 1980: double-digit infla­
tion persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Capdevielle, Patricia and Donato Alvarez. International comparisons
of trends in productivity and labor costs. 1981 Dec. 14-20.
Carey, Max L. Occupational employment growth through 1990. 1981
Aug. 42-55.
Carnes, Richard B. Productivity trends for intercity bus carriers. 1981
May. 23-27.
Chen, Yung-Ping. The growth of fringe benefits: implications for so­
cial security. 1981 Nov. 3-10.
Clem, Andrew, David W. Callahan, John Wetmore. Inflation cross­
currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981 June. 14-21.
Converse, Mary and Lucretia Dewey Tanner. The 1978-80 pay guide­
lines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981 July. 16-21.
Daly, Patricia A. Agricultural employment: has the decline ended?
1981 Nov. 11-17.
Darity, William Jr. and Barbara R. Bergmann. Social relations, pro­
ductivity, and employer discrimination. 1981 Apr. 47-49.
DeFreitas, Gregory E. What is the occupational mobility of black im­
migrants? 1981 Apr. 44—45.
Devens, Richard M., Jr. Book review. 1981 Apr. 72-73.
-------- Book review. 1981 Nov. 57.
Douty, H. M. Book review. 1981 Dec. 63.
Duke, John and Horst Brand. Cyclical behavior of productivity in the
machine tool industry. 1981 Nov. 27-34.
Elson, Martin W. and John F. Burton, Jr. Workers’ compensation in­
surance: recent trends in employer costs. 1981 Mar. 45-50.
Farber, Henry S. Role of arbitration in dispute settlement. 1981 May.
34-36.
Finn, Peter. The effects of shift work on the lives of employees. 1981
Oct. 31-35.
Fisk, Donald M. Pilot study measures productivity of State, local
electric utilities. 1981 Dec. 45-47.
Ann C. Wives’ earnings as a factor in family net worth accumulation.
1981 Jan. 53-57.
Fulco, Lawrence J. Long nonfarm productivity slide ends during the
third quarter. 1981 Mar. 66-67.
---------Productivity drops, output and hours rise during the fourth
quarter. 1981 June. 40-43.
Gartaganis, Arthur J. Book review. 1981 Mar. 76-77.
Gastwirth, Joseph L. Estimating the demographic mix of the available
labor force. 1981 Apr. 50-57.
Goldberg, Joseph P. Book review. 1981 Oct. 51-52.
Goldin, Claudia. Book review. 1981 Apr. 70-72.
Gray, Lois S. Unions implementing managerial techniques. 1981 June.
3-13.
Greene, Richard. Employment trends in energy extraction. 1981 May.
3-8.

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

Greer, Charles R. and John C. Shearer. Do foreign-owned U.S. firms
practice unconventional labor relations? 1981 Jan. 44-48.
Grossman, Allyson Sherman. The employment situation for military
wives. 1981 Feb. 60-64.
Working mothers and their children. 1981 May. 49-54.
Gudza, Henry P. Book review. 1981 Mar. 77-78.
Hayghe, Howard. Husbands and wives as earners: an analysis of fam­
ily data. 1981 Feb. 46-53.
Herman, Arthur S. Productivity slows or drops in 1979 in more than
half of industries measured. 1981 Apr. 58-61.
Hilaski, Harvey J. Understanding statistics on occupational illnesses.
1981 Mar. 25-29.
Hoffman, Saul D. On-the-job training: differences by race and sex.
1981 July. 34-36.
Holloway, Thomas M. Book review. 1981 Dec. 62.
Howell, Craig and David W. Callahan. Price changes in 1980: double­
digit inflation persists. 1981 Apr. 3-12.
Howenstine, E. Jay. Private rental housing abroad: dwindling supply
stirs concern. 1981 Sept. 38-42.
Ishee, Tommy. Book review. 1981 Aug. 64-65.
Johnson, Beverly L. and Elizabeth Waldman. Marital and family pat­
terns of the labor force. 1981 Oct. 36-38.
Johnson-Dietz, Sue and Donna E. Ledgerwood. Sexual harassment:
implications for employer liability. 1981 Apr. 45-47.
Kahn, Robert L. Work, stress and individual well-being. 1981 May.
28-30.
Kaufman, Stuart Bruce. Birth of a federation: Mr. Gompers endeav­
ors ‘not to build a bubble.’ 1981 Nov. 23-26.
Keller, Richard L. and Felice Porter. Public and private pay levels: a
comparison in large labor markets. 1981 July. 22-26.
Klein, Deborah Pisetzer. Book review. 1981 June. 61-62.
Koziara, Karen S. and David A. Pierson. The lack of female union
leaders: a look at some reasons. 1981 May. 30-32.
Krislov, Joseph. Book review. 1981 Apr. 73-74.
Kutscher, Ronald E. New economic projections through 1990— an
overview. 1981 Aug. 9-17.
Ledgerwood, Donna E. and Sue Johnson-Dietz. Sexual harassment:
implications for employer liability. 1981 Apr. 45^-7.
Leon, Carol Boyd. Book review. 1981 May. 62-63.
-------- Employed but not at work: a review of unpaid absences. 1981
Nov. 18-22.
--------- The em ploym ent-population

ratio: its value in labor force

analysis. 1981 Feb. 36-45.
LeRoy, Douglas R. Scheduled wage increases and cost-of-living provi­
sions in 1981. 1981 Jan. 9-14.
Levitan, Sar A. and Richard S. Belous. Working wives and mothers:
what happens to family life? 1981 Sept. 26-30.
Linsenmayer, Tadd. ILO conference focuses on bargaining, worker
safety, rather than politics. 1981 Oct. 44-46.
Martin, Philip. Book review. 1981 June. 59-61.
MacLaury, Judson. The job safety law of 1970: its passage was peril­
ous. 1981 Mar. 18-24.
McCaffrey, David P. Work-related amputations by type and preva­
lence. 1981 Mar. 35-41.
McCollum, James K. Book review. 1981 Aug. 63-64.
Milkovich, George T. The male-female pay gap: need for réévaluation.
1981 Apr. 42-44.
Moffitt, Robert A. The negative income tax: would it discourage
work? 1981 Apr. 23-27.
Moore, Geoffrey H. A new leading index of employment and unem­
ployment. 1981 June. 44-47.
-------- and Phillip Cagan. Some proposals to improve the Consumer
Price Index. 1981 Sept. 20-25.
Mounts, Gregory J. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant deci­
sions of 1979-80. 1981 Apr. 13-22.
Moy, Joyanna and Constance Sorrentino. Unemployment, labor force
trends, and layoff practices in 10 countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Mueller, Charles F. Migration of the unemployed: a relocation assis­
tance program. 1981 Apr. 62-64.
Mullen, Mary Ann. Key officer of new police union loses to coalition
in close vote. 1981 Oct. 42-43.
Nelson, Richard R. State labor legislation enacted in 1980. 1981 Jan.
21-34.

115

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1981 • Index o f Volume 104
Niehaus, Richard J., Donald M. Atwater, James A. Sheridan. Labor
pool for antibias program varies by occupation and job market.
1981 Sept. 43-45.
Niemi, Beth T. Book review. 1981 Jan. 63-64.
Norwood, Janet L. Two Consumer Price Index issues: weighting and
homeownership. 1981 Mar. 58-59.
Olsen, John G. Labor and material requirements for Federal building
construction. 1981 Dec.
Orr, James A. and C. Michael Aho. Trade sensitive employment: who
are the affected workers? 1981 Feb. 29-35.
Oswald, Rudy A. Microeconomic research ignored by government
and industry. 1981 May. 32-34.
Otto, Phyllis Flohr. Transformer industry productivity slows. 1981
Nov. 35-39.
Padilla, Arthur. The unemployment insurance system: its financial
structure. 1981 Dec. 32-37.
Parnes, Herbert S. Inflation and early retirement: recent longitudinal
findings. 1981 July. 27-30.
Persigehl, Elmer S. and James D. York. Productivity trends in the
ball and roller bearing industry. 1981 Jan. 40-43.
Personick, Martin E. and Carl B. Barsky. Measuring wage dispersion:
pay ranges reflect industry traits. 1981 Apr. 35-41.
Personick, Valerie A. The outlook for industry output and employ­
ment through 1990. 1981 Aug. 28-41.
Pierson, David A. and Karen S. Koziara. The lack of female union
leaders: a look at some reasons. 1981 May. 30-32.
Plunkert, Lois. BLS tests feasibility of a new job openings survey.
1981 Dec. 52-53.
Porter, Felice and Richard L. Keller. Public and private pay levels: a
comparison in large labor markets. 1981 July. 22-26.
Rohrlich, George F. Book review. 1981 Sept. 54.
Rones, Philip L. Can the Current Population Survey be used to iden­
tify the disabled? 1981 June. 37-38.
-------- Response to recession: reduce hours or jobs? 1981 Oct. 3-11.
Root, Norman. Injuries at work are fewer among older employees.
1981 Mar. 30-34.
---------and Deborah Sebastian. BLS develops measure of job risk by
occupation. 1981 Oct. 26-30.
Ruben, George. Industrial relations in 1980 influenced by inflation
and recession. 1981 Jan. 15-20.
Rubin, Rose M. Book review. 1981 July. 51.
Runner, Diana. Legislative revisions of unemployment insurance in
1980. 1981 Jan. 35-39.
Rytina, Nancy F. Occupational segregation and earnings differences
by sex. 1981 Jan. 49-53.
Schlein, David J. and Mary Anne Andrews. Bargaining calendar will
be heavy in 1982. 1981 Dec. 21-31.
Sebastian, Deborah and Norman Root. BLS develops measure of job
risk by occupation. 1981 Oct. 26-30.
Saunders, Norman C., The U.S. economy through 1990— an update.
1981 Aug. 18-27.
Seidman, Bert. Book review. 1981 Jan. 64-65.
Sekscenski, Edward S. The health services industry: a decade of ex­
pansion. 1981 May. 9-16.
Shearer, John C. and Charles R. Greer. Do foreign-owned U.S. firms
practice unconventional labor relations? 1981 Jan. 44—48.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
116
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Sheridan, James A., Donald M. Atwater, Richard J. Niehaus. Labor
pool for antibias program varies by occupation and job market.
1981 Sept. 43-45.
Smith, Patricia B. The Employment Cost Index in 1980: a first look
at total compensation. 1981 June. 22-26.
Sorrentino, Constance. Youth unemployment: an international per­
spective. 1981 July. 3-15.
-------- and Joyanna Moy. Unemployment, labor force trends, and
layoff practices in 10 countries. 1981 Dec. 3-13.
Stamas, George D. The puzzling lag in southern earnings. 1981 June.
27-36.
Steinberg, Edward. Book review. 1981 Feb. 81-82.
Sunshine, Jonathan. Disability payments stabilizing after era of accel­
erating growth. 1981 May. 17-22.
Tanner, Lucretia Dewey and Mary Converse. The 1978-80 pay guide­
lines: meeting the need for flexibility. 1981 July. 16-21.
Taylor, Daniel E. Absences from work among full-time employees.
1981 Mar. 68-70.
-------- Education, on-the-job training, and the black-white earnings
gap. 1981 Apr. 28-34.
Terry, Sylvia Lazos. Involuntary part-time work: new information
from the CPS. 1981 Feb. 70-74.
-------- Work experience of the population in 1979. 1981 June. 48-52.
Thompson, John. BLS job cross-classification system relates informa­
tion from six sources. 1981 Nov. 40-44.
Tinsley, LaVerne C. Workers’ compensation in 1980: summary of ma­
jor enactments. 1981 Mar. 51-57.
Triplett, Jack E. Reconciling the CPI and the PCE Deflator. 1981
Sept. 3-15.
Tucker, John T. Government employment: an era of slow growth.
1981 Oct. 19-25.
Urquhart, Michael. Book review. 1981 July. 52-53.
---------The services industry: is it recession-proof? 1981 Oct. 12-18.
Van Auken, Kenneth G., Jr. Book review. 1981 July. 50-51.
Waldman, Elizabeth and Beverly L. Johnson. Marital and family pat­
terns of the labor force. 1981 Oct. 36-38.
Westcott, Diane N. Employment and unemployment in the first half
of 1981. 1981 Aug. 3-8.
-------- The youngest workers: 14- and 15-year olds. 1981 Feb. 65-69.
---------and Robert W. Bednarzik. Employment and unemployment: a
report on 1980. 1981 Feb. 4—14.
Westfield, Fred M. Book review. 1981 Jan. 62-63.
Wetmore, John, David W. Callahan, Andrew Clem. Inflation cross­
currents: energy, food, and homeownership. 1981 June. 14—21.
Wolfe, Barbara L. The CPS, work, and disability: a reply. 1981 June.
38-39.
Wool, Harold. Coal industry resurgence attracts variety of new work­
ers. 1981 Jan. 3-8.
Workman, Philip A. Using statistics to manage a State safety and
health program. 1981 Mar. 42-44.
York, James D. and Elmer S. Persigehl. Productivity trends in the
ball and roller bearing industry. 1981 Jan. 40-43.
Young, Anne McDougall. Labor force activity among students, grad­
uates, and dropouts in 1980. 1981 July. 31-33.

Published by the
United States Department of Agriculture
Prices Paid by Farmers1

Each month, the Agricultural Outlook
pools USDA's latest analyses of the
agricultural economy in one comprehen­
sive package. Its regular coverage
includes:

1977 = 100
160

• Commodity supply & dem and
• Farm income
• World agriculture 8c trade

110

• Food prices
• Food marketing
• Transportation 8c storage

U.S. Corn Exports
Million metric tons

• Inputs
• General economic trends
Plus in-depth special articles on topics
vital to modern U.S. agriculture.
Consumer Price Index

For a complimentary copy, write or call:

Percent change from a year earlier

Leland Scott, Managing Editor
EMS Information (MLR)
500 12th St. SW, Room 451
Washington, D.C. 20250
(202) 382-9755

Yearly subscription rate:
$30 1st class domestic
$37.50 foreign
F

M

A

M


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

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

U.S. Department ot Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington D.C. 20212

Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
Lab-441

Official Business

SECOND CLASS MAIL

Penalty for private use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED

p4

TS^oueobi»'* ’
PL

,J K

3 AI f\ T L oU 13

03166
__

¿mmmmsa&M


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

■■

„

■' ‘ '■

'

.

m m m m M
0$n

» :-iL

.'V < > * * * £

U.S. M AIL