The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
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. N orw ood, C om m issioner T h e M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w is p u b lis h e d b y th e B u re a u o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s o f th e U .S . D e p a rtm e n t o f L a b o r. C o m m u n ic a tio n s o n e d ito ria l m a tte rs s h o u ld b e a d d re s s e d to th e E d ito r-In -C h ie f, M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , B u re a u o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , W a s h in g to n , D .C . 2 0 2 1 2 . P h o n e : (2 0 2 ) 5 2 3 - 1 3 2 7 . S u b s c rip tio n p ric e p e r y e a r— $ 2 6 d o m e s tic ; $ 3 2 .5 0 fo re ig n . S in g le c o p y $ 5 , d o m e s tic ; $ 6 .2 5 , fo re ig n . S u b s c rip tio n p ric e s a n d d is trib u tio n p o lic ie s fo r th e M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w (IS S N 0 0 9 8 -1 8 1 8 ) a n d o th e r G o v e rn m e n t p u b lic a tio n s a re s e t b y th e G o v e rn m e n t P rin tin g O ffic e , an a g e n c y o f th e U .S . C o n g re s s . S e n d c o rre s p o n d e n c e o n c irc u la tio n a n d s u b s c rip tio n m a tte rs (In c lu d in g a d d re s s c h a n g e s ) to: S u p e rin te n d e n t o f D o c u m e n ts , G o v e rn m e n t P rin tin g O ffic e , W a s h in g to n , D .C . 2 0 4 0 2 M a k e c h e c k s p a y a b le to S u p e rin te n d e n t o f D o c u m e n ts . T h e S e c re ta ry o f L a b o r h a s d e te rm in e d th a t th e p u b lic a tio n o f th is p e rio d ic a l is n e c e s s a ry in th e tra n s a c tio n o f th e p u b lic b u s in e s s re q u ire d by la w o f th is D e p a rtm e n t. U s e o f fu n d s fo r p rin tin g th is p e rio d ic a l h a s b e e n a p p ro v e d b y th e D ire c to r o f th e O ffic e o f M a n a g e m e n t a n d B u d g e t th ro u g h A p ril 3 0 , 1 9 8 7 . S e c o n d -c la s s p o s ta g e p a id a t W a s h in g to n , D .C . a n d at a d d itio n a l m a ilin g a d d re s s e s . /|\lr ♦ Regional Commissioners for Bureau of Labor Statistics Region I— Boston: A n th o n y J. F e rra ra 1 6 0 3 J F K F e d e ra l B u ild in g , G o v e rn m e n t C e n te r, B o s to n , M a s s . 0 2 2 0 3 P h o n e : (6 1 7 ) 2 2 3 - 6 7 6 1 C o n n e c tic u t M a in e M a s s a c h u s e tts N e w H a m p s h ire R h o d e Isla n d V e rm o n t Region II— New York: S a m u e l M . E h re n h a lt 1 5 1 5 B ro a d w a y , S u ite 3 4 0 0 , N e w Y o rk , N .Y . 1 0 0 3 6 P h o n e : (2 1 2 ) 9 4 4 - 3 1 2 1 N e w J e rs e y N e w Y o rk P u e rto R ico V irg in Is la n d s Region III— Philadelphia: A lv in I. M a rg u lis 3 5 3 5 M a rk e t S tre e t P .O . B o x 1 3 3 0 9 , P h ila d e lp h ia , P a. 19101 P h o n e : (2 1 5 ) 5 9 6 - 1 1 5 4 D e la w a re D is tric t o f C o lu m b ia M a ry la n d P e n n s y lv a n ia V irg in ia W e s t V irg in ia Region IV— Atlanta: D o n a ld M . C ru s e 1371 P e a c h tre e S tre e t, N .E ., A tla n ta , G a . 3 0 3 6 7 P h o n e : (4 0 4 ) 8 8 1 - 4 4 1 8 A la b a m a F lo rid a G e o rg ia K e n tu c k y M is s is s ip p i N o rth C a ro lin a S o u th C a ro lin a Tennessee Region V— Chicago: W illia m E. R ic e 9 th F lo o r, F e d e ra l O ffic e B u ild in g , 2 3 0 S. D e a rb o rn S tre e t, C h ic a g o , III. 6 0 6 0 4 P h o n e : (3 1 2 ) 3 5 3 - 1 8 8 0 Illin o is In d ia n a M ic h ig a n M in n e s o ta O h io W is c o n s in Region VI— Dallas: B ry a n R ic h e y S e c o n d F lo o r, 5 5 5 G riffin S q u a re B u ild in g , D a lla s , T e x . 7 5 2 0 2 A rk a n s a s L o u is ia n a N e w M e x ic o O k la h o m a Texas Regions VII and VIII— Kansas City: E llio tt A. B ro w a r 911 W a ln u t S tre e t, K a n s a s C ity , M o . 6 4 1 0 6 P h o n e : (8 1 6 ) 3 7 4 - 2 4 8 1 VII Io w a K ansas M is s o u ri N e b ra s k a VIII C o lo ra d o M o n ta n a N o rth D a k o ta S o u th D a k o ta U ta h W y o m in g D ecem ber cover: "In d u s try ,” a 1934 oil painting by A rth u r D urston, c o u rte sy N ational M useum of A m e rica n Art, W ashington, D.C. C over design by M elvin B. M oxley https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Regions IX and X— San Francisco: S a m M . H ira b a y a s h i 4 5 0 G o ld e n G a te A v e n u e , B o x 3 6 0 1 7 , S a n F ra n c is c o , C a lif. 9 4 1 0 2 P h o n e : (4 1 5 ) 5 5 6 - 4 6 7 8 IX A m e ric a n S a m o a A riz o n a C a lifo rn ia G uam H a w a ii N evada T ru s t T e rrito ry o f th e P a c ific Is la n d s X A la s k a Id a h o O re g o n W a s h in g to n M O N TH LY LABO R REVIEW DEC EM BER 1983 VO LU M E 106, NUM BER 12 LIBRARY Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-C hief Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor JAN 3 1984 J. A. M ark and W H W aldorf 3 M ultifactor productivity: a new BLS m easure New annual indexes for private business show that gains in the o u tp u t per unit of labor and capital a ccount for m ost of the 1 9 48-81 grow th of o u tp u t per hour of all persons FAMILIES AT WORK: Elizabeth W aldm an 16 THE JOBS AND THE PAY Labor force statistics from a fam ily persp ective The fam ily unit is now a focus for policy, p rogram evaluation, and research; tw o data series m ore q uickly ca p tu re the c yclica l effects on fam ily m em bers D eborah Pisetzner Klein 21 Trends in em ploym ent and unem p loym ent in fam ilies M ultiearner fam ilies have extra financial protection, but recessions e rode it; in latest dow nturn, em ploym ent of w ives d e clin e d less than that of h usbands Howard Hayghe 26 M arried couples: w ork and incom e patterns With most fathers and slightly m ore than half of m others w orking, the overw helm ing m ajority of children have at least one em p lo ye d parent B L Johnson and E W aldm an 30 M ost w om en w ho head fam ilies receive poor job m arket returns The m ajority of these w om en have a strong com m itm ent to the labor force, but have lower average educational attainm ent and earnings Sheila B. Kam erm an 35 Child care services: a national picture As m ore m others hold jobs, the dem and for c h ild -ca re services continues to g ro w — e specially for infant and to d d le r c a re — and is e x a ce rb a te d by brief m aternity leaves Kezia Sproat 40 How do fam ilies fare w hen the bread w inner retires? Using national longitudinal survey data on the retirem ent e xp e rie n ce of men, researchers provide som e insights on the e co n o m ic situation of fam ilies of retirees REPORTS Law rence J. Fulco Carl Prieser 45 49 Recent productivity m easures d e p ict grow th patterns since 1980 Skill level differences in w h ite-collar pay Harry B. W illiam s 52 W ages of app lia nce technicians vary w idely https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEPARTMENTS 2 45 49 54 55 59 63 101 Labor m onth in review Productivity reports Research sum m aries M ajor agreem ents expiring next m onth D evelopm ents in industrial relations Book reviews Current labor statistics Index of volum e 106 Labor Month In Review OLDER WORKERS. The National Commission for Employment Policy, an independent agency established under the Job Training Partnership Act, published a series of studies exploring the employment problems of older workers. One of the studies notes that older workers are unemployed longer than other workers; for example, in October 1982, men age 45 and over were, on average, unemployed for 15 weeks, compared with 10 weeks for all men age 16 and over. This study, devoted specifically to displaced older male workers, focuses on the relationship between age and the wage loss associated with displacement and reemployment. The study, which used the National Longitudinal Survey of Mature Men (aged 45-59 when first interviewed in 1966), examines the age/wage relationship among male workers 45 years and older who were displaced and subsequently found new jobs between 1966 and 1978. cent of the average wage loss for the sample. • Those workers who lost their jobs between 1966 and 1969 when the na tional unemployment rate was relatively low did not, on average, ex perience a wage loss, while those who were displaced during a period of higher unemployment experienced an average loss of 6 percent of their pre displacement average hourly earn ings. The sample. Comparing the sample of displaced men with the full survey group provides an indication of the characteristics of men who are more likely to experience involuntary displace ment. Seventy percent of the survey group in 1966 were white, 28 percent were black, and the remainder were of other races. But whites account for 68.5percent of the sample of job losers and blacks, 31 percent, reflecting the slightly greater likelihood that blacks would suf fer involuntary displacement. Older workers in the original group were Findings. The findings of the study somewhat less likely than their younger counterparts to lose jobs involuntarily. were: • For workers under the age of 65, the The displaced workers have somewhat age/wage pattern of displaced older lower levels of schooling, on average, male workers on their p ost relative to the full sample. Although col displacement job is similar to the lege graduates are particularly under age/wage pattern on previous jobs. represented (at least among whites), jobBut workers over age 65 suffer wage losers can be found in every educational penalties, compared to the pre attainment group. displacement earnings pattern of Craftworkers make up more than a displaced men. third of the displaced workers, and they, • Some of the age-related loss in earn along with laborers (farm and nonfarm), ings can be attributed to changes in are the occupational groups that are par the occupations of displaced men. ticularly prone to displacement. While Among those who return to work, half of the full sample is composed of older workers are more likely to craftworkers, operatives, and laborers, change occupations than younger these blue-collar workers account for workers. more than 70 percent of the sample of • The loss of firm-specific human displaced workers. Involuntary displace capital (i.e., skills and knowledge ment is especially common among con particularly useful at a specific firm) struction workers. Sixty-five percent of associated with seniority on the pre the displaced men were in construction displacement job accounts for a or manufacturing, although job-losers 3.5-percent drop in the average hour can be found in every industry. ly earnings of men in constant Job tenure appears to be significantly dollars, representing nearly 90 per related to the likelihood of displace 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ment: proportionately nearly twice as many displaced workers compared to the full survey sample had tenure of 5 years or less, and among job-losers a quarter of whites and a third of blacks were displaced from jobs that they had held for less than 1 year. This suggests that there may well be a substantial number of older workers for whom job loss is a recurring phenomenon, such that they keep moving from one short term job to another. At the same time, however, job displacement is by no means confined to workers with limited service with their employers: nearly a third of the displaced workers lost jobs that they had held for more than 10 years. Finding the same job. Craftworkers are most likely to remain in their occupation group following loss of a job. Salesworkers also exhibit relatively high oc cupational stability. Clerical workers, service workers, and managers are the least occupationally stable following job displacement. Construction workers, while most likely to experience job displacement, are also most prone to find subsequent employment in the same industry from which they were displaced. While the distribution by industry of post displacement jobs is rather similar to the distribution of pre-displacement jobs (with net movement out of manufactur ing and transportation/utilities and into services and public administration), there is substantial mobility of in dividuals across industries. Thirty-eight percent of the displaced workers were subsequently employed in different in dustries. Copies of the report, Age Discrimina tion and Labor Market Problems o f Displaced Older Male Workers, by David Shapiro and Steven H. Randall, and of the other reports on older workers are available in limited numbers from the National Commission for Employment Policy, 1522 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. □ Multifactor productivity: a new BLS measure New annual indexes for private business show that advances in the output per unit of labor and capital input accountfor most o f the growth of output per hour of all persons during 1948-81 Je r o m e A. M ark and W il l ia m H. W aldorf The Bureau of Labor Statistics now publishes three measures of productivity: (1) the familiar index of labor productivity, which relates output to hours of all persons involved in the production process; (2) a new index of capital productivity, which relates output to capital inputs; and (3) a new index of multifactor productivity, which relates output to inputs of labor and capital. The new annual measures help explain that, between 1948 and 1981, when private business sector output grew by 3.4 percent annually, the growth was due about equally to in creases in labor and capital inputs (such as hours of all persons and plant and equipment) and to more productive use of these resources, as measured by multifactor produc tivity. This article reports on the development of the multifactor and capital productivity measures and shows how the new measures can be used to analyze the long-term trend and the post-1973 productivity slowdown. Three objectives Unlike the familiar b l s productivity measures for the business sector, the new ones for private business exclude government enterprises. (See exhibit 1.) Each of the pro ductivity measures has its own purposes; the multifactor productivity series has at least three. First, it is an important indicator of progress in the U.S. economy because it shows the rise in private business output obtained from a fixed Jerome A. Mark is the Associate Commissioner for Productivity and Tech nology, and William H. Waldorf is Chief of the Division of Productivity Research, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis quantity of resource inputs. For example, as a result of the growth in multifactor productivity, the private business sec tor produced 65 percent more output from a fixed amount of resource inputs in 1981 than it did in 1948,' the initial year of the new series. Among a host of factors contributing to the rise in mul tifactor productivity were changes in technology and in the skill composition of the work force, changes in resource utilization resulting from shifts in aggregate demand, dif ferences in effort per worker, changes in energy costs, econ omies of scale, and research and development expenditures. A second, and closely related, purpose of the multifactor productivity measure is to help explain the long-term growth— and post-1973 slowdown— in output per hour of all persons (labor productivity). In effect, changes in output per hour are divided into changes in the contribution of capital ser vices per hour (capital intensity) and changes in multifactor productivity. For example, between 1948 and 1981, output per hour of all persons in the private business sector grew at an average annual rate of 2.5 percent; the rise in capital services per hour accounted for roughly 40 percent of this growth and the gain in multifactor productivity, for the remaining 60 percent. The rate of growth of capital services per hour decelerated after 1973, helping to slow the growth rate of output per hour, but most of the sluggish advance resulted from a falloff in the growth rate of multifactor productivity. A third purpose of the multifactor productivity measure is to help analyze cost and price movements. The Bureau regularly publishes annual and quarterly measures showing 3 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity Exhibit 1. econom y P roductivity m easures for m ajor sectors of the M e a s u re In p u ts F re q u e n c y Labor Labor Labor Labor Labor Labor Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly 1947 to 1947 to 1947 to 1947 to 1947 to 1947 to Capital2 Capital2 Capital2 Annually Annually Annually 1948 to present 1948 to present 1948 to present Labor and capital Labor and capital Labor and capital Annually 1948 to present P e rio d O u tp u t p e r h o u r o f a l l p e rs o n s Business1 ...................................... Nonfarm business.................... Nonfinancial corporations . . . Manufacturing .................. Durable ......................... Nondurable.................... present present present present present present O u tp u t p e r u n it o f c a p ita l Private business ....................... Private nonfarm business . . . Manufacturing .................. M u l t i fa c to r p r o d u c tiv ity Private business ....................... Private nonfarm business . . . Manufacturing ................. Annually 1948 to present Annually 1948 to present includes government enterprises. 2ln constant dollars (1972). N ote: In 1981, business accounted for 78 percent of the gross national product in 1972 dollars: nonfarm business, 75 percent; nonfinancial corporations, 59 percent; manufacturing, 24 percent; durable goods, 14 percent, and nondurable goods, 10 percent. Private business accounted for 76 percent of the gross national product; private nonfarm business, 74 percent; and manufacturing, 24 percent. the relationship between unit labor cost, hourly compen sation, and output per hour. Unit labor cost is directly related to hourly compensation but inversely related to output per hour. Hence, increases in labor productivity help to offset rises in hourly compensation, dampening increases in unit labor cost. There is a more comprehensive but also simple relation ship between prices and multifactor productivity: The changes in the price of net output (that is, the sector’s implicit price deflator) are directly related to changes in both hourly com pensation and the price of capital services, but inversely related to changes in multifactor productivity.2 Thus, in creases in multifactor productivity help to offset rises in input prices so that increases in output prices are moderated. As noted, the multifactor productivity index measures changes in output per combined units of labor and capital inputs. To construct this index, the Bureau resolved several major measurement issues.3 These involved (1) determining the appropriate output measure, (2) establishing the maxi mum coverage that could be meaningfully obtained, (3) developing the appropriate capital input measure, (4) developing the appropriate labor input measure, and (5) aggregating the capital and labor inputs into a composite input measure. The formal model underlying the multifactor productivity measure is shown in the appendix. Output measure In general, the analysis uses a net output measure which is the value of final goods and services produced, adjusted for price change, less the value of purchased materials and services, also adjusted for price change. The output measure includes capital depreciation, as in the more familiar b l s output-per-hour indexes; it is consistent with the gross na tional product ( g n p ) concept. Is it appropriate to include capital depreciation in the output measure? Some private 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis researchers developing multifactor productivity measures have, like the Bureau, done so, while others have not. In deriving the multifactor productivity measures, the Bureau included capital depreciation in output, in part, for consistency with existing measures, but, more importantly, in order to have the productivity measures consistent within a framework for examining changes in prices, costs, and productivity, all of which include depreciation. Extent of coverage The coverage was based on two considerations: First, whether the output data available (in this case from the national income and product accounts) are measured by inputs; and, second, whether there are labor and capital input measures that correspond to the available output measures. In some sectors of the national accounts, because of the unavailability of suitable alternatives, output is measured essentially by labor compensation, which is extrapolated by changes in employment. Because this method implies no change in productivity, such output measures are not useful for productivity measurement and were excluded from the b l s measures. The method is used primarily for the general government, households, and nonprofit institutions com ponents of the national accounts. For other sectors— such as rest-of-world and owner-oc cupied housing— the output data are derived independently of the labor input data, but there are no corresponding labor input measures available. Therefore, these sectors have also been excluded from the Bureau’s productivity measures. Government enterprises were also excluded from the mul tifactor productivity measures because there are no data available for measuring capital’s share of output, and it would be extremely difficult to estimate. Capital input The capital input series attempts to measure the flow of services derived from the stock of physical assets. In the measurement of capital input, three major issues had to be addressed: (1) the definition of capital, (2) whether gross or net stock should be used, and (3) how to aggregate the stock measures. With regard to the first issue, a broad definition including equipment, structures, land, and inventories was used. Equipment and structures were assigned to 47 asset classes to take into account differences among types of capital goods. Financial assets are presently not included. The question of whether capital should be measured in terms of gross or net stock is a difficult empirical issue. For productivity measurement, the appropriate concept is “ pro ductive” capital stock, which represents the stock used to produce the capital services employed in current production. To measure the productive stock, it is necessary, for each type of asset, to take account of possible loss of efficiency of the asset as it ages. That is, assets of different vintages Table 1. P roductivity indexes and related m easures, percent change from 1981 to 1982 M e a s u re Productivity: Output per hour of all persons .................................... Output per unit of capital ...................................... Multifactor productivity2 ............. Output ......................................... Inputs: Hours of all persons .................. Capital services............................ Combined units of labor and capital input3 ............................ Capital services per hour of all persons ............................... P riv a te b u s in e s s 1 P riv a te n o n fa rm b u s in e s s 1 -0 .1 -0 .1 1.2 -5 .1 -1 .9 -2 .8 -5 .2 -1 .9 -2 .8 -8 .4 -1 .3 -6 .9 -2 .8 2.4 -2 .8 2.5 -8 .0 1.6 -1 .0 -1 .0 -5 .7 5.3 5.4 10.4 M a n u fa c tu rin g Excludes government enterprises. 20utput per unit of combined labor and capital input. 3Hours of all persons combined with capital service input index, weighted by labor and capital shares. have to be aggregated. Some analysts have used measures of the gross stock, in which an asset shows no decline in efficiency until it is discarded. Others have used a net con cept which shows the asset’s efficiency declining as it ages. Those who have used net capital stock have assumed dif ferent age/efficiency patterns. After carefully considering the alternatives, b l s chose a concave form (slower declining efficiency during earlier years) and used available empirical evidence to confirm its shape. In addition, some members of the Bureau’s Business Research Advisory Council can vassed companies they represent to confirm the “ reasona bleness” of using a concave form. We shall discuss the choice of an age/efficiency pattern in more detail later when we report a sensitivity analysis comparing the b l s method of measuring capital stock with methods used by others. Finally, in combining the various types of capital stock, the weights applied were implicit rental prices of each type of asset. The implicit rental price can also be viewed as a “ user cost” of capital. It reflects the implicit rate of return to capital, the rate of depreciation, capital gains, and taxes. Its use as a weight is based on the principle that capital services inputs should be combined with weights that reflect their marginal productivity— and rental price is the appro priate price.4 The final capital input measure then is a weighted sum of the percent changes in net capital stocks by asset type. The weights are the averages of the respective rental prices for the current and past year; the measure is a Tornqvist index. Labor input The Bureau’s measures of output per hour of all persons used in the multifactor productivity indexes are primarily derived from the Current Employment Survey and, in gen eral, refer to hours paid. Although it would be desirable to have a measure based on hours worked, suitable historical data are not now available. We shall discuss changes in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid based on sparse infor mation and recent b l s surveys. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Hours data for the multifactor productivity index, which are aggregated for all persons— namely, production work ers, nonproduction workers, self-employed and unpaid fam ily workers— are not differentiated in terms of the composition of the work force (age, sex, education, experience, and so on). Aggregating capital and labor inputs Before the overall input and hence multifactor produc tivity measures could be developed, the labor and capital shares for weighting the factor inputs had to be derived. Data are available for employees’ labor compensation and for corporate capital income, but they are not available separately for proprietors’ income. Thus, the labor share of proprietors’ income had to be estimated. Various assumptions can be made to do this. For example, production worker earnings can be imputed to the self-em ployed, but this frequently results in negative nonlabor pro prietor income (which is obtained as a residual). Conversely, the rate of return on capital in the corporate sector can be applied to the proprietors’ capital, but this frequently implies negative proprietor labor income. In the Bureau measures, proprietor and unpaid family worker hours were assigned the same average wages re ceived by paid employees, and capital income was measured by assigning noncorporate capital the same rental price as corporate capital. This computed value was compared with reported noncorporate income in the national income ac counts, and both the labor and capital income totals were scaled to agree with those levels. With these scaled weights, labor and capital inputs were combined using the Tornqvist index number formula. Recent developments In 1982, the most recent year for which data are available, multifactor productivity fell 1.9 percent in the private busi ness sector (table 1). This reflected a 2.8-percent drop in output, the largest annual decline since 1948, coupled with a 1.0-percent decrease in combined labor and capital inputs. There was a 2.4-percent rise in capital services and a 2.8percent decline in hours, entailing a 5.3-percent increase in the amount of capital per hour. Output per hour of all persons in the private business sector, the more familiar measure of productivity, declined only 0.1 percent compared with the 1.9-percent decrease in multifactor productivity. This difference was due to the increase in the amount of capital per hour (5.3 percent) which, when multiplied by capital’s share of output, indi cates that the increased capital per hour offset 1.8 percentage points of the decline in multifactor productivity. Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) in the private business sector dropped 5.1 percent in 1982. This reflects a reduction in capacity utilization, among other things. The percent changes in the output, input, and productivity measures in 1982 were virtually the same in private nonfarm 5 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity Table 2. A verage annual rates of grow th in productivity indexes and related m easures by m ajor sector, 1948 to 1 9811 [In percent] P r iv a te n o n fa rm b u s in e s s 2 P riv a te b u s in e s s 2 M e a s u re 1948 to 1981 1948 to 1973 1973 to 1981 1948 to 1981 1948 to 1973 M a n u fa c tu r in g 1973 to 1981 1948 to 1981 1948 to 1973 1973 to 1981 P roductivity indexes: Output per hour of all persons................................................... Output per unit of capital services............................................. Multifactor productivity3 ............................................................. Output ........................................................................................ 2.5 -0 .1 1.5 3.4 3.0 0.2 2.0 3.7 0.8 -0 .9 0.2 2.3 2.1 -0 .1 1.3 3.5 2.5 0.2 1.7 3.9 0.6 -1 .0 0.1 2.2 2.6 -0 .2 1.8 3.4 2.9 0.6 2.2 4.0 1.6 -2 .6 0.6 1.3 Inputs: Hours of all persons .................................................................. Capital services............................................................................ Combined labor and capital inputs4 ........................................... 0.9 3.5 1.8 0.7 3.6 1.7 1.4 3.2 2.0 1.4 3.6 2.1 1.3 3.6 2.1 1.6 3.3 2.2 0.7 3.5 1.5 1.1 3.4 1.8 -0 .2 3.6 0.8 'Average annual rates based on compound rate formula using data in the appendix , ‘'Excludes government enterprises. business as in the private business sector. Multifactor productivity in the manufacturing sector de creased 1.3 percent in 1982, somewhat less than in the other two sectors. This reflected sharp decreases in both output ( —6.9 percent) and combined inputs of labor and capital ( —5.7 percent). Capital services increased only 1.6 percent, the smallest percent rise since 1972, and hours declined 8.0 percent, the largest relative decrease since 1975. Output per hour actually increased in the manufacturing sector by 1.2 percent in 1982. This was because the increase in capital per hour (10.4 percent), when multiplied by cap ital’s share, resulted in a 2.5-percentage-point offset to the decline in multifactor productivity. Output per unit of capital services fell 8.4 percent in manufacturing in 1982. Table 3. A verage annual rates of grow th in output per hour of all persons, contribution of capital services per hour, and m ultifactor productivity, by m ajor sector, 1948 to 19811 [In percent] 1948 to 1981 1948 to 1973 1973 to 1981 (1 ) (2 ) (3 ) (4 ) (C o l. 3 C o l. 2 ) Output per hour of all persons.................... 2.5 3.0 0.8 -2 .2 Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour2 .............................. Equals: Multifactor productivity3 . . . . 1.0 1.5 1.0 2.0 0.6 0.2 -0 .4 -1 .8 2.1 2.5 0.6 -1 .9 0.8 1.3 0.8 1.7 0.5 0.1 -0 .3 -1 .6 2.6 2.9 1.6 -1 .3 0.8 1.8 0.7 2.2 1.0 0.6 0.3 -1 .6 M e a s u re S lo w d o w n P r iv a te b u s in e s s P r iv a te n o n fa rm b u s in e s s Output per hour of all persons............... Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour2 ............................ Equals: Multifactor productivity3 .......... M a n u fa c tu rin g Output per hour of all persons.................. Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour2 ................................. Equals: Multifactor productivity3 .......... tables. 2Change In capital per unit of labor weighted by capital’s share of total output. 30utput per unit of combined labor and capital input. 6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 30utput per unit of combined labor and capital input. 4Hours of all persons combined with capital service inputs index, weighted by labor and capital shares. Long-term trends Productivity varies over the business cycle and, in order to measure trends, average annual rates of change are cal culated between periods of peak activity in the cycle. The year 1981 is used as the last year in the comparison of long term trends because it is the most recent peak year of a business cycle as designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Table 2 summarizes average annual rates of change of the new b l s measures for the private business, private non farm business, and manufacturing sectors. Between 1948 and 1981, output in the private business sector, which ac counted for about three-fourths of gross national product in 1981, grew at an average rate of 3.4 percent per year. Of this increase, 1.8 percentage points resulted from increases in combined labor and capital inputs, and the remaining 1.5 percentage points was due to growth of multifactor pro ductivity. There was a sharp slowdown in the rate of growth of output between 1948-73 and 1973-81 which coincided with an even greater slackening in multifactor productivity growth. Nearly all of the growth in output after 1973 came from increases in combined labor and capital inputs. This re flected a moderate slowdown in the annual rate of growth of capital inputs and a doubling of the rate of growth of hours of all persons between the two periods. In private nonfarm business, multifactor productivity hardly grew after 1973; virtually all of the annual rise in output (2.2 percent) came from increases in labor and capital in puts. There was also a moderate slowdown in the annual rate of growth of capital services coupled with only a small rise in inputs of hours of all persons. The much smaller increase, after 1973, in the annual growth rate of hours of all persons in nonfarm business, compared with that for all private business, is due to a large shift of workers from the farm to nonfarm sector during 1948-73. The picture is essentially the same in manufacturing. Over the three decades, growth in multifactor productivity and combined labor and capital inputs contributed about equally to the growth in output. And, a slowdown in the growth rate of output after 1973 was accompanied by a falloff in productivity growth. Manufacturing differed from the other two sectors in that capital services rose at a faster rate after 1973, while hours of all persons showed an absolute decline. This means that all of the growth in hours in the nonfarm business sector after 1973 occurred outside manufacturing and outside farming. Table 2 also shows average annual rates of growth of the new b l s measures of output per unit of capital services (capital productivity). This series exhibited only a negligible downward trend, between —0.1 and —0.2 percent per year, in each of the three sectors during 1948-81. In effect, there was no saving in capital per unit of output over the three decades. As shown in chart 1 for the private business sector, the annual movements in output per unit of capital services were largely cyclical.5 Output per hour of all persons and mul tifactor productivity also exhibited cyclical patterns. Al though the numbers differ somewhat, the analysis for private nonfarm business and manufacturing is essentially the same. Table 3 summarizes the relationship between average an nual rates of growth of output per hour, capital per hour, and multifactor productivity. In this form, it extends the Bureau’s work toward explaining the growth and post-1973 slowdown in labor productivity. From 1948 to 1981, output per hour of all persons in the private business sector grew at an average annual rate of 2.5 percent. The growth of capital services per hour con tributed 1.0 percentage points to the growth in labor pro ductivity, and multifactor productivity accounted for the balance. From 1973, after the trend rate slowed, to 1981, output per hour of all persons grew at an annual rate of 0.8 percent compared with 3.0 percent between 1948 and 1973, a falloff of 2.2 percentage points per year. There was also a slowdown in the annual rate of growth of capital services per hour. However, this contributed only 0.4 percentage point to the deceleration in labor productivity; the falloff in the rate of growth of multifactor productivity— 1.8 per centage points— accounted for most of the slowdown. The picture was essentially the same for private nonfarm business. The major share of the growth of output per hour from 1948 to 1981 was accounted for by growth in multi factor productivity; the opposite occurred after 1973, with growth in the contribution of capital services also slowing. The experience in manufacturing differed somewhat from that in the other two sectors. In contrast to private business and private nonfarm business, capital services per hour in manufacturing grew at a faster annual rate after 1973 than before and, consequently, the slowdown in the annual rate of growth was somewhat less for output per hour than for multifactor productivity. C h art 1. Indexes of o u tp u t per hour of all persons, o u tp u t per unit of c a p ita l, and m u ltifa c to r p rodu ctivity in the private business sector, 1948 to 1982 R atio scale (1948 = 100) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 7 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity Some sensitivity analyses Only about 18 percent of the slowdown in the rate of growth of output per hour in the private business sector between 1948-73 and 1973-81 can be explained by the slowdown in the growth rate of capital per hour. (See table 3.) The fraction is slightly smaller (16 percent) for the pri vate nonfarm sector and, in the case of manufacturing, the higher rate of growth of capital per hour after 1973 helped to offset part of the multifactor productivity slowdown. Given the importance of this result, it is useful to address the following quantitative question: How sensitive is this finding to some frequently debated measurement issues? Specifically, is the broad conclusion about the relative im portance of capital to the slowdown in output per hour significantly affected by the following: (1) the choice of terminal years after 1973; (2) the inclusion of land, inventories, or tenant-occupied residential structures, or all, as part of the aggregate capital service measure; or (3) the use of different age/efficiency functions in com puting the productive capital stock. Effect of changing the terminal year In general, there are at least two considerations in se lecting specific intervals when measuring productivity growth rates. First, we want a period that is long enough to “ es tablish” a statistical trend. Second, we want to select end Table 4. C ontributions to the slow dow n in the annual grow th rate of output per hour of all persons, by m ajor sector, for selected periods com pared with 1 9 4 8 -7 3 [In percent] 1973 to 1977 1973 to 1978 1973 to 1979 1973 to 1980 1973 to 1981 Output per hour of all p ersons.......... -1 .6 -1 .8 -2 .2 -2 .4 -2 .2 Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour ......................... Equals: Multifactor productivity . . . -0 .2 -1 .4 -0 .5 -1 .3 -0 .6 -1 .6 -0 .4 -2 .0 -0 4 -1 .8 12 88 28 72 27 73 17 83 18 82 Output per hour of all persons.................... -1 .3 -1 .4 -1 .9 -2 .1 -1 .9 Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour .................. Equals: Multifactor productivity -0 .1 -1 .2 -0 .3 -1 .1 -0 .5 -1 .4 -0 3 -1 .8 -0 3 -1 .6 8 92 21 79 26 74 14 86 16 84 -1 .1 -1 .3 -1 .4 -1 .6 -1 .3 0.3 -1 .4 0.0 -1 .3 01 -1 .5 03 -1 .9 0-3 -1 .6 -2 7 127 0 100 -7 107 M e a s u re P r iv a te b u s in e s s Percent of slowdown: Capital services per hour . . . Multifactor productivity . . . P r iv a te n o n fa rm b u s in e s s Percent of slowdown: Capital services per hour . . Multifactor productivity . M a n u fa c tu rin g Output per hour of all p e rsons.................... Minus: Contribution of capital services per hour .................... Equals: Multifactor productivity Percent of slowdown: Capital services per hour . . . Multifactor productivity . . . 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis -1 9 1191 23 123 points which represent similar points of the economic cycle and thus minimize the effects of cyclical changes. The most common method is to select peaks of business cycles as the end points. The presumption is that labor and capital are fully— or at least about equally— used during both periods. Given these criteria, we selected the periods 1948 through 1973 and 1973 through 1981. Each of the terminal years includes a cyclical peak designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research.6 To examine whether the choice of a different end year would significantly affect the explanation of the productivity slowdown, we analyzed the slowdown by looking at periods varying from 1973 to 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980 and 1981. In 1981, the annual index of business output reached a peak in July. The year 1979 was also a somewhat higher year than the two earlier ones but not as high as 1981. The other three years (1977, 1978, and 1980) are included only for comparison. (See table 4.) When 1979 and 1981 are used as terminal years, the slowdown in the annual growth rate of output per hour is the same— 2.2 percentage points. However, for the 1973— 79 period, 27 percent of the slowdown in labor productivity is attributable to a slower rate of growth in the capital-labor ratio and 73 percent to a deceleration in multifactor pro ductivity. As previously indicated, the respective propor tions based on 1973-81 are about 18 percent and 82 percent. The proportions for the other 3 years are approximately within the range of those for 1979 and 1981. These patterns are similar for the nonfarm business sector. The story in manufacturing is somewhat different. Al though there was a slowdown in the rate of growth of output per hour for each of the five periods compared, there was none during which a falloff in the growth in capital per hour was a contributing factor. In fact, in 4 of the 5 comparisons, the rate of growth of capital per hour accelerated in the later period, so that the slowdown in multifactor productivity was actually larger than that for output per hour. Therefore, for private business and nonfarm business, there is some change in the relative importance of capital in explaining the slowdown in output per hour when the terminal year is changed from 1981 to 1979 or other years. However, in the case of manufacturing, changes in the cap ital-labor ratio did not contribute to the productivity slow down in any of the five periods. Regardless of the periods selected, the smaller growth in the capital-labor ratio never accounts for the bulk of the slowdown in output per hour and, at most, accounts for less than 30 percent, while multifactor productivity accounts for at least 70 percent. This applies to all three categories: private business, private nonfarm business, and manufac turing. The capital services measure The second measurement issue concerns the composition of the capital service measure. The b l s measure is designed to gauge the flow of capital services to the production pro cess and comprises business structures and equipment, ten ant-occupied residential structures, inventories, and land. Scholars working on productivity generally agree that in ventories and land should be counted in capital inputs, but there is a question about how these nondepreciable assets should be combined with the depreciable ones— that is, business structures and equipment, ( b l s aggregates different asset types using rental prices; the rental prices for depre ciable assets include depreciation.) A question has also been raised about whether tenant-occupied structures should be included because owner-occupied dwellings are excluded. To judge the sensitivity of the results to these questions, we excluded tenant occupied dwellings, inventories, and land individually and together from the measure of the pro ductive capital stock. In the case of the private business sector, excluding land or inventories has only a negligible effect on the annual rates of growth of capital services per hour during both 1948-73 and 1973-81. (See table 5.) Excluding tenant-occupied residential structures has a larger effect on the growth rates of the capital-labor ratio, but the differences are too small to significantly affect capital’s contribution to the growth rates of output per hour during the two subperiods. This is because the contribution is mea sured by weighting the growth in the capital-labor ratio by capital’s share of output, which was about 35 percent. The net result of these experiments for the private business sector is that changing the composition of the capital input measure would alter the contribution of the capital-labor ratio to the falloff in output per hour by no more than 0.1 percentage point. The results are the same for the private nonfarm business sector; and the earlier conclusions for manufacturing remain unchanged.6 The age/efficiency function The third and last sensitivity analysis with regard to cap ital involves the choice of the age/efficiency function. To measure the productive capital stock, b l s used the so-called perpetual inventory method, which is simply a weighted sum of past investments. The weights are based on an age/ efficiency function which describes the pattern of services derived from the capital good as it ages. Unfortunately, the best available empirical evidence does not provide a clear answer on the shape of the function. In fact, different re searchers have used different forms based largely on their own observations. b l s and some private researchers have assumed that assets lose efficiency at a slow rate early in their life and at a much faster rate as they age . 7 Other researchers assume that an asset’s efficiency decreases at a constant rate throughout its life , 8 and others assume a function in which an asset loses no efficiency until the end of its life, followed by a 100 percent loss .9 The Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce uses a straight-line decay function for developing its measures of capital wealth for the National https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 5. Effects of exclu ding selected assets from published m easures for private business, selected periods [In percent] ___________________________________ A ll a s s e ts e x c lu d in g : P e rio d A ll a s s e ts 1 In v e n to r ie s Land R e s id e n tia l R e s id e n tia l, la n d , a n d in v e n to rie s C o n trib u tio n o f c a p ita l s e r v ic e s 2 0.9 1.0 0.6 -0 .4 1948-1981 . . . . 1948-1973 . . . . 1973-1981 . . . . Slowdown.......... 0.9 1.0 0.6 -0 .4 0.9 1.1 0.6 -0 .5 1948-1981 . . . . 1948-1973 . . . . 1973-1981 . . . Slowdown.......... 1.5 2.0 0.2 -1 .8 1.5 1.9 0.2 -1 .7 1.0 1.1 0.7 -0 .4 1.1 1.2 0.8 -0 .4 M u ltifa c to r p r o d u c tiv ity 3 1.5 2.0 0.2 -1 .8 1.4 1.9 0.1 -1 .8 1.3 1.8 0.0 -1 .8 1All assets include equipment structures, rental residential capital, inventories, and land. 2Rate of growth of capital services per hour weighted by capital’s share of output. 30utput per unit of combined labor and capital inputs where the combined input is a weighted average of capital and labor (hours of all persons) inputs. The respective weights are capital's share (approximately 35 percent during the period) and labor's share (ap proximately 65 percent during the period). Income and Product Accounts. b l s calculated the contribution of the growth of the cap ital-labor ratio and the growth rates of multifactor produc tivity under each assumption and concluded that the choice of function had very little effect on either the multifactor productivity growth rates or the contribution of capital ser vices per hour to the growth rate of output per hour. (See table 6.) In fact, the differences in the annual growth rate of multifactor productivity are at most 0.1 percentage point regardless of the form of the function or the period. In sum, selecting a different terminal year for the post1973 productivity slowdown, changing the composition of the capital input measure, or choosing a different age/effi ciency function would not significantly alter the broad find ings that most of the slowdown in output per hour after 1973 is attributable to factors affecting the growth in mul tifactor productivity. We should note that there is another, possibly significant, measurement issue. In the brief statement on the age/effi ciency function, we observed that the b l s and all other measures of capital input for productivity analysis assume a fixed pattern of efficiency loss as assets age. Some analysts have hypothesized that the slowdown in output per hour after 1973 may have been caused by a decrease in the ser vices of capital relative to the measured capital stock . 10 Presumably, the principal reason is increased obsolescence as a result of the sharp rise in oil prices in 1973 and 1979 and the shift of part of capital spending to energy-saving techniques. This hypothesis has been much debated in the literature. It is an important issue, and the Bureau has un dertaken research to measure its significance. Sources of change in multifactor productivity As we have indicated, many factors have influenced the long-term growth and the post-1973 slowdown in the b l s measure of multifactor productivity. We will briefly review 9 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity several of the more empirically manageable sources of these changes." These include (1) intersectoral shifts in re sources; (2) compositional changes in the workforce; (3) changes in capacity utilization; (4) growth of research and development ( r & d ) outlays; and (5) changes in hours at work relative to hours paid. While these factors help to explain part of the longer term annual growth rate of mul tifactor productivity and its falloff after 1973, the part left unexplained remains uncomfortably large. Long-term growth. Improved allocation of labor and cap ital among sectors obviously results in increased multifactor productivity. The most dramatic shift during the postwar period was the movement of labor from the farm to the nonfarm sector of the economy. In 1948, the number of persons engaged in farming accounted for about 16 percent of the total number engaged in the private business sector; by 1973, the ratio had dropped to 5 percent, and by 1981, to 4 percent. In fact, the shift was virtually completed by the m id-1960’s. According to b l s estimates, this re allocation of labor contributed about 0.1 percentage point to the multifactor productivity growth rate from 1948 to 1981. The b l s measure of multifactor productivity is based on hours of all persons and assumes that their skills are ho mogeneous. Consequently, shifts from less to more skilled labor are not reflected in the b l s measure of labor input but, instead, are attributed to growth in multifactor pro ductivity. The change in the composition of the labor force— particularly in higher educational attainment— has been one of the most important sources of growth in multifactor pro ductivity between 1948 and 1981. Increases in the efficiency of an hour’s work resulting from a shorter workweek, as well as increased work experience (at least as suggested by changes in the age-sex composition of the labor force) have also contributed to changes in the b l s measure of multifactor productivity. Based on estimates made by Edward F. Den ison, the sum of these compositional changes— mainly in creased education— contributed about 0.4 percentage point per year to the growth of multifactor productivity over the 33 years . 12 Available information on capacity utilization for manu facturing indicates that the rates were about the same in 1948 and 1981. This at least suggests that changes in the rate of capital utilization probably did not affect the long term trend in the b l s measure of multifactor productivity. Technological improvements in production are generally viewed as one of the major sources of growth in multifactor productivity. Consequently, research and development have been a major area of study in connection with multifactor productivity. Judging from estimates made by Zvi Griliches for the mid-1960’s and 1970’s and by Nestor Terleckyj from the late 1940’s to the early 1980’s, r & d may have contrib uted between 0.2 and 0.3 percentage points to the annual growth in multifactor productivity from 1948 to 1981.13 10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The b l s series on labor inputs is based on hours paid rather than hours worked and therefore includes paid va cations and sick leave. For productivity measurement, it would be more appropriate to use an hours worked measure, but the necessary data are not now available. 14 The Bureau has experimented with varied sources of data on leave prac tices and so on for 1952, 1972, and 1977 to obtain a rough approximation to the trend in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid for all employees in the private nonfarm business sector. According to these rough estimates, the ratio de creased by 0.1 percent per year between 1952 and 1977. Therefore, adjusting the b l s measure of hours paid to an hours at work concept would reduce the average annual rate of growth of labor inputs by 0.1 percent per year during the 15-year period and, consequently, raise the annual rate of growth of multifactor productivity by somewhat less than 0.1 percentage point. 15 (Estimates for manufacturing sug gest that the decrease in hours at work relative to hours paid was somewhat larger ( —0 .2 percent per year) during the same period, 1972-77, and therefore the upward adjustment in the growth rate of multifactor productivity would be somewhat more than 0.1 percentage point.) Adding the effects of the five sources we have briefly discussed indicates that, together, they explain about 0 .6 percentage point of the 1 .5-percent average annual rate of growth in multifactor productivity in the private business sector during 1948-81. That is, these measured factors ex plain about 40 percent of the long-term rise in multifactor productivity— about 60 percent remains unexplained. The post-1973 slowdown. The measured sources account for an even smaller fraction of the post-1973 multifactor productivity slowdown. As indicated, the shift of workers out of farming had virtually come to an end by 1965 and this contributed 0 .2 percentage points to the productivity slowdown after 1973. Compositional changes in the labor force occurred at about the same rate before and after the slowdown and consequently were not a contributing factor. There was a slowdown in the rate of growth of r & d during the 1970’s and this could have been a factor, but probably did not contribute more than 0.1 percentage points. And, using hours paid rather than hours at work in measuring hours of all persons could have contributed another 0.1 percentage point to the measured productivity slowdown. The effects of these four sources, taken together, account for 0.4 percentage points— or about 22 percent— of the 1.8percent-per-year falloff in multifactor productivity growth in the private business sector between 1948-73 and 197381. Data are not available for measuring changes in capacity utilization for private business but, judging from an analysis of manufacturing, changes in the rates of capacity utilization could account for a significant proportion of the multifactor productivity slowdown in private business after 1973. Even with this additional adjustment, the percentage left unex plained would probably still be large. Table 6. Sensitivity of m ultifactor productivity m easure, and the contribution of the capital-labor ratio to output per hour for selected age/efficiency functions in private business [In percent] Year __________________________________ B LS (H y p e r b o lic ) H u lte n /W y k o ff (B e s t g e o m e tric a p p r o x im a tio n )1 G ross (O n e -h o s s -s h a y ) S tra ig h t lin e M u ltifa c to r p ro d u c tiv ity 1948-1981............. 1948-1973............. 1973-1981............. Slowdown............. 1.5 2.0 0.2 -1 .8 1948-1981............. 1948-1973............. 1973-1981............. Slowdown............ 1.0 1.0 0.6 -0 .4 1.6 2.0 0.3 -1 .7 1.5 2.0 0.2 -1 .8 1.5 1.9 0.3 -1 .6 C o n trib u tio n of c a p ita l s e rv ic e s p e r h o u r 0.9 1.0 0.5 -0 .5 1.0 1.0 0.6 -0 .4 1.0 1.1 0.5 -0 .6 1Charles R. Hulten and Frank C. Wykoff, “ The Measurement of Economic Deprecia tion," in Charles R. Hulten, ed., Depreciation, Inflation and the Taxation o f Incom e from Capital (Washington, The Urban Institute Press, 1981), pp. 81-125. Summary As we pointed out in the beginning, the new b l s measures of capital service inputs and multifactor productivity extend the Bureau’s work in measuring the causes of the growth of labor productivity and its slowdown after 1973. The major conclusions at this stage are that, between 1948 and 1981, about two-fifths of the growth of output per hour of all 1Part of the increase in output per unit of combined capital and labor inputs in the private business sector reflects gains from resources employed in other sectors of the economy. These include, for example, resources used by government and nonprofit institutions for education and training programs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics presently treats education of the work force as a source of growth of multifactor productivity. The Bureau is currently developing measures showing the compositional changes in the labor force that reflect, among other things, the resources used in education and training. These will be used to adjust the hours series in order to obtain a more comprehensive measure of labor input. te c h n ic a lly speaking, the relationship between the price of net output, factor prices, and multifactor productivity is the “ dual” of the relationship between net output, labor and capital service inputs, and multifactor pro ductivity. 3The methodology and sources of data underlying the measures of pro ductivity are discussed in detail in T r e n d s in M u l t i f a c t o r P r o d u c t i v i t y , 1 9 4 8 - 8 1 , Bulletin 2178 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1983). 4 Dale W. Jorgenson and Zvi Griliches, “ The Explanation of Produc tivity Change,” T h e R e v i e w o f E c o n o m i c S tu d ie s , July 1967, pp. 2 4 9 83. 5 Changes in the b ls measures of output per unit of capital services were closely correlated with changes in the Federal Reserve Board index of capacity utilization in manufacturing. For 1948-81, the correlation coef ficient was 0.90. 6 The choice o f these terminal years was also based on an analysis of quarterly data on output per hour of all persons. For the detailed discussion, see T r e n d s in M u l t i f a c t o r P r o d u c t i v i t y . b ls 7 The BLS calculations for private nonfarm business and for manufac turing are reported in T r e n d s in M u l t i f a c t o r P r o d u c t i v i t y . See also Edward F. Denison, A c c o u n ti n g f o r S l o w e r E c o n o m i c G r o w t h (Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1979); and C a p i t a l S to c k E s t i m a t e s f o r I n p u t - O u tp u t I n d u s t r i e s : M e t h o d a n d D a t a (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1979). These estimates were mainly developed by Jack Faucett Associates. 8 Barbara Fraumeni and Dale Jorgenson, “ The Role of Capital in U.S. Economic Growth, 1 9 4 8 -7 6 ,” in George M. von Furstenberg, ed., C a p i t a l E f f ic ie n c y a n d G r o w t h (Cambridge, Mass, Ballinger Publishing Co., 1980). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis persons in the private business sector resulted from increases in the amount of capital per hour used in production and about three-fifths came from the growth of multifactor pro ductivity, or economic progress. Although the growth rate of capital per hour slowed between 1948-73 and 1973-81, most of the labor productivity deceleration reflected a falloff in multifactor productivity growth. These findings virtually prescribe the Bureau’s future re search in this area. It includes trying to determine whether the method of measuring capital stock has tended to over state its growth, particularly after 1973, because of unac counted-for increases in obsolesence rates due to the sharp rises in energy prices in 1973 and 1979. The Bureau is also attempting to measure the sources of growth and the slow down of multifactor productivity, including the sources we have discussed. And, in addition, b l s is constructing mul tifactor productivity measures at the two-digit Standard In dustrial Classification (sic) level in manufacturing which will relate gross output to inputs of energy, other purchased materials, and purchased services, as well as to inputs of capital services and labor. These disaggregated measures will make it possible to measure the direct and indirect effects of changes in energy and other materials prices on the growth and slowdown of multifactor productivity. 16 □ 9 John Kendrick and Elliot Grossman, P r o d u c t i v i t y in th e (Baltimore, Md., The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980). U n ite d S ta te s 10Martin Neil Baily, “ Productivity and the Services of Capital and Labor,” B r o o k i n g s P a p e r s o n E c o n o m i c A c t i v i t y , Vol. 1, 1981, pp. 1 66; and E. R. Bemdt and D. O. Wood, “ Engineering and Econometric Interpretations of Energy-Capital Complementarity.” A m e r i c a n E c o n o m i c R e v i e w , June 1979, pp. 3 42-54. 11 For a more detailed discussion of factors affecting the BLS measure of multifactor productivity, see T r e n d s in M u l t i f a c t o r P r o d u c t i v i t y . For analyses of possible sources contributing to the productivity growth and slowdown besides those discussed in this section, see Edward F. Denison, “ The Interruption of Productivity Growth in the United States,” E c o n o m i c J o u r n a l , March 1983, pp. 1-2 2 , and references cited there. 12 Edward F. Denison has kindly made his estimates through 1981 avail able to us. For a discussion of his methodology in arriving at these esti mates, see Edward F. Denison,, A c c o u n t i n g f o r U n i t e d S t a t e s E c o n o m i c G r o w t h , 1 9 2 9 - 6 9 (Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1974). l3Zvi Griliches, “ R&D and the Productivity Slowdown,” A m e r i c a n May 1980, pp. 343-48; and Nestor E. Terleckjy, “ R&D, Innovation and the Economy: What do Economists Know?” Remarks delivered at the White House Conference on Productivity, held in San Diego, Calif., July 20, 1983. 14The b ls started a survey in 1981 which collects statistics on hours at work, and this will make it possible in the future to adjust the hours measure to a more appropriate one. At the time o f this writing, the survey data for 1982 are being processed. An article showing the findings and the meth odology will be published in the M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w . E c o n o m i c R e v ie w , 15The contribution of the decline in the ratio to multifactor productivity growth is measured by multiplying labor’s share of total output (0.65) by the annual rate of decline in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid. 16Dale W. Jorgenson, “ Energy Prices and Productivity Growth,” in Jerome M. Rosow, ed., P r o d u c t i v i t y P r o s p e c t s f o r G r o w t h (New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold C o., 1981), pp. 35-53; and E. R. Bemdt and D. O. Wood, “ Engineering and Econometric Interpretations of EnergyCapital Complementarity.” 11 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity APPENDIX: The multifactor productivity model As indicated in the text, the b l s multifactor productivity measure includes capital in addition to labor inputs. It also incorporates recent theoretical developments in productivity measurement using an index number framework based on a fairly flexible form of the production function. The production function underlying the multifactor pro ductivity measure assumes Hicks’ neutral technical change and constant returns to scale (which is used later in the analysis). The general form of the function can be written as , 1 0 (0 ( 1) Q (t) = K (t) = L (/) = A (t) — Differentiating (1) with respect to time, t, and with some algebraic manipulations, the derived “ sources of growth” equation (with t omitted) is , 2 (2 ) = A( t ) f [ K( t ) , L( t ) ] where, real net output at time t; input o f capital services at time t; input of labor services at time t; and index o f Hicks’ neutral technical change or mul tifactor productivity at time t. Q A - = - + Q A dQ K K dQ L dK QJ K + \d L Q where a dot over the variable indicates the derivative of the Table A - 1 . Productivity and related m easures in private business, 1 9 4 8 -8 2 1 [1977 = 100] P ro d u c tiv ity In p u ts O u tp u t p e r h o u r o f a ll p e rs o n s O u tp u t p e r u n it of c a p ita l M u ltifa c to r p ro d u c tiv ity 2 O u tp u t3 1948 .............................................. 1949 .............................................. 45.3 46.0 99.0 93.5 60.0 59.3 1950 .............................................. 1 9 5 1 .............................................. 1952 .............................................. 1953 .............................................. 1954 .............................................. 49.7 51.2 52.9 54.6 55.6 98.6 100.1 99.3 100.6 96.2 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 57.8 58.5 60.0 61.8 63.9 1960 .............................................. 1 9 6 1 .............................................. 1962 .............................................. 1963 .............................................. 1964 .............................................. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 Year C o m b in e d u n its o f la b o r a n d c a p ita l in p u ts 6 C a p ita l p e r h o u r of a ll p e rs o n s H o u rs of a ll p e rs o n s 4 C a p ita l5 36.8 36.1 81.3 78.6 37.2 38.6 61.3 60.9 45.7 49.2 63.6 65.1 66.3 68.0 67.7 39.5 41.8 43.2 45.1 44.3 79.5 81.8 81.8 82.6 79.8 40.1 41.8 43.5 44.9 46.1 62.1 64.3 65.2 66.4 65.5 50.4 51.1 53.2 54.3 57.7 100.9 100.0 97.9 94.3 99.3 70.7 70.9 71.6 72.0 74.9 47.9 49.2 49.7 48.9 52.5 82.9 84.2 82.9 79.0 82.1 47.5 49.2 50.7 51.9 52.9 67.8 69.4 69.4 67.9 70.0 57.3 58.5 61.2 65.6 64.4 64.8 67.0 69.6 72.2 75.3 98.5 98.0 101.2 102.6 105.2 75.4 76.9 79.7 82.0 84.9 53.3 54.2 57.2 59.7 63.3 82.2 80.9 82.2 82.7 84.0 54.1 55.3 56.6 58.2 60.2 70.7 70.5 71.8 72.9 74.5 65.8 68.4 68.8 70.4 71.6 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................................. .............................................. 78.0 80.4 82.3 85.1 85.3 107.8 108.0 104.9 105.5 103.7 87.6 89.3 89.6 91.7 91.2 67.6 71.3 72.9 76.7 78.9 86.7 88.7 88.6 90.1 92.5 62.7 66.0 69.5 72.7 76.1 77.2 79.9 81.4 83.7 86.5 72 4 74.5 78 5 80 7 82.3 1970 .............................................. 1 9 7 1 .............................................. 1972 .............................................. 1973 .............................................. 1974 .............................................. 86.1 89.2 92.3 94.7 92.4 98.5 98.1 101.0 103.0 96.5 90.2 92.2 95.2 97.5 93.8 78.3 80.6 86.0 91.8 89.9 90.9 90.4 93.2 96.9 97.2 79.4 82.2 85.2 89.1 93.1 86.8 87.5 90.4 94.1 95.8 87 4 91 0 91 5 92 0 95.8 ............................................. ............................................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................................. 94.5 97.6 100.0 100.6 99.3 92.0 96.1 100.0 101.8 100.3 93.6 97.1 100.0 101.0 99.7 88.0 93.7 100.0 105.5 107.9 93.1 95.9 100.0 104.9 108.6 95.7 97.5 100.0 103.6 107.5 94.0 96.5 100.0 104.4 108.2 102 8 101 6 100 0 98 8 99.0 1980 ............................................. 1 9 8 1 ............................................. 1982 .............................................. 98.8 101.2 101.1 95.5 95.8 90.9 97.7 99.3 97.4 106.4 109.8 106.6 107.7 108.4 105.4 111.4 114.6 117.3 108.9 110.5 109.4 103 4 105 7 111.3 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 world sector, the rental value of owner-occupied real estate, the output arising in nonprofit organizations, the rental value of real estate occupied by nonprofit organizations, the output of paid employees of private households, government, and the statistical discrep ancy in preparing the national income accounts. The private nonfarm business sector also excludes farms but includes agricultural services. 20utput per unit of combined labor and capital inputs. 3Gross Domestic Product originating in the sector, in constant dollars. 4Paid hours of all employees, plus the hours of proprietors and unpaid family workers engaged in the sector. 12 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 5A measure of the flow of capital services used in the sector 6Hours of all persons combined with capital input, using labor and capital shares of output as weights. S ource : Output data are from Bureau of Economic Analysis ( bea), U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Compensation and hours data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and bea . Capital measures are based on data supplied by bea and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Table A -2 . Productivity and related m easures in private nonfarm business, 1 9 4 8 -8 2 1 [1977 = 100] In p u ts P ro d u c tiv ity O u tp u t p e r h o u r of a ll p e rs o n s Year O u tp u t p e r u n it of c a p ita l M u ltifa c to r p ro d u c tiv ity 2 O u tp u t3 H o u rs of a ll p e rs o n s 4 C a p ita l5 C o m b in e d u n its ot la b o r a n d c a p ita l in p u ts 6 C a p ita l p e r h o u r of a ll p e rs o n s 1948 .............................................. 1949 .............................................. 51.2 52.3 97.9 92.7 64.6 64.2 35.6 34.9 69.6 66.8 36.4 37.7 55.2 54.5 52.3 56.4 1950 .............................................. 1 9 5 1 .............................................. 1952 .............................................. 1953 .............................................. 1954 .............................................. 55.6 56.6 58.0 59.0 59.9 98.2 100.4 99.6 100.8 96.1 68.1 69.5 70.4 71.4 71.0 38.3 40.8 42.2 44.1 43.2 69.0 72.2 72.8 74.7 72.1 39.0 40.7 42.4 43.7 44.9 56.3 58.8 60.0 61.7 60.9 56.6 56.3 58.2 58.5 62.3 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 62.3 62.5 63.6 65.1 67.4 100.9 100.0 98.0 94.0 99.5 74.1 74.0 74.3 74.3 77.5 46.8 48.1 48.7 47.8 51.6 75.1 77.0 76.6 73.4 76.6 46.4 48.1 49.7 50.8 51.9 63.2 65.1 65.6 64.3 66.6 61.8 62.5 64.9 69.3 67.7 1960 .............................................. 1 9 6 1 .............................................. 1962 .............................................. 1963 .............................................. 1964 .............................................. 67.9 70.0 72.5 74.9 77.8 98.4 98.0 101.3 102.7 105.6 77.6 78.9 81.7 83.8 86.7 52.3 53.3 56.4 58.9 62.7 77.0 76.1 77.8 78.6 80.5 53.2 54.4 55.7 57.4 59.4 67.4 67.5 69.0 70.3 72.3 69.0 71.4 71.6 73.0 73.7 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 80.3 82.2 83.8 86.6 86.4 108.2 108.7 105.3 106.0 104.1 89.2 90.7 90.7 92.9 92.1 67.0 71.0 72.5 76.4 78.7 83.5 86.4 86.5 88.2 91.1 62.0 65.3 68.9 72.1 75.6 75.1 78.3 79.9 82.3 85.4 74.2 75.6 79.6 81.7 83.0 1970 .............................................. 1 9 7 1 .............................................. 1972 .............................................. 1973 .............................................. 1974 .............................................. 86.8 89.7 93.0 95.3 92.9 98.6 98.0 101.1 103.2 96.5 90.6 92.4 95.7 97.9 94.1 77.8 80.1 85.8 91.7 89.7 89.7 89.3 92.2 96.2 96.6 78.9 81.8 84.8 88.8 93.0 95.6 85.9 86.7 89.7 93.6 95.4 88.0 91.5 92.0 92.3 96.3 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 94.7 97.8 100.0 100.6 99.0 91.7 96.1 100.0 101.9 100.1 93.6 97.2 100.0 101.1 99.4 87.6 93.6 100.0 105.7 108.0 92.5 95.7 100.0 105.1 109.0 97.4 100.0 103.7 107.9 93.6 96.3 100.0 104.6 108.6 103.4 101.8 100.0 98.7 99.0 1980 .............................................. 1 9 8 1 .............................................. 1982 .............................................. 98.3 100.2 100.2 95.2 95.0 90.0 97.3 98.4 96.6 106.4 109.3 106.2 108.2 109.0 106.0 111.7 115.1 118.0 109.4 111.1 110.0 103.2 105.5 111.2 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 N ote: See table A-1 for sources and footnotes. dQ dt Equation (2) shows the rate of change of output as the sum of (a) the rate of change of multifactor productivity, variable with respect to time I i.e., Q = —), and (b) a weighted average of the rates of change of capital and labor inputs, the terms in brackets. Conceptually, multifactor productivity indicates the changes in output re sulting from shifts of the production function whereas the terms in brackets measure changes in output resulting from movements along the production function (that is, from increases in combined capital and labor inputs). The terms in brackets that measure the movements along the production function have a straightforward interpretadQ K \ ( — — 1, is the elasticity of output with respect to the input of capital services, that is, the percent change in output per 1-percent change in the input of capital service. This is multiplied by the percent , • change in capital https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis K input, — , so that the product, K ( §Q K \ \ ; I, is simply the percent change in output re \d K Q ) sulting from the relative increase in capital services— hold ing labor inputs constant. The interpretation of the terms for labor input shown in the brackets is the same as that for capital services. Thus, the sum of the terms in brackets measures the contribution of changes in both capital service and labor inputs to changes in output. It shows the change in output that would be realized if there were no change in multifactor productivity. Transferring the term for the relative change in multifactor productivity in (2 ) to the lefthand side of the equation, we have, . A = Q _ ldQK\ K ldQL\L A Q L W ö/ K \ dL QJ L In this expression, multifactor productivity can be seen as a measure of economic progress; it shows the rate of growth in output in excess of the increases simply due to increases in labor and capital inputs. This is the first major purpose of the multifactor productivity measure referred to in the introduction. 13 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Multifactor Productivity Table A -3 . Productivity and related m easures in the m anufacturing sector, 1 9 4 8 -8 2 1 [1977 = 100] P ro d u c tiv ity Year O u tp u t p e r h o u r o f a ll p e rs o n s O u tp u t p e r u n it of c a p ita l In p u ts O u tp u t3 p ro d u c tiv ity 2 a ll p e rs o n s 4 C a p ita l5 C o m b in e d u n its o f la b o r a n d c a p ita l in p u ts 6 C a p ita l p e r h o u r of a ll p e rs o n s 1948 .............................................. 1949 .............................................. 45.1 46.9 93.9 85.6 56.1 55.9 35.8 33.9 79.4 72.4 38.1 39.6 63.8 60.7 48.0 54.8 1950 .............................................. 1 9 5 1 .............................................. 1952 .............................................. 1953 .............................................. 1954 .............................................. 49.4 51.1 52.0 52.9 53.7 94.5 99.2 95.5 98.4 89.0 59.9 62.2 62.2 63.5 62.2 38.6 43.0 44.5 47.5 44.1 78.2 84.2 85.4 89.8 82.1 40.9 43.4 46.6 48.3 49.6 64.6 69.2 71.5 74.8 70.9 52.3 51.5 54.5 53.8 60.4 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 56.4 56.0 57.1 56.9 59.6 95.6 92.4 89.5 80.4 89.1 65.8 64.8 65.1 62.8 67.0 48.9 49.2 49.5 45.2 50.5 86.6 87.9 86.5 79.4 84.7 51.1 53.3 55.3 56.2 56.7 74.2 76.0 76.0 72.0 75.4 59.0 60.6 63.9 70.8 66.9 1960 .............................................. 1 9 6 1 .............................................. 1962 .............................................. 1963 .............................................. 1964 .............................................. 60.0 61.6 64.3 68.9 72.3 88.0 86.9 92.9 98.3 102.3 67.0 68.0 71.5 76.3 79.8 50.7 50.7 55.1 59.6 63.9 84.4 82.3 85.6 86.5 88.4 57.5 58.3 59.2 60.7 62.4 75.6 74.6 77.0 78.2 80.0 68.2 70.9 69.2 70.1 70.6 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 74.5 75.3 75.3 78.0 79.3 107.3 108.6 101.1 101.1 100.5 82.8 83.7 81.8 83.7 84.6 69.8 75.1 75.0 79.1 81.7 93.6 99.8 99.6 101.4 103.1 65.1 69.2 74.2 78.2 81.3 84.3 89.8 91.7 94.4 96.6 69.5 69.3 74.5 77.1 78.9 1970 .............................................. 1 9 7 1 .............................................. 1972 .............................................. 1973 .............................................. 1974 .............................................. 79.1 83.9 88.2 93.0 90.8 91.8 92.3 99.8 108.2 99.6 82.3 86.0 91.1 96.8 93.0 77.0 78.7 86.2 95.9 91.9 97.3 93.7 97.8 103.2 101.2 83.9 85.2 86.4 88.6 92.2 93.6 91.5 94.7 99.1 98.8 86.2 90.9 88.3 85.9 91.1 .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. 93.4 97.5 100.0 100.8 101.5 89.4 96.1 100.0 101.5 99.5 92.2 97.1 100.0 101.0 101.0 85.4 93.6 100.0 105.3 108.2 91.4 95.9 100.0 104.5 106.6 95.5 97.4 100.0 103.8 108.8 92.6 96.4 100.0 104.3 107.2 104.4 101.5 100.0 99.3 102.1 1980 .............................................. 1 9 8 1 .............................................. 1982 .............................................. 101.7 105.3 106.5 90.7 90.2 82.7 98.7 101.2 99.9 103.5 106.5 99.1 101.8 101.2 93.0 114.1 118.0 119.9 104.8 105.2 99.2 112.1 116.7 128.8 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 N ote: See table A -1 for sources and footnotes. The assumption of constant returns to scale means that the weights (that is, the elasticities) in brackets sum to unity. Using this, we can obtain the important relationship, (4) The elasticities, or weights, in equations (2) through (4) are not observable and, in order to estimate these, it is necessary to make the further assumption that the marginal products of capital and labor are equal to their respective real market prices. This is equivalent to assuming a com petitive economy operating at long-run equilibrium. Thus, it is assumed that, This expression shows that the rate of change of labor Q productivity, I ^ — 7 I, is equal to the sum of the rate of & L, (5) change of multifactor productivity, —, and the contribution A of the change in capital per hour (capital intensity) to output, where the contribution is measured by the elasticity of output where, with respect to the input of capital services, ( — — I , times \dKQJ' the rate of change of capital services per hour, This relationship helps to explain the growth and post-1973 slowdown of labor productivity, the second major purpose of multifactor productivity measurement noted in the intro duction. 14 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis d_Q dK C BQ — and, — P dL W P P = price o f net output; C —rental price o f capital services; and W — price o f labor services. Substituting the expressions in (5) for the marginal pro ductivities in the elasticity equations yields the capital and labor shares, SK and SL, respectively. (6) SK — , and S, PQ L WL PQ where, SK + SL — 1. SKl — 1/2 [SKl + S’*-,-/]; and Equations (2) through (4) can now be written as: $u = 1/2 [SLl + SLt_l]. (2') (S') (4') K + SL K A + Q ~A Q A Q A ~~ Q Q Q ~ L — L Sk == k + SL K (K A — + Sk A \K Tables A-l, A-2, and A-3 present index numbers of the annual measures (of the antilogarithms) of the variables shown in equation (2") and of the Tornqvist approximations of (3') and (4'). Thus, table A shows for the private business sector yearly index numbers (1977=100) of output, bls ^ multifactor productivity, , / ^ and combined Q(t-l) H A(t-l) units of labor and capital inputs, the antilogarithm of the sum of the terms in brackets. ---------- F O O T N O T E S ---------- Equations (2') through (4') are Divisia indexes with changing weights, and require continuous data. The b l s multifactor productivity indexes are based on the Tornqvist index number formula which is a discrete approximation to the Divisia index . 3 More specifically, the discrete index number formula used for measuring (2 ') is: ( 2") A(t) — InA(t-l) Q(t-l) L (t) K (t) + SkM K ( t - l ) + SulnL ( t - l ) <2( 0 In where https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1For simplicity, the analysis is limited to two inputs, capital and labor; more generally, K and L can be viewed as vectors of capital and labor inputs, respectively. 2For the derivation of this growth equation and its interpretation, see Robert M. Solow, “ Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Func tion,” R e v i e w o f E c o n o m i c s a n d S t a t i s t i c s , August 1957, pp. 312-20; and Dale W. Jorgenson and Zvi Griliches, “ The Explanation of Productivity Change,” R e v i e w o f E c o n o m i c s S t u d i e s , July 1967, pp. 249-8 0 . 3The Tornqvist quantity index is said to be an e x a c t index for the homogeneous translogarithmic production function. This means that the change in output resulting from changes in inputs and input prices as measured by the Tornqvist index is the same as would be obtained by using a homogeneous translogarithmic production function. See W. E. Diewert, “ Aggregation Problems in Measurement of Capital,” in Dan Usher, ed., T h e M e a s u r e m e n t o f C a p i t a l , Studies in Income and Wealth Vol. 45, National Bureau of Economic Research (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1980), pp. 4 4 6 -5 2 , and cited references. 15 Labor force statistics from a family perspective Over time, the family unit has become a major focus for policy planning, program evaluation, and research; two data series, which are now part o f the regular CPS, more quickly capture the effects o f the business cycle on the employment and earnings of family members E lizabeth W a l d m a n “ As are families so is society . . . If well ordered, well in structed, and well governed, they are springs from which go forth the streams of national greatness and prosperity— of civil order and public happiness.” 1 Families are the basic unit of American society that provide the country with its current labor supply and mold the char acter of its future workers. But, in contrast to the “ well ordered,” ideal state described above, family life is more often depicted as in flux or crisis. This has been especially true of the years following World War II, during which families changed from an extended to a nuclear structure, moved from a rural to an urban setting, and adjusted from wartime pressures to periods of peacetime prosperity or recession. In 1940, a monthly sample survey was initiated to mea sure changes in the characteristics of the Nation’s labor force .2 This article draws on the results of that survey to present a historical perspective on the labor market activities of family members. Subsequent sections review recent de velopments in survey procedures that permit the tracking of broad secular trends and of business-cycle effects on family employment and income, and suggest future directions for family-oriented economic analyses. Trends: 1940’s to early 1980’s Since 1940, but especially over the last decade, families have become substantially smaller, and the variety of living Elizabeth Waldman is a senior economist in the Office of Employment and Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 16 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis arrangements has increased. For example, today’s schoolage and preschool children are more likely to be living with one parent or a stepparent and are far more likely to have a working mother. Factors contributing to such changes include unusually low fertility rates, exceptionally high di vorce rates, later marriage, the aging of the population, and greater labor force participation by married women. Some other results of these developments are shown in table 1. Since 1940, the number of married couples has nearly doubled, but the number of families maintained by women has nearly tripled, and half a million more men now do not live with their spouses but maintain their own fam ilies. The 43-year span which saw broken families become more numerous and their employment and unemployment problems more prominent also witnessed the gradual trans formation of more than half of all married couples to multieamer families, and the labor force from one that was predominately male to one that is currently 45 percent fe male. Married women have accounted for the majority of additional workers demanded by the economy, except dur ing 1941-44, when men and single women dominated the wartime influx to the labor force. Despite the grave national emergency of World War II, married women continued to be utilized in the civilian labor force along traditional prewar lines. If a wife had no chil dren, she was generally free to take a paid job, but if she had even one young child, society expected her to stay at home. The largest single source of additional wartime work- ers were male and female youths of high-school or college age. Women over the age of 35 were the second largest labor pool. 3 These “ extra” workers were recruited mainly from the ranks of married women who either had no children or whose children were old enough not to require their mothers’ full-time care. Married women’s wartime labor force participation rates were: Participation rate (in percent) 1940 1944 Age 18 to Age 35 With With 64 ........................................... to 44 ........................................ no children under 10years----children under 10 years.......... 14 15 20 8 23 26 35 13 The labor force recruitment of women ages 20 to 34 was limited because of the wartime rise in marriages and child birth within this age group. Labor force participation rates for married women did not decline in the postwar period. In 1950, participation rates of wives were much the same as they had been in 1944 (table 2). Over the ensuing decades, wives’ rates moved up, pausing only occasionally, mostly during some recessions. For wives with young children, labor force participation rates have quadrupled since 1950. Age of youngest child One of the effects of the general increase in married moth ers’ labor force activity is that many differences in their participation rates that previously were correlated with the age of the youngest child in the home have become blurred or have disappeared entirely in recent years (table 3). In 1970, married mothers’ participation rates ranged from 24 percent for those whose youngest child was less than a year old to 57 percent where the youngest was 14. Moreover, participation rates exhibited a step-wise progression closely related to the age of the youngest child. On balance, the participation rates for mothers of children 0 to 2 years old were about 30 percent or lower; for mothers with 3- to 5year-olds, they were in the mid- to upper-30-percent range; and for those with 6 - to 11-year-olds, rates were in the 40to 50-percent range. Participation rates exceeded 50 percent only among those women with junior-high or high-school age children. By March 1983, these four distinct “ steps” or ranges of participation rates had been reduced to three. The rate for mothers of infants was 45 percent, with rates for those with children 2 to 5 years old falling in a narrow band between 50 and 57 percent, and rates for mothers with school-age children concentrated in an almost equally small range be tween 60 and 67 percent. In addition, by 1983, the entire range of participation rates had contracted. In 1970, the highest rate (57 percent) was more than twice the lowest (24 percent), but by 1983, the highest (67 percent) was only about half again as great as the lowest (45 percent). That https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 45 percent of all wives with infant children are now in the labor force reflects many interrelated factors, such as infla tion and recession. It also attests to the turnaround in so ciety’s attitude about mothers working outside the home and to women’s persistence in the labor market despite higherthan-average unemployment rates. As in the past, mothers with young children have a more difficult time in the labor market than other mothers.4 In March 1983, the unemployment rate for married women with toddlers under 3 was 12.8 percent, about twice that of mothers whose youngest child was at least 6 years old. In part, unemployment rates of mothers of young children may be higher because child-care responsibilities may restrict the types of jobs these women can accept. When employed, however, more than 60 percent of toddlers’ mothers work at full-time jobs. This proportion rises to more than 70 percent when the children are school age. Of all 46 million children under age 18 in married-couple families, half had both parents in the labor force. (The issue of child care for working mothers is discussed by Sheila Kamerman else where in this issue.) Husbands In March 1983, when 52 percent of all wives were in the work force, 79 percent of the husbands were, too. But, over time, husbands’ labor force participation rates have drifted down considerably: Participation rate Year (in percent) 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1983 ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... 93 92 89 87 81 79 Much of the decline is attributable to a reduction in the number of husbands 55 or older in the labor force. This is due in large part to the growth of a great variety of private Tab le 1. Fam ilies by type, selected years, 1 9 4 0 -8 3 [Numbers in thousands] O th e r f a m ilie s Y e a r1 A il fa m il ie s M a in t a in e d by w o m e n M a r r ie d c o u p le f a m ilie s M a in t a in e d by m e n T o ta l A s p e rc e n t o f a ll fa m il ie s 1940 ....................... 1947 ....................... 32,166 35,794 26,971 31,211 1,579 1,186 3,616 3,397 11.2 9.5 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... 39,303 41,951 45,062 47,836 51,227 56,257 59,910 34,440 36,378 39,293 41,649 44,415 47,528 49,132 1,184 1,339 1,275 1,181 1,239 1,412 1,769 3,679 4,234 4,494 5,006 5,580 7,316 9,009 9.4 10.1 10.0 10.5 10.9 13.0 15.0 1983 ....................... 61,834 49,947 2,059 9,828 15.9 1Data were collected In April of 1940, 1947, and 1955, and In March of all other years. Note: Data for 1975 have been revised since initial publication. 17 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Family Labor Force Statistics retirement plans and better social security benefits, including a broadening of the eligibility requirements for disability benefits. In 1982, the labor force participation rate for hus bands age 65 or over was 19 percent, compared with 48 percent in 1952. Corresponding rates for husbands 55 to 64 years of age were 71 and 89 percent. But participation rates for younger husbands have also drifted downward, a de velopment probably related, to some degree, to the increas ing participation of their wives. (More details about the current labor force activity and income of husbands and wives by race and Hispanic origin are provided in Howard Hayghe’s article on page 26 of this issue. Information on men’s reasons for early retirement and the effects on the family is presented in Kezia Sproat’s article on page 40.) Divorce Divorce is . . . . “ a symptom of general family illness due to vast social changes confusing to individuals. But will these confusions be resolved as long as women insist upon feministic movements and men in baffled protest cry out that women are usurping their place in the world.” 5 These thoughts from a 1939 treatise, “ The American Family in A Changing Society,” could easily have been written during the turbulent 1970’s, when the divorce rate hit the highest level ever recorded , 6 and a million women were added to the labor force in every year but one. The Depres sion of the 1930’s had placed enormous strains on family life as the economic foundations of a great many families crumbled. Although neither divorce nor the employment of wives was as common as in recent years, both were viewed as destroyers of family life. The 1970’s— like the 1930’s— were also years of great stress for many families, but for different reasons, including inflation and changing lifestyles. In 1940, there was 1 divorce for every 6 marriages, while in 1980, there was 1 for every 2 marriages. During both periods, an extensive amount of remarriage occurred, so that married-couple families predominated— 84 percent in 1940 and 80 percent in 1980. However, divorces have also swelled the number of families maintained by women in recent years, a factor that raises the labor force participation rate of women maintaining families because divorcees have historically registered the highest participation rates of any marital group of women. In 1983, 60 percent of women maintaining families were in the labor force, compared with 44 percent in 1946 when widows dominated the group. (More details on families maintained by women are provided in Beverly Johnson’s article on page 30 of this issue.) Current data All of the family labor force statistics discussed so far are derived from detailed data collected only once each year. Since 1940, these statistics have typically been collected in the March supplement to the Current Population Survey, to provide a “ snapshot” of the employment status of family members. When the structure of families changed exten 18 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis sively in the 1970’s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( b l s ) began developing two new series of monthly and quarterly data that would more quickly capture the effects of businesscycle changes on the employment situation of families and their members. 7 b l s now publishes a series of person-family data every month in Employment and Earnings. Introduced in July 1977 on a quarterly basis, this series confirms long-term trends. For example, families in which the husband is em ployed are more likely to have other employed members than families where the husband is either unemployed or not in the labor force. Of the 36.8 million families where the husband was employed in the second quarter of 1983, 64 percent had at least one other employed person, while of the 2 .6 million families where the husband was unem ployed, 58 percent had some other person employed. Only 18 percent of the unemployed women maintaining families lived with another relative who was employed. The monthly statistics thus enable analysts to track the extent of unem ployment within families as a recession develops or abates, and report on the cushioning effect when other family mem- Table 2. Labor force participation rates of m arried w om en, husband present, by presence and age of own children, 1 9 5 0 -8 3 P a r tic ip a tio n ra te Y e a r1 T o ta l W ith no c h ild re n u n d er 18 ye a rs W ith c h ild r e n u n d e r 1 8 y e a r s T o ta l 6 to 1 7 y e a r s , none young er Under 6 ye a rs 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 23.8 25.2 25.3 26.3 26.6 27.7 29.0 29.6 30.2 30.9 30.3 31.0 30.9 31.2 31.6 32.7 35.3 35.6 35.4 35.2 18.4 20.5 20.7 22.4 22.7 24.0 24.5 25.3 26.5 27.9 28.3 30.3 31.1 32.2 33.2 34.7 36.4 36.6 37.6 39.8 11.9 14.0 13.9 15.5 14.9 16.2 15.9 17.0 18.2 18.7 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 30.5 32.7 32.7 33.7 34.4 34.7 35.4 36.8 38.3 39.6 34.7 37.3 36.1 37.4 37.8 38.3 38.4 38.9 40.1 41.0 27.6 29.6 30.3 31.2 32.0 32.2 33.2 35.3 36.9 38.6 39.0 41.7 41.8 41.5 43.0 42.7 43.7 45.0 46.9 48.6 18.6 20.0 21.3 22.5 22.7 23.3 24.2 26.5 27.6 28.5 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 40.8 40.8 41.5 42.2 43.1 44.4 45.1 46.6 47.5 49.3 42.2 42.1 42.7 42.8 43.0 43.8 43.7 44.8 44.6 46.6 39.7 39.7 40.5 41.7 43.1 44.9 46.1 48.2 50.2 51.9 49.2 49.4 50.2 50.1 51.2 52.2 53.6 55.5 57.1 59.0 30.3 29.6 30.1 32.7 34.4 36.7 37.5 39.4 41.7 43.3 1980 1981 1982 1983 .................. .................. .................. .................. 50.1 51.0 51.2 51.8 46.0 46.3 46.2 46.6 54.1 55.7 56.3 57.2 61.7 62.5 63.2 63.8 45.1 47.8 48.7 49.9 1Data were collected in April of 1951-55 and March of all other years. N ote: Children are defined as “ own” children of the women and include nevermarried sons and daughters, stepchildren, and adopted children. Excluded are other related children such as grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and cousins, and unrelated children. bers are employed. (The article by Deborah Klein on page 21 of this issue provides more details on this subject.) A second new statistical series concerns the weekly earn ings of families. Between 1967 and 1978, b l s reported once a year on the usual weekly wage and salary earnings of individuals by age, sex, race, and occupation. The infor mation was obtained from supplemental c p s questions asked each May. As part of the shift in emphasis to current, familybased statistics during the late 1970’s, steps were taken to relate the earnings of individual workers to the families in which they lived and to collect the data more frequently. The new quarterly series of weekly family earnings began with data for 1979 and was first published early in 1980.8 Since that time, quarterly news releases have illustrated the different earnings patterns among families and the general effects of inflation on their purchasing power. For instance, during the second quarter of 1983, median weekly earnings for married-couple families were $517 per week— $354 if there was one earner and $646 if there was more than one. Multiearner families continued to account for slightly more than half of all married-couple families. These families were a little better off than others over the year, because their median earnings had increased somewhat more (4.4 percent) than the increase in the Consumer Price Index (3.5 percent). For families maintained by women, median weekly earnings ($271) were well below those of married couples, but had at least kept pace with inflation. The present and future Increasingly, the family unit itself has become the focus for policy planning, program evaluation, and research. The data series currently published by b l s permit policymakers and planners to address the social and economic issues that affect the daily lives of people in families on a more timely basis than ever before. We can now examine the ways in which children and youth, their parents or stepparents, el derly couples, and those living in minority families are affected by the dynamics of the labor market. Most importantly, the analysis of family statistics aids in shaping our thinking about family life in the future. Clearly, we know a great deal about the demographic characteristics of the population and can estimate the age and race distri butions of the population for 1990, the year 2000, and Table 3. Labor force participation rates of w ives by age of young est child, selected years, 1 9 7 0 -8 3 1970 1975 1980 1983 All w iv e s .............................. 40.8 44.5 50.1 51.8 With no children under 18 ............. 42.2 43.8 46.0 46.6 57.2 P r e s e n c e a n d a g e o f c h ild r e n With children under 18 .................. Age of youngest child: 0 to 1 year ............................... 2 years .................................... 3 years .................................... 4 years .................................... 5 years .................................... 39.7 44.9 54.1 24.0 30.5 34.5 39.4 36.9 31.0 37.1 41.1 41.2 44.0 39.0 48.1 51.7 51.5 52.4 44.6 50.4 56.1 57.2 56.6 6 years .................................... 7 years, .................................... 8 years .................................... 9 years .................................... 10 years.................................... 11 ye a rs.................................... 42.0 44.7 44.6 48.5 48.7 47.6 46.4 51.3 52.1 52.4 56.2 52.8 58.5 61.7 62.3 60.8 63.3 63.4 59.4 61.1 65.0 60.4 62.4 66.4 12 years.................................... 13 years.................................... 14 years.................................... 15 years.................................... 16 years.................................... 17 years.................................... 51.8 51.8 56.9 52.8 54.3 55.1 49.7 54.0 52.5 55.3 54.7 52.6 65.7 64.6 62.6 60.8 62.3 55.6 66.6 65.3 66.4 64.1 66.8 62.2 beyond. We can apply current age-, sex-, and race-specific labor force participation rates to the extrapolated population to obtain estimates of the future size and configuration of the labor force.9 But how far off are such estimates likely to be? What are the long-term trends in the nondemographic factors affecting the proportions of women who will be in the labor force at some future date? What will be the effect of today’s tech nological changes and worker dislocations; of more flexible work schedules; of later retirement? Is the nuclear family in its classical form (father, mother, children, but no grand parents or other relatives) truly “ rapidly breaking down today, not because of ‘loose morals’ or ‘permissiveness,’ but because it no longer serves the needs of the popula tion?” 10 Some of these nondemographic factors may have as much to do with shaping the future labor force as similar factors— such as the birth control pill, the transistor, the computer, and the laws governing employment— have had in molding today’s work force. As the articles on family statistics in this issue suggest, it is appropriate to monitor both the current status of workers in families and emerging demographic and nondemographic trends in constructing statistics for the future. □ FOOTNOTES ‘ William Makepeace Thayer, American author, 1820-1898, as quoted in Ralph Emerson Browns, ed ., T h e N e w A m e r i c a n D i c t i o n a r y o f T h o u g h ts (New York, Standard Book Co, 1957), p. 204. 2The survey referred to is the Current Population Survey ( c p s ). Detailed information about the survey’s background, concepts, and reliability is published in “ Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment from the Current Population Survey,” H a n d b o o k o f M e t h o d s , V o lu m e I , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Unless otherwise indicated, labor force data in this report were obtained from the c p s . 3 See “ Source of Wartime Labor Supply in the United States,” M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v i e w , August 1944, pp. 264-78. 4 See reprints of special labor force reports on the marital and family status of workers, beginning with M a r i t a l S ta tu s o f W o r k e r s , M a r c h 1 9 5 9 , Special Labor Force Report 2 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1960). Also see Elizabeth Waldman and others, “ Working mothers in the 1970’s: a look 19 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Family Labor Force Statistics at the statistics." M o n t h ly other articles in that issue. L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1979, pp. 3 9 -4 9 , and 5 Harriet Ahlers Houdlette. T h e A m e r i c a n F a m i ly in a C h a n g in g W o r l d (Washington. American Association of University Women, 1939), p. 25. 6 See Waldman and others. "Working mothers in the 1970’s .” Also see U .S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, "Births. Marriages, Divorces, and Deaths for 1982,” M o n t h ly V it a l S t a t i s t i c s R e p o r t , Mar. 14, 1983, p. 3. 1 S e e H o w a r d Hayghe. "New data series on families shows most jobless have working relatives.” M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v i e w , December 1976, pp. 4 6 48; and Janet Norwood, "New approaches to statistics on the fam ily,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , July 1977, pp. 3 1-34. 8 See U .S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics “ New Data Relate Workers’ Earnings to the Families in Which They L ive,” u s d l 8 0 188, Mar. 27, 1980. 9 Articles in the November 1983 issue of the R e v i e w present the results of the Bureau’s most recent projections of economic growth, distribution of demand, and employment through 1995. See also Richard W. Riche, Daniel E. Hecker, and John U. Burgan, "High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of the employment p ie,” in the same issue for a discussion o f the employment implications of the growth of high technology industries. l0Alvin Toifler, 1975), p. 89. T he E c o -S p a sm R e p o rt Achieving pay equality Although most people are familiar with the implications of the Equal Pay Act . . . and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act . . . [the struggle against] pay discrimination has a long and confusing history. It began as far back as the National War Labor Board ( n w l b ) in World War II with the movement of women into industrial jobs. Title II of Executive Order 9250 established the Wage and Salary Stabilization Policy; Paragraph Two of the order set standards for wage adjustments to be “ the correction of maladjustments or inequalities, the elimination of substandards of living and the correction of gross inequities.” The n w l b also issued General Order No. 16, which stated that wages for women could be increased without approval of the n w l b to “ equalize the wage or salary rate paid to females with rates paid to males for comparable quality and quantity of work on the same or similar operations.” . . . Beyond Title VII and the Equal Pay Act there still exist two other possibilities regarding legal action for comparable worth plaintiffs: The first is that the cases may be tried under the 14th amendment, which provides equal treatment under the law, and this is where plaintiffs might venture. The guarantees of the 14th amendment have been raised in ques tions including reverse discrimination. Many cases in this area have been tried and are continuing to be developed. Another resort is to have new legislation passed that makes it clear that jobs are to be priced based on comparable worth . . . . W. B e a t t y a n d J a m e s R . B e a t t y “ Job Evaluation and Discrimination: Legal, Economic, and Measurement Perspectives on Comparable Worth and Women’s Pay,” in H. J o h n B e r n a r d i n , Women in the Work Force (New York, Praeger Publishers, 1982), pp. 211 and 215. — R ic h a r d 20 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (New York, Bantam Books, Trends in employment and unemployment in families Multiearner families have extra protection against financial reversals, but economic recession tends to erode this cushion; during the most recent downturn, the employment of married women declined less than that of married men who are more likely to work in cyclically sensitive industries D ebo r ah P isetzner K lein The monthly employment and unemployment statistics re ceive a great deal of national attention because they are a useful yardstick of the state of the economy. In addition to the overall measures, the Bureau of Labor Statistics issues a wide range of data series focusing on specific worker groups. In recent years, there has been an expansion in the data series that enable us to examine the situation of indi vidual workers in a family context. These data provide ad ditional insights into the personal impact of employment and unemployment, because family members often pool their earnings and support each other both financially and emotionally when out of work. This article explores recent trends in employment and unemployment in families.1 In 1982, 85 percent of the labor force lived in family units. (Of the remainder, 10 million lived alone and 7 mil lion lived with nonrelatives, such as roommates or house mates.) As table 1 shows, more than a third of the labor force consisted of husbands and nearly a quarter were wives. Including other related persons (mostly teenagers and young adults), more than 70 percent of the labor force lived in married-couple families. In recent years, however, there has been a very marked increase in the number of families maintained by women on their own. In 1982, nearly onetenth of the labor force lived in such families, including the Deborah Pisetzner Klein is a senior economist in the Division of Employ ment and Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis women themselves, their older children (age 16 and over), and other relatives. Families maintained by unmarried men constituted the remainder of the labor force. With the increase in the number of families maintained by women, and growing labor force participation by wives, husbands are no longer the mainstay of the market economy. Married men accounted for only 36 percent of the labor force in 1982, down from 41 percent just 5 years earlier and 52 percent in 1955. Employment Over the long run, the number of employed persons changes in line with population movements, variations in the desire for work among persons in different demographic groups, and the availability of jobs. During the 1970’s, the number of employed persons increased by a whopping 20 million, as the crest of the baby boom reached working age, the proportion of married women working outside the home increased dramatically, and the rapidly expanding serviceproducing sector provided many new jobs. These devel opments translated into significant growth in the number of multiworker families. Today more than 60 percent of all husband-wife families have at least two persons employed, compared with fewer than 40 percent in 1955. More recently, cyclical movements in employment have dominated secular ones. Between April 1981 and February 1983, the number of married men with jobs dropped by 1.8 21 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Family Employment and Unemployment million, but by June 1983, the recovery had returned 500,000 to employment. The impact of the 1981-82 recession was much less se vere among married women. The number employed de clined for several months during 1981— for a total reduction of about 500,000— but began rising again shortly. By June 1983, the number of employed wives was 24.3 million, more than 700,000 above the 1981 low. Thus, in mid-1983, the number of employed married women stood at an alltime high while the number of employed married men was 2 million below its peak of 39.9 million recorded before the 1980 recession. Employment among women maintaining families on their own has increased over time along with their expanded population. More recently, their employment level has held at about 5 million, but the proportion with jobs declined from 54 to 52 percent over the course of the 1981-82 reces sion and showed no appreciable improvement in the first half of 1983. (See chart 1.) In 1979, for example, when the overall rate was 5.8 percent, the rate for husbands was below 3 percent. However, un employment for this group is highly cyclical because many married men work in the goods-producing sector of the economy. Thus, their jobless rate rises sharply in every recession and tends to show the most improvement during recoveries. Over the past recession, for instance, the rate for husbands was 3.8 percent in April 1981, peaked in December 1982 at 7.8 percent, and came down about a percentage point in the first half of 1983. While the recovery was still in progress in mid-1983 and further reductions could therefore be expected, it should be noted that, in the business cycles shown in chart 2, married men began each recession with a higher unemployment rate than the previous one. The unemployment rate for all adult men surpassed the rate for all adult women in 1982, but this was not true among married persons. The jobless rate for married women has consistently been higher than that for married men, although the gap did narrow considerably during the 1981-82 reces sion. With recovery underway in 1983, the rate for married men dropped more sharply than that for married women, and by midyear, the gap was back to more than a full percentage point. (See chart 2.) Unemployment among women who maintain families tends to be very high. These women, on average, have completed fewer years of school than wives and are concentrated in lower skilled, lower paying jobs, where there is considerable turnover.3 During the late 1960’s, the unemployment rates for married women and for women who maintained families on their own were very similar. Since the early 1970’s, however, the rates have diverged. As can be seen in chart 2, women who maintain families have shown little or no improvement in their jobless situation during expansionary periods. Unemployment The unemployment cushion in families With lower-than-average unemployment rates, husbands and wives account for a much smaller share of unemploy ment (two-fifths in 1982) than they do of the labor force (three-fifths). Women who maintain families on their own account for a slightly larger share of unemployment (6 per cent) than of the labor force (5 percent). Relatives, regard less of their family type, are typically young people with high unemployment rates; they account for less than onefifth of the labor force but nearly two-fifths of the unem ployed. These relationships change over the business cycle, with married men comprising a greater share of unemployment when economic conditions are at their worst. For example, husbands’ share of the jobless total rose from 19 percent in July 1981 to 24 percent in December 1982, before receding slightly to 23 percent by June 1983.2 (See table 2.) Married men generally have strong attachment to the labor force and typically have relatively low unemployment rates. With the rising incidence of multiworker families comes the greater likelihood that there will still be a worker in the family when someone becomes unemployed. However, recession not only increases unemployment but also serves Table 1. Labor force, unem ploym ent, and em ploym ent by fam ily status, 1982 annual averages [In percent] F a m ily s ta tu s L a b o r fo rc e U n e m p lo y m e n t E m p lo y m e n t All persons.............................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 In married-couple families: Husbands...................................... W ives........................................... Relatives...................................... 36.0 23.2 12.6 23.3 17.1 23.3 37.4 23.8 11.4 In families maintained by women: Women who maintain families . . Relatives...................................... 5.2 4.4 6.3 11.4 5.1 3.7 In families maintained by men: Men who maintain families . . . . Relatives...................................... 1.7 1.4 1.7 2.6 1.7 1.2 Persons living alone......................... 9.5 7.0 9.7 All o th e rs ......................................... 6.1 7.2 5.9 22 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis T able 2. U nem p loym ent by fam ily status, selected m onths, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] J u ly 1 9 8 1 Decem ber 1982 F a m ily s ta tu s June 1983 Num ber P e rc e n t N um ber P e rc e n t N um ber P e rc e n t Total, all persons........... 7,854 100.0 12,036 100.0 11,146 100.0 Husbands .................... W iv e s .......................... Relatives in marriedcouple families . . . . 1,508 1,398 19.2 17.8 2,907 2,036 24.2 16.9 2,586 1,970 23.2 17.7 1,916 24.4 2,735 22.7 2,558 22.9 Women who maintain families.................... Relatives in such families.................... 613 7.9 763 6.3 730 65 932 11.9 1,389 11.5 1,303 11.7 Other persons............. 1,483 18.9 2,206 18.3 1,999 17.9 C h art 1. E m p lo ym en t-p o p u latio n ra tio s 1 for husbands, w ives, and w o m en w ho maintain families, qu arterly averages, 1 96 8— second q u arter 1983, seasonally ad ju sted Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 C h art 2. U n em p lo ym en t rates for husbands, w ives, and w o m en w ho m ain ta in fa m ilie s , by m onth, 1 9 6 8 -8 3 , sea so n ally adjusted Percent 14 13 d1 2 •1 1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 C h art 3. N u m b er of unem p loyed persons in fa m ilie s and the p ercen tag e w ith so m eo n e in fa m ily em p loyed , qu arterly averages, 1 9 7 6 — second q u arter 1983, s e a so n ally ad justed Percent 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 'T h e em ploym ent-p opulation ratio is the proportion of all em ployed civilians in th e c ivilian n oninstitutional population age 16 and over. N o t e : S haded areas ind ic a te recessionary periods as desig n a te d by the N a tio n a l Bureau of E conom ic R esearch. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 23 MONTHLY LABOR RHVIEW December 1983 • Family Employment and Unemployment to reduce the cushion provided by other family members. From the middle of 1981 to the end of 1982, for example, the number of unemployed family members rose from 7 to 10 million; at the same time, the proportion of the unem ployed living in a family with an employed member dropped from 70 to 66 percent. (See chart 3.) The major reason for this decline was the general contraction of employment caused by the recession as well as the increasing share of unem ployment accounted for by persons with a relatively lower likelihood of having employed family members. Relatives in husband-wife families— most typically teen age and young adult children of the couple— are the most likely group to live in a family with workers; in 9 out of 10 cases, at least one of their parents has a job. In 1979, these relatives constituted more than 28 percent of the un employed; in 1982, with the sharp increases in joblessness for groups with traditionally lower unemployment rates, their share was down to 23 percent. Even among this group, there was a recessionary decline in the family employment cushion. The number of unemployed relatives in marriedcouple fam ilies rose from 1.9 to 2.7 million during the 1981-82 recession, and the proportion with an employed person in their family edged down from 93 to 86 percent. Unemployed wives are also very likely to have an em ployed person in their family. In 1978, the proportion peaked at nearly 90 percent. Because the person most likely to be working is the husband and because the employment levels of married men were reduced during the recession, the pro portion of unemployed wives with working husbands de clined sharply, from 87 percent in mid-1981 to 75 percent in mid-1982. With the pickup in employment in 1983, the proportion edged up to 77 percent by midyear. As married women have entered the labor force, the pro portion of unemployed husbands with a working family member has increased markedly. Between 1977 and 1981, the proportion of unemployed husbands with a working wife increased from 48 to 55 percent. As mentioned earlier, the 1981—82 recession drove up unemployment among married men, but the proportion with an employed person in the family did not drop as sharply as among other groups. This was primarily because employment levels for wives did not decline nearly as much as for husbands. With the onset of the recovery, the proportion of unemployed husbands with a worker in the family began to rise, and by June 1983, had reached 56 percent. Difficulties in coping with economic downturns are ex acerbated by the fact that, to a certain extent, unemployment tends to run in families. Persons with high levels of edu cational attainment and good preparation for careers often marry each other, as do persons with more limited labor market skills. Even more important, when high unemploy ment hits a specific geographic area, it can affect more than one family member. The fact that the unemployment rate for persons with unemployed spouses runs about three times the rate for persons with employed spouses illustrates this 24 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis point most dramatically. Thus, in 1982, the unemployment rate for wives with unemployed husbands was 20.7 percent, compared with 6.3 percent for wives with employed hus bands. While the number of married couples who are both unemployed is relatively small— it peaked at 400,000 in December 1982 and was down to 300,000 by mid-1983 (not seasonally adjusted)— the impact of multiple unemployment on their financial well-being is considerable. Unemployment is a particularly severe problem for fam ilies maintained by women. Because there are smaller num bers of persons of working age, on average, in these families, the likelihood of there being an employed member to cush ion the effects of unemployment is also smaller. Since quart erly data of this type first became available in 1976, the proportion of unemployed women who maintain families that include an employed person has never been as high as 22 percent. Moreover, unemployed relatives in such fam ilies are substantially less likely to have an employed person in their family than relatives in married-couple families. However, in both cases, the problems are principally struc tural in nature, and the business cycle does not bring about substantial change. Blacks and Hispanics Because the cushioning effect of working family members is so different by family type, an understanding of the family composition of different groups in the population is impor tant. In particular, the family composition of blacks and His panics is quite different from that of whites. (See table 3.) Whites are most likely to live in married-couple families where unemployment rates are relatively low and multiple workers most frequent. Blacks, on the other hand, are more likely than whites or Hispanics to live in families maintained by women, which, as we have just seen, are relatively disadvantaged in the labor market. In 1982, 28 percent of the black working-age population lived in a family main tained by a woman, compared with only 8 percent of the Table 3. Fam ily status of the civilian noninstitutionai popu lation by race and H ispanic origin, 1982 annual averages [In percent] F a m ily s ta tu s W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic 100.0 100.0 100.0 30.0 30.0 12.8 19.1 18.6 11.9 26.3 27.1 15.7 In families maintained by women: Women who maintain families.................. Relatives......................................... 4.4 3.8 14.5 13.6 7.6 6.9 In families maintained by men: Men who maintain families....................... Relatives................................. 1.3 1.3 2.0 2.3 1.8 2.3 11.2 12.3 6.3 5.2 5.6 5.8 All persons...................................... In married-couple families: Husbands ........................................... W iv e s .................................... Relatives...................................... Persons living alone............................ All others................................. white population and 15 percent of the Hispanic population. Primarily because of these differences in family composi tion, the likelihood that unemployed black workers lived in a family with someone employed is lower than for other groups. In 1982, about half of all unemployed blacks lived in a family that included an employed person, compared with about 60 percent of unemployed whites and 56 percent of unemployed Hispanics.4 Q FOOTNOTES A c k n o w l e d g m e n t : The author thanks Stella Cromartie, Kenneth Buckley, and George Methee o f the Office of Employment and Unemployment Statistics for their technical assistance in the preparation of this article. 1The source of data is the Current Population Survey, a monthly sample survey o f households conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. Data relate to the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years o f age and over. A description of the survey appears in the Bureau o f Labor Statistics publication, E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s . Some of the series were seasonally adjusted for the first time for this article. 2 For a discussion of the economic recovery during the first half of 1983, see Norman Bowers, “ Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983,” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis August 1983, pp. 8 -1 4 . A discussion of the 198182 downturn may be found in Michael A. Urquhart and Marillyn A. Hewson, “ Unemployment continued to rise in 1982 as recession deep ened,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , February 1983, pp. 3 -1 2 . M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w . 3 A discussion of the labor market situation of women maintaining fam ilies may be found in Beverly Johnson and Elizabeth Waldman, “ Most women who maintain families receive poor labor market returns,” in this issue. 4 Other articles in this issue focus on specific family types and compare the labor market experience of whites, blacks, and Hispanics in each family type. Women paid less— why? Remuneration is an area in which the difference between the position of men and women is particularly marked. Women are generally more numerous in the “ low-paid” category; in France, for example, a survey carried out by the Centre for the Study of Incomes and Costs, published in 1981, showed that 33 percent of women workers and 13 percent of men in a representative sample were in this category. Furthermore, whether one takes the average or the median, women’s earnings are lower than men’s in almost all countries and in most sectors and occupations. In 1977, women’s earnings in the industrialized countries amounted in real terms to between 55 and 80 percent of those of men. These differences are caused by a variety of factors. Skill and education, experience and seniority as well as hours of work partly explain them; it is well known that women are numerous at the low-skill levels, that they often have little seniority because of interruptions in their careers owing to maternity or turnover in arduous jobs, and that they work fewer hours (limits on overtime imposed by legislation or family constraints). In in dustry the prohibition of night work, which inhibits their recruitment for certain posts, deprives them also of the wage differential for the night shift. It will be noted also— and this is probably the main cause of wage differences— that women workers are unevenly distributed in the various sectors and occupational categories and levels. We have already drawn attention to the existence of a dual employment market assigning men and women to different jobs (paradoxically, it is sometimes because of the competence displayed by women in a precise technique that any access to better-paid jobs is difficult for them). — M a r ie -C laire S eg ur et “ Women and Working Conditions: Prospects for Improvement?” International Labour Review, May-June 1983, p. 301. 25 Mamed couples: work and income patterns Differences in family income among whites, blacks, and Hispanics are rooted in the work patterns of husbands and wives How ard Hayghe Today’s married-couple families— whether white, black, or Hispanic— supply the U.S. labor force with most of its workers. By the turn of the century— a little less than two decades from now— most of these men, women, and chil dren will still be alive. A clearer understanding of the current status of work patterns in white and minority families per mits valuable insights into the nature of work and the family and needs of the family in the closing years of this century. This article deals with white, black, and Hispanic mar ried-couple families, highlighting their current work-income profiles and exploring briefly some of the major differences. More than 8 of 10 white families are married couples, as are 5 of 10 black families and 7 of 10 Hispanic families. Together these families supply about 71 percent of the Na tion’s workers. The data used were obtained primarily from supplemental questions to the March 1983 Current Popu lation Survey.1 lower incomes and a higher incidence of unemployment than white families. About 87 percent of the Hispanic husbands were in the labor force in March 1983 compared with 79 percent of whites and 76 percent of blacks (table 1). On average, Hispanic husbands are substantially younger than their black or white counterparts. But, their relative youth (which im plies inexperience for many) works against them by con tributing to a higher unemployment rate than for whites (but about the same as for black husbands). The majority of black and white husbands have completed high school, whereas more than half of Hispanics left prior to completion. Wives present a somewhat different labor force pattern and the underlying reasons for it are complex. Black wives historically have been more likely to be in the labor force than white wives, as shown by labor force participation rates for selected years: Spouses at work Husbands and wives in white, black, and Hispanic fam ilies2 display considerable differences in age and education, which, in turn, influence their respective labor force par ticipation patterns and income levels. In general, black fam ilies today are more likely to be multiearner families than white or Hispanic married couples. Nonetheless, black mar ried-couple families (like their Hispanic counterparts) have Howard Hayghe is an economist in the Division of Employment and Un employment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 26 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Y ear March March March March 1950 1960 1970 1980 W hite B la ck 22.8 29.6 39.7 49.3 37.0 40.8 52.5 59.0 This gap continued in March 1983, when the participation rates for white and black wives were 51.0 and 60.8 percent, respectively. The historically higher labor force participation rate of black wives reflects several interrelated elements, including the impact of economic problems stemming from many black husbands’ longstanding labor market difficulties and Table 1. Selected characteristics of m arried-couple fam ilies by race and Hispanic origin, March 1983 S e le c te d c h a r a c te r is tic s W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic Married-couple families, total (In thousands)........................................... As percent of all fam ilies.................... 45,273 84.2 3,504 52.9 2,456 71.9 Median age: Husband .............................................. W ife ..................................................... 45.4 42.5 43.8 41.2 38.9 35.9 Median years of school completed: Husband .............................................. W ife ..................................................... 12.7 12.7 12.2 12.2 11.5 11.6 Labor force participation rate:1 Husband .............................................. W ife ..................................................... 79.4 51.0 76.3 60.8 86.9 46.9 Unemployment rate:1 Husband .............................................. W ife ..................................................... 7.8 6.8 12.3 11.3 13.2 16.5 21,702 1,911 1,691 47.9 54.5 68.9 53.1 46.9 52.1 47.9 43.1 56.9 H u s b a n d s a n d w iv e s P re s e n c e o f o w n c h ild r e n 2 u n d e r 1 8 Married couples with children under 18, total (in thousands) ............................ As percent of all married-couple families ........................................... Percent with: Children 6 to 17, none younger Children under 6 ......................... 1Not seasonally adjusted. 20wn children Include only never-married sons, daughters, stepchildren, and adopted children. All other children in the household are excluded. the greater frequency of marital breakups among black fam ilies.3 Undoubtedly, the long history of black men’s above average unemployment rates4 has influenced their wives’ decisions to work outside the home. The following infor mation from different periods illustrates this point. During the sharp labor force buildup prior to World War II, Howard Meyers wrote, “ The demand (for labor) . . . is restricted largely to young white males. . . . Negroes are apparently almost entirely barred from many lines of defense production.” 5 From the early 1960’s: “ Negro women in cities have always been able to get steadier jobs, usually as domestics, than men. This often meant that a black man was capable of being a biological father but not an economic father.” 6 Finally, Richard Freeman found that in the 1960’s (especially after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) black women were much more able to improve their eco nomic position than were black men, in part be cause of the relatively greater ease with which the women were hired into higher-paying occupations.7 While economic factors are among the principal reasons for black wives’ high labor force participation, the cultural heritage of Hispanic women appears to lead, in part, to their relatively low participation rates. As stated by Morris J. Newman, Hispanics are “ an amalgam of several historically and culturally distinct ethnic groups linked together by the shared background of Spanish colonialism in the New World.” 8 Part of this background is an emphasis on the homemaking and childbearing and rearing role of women. Whether white, black, or Hispanic, wives’ employment https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis status appears to be related to their husbands’ status (table 2). While black wives’ labor force participation is relatively high regardless of their husbands’ employment status, all wives whose husbands were employed were more likely themselves to be employed than wives with unemployed husbands or husbands not in the labor force. At first glance, this relationship may appear contrary to logical expectations. Shouldn’t the wife try to replace earn ings lost when the husband is jobless or out of the labor force? Indeed, this is the idea behind the additional-worker hypothesis of labor market activity during cyclical down turns.9 The reality, however, is that wives of unemployed husbands have lower participation rates and experience greater difficulty finding work than wives whose husbands are at work. For instance, among whites, 3 percent of the wives of employed husbands were jobless compared with 11 per cent of those whose husbands were unemployed. For those not in the labor force, age is an obvious explanatory factor; close to 80 percent of the husbands who were not in the work force were 65 years old or over and retired, as were their wives. Children. Conventional wisdom decrees that wives with preschool children are less likely to be in the labor force than wives whose youngest child is school age. While this is true for whites and Hispanics, it has never been true for black wives. Not only do black married mothers continue to have higher labor force participation rates than white or Hispanic mothers, there is also no appreciable difference in the black rates by age of youngest child, as shown below for March 1983: Wives with children under 18 .................. 6 to 17, none younger Under 6 ....................... W hite B lack H isp a n ic 56.2 63.4 48.2 68.5 69.1 67.8 46.8 53.5 41.9 Tab le 2. E m ploym ent status of w ives by em ploym ent status of husbands, race, and H ispanic origin, M arch 1983 H u s b a n d 's e m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s o f w iv e s E m p lo y e d U n e m p lo y e d N o t in la b o r fo rc e 55.3 3.4 41.3 50.1 11.1 38.8 19.1 1.1 79.7 63.1 7.0 29.9 48.9 16.9 34.2 30.8 1.2 67.9 43.8 6.4 49.8 30.7 20.4 48.9 19.6 1.6 78.8 W h ite Percent of wives who were: Employed ............................... Unemployed ............................ Not in labor fo rc e .................... B la c k Percent of wives who were: Employed ................................. Unemployed ............................ Not in labor fo rc e .................... H is p a n ic o rig in Percent of wives who were: Employed ................................. Unemployed ............................ Not in labor fo rc e .................... 27 MONTHLY LABOR RHV1LW December 1983 • Married-Couple Work and Income Patterns bands) and by the number of weeks husbands and wives worked during the year. As shown in the following text tabulation, usual weekly earnings (full-time wage and sal ary) were more than $100 above the medians for blacks and Hispanics in 1982, while the differences among wives’ earn ings were considerably less: Table 3. C h ild re n 1 in m arried-couple fam ilies by em ploym ent status of parents, race, and Hispanic origin, March 1983 Ite m W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic Children under 18 years, total2 (in thousands)........................................... 40,814 3,769 3,722 Percent with: No employed parent ....................... One employed parent or more . . . . One employed parent only . . . . Father ...................................... Mother .................................... Two employed parents............... 6.6 93.4 48.8 44.2 4.6 44.3 10.9 89.1 42.2 31.8 10.4 46.9 14.0 86.0 54.2 49.2 5.0 31.8 Husbands ................ W ives....................... 'Children are defined as "own" children and include only never-married sons, daugh ters, stepchildren, and adopted children. All other children in household are excluded. includes children whose fathers are in the Armed Forces and living with the family on or off base in the United States. These fathers are treated as employed. Because most fathers and just over half of mothers are in the labor force (94 and 54 percent, respectively, for whites, blacks, and Hispanics combined), the overwhelming majority of children have at least one employed parent (table 3). White children are somewhat more likely to have an employed parent than black or Hispanic children, reflecting the higher unemployment rates among black and Hispanic husbands and wives. Income and poverty Whatever the number of earners, the 1982 average annual income of married-couple families continued to be higher for whites than for blacks or Hispanics. Median income for black ($14,200) and Hispanic ($13,800) families was roughly 60 percent of median income for white families ($23,500). For two-earner families where both spouses worked, the difference between whites and blacks was about 12 per centage points, and 21 points between whites and Hispanics (table 4). In addition, white married couples averaged more income from sources other than wages and salaries than either the black or Hispanic couples.10 These income differences are partly explained both by differences in weekly earnings of spouses (especially hus W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic $412 $246 $303 $231 $297 $213 The effect of these differences in weekly earnings on differences in yearly family income is strengthened by the fact that 74 percent of white husbands who were employed at any time in 1982 worked full time all year compared with 68 percent of their black or Hispanic counterparts. The size of the gap in husbands’ average weekly earnings reflects the marked difference in their occupations. By com parison, wives, whose earnings are far more similar, tend to work in much the same occupations (table 5). White husbands are more often employed in managerial, profes sional specialty, and precision production occupations (which are usually relatively high-paying) than their black and His panic counterparts. In contrast, a higher proportion of the blacks and Hispanics work in lower paying jobs, such as operators and fabricators, service workers, and equipment handlers, cleaners, and helpers. Wives, whether white, black, or Hispanic, tend to be concentrated in the same occupa tional groupings, namely, technical, sales, and administra tive support. Poverty. In 1982, about 7 percent of the white couples had incomes below the poverty level11 compared with 16 percent for blacks and 19 percent for Hispanics. These rates reflect the earnings and employment differences discussed above as well as the fact that black and Hispanic families have more children, on average, than white families. The incidence of poverty was relatively low by race or Hispanic origin when both the husband and wife were earn- Table 4. N um ber of earners, m edian fam ily incom e, and poverty status In 1982 of m arried-couple fam ilies, by race and H is panic origin, March 1983 W h ite N u m b e r a n d re la tio n s h ip of e a rn e rs Total (in thousands).............................. In percent ........................................... T o ta l 45,273 100.0 M e d ia n in c o m e B la c k P e rc e n t in T o ta l p o v e rty $26,710 - 6.9 - 3,504 100.0 M e d ia n in c o m e H is p a n ic P e rc e n t M e d ia n in p o v e rty T o ta l $20,680 - 15.6 - 2,456 100.0 in c o m e $19,390 - P e rc e n t in p o v e rty 19.3 - No earners.......................................................... 13.0 12,710 16.8 12.4 7,470 43.9 7.7 7,220 48.9 One earner.......................................................... Husband .......................................................... Wife ............................................................... Other ............................................................... 28.7 23.6 3.9 1.2 22,310 23,460 16,220 21,090 10.3 9.0 16.4 15.7 25.7 17.7 6.8 1.2 13,650 14,240 12,450 I1) 24.4 24.4 23.5 (1) 33.6 30.5 2.0 1.1 13,760 13.820 f1) (1) 29.2 28.7 (1) (1) Two earners or more ........................................ Husband and wife only ................................. Husband, wife, and o th er(s)......................... Husband and other(s) ................................... Other combinations........................................ 58.3 38.9 11.6 6.5 1.4 32,220 29,650 41,980 35,730 25,180 3.0 2.9 1.6 4.4 10.5 61.9 42.9 11.6 4.7 2.8 26,520 26,110 32,900 21,500 18,930 6.2 4.2 3.2 25.8 17.3 58.6 36.9 5.5 9.2 2.0 24,760 23,290 33,190 24.130 t1) 9.6 9.4 6.2 12.9 (1) U l A l l l a n n n ^ — ----- -------------------------------------- .______ 'Median and percent not shown where base is less than 75,000. 28 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 5. O ccupation of em ployed husbands and wives, by race and Hispanic origin, M arch 1983 H usbands W iv e s O c c u p a tio n s W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic Total (in thousands) ...................................................................................... In percent ................................................................................................... 33,152 100.0 2,348 100.0 1,908 100.0 21,766 100.0 1,881 100.0 1,041 100.0 Managerial and professional specialty ....................................................................... Executive, administrative, and managerial............................................................. Professional specialty.............................................................................................. 29.6 16.2 13.4 14.2 8.2 6.0 12.9 8.3 4.6 25.1 9.0 16.0 17.6 4.9 12.7 14.0 6.1 8.0 Technical, sales, and administrative support............................................................ Technicians and related su p p o rt............................................................................ Sales ....................................................................................................................... Administrative support, including clerical ............................................................ 19.4 2.5 12.1 4.9 14.3 2.1 3.8 8.3 13.5 1.9 6.3 5.2 47.4 3.2 12.5 31.7 34.6 3.6 6.4 24.6 39.3 1.9 10.2 27.2 Service occupations ................................................................................................... Private household ................................................................................................... Protective service ................................................................................................... All other .................................................................................................................. 6.3 (1) 2.7 3.6 14.8 — 4.1 10.7 12.2 14.6 1.0 0.3 13.3 28.0 4.9 0.4 22.7 20.8 2.4 0.5 18.0 Precision production, craft, and repair .................................................................... Mechanics and repairers......................................................................................... Construction trades ................................................................................................ Other precision production ................................................................................... 22.1 8.1 7.5 6.4 16.1 6.1 23.3 8.2 1.9 0.3 5.5 4.6 7.7 0.1 2.9 0.2 0.2 2.5 3.7 0.5 0.4 2.9 Operators, fabricators, and laborers ......................................................................... Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors.................................................. Transportation and material m oving....................................................................... Handlers, equipment cleaners, and helpers.......................................................... Farming, forestry, and fis h in g ................................................................................... 17.6 7.5 6.7 3.5 5.0 35.9 12.3 13.7 16.3 13.8 20.4 16.5 0.9 2.9 1.7 9.9 4.8 — 2.6 9.6 7.4 1.5 31.4 14.3 9.1 8.0 6.8 9.6 7.4 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.3 0.6 'Less than 0.05 percent. ers. However the poverty rate of white multiearner families was half that of similar black and one-third that of similar Hispanic families— 3 percent for whites, 6 percent for blacks, and 10 percent for Hispanics in 1982. In contrast, among one-earner families the poverty rate for white families— at 10.3 percent— was 14 percentage points below that of sim ilar black couples and 19 points below the Hispanic rate. Among families with no earners, the differences were 27 percent for whites and 32 percent each for blacks and His panics. Although the incidence of poverty is reduced when there are earners in the family, many families have earners and still remain in poverty.12 In fact, the majority of married couples with incomes below the poverty line in 1982 con tained at least one earner at some time during the year. About 68 percent of white, 65 percent of black, and 80 percent of Hispanic married-couple families in poverty had income from the earnings of at least one member during the year. Moreover, about 1 of 4 families in poverty had two earners or more. Q FOOTNOTES 'The Current Population Survey ( c p s ), conducted for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau of the Census, is a monthly sample survey o f some 60,000 households in the United States. The information obtained from this survey relates to the employment status of persons 16 years old and over in the civilian noninstitutional population. In the March survey, taken each year, supplemental information is obtained annually regarding earnings and income as well as the work experience of individuals in the prior year. Data on persons from the March surveys are tabulated by marital and family status. Because it is a sample survey, estimates derived from the Current Pop ulation Survey may differ from the actual counts that could be obtained from a complete census. Therefore, small estimates or small differences between estimates should be interpreted with caution. For a more detailed explanation, see the Explanatory Note in M a r i ta I a n d F a m i l y P a t t e r n s o f W o r k e r s .A n U p d a t e , Bulletin 2163 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1983). 2 A family consists of two persons or more who are related by blood or marriage and living together in the same household. Relationship of family members is determined by their relationship to the reference person or householder, that is, the person in whose name the housing unit is owned or rented. 3 See Gordon Green and Edward Welniak, “ Changing families, shifting incom es,” A m e r i c a n D e m o g r a p h i c s , February 1983, pp. 4 0 -4 3 . 4See P e r s p e c t i v e s o n W o r k in g W o m e n : reau o f Labor Statistics, 1980), table 65. A D a ta b o o k , Bulletin 2080 (Bu 5 See Howard B. Meyers, “ Effects of the National Defense Program on https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Unemployment and Need” (address presented at the National Conference on Social Work, Atlantic City, N.J.). Release dated June 5, 1941. p. 7. 6 Michael Harrington, “ The Economics of Protest,” in Arthur M. Ross and Herbert Hill, eds., E m p l o y m e n t , R a c e a n d P o v e r t y (New York, Harcourt, Brace and World, 1967), p. 250. 7 Richard B. Freeman, “ Changes in the Labor Market for Black Amer icans, 1 9 4 8 - 7 2 B r o o k in g s P a p e r s o n E c o n o m i c A c t i v i t y 1: 1973, pp. 6 7 131. 8See Morris J. Newman, “ A profile of Hispanics in the U.S. work force,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , December 1978, pp. 3 and 5. 9See, for example, W. G. Bowen and T. A. Finegan, T h e E c o n o m i c s (Princeton, N .J., Princeton University Press, 1969), pp. 147-51. o f L a b o r F o r c e P a r tic ip a tio n 10See M o n e y I n c o m e o f H o u s e h o l d s , F a m i l i e s a n d P e r s o n s in th e U n i t e d S ta te s : 1 9 8 1 , C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts , Series P-60. No. 137 (Bureau of the Census, 1982), table 23. "In accordance with the poverty index adopted by a 1969 Federal interagency committee, families are classified as being above or below the low income level. The poverty threshold for a family of four in 1982 was $9,862. For further details, see M o n e y I n c o m e a n d P o v e r t y S t a t u s o f F a m i l i e s a n d P e r s o n s in th e U n i t e d S t a t e s : R e p o r ts , 1 9 8 2 , C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n Series P-60, No. 140 (Bureau of the Census, 1983), p. 295. 12 For information relating employment problems and economic status see L in k i n g E m p l o y m e n t P r o b l e m s t o E c o n o m i c S ta tu s , Bulletin 2169 (Bu reau of Labor Statistics, 1983). 29 Most women who maintain families receive poor labor market returns The majority of these women have a strong commitment to the labor force, but have lower average educational attainment and earnings, bringing them closer to poverty with each additional child B ever ly L. Jo hnson an d E l iz a b e t h W a ld m a n Women who maintain their own families1 are considerably more likely to work or look for work today than in the past. But their historical pattern of marginal earnings and high unemployment persists, keeping the economic status of their families well below that of the majority of American fam ilies. The results of a March 1983 nationwide survey2 reveal a continuation of the multiple problems that hinder many women who support families from being more competitive in the marketplace. Prominent among these problems are lower average educational attainment and relatively higher proportions with children to raise. Overall picture In March 1983, 9.8 million families had as their principal support women who were divorced, separated, widowed, or never married. These families accounted for 16 percent of all families in the United States, up 5 percentage points from 1970. Sixty percent of women maintaining families were labor force participants, compared with 53 percent in 1970, and their numbers in the labor force doubled over the 13-year period (table 1). The reasons for this increased labor market activity have a great deal to do with the dramatic demographic and social Beverly L. Johnson is a social science research analyst and Elizabeth Waldman is a senior economist in the Division of Employment and Un employment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 30 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis changes of the period, perhaps the most crucial being the movement of the baby-boom generation of the 1950’s and early 1960’s into the working-age population. This move ment was accompanied by record numbers of marriages and, Tab le 1. Selected characteristics of w om en m aintaining fam ilies, M arch 1970, 1975, 1980, and 1983 [Numbers in thousands] C h a r a c te r is tic C iv ilia n n o n in s titu tio n a l p o p u la tio n L a b o r fo rc e p a r tic ip a tio n ra te 1970 1975 1980 1983 Total women maintaining fa m ilie s.................. 5,580 7,316 9,009 9,828 52.9 54.4 59.7 59.6 Never married . . . . Separated ............. W idow ed............... Divorced ............... 610 1,324 2,389 1,258 932 1,707 2,539 2,139 1,453 1,805 2,588 3,164 1,823 1,831 2,559 3,615 57.4 53.8 38.4 77.3 53.6 55.0 37.8 73.9 55.6 60.4 38.3 78.6 55.8 62.3 34.3 78.2 Median age .......... 48.2 43.5 41.4 41.1 — — — - 2,861 3,291 3,788 45.8 45.7 46.9 47.9 4,456 2,661 1,795 5,718 3,638 2,080 6,040 3,746 2,294 59.4 67.0 46.9 60.0 66.3 50.6 67.0 74.0 54.9 67.0 74.2 55.2 5,254 1,967 471 6,302 2,537 637 6,783 2,808 800 53.4 50.9 (2) 55.7 51.2 43.5 62.1 54.0 50.7 60.5 57.1 49.0 With no children1 under age 18 . . . 2,652 With children under age 1 8 ............... 2,928 6 to 17, only . . . 1,815 Under age 6 . . . 1,112 White ..................... Black .................... Hispanic ............... 4,185 1,349 (2) 1970 1975 1980 1983 'Children are defined as "own" children of the family. Included are never-married daughters, sons, stepchildren, and adopted children. Excluded are other related chil dren such as grandchildren, nieces, nephews, cousins, and unrelated children. 2Data not available. N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual Items may not equal totals. Data for 1975 have been revised since initial publication. in turn, a soaring divorce rate.3 Thus, by the time the 1980’s began, divorcees— who have the highest labor force par ticipation rate of any marital category of women— had re placed widows (who have the lowest) as the largest group of women maintaining families. In addition, a sharp rise in childbearing among single women helped increase the num ber of one-parent families. In March 1983, more than three-fifths of the women main taining families were parents with children under age 18 in the home. Labor force participation rates show these single parents had a strong commitment to the labor force. Seventyfive percent were in the work force when their youngest child was school age (6 to 17 years), as were 55 percent of those with preschoolers (under age 6). Once in the labor market, however, the female single parent often had a difficult time finding a job, especially if she had at least one preschool child. In March 1983, the unemployment rate for mothers with preschoolers was 23 percent, compared with 15 percent for mothers whose youngest child was of school age (table 2). The unemploy ment rate for mothers in married-couple families was less than half that of mothers maintaining families. When unemployed, women maintaining families were far less likely than other householders to be living with another relative who was employed full time. In the first quarter of 1983, for example, only 9 percent of all unemployed women maintaining families had someone in their family who had a full-time job. This compared with 16 percent of all jobless men maintaining families without a spouse and about 41 percent of all unemployed husbands. The workplace Most employed women maintaining families worked at full-time jobs— 83 percent in March 1983. Those age 25 to 54 were more likely to be working full time (86 percent) than either younger (72 percent) or older women (73 per cent). Obviously, these high full-time proportions represent a serious commitment on their part to market work. Like most employed women, the largest proportion of those maintaining families were in administrative support jobs (table 3). This was the case for all marital groups. Divorced women (because they were younger and had more years of schooling, on average) were more likely than other women maintaining families to be in managerial and profes sional jobs and less likely to be in service occupations. Most of today’s better paying jobs require at least a high school diploma, and many professional fields require a col lege degree. Although working women maintaining families have been completing more formal schooling in recent years, a high proportion had not completed high school— 23 per cent, compared with 15 percent of working wives. Despite some movement into professional and managerial jobs between 1970 and 1983, particularly by divorcees, most employed women maintaining families have tended to re main in the generally lower paying or lesser skilled jobs https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Tab le 2. Labor force status of w om en m aintaining fam ilies, by presence and age of young est child, and m arital status, M arch 1983 [Numbers in thousands] L a b o r fo rc e s ta tu s T o ta l Women maintaining families .................. 9,828 ■In labor force . . . . 5,861 Participation rate . . 59.6 831 Unemployed . . . . Unemployment 14.2 ra te .................. 3,966 Not in labor force W ith no o w n c h ild r e n 1 u n d e r a g e 18 W ith c h ild r e n 1 u n d e r a g e 1 8 T o ta l C h ild r e n a g e 6 to 1 7 o n ly C h ild r e n under age 6 3,788 1,815 47.9 131 6,040 4,047 67.0 700 3,746 2,780 74.2 406 • 2,294 1,266 55.2 294 7.2 1,973 17.3 1,993 14.6 966 23.2 1,028 Never-married............. 1,823 In labor force . . . . 1,018 Participation rate . . 55.8 Unemployed . . . . 213 Unemployment 20.9 ra te .................. Not in labor force 805 574 372 64.8 33 1,248 646 51.8 180 446 292 65.5 66 802 353 44.0 115 8.9 202 27.9 603 22.6 154 32.6 449 Separated.................... 1,831 In labor force . . . . 1,141 Participation rate . . 62.3 217 Unemployed . . . . Unemployment ra te .................. 19.0 690 Not in labor force 365 228 62.5 37 1,466 913 62.3 180 828 573 69.2 100 637 339 53.2 80 16.2 137 19.7 553 17.5 255 23.6 298 Widowed .................... 2,559 877 In labor force . . . . Participation rate . . 34.3 77 Unemployed . . . . Unemployment ra te .................. 8.8 Not in labor force 1,682 2,025 587 29.0 32 534 290 54.3 44 463 253 54.6 32 71 37 (2) 12 5.5 1,438 15.2 244 12.6 210 (2) 34 Divorced .................... 3,615 In labor force . . . . 2,826 Participation rate . . 78.2 Unemployed . . . . 324 Unemployment ra te .................. 11.5 Not in labor force 790 824 628 76.2 29 2,792 2,198 78.7 295 2,008 1,661 82.7 208 784 537 68.5 87 4.6 196 13.4 594 12.5 347 16.2 246 ’ Children are defined as “ own" children of the family. Included are never-married daughters, sons, stepchildren, and adopted children. Excluded are other related children such as grandchildren, nieces, nephews, cousins, and unrelated children. 2Rate not shown where base is less than 75,000. N ote: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. within a broad occupation group. Their relatively poor oc cupational standing was reflected by their lower full-time wage and salary earnings when compared with husbands or men maintaining families. In the first quarter of 1983, the median weekly earnings for female householders were $256, compared with $400 for husbands or male family house holders.4 Only 30 percent of the wage-earning families maintained by women were multiple-earner families, and their median weekly earnings were $440. In contrast, 56 percent of all married-couple families with earners were in the multipleearner category, and their median weekly earnings were $629. Although weekly aggregate earnings of families main tained by women were relatively low, annual income for families in which the woman herself worked was roughly twice as high as for families in which the householder did not work. For example, in 1982, median family income was $14,580 when the woman was an earner at some time during the year and $7,050 when she was not. 31 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Women Who Maintain Families Tab le 3. Educational attainm ent and occupational distribution of w om en m aintaining fam ilies by m arital status, race, and H ispanic origin, M arch 1983 M a r it a l s ta tu s Ite m T o ta l N e v e rm a r r ie d S e p a ra te d W id o w e d R a c e a n d H is p a n ic o rig in D iv o r c e d W h ite B la c k H is p a n ic E d u c a tio n a l a tta in m e n t Total in labor force: Number (thousands) .............................................................................................. Percent ..................................................................................................................... Less than 4 years high school .......................................................................... 4 years high school only .................................................................................... 1 to 3 years college ............................................................................................ 4 years college or m ore...................................................................................... 5,861 100,0 22.9 46.6 18.3 12.2 1,018 100.0 23.8 44.2 20.0 12.0 1,141 100.0 28.0 47.1 15.3 9.5 877 100.0 33.8 42.0 14.7 9.7 2,826 100.0 17.1 48.7 20.1 14.2 4,104 100.0 19.7 47.9 18.4 14.0 1,603 100.0 31.2 43.5 18.6 6.7 39.2 100.0 48.5 33.7 11.5 6.4 Total employed: Number (thousands) .............................................................................................. P ercent..................................................................................................................... 5,031 100.0 804 100.0 924 100.0 801 100.0 2,502 100.0 3,656 100.0 1,255 100.0 340 100.0 Managerial and professional specialty .................................................................. Executive, administrative, and managerial ........................................................ Professional specialty ......................................................................................... 19.8 8.4 11.5 19.3 7.0 12.3 15.0 6.2 8.9 18.6 9.5 9.2 22.2 9.3 12.9 21.7 9.4 12.3 14.4 5.6 8.8 12.4 7.1 5.3 Technical, sales, and administrative su p p o rt........................................................ Technicians and related support ....................................................................... Sales occupations .............................................................................................. Administrative support, including clerical ........................................................ Secretaries, stenographers, and ty p is ts ........................................................ Financial records processing .......................................................................... Other ................................................................................................................ 41.0 3.1 9.4 28.5 10.1 4.3 14.1 39.1 2.7 7.8 28.5 8.8 4.9 14.8 39.4 2.4 8.9 28.0 9.2 4.3 14.5 37.2 1.7 11.4 24.0 8.4 2.7 12.9 43.4 3.8 9.5 30.1 11.3 4.6 14.2 44.8 3.1 11.1 30.6 11.5 4.9 14.2 29.8 2.7 4.5 22.6 6.4 2.5 13.7 36.5 2.4 7.1 27.1 7.9 2.4 16.8 Service occupations................................................................................................. Private household................................................................................................ Food ..................................................................................................................... Health .................................................................................................................. Cleaning................................................................................................................ Personal................................................................................................................ Other service........................................................................................................ 22.2 2.6 6.8 5.3 3.9 3.0 0.6 25.0 3.2 5.1 6.5 5.7 3.7 0.8 28.6 4.2 8.1 9.1 4.0 2.5 0.7 28.8 4.7 8.9 4.6 7.4 2.6 0.6 16.9 1.0 6.1 3.8 2.2 3.1 0.7 17.8 1.8 6.4 3.1 2.6 3.2 0.7 35.9 5.0 7.4 12.2 7.7 2.8 0.8 25.0 5.0 6.5 2.9 6.5 3.8 0.3 Precision production, craft, and re p a ir.................................................................. 2.5 1.9 2.4 1.7 2.9 2.8 1.5 3.5 Operators, fabricators, and laborers ..................................................................... Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors .............................................. Transportation and material m o v in g .................................................................. Other ..................................................................................................................... 13.9 11.2 0.9 1.8 14.3 12.6 0 1.7 14.1 10.8 1.4 1.9 12.4 10.1 0.9 1.4 14.1 11.2 1.0 1.9 12.3 10.1 0.6 1.6 18.1 14.1 1.6 2.4 21.2 17.6 2.1 1.5 Farming, forestry, and fishing ............................................................................... 0.6 0.5 0.5 1.1 0.4 0.7 0.2 1.2 O c c u p a tio n Situation for minorities As of March 1983, about 70 percent (6.8 million) of all women maintaining families were white; 29 percent (2.8 million) were black, and fewer than 10 percent (800,000) were of Hispanic origin (virtually all of whom were also included in the white racial category). Examining each raceethnic category separately and making labor force partici pation and income comparisons brings the situation for mi nority families into sharper focus. On average, the black women had more children under age 18 and less education than the white women. Black women maintaining families (as well as those of Hispanic origin) have lower median earnings, lower labor force par ticipation rates, and higher unemployment rates than the white women. Also, black and Hispanic families maintained by women were even less likely than similar white families to have more than one earner, probably because they were less apt to have another member of working age in the home. Furthermore, a larger share of white than black or His panic women were divorced, and a smaller proportion had never married. And, as shown earlier, divorced household ers have much higher participation rates than the nevermarried. Thus, in March 1983, the labor force participation 32 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis rate for white female householders was 60 percent, com pared with 57 percent for blacks and 49 percent for Hispanics. Another factor is that 1 of 8 black and Hispanic householders was under age 25, compared with 1 of 13 whites. Younger women, in the early stages of labor force entry, often have not acquired the skill and experience nec essary to hold many of today’s better paying jobs. In ad dition, about half of the Hispanic women householders and one-third of the black had not completed high school, com pared with only one-fifth of the whites. Moreover, the oc cupational distributions for these three groups of women mirror their educational attainment; about 22 percent of employed white householders were professional and man agerial workers, compared with 14 percent for black, and 13 percent for Hispanic women. Blacks and Hispanics were heavily clustered in service and operative jobs which require less formal education and training and pay less money. Finally, the higher participation rate of white women may also reflect the smaller average size of their families, as well as the lower proportion with children under 6 years of age. Unemployment rates were much higher among black women maintaining families (21.7 percent) than white (10.9 Table 4. Labor force status of w hite, black, and Hispanic origin w om en m aintaining fam ilies, by presence of children and m arital status, M arch 1983 [Numbers in thousands] T o ta l R a c e , H is p a n ic o r ig in , a n d m a r ita l s ta tu s W ith c h ild r e n 1 u n d e r a g e 1 8 P o p u la tio n L a b o r fo rc e p a rtic ip a tio n ra te U n e m p lo y m ent ra te White women, to ta l.......... Never m arried............... Separated .................... W idowed....................... Divorced ....................... 6,783 842 1,117 1,963 2,861 60.5 53.6 62.1 34.6 79.7 Black women, to ta l.......... Never married............... Separated .................... W idowed....................... Divorced ....................... 2,808 940 657 536 675 Hispanic women, total . . . Never m arried............... Separated .................... W idowed....................... Divorced ....................... 800 193 255 123 229 W ith no c h ild r e n 1 u n d e r a g e 1 8 P o p u la tio n L a b o r fo rc e p a r tic ip a tio n ra te U n e m p lo y m ent ra te P o p u la tio n L a b o r fo rc e p a r tic ip a tio n ra te U n e m p lo y m ent ra te 10.9 12.4 16.9 7.4 9.9 3,959 442 918 376 2,224 70.3 47.5 62.0 59.0 80.0 13.4 22.4 16.3 12.6 11.5 2,824 399 200 1,588 637 46.8 60.4 62.5 28.8 78.3 5.6 3.7 19.2 4.8 4.0 57.1 57.0 62.1 32.5 71.9 21.7 28.2 22.8 13.8 16.5 1.923 785 504 132 502 60.3 54.0 62.7 39.4 72.9 25.7 30.4 25.3 (2) 20.2 885 155 153 404 173 50.2 72.3 60.1 30.2 68.2 11.3 19.6 14.1 8.2 4.2 49.0 47.2 39.2 35.0 69.0 13.5 14.3 20.0 (2) 9.5 585 136 209 51 189 48.2 33.8 38.8 (2) 68.3 16.0 (2) 21.0 (2) 9.3 214 57 46 72 40 51.4 (2) (2) (2) (2) 6.4 (2) (2) (2) (2) 'Children are defined as “ own” children of the family. Included are never-married daughters, sons, stepchildren, and adopted children. Excluded are other related children such as grandchildren, nieces, nephews, cousins, and unrelated children. 2Rate not shown where base is less than 75,000. percent) and Hispanic women (13.4 percent) (table 4). This reflects, in part, the higher concentration of never-married mothers among black female householders. Typically, nevermarried mothers have higher jobless rates than mothers of other marital status. Annual median income of white families maintained by women ($13,145 in 1982), while much lower than that of other types of white families, was far above the levels of the black ($7,489) and Hispanic ($7,611) families. This pattern persisted regardless of the presence of children. Part of the difference stems from the fact that earnings of black women represented a larger share of their family income than those of the white women— 77 versus 70 percent. Also contributing to this situation was the larger share of divorced white women who received child support or alimony pay ments.5 Moreover, as mentioned earlier, white families maintained by women were more likely to have at least two earners than either the black or Hispanic families. Poverty and children Because average income among families maintained by women is low— whether they are in or out of the paid work force— proportionately more live below the poverty line6 than other families. In 1982, more than 1 of 3 families maintained by women were poor, compared with 1 of 13 other families. Although the percentages of black and His panic families maintained by women in poverty were much greater than for white families of the same type, they all greatly exceeded the proportions for other family groups: Total ....... White ......... Black ........... Hispanic . . . . F a m ilies m a in ta in ed by w om en M a rrie d co u p le fa m ilie s F a m ilies m a in ta in ed b y m en 36.9 28.9 56.1 55.5 7.6 6.9 15.6 19.3 14.7 12.6 25.0 18.4 For families in which the female householder had earnings at some time during 1982, about 1 of 4 were in poverty, compared with more than 1 of 2 of the families in which the householder had no earnings. These differences were even wider for families with children under age 18. When the mother had earnings, 29 percent of their families had incomes below the poverty level; when she did not, 88 percent were poor. Moreover, regardless of the mother’s earner status, the incidence of poverty increased with each additional child in the home— from 37 percent when one child was in the home to 85 percent when four or more children were present. FOOTNOTES 'The terminology “ women maintaining families” or “ female family householder is defined as a never-married, divorced, widowed, or sep arated woman with no husband present and who is responsible for her family. These terms have replaced the phrase “ female-headed families” used in earlier reports in this series. 2 Unless otherwise indicated, data in this report relate to the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over and are based primarily on information from supplementary questions in the March 1983 Current Population Survey. For the most recent report on this subject, containing data for March 1981, see Beverly L. Johnson and Elizabeth Waldman, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis “ Marital and family patterns of the labor force,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , October 1981, pp. 3 6 -3 8 . Sampling variability may be relatively large in cases where numbers are small, and small differences between estimates or percentages should be interpreted with caution. For further information on reliability of data, see the Explanatory Note in M a r i t a l a n d F a m i l y P a t t e r n s o f W o r k e r s : A n U p d a t e , b ls Bulletin 2163 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1983), pp. A -5 A-7. 3The divorce rate has been rising since the mid 1960’s. Between 1966 and 1981, the rate increased from 2.5 per 1,000 population to 5.3 per 33 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Women Who Maintain Families 1,000. For more details, see "Advance Report of Final Divorce Statistics, 1980,” M o n t h ly V it a l S t a t i s t i c s R e p o r t (Washington, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, June 27, 1983), table 1, p. 4. 4See, “ Earnings o f workers and their families: First quarter 1983,” USDL News Release, 8 3-2 0 1 , May 2, 1983 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Sta tistics). 5 See Allyson Sherman Grossman and Howard Hayghe, "Labor force activity of women receiving child support,” M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v i e w , No vember 1 9 8 2, pp. 3 9 -4 1 . Also see D i v o r c e , C h i l d C u s t o d y , a n d C h i l d S u p p o r t , Current Population Report Series, 84 (Washington, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1981), p. 4. 6 Families are classified as being above or below the low income level according to the poverty index adopted by a 1969 Federal Interagency Committee. The poverty thresholds are updated every year to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index. The poverty threshold for a family of four was $9,862 in 1982. For further details, see M o n e y I n c o m e a n d P o v e r t y S t a t u s o f F a m i l i e s a n d P e r s o n s in th e U n i t e d S t a t e s : 1 9 8 2 , Current Pop ulation Report Series P -6 0 , No. 140 (Washington, U .S. Bureau o f the Census, 1983), pp. 3, 4, and 29. Work schedules: a need for flexibility The conditions of work of men and women differ in respect of hours of work. This is partly due to the contraints of life outside work and partly to legislation. Although people are beginning to challenge the idea that women have to assume greater family responsibilities than men, in practice they still bear the brunt of the housework and caring for the children. We have already spoken of the preponderance of married women and mothers among part-time workers; similarly, it is because of family responsibilities that women often do less overtime. Furthermore, while it is rare for the labor legislation to provide for shorter normal working hours for women than for men, it frequently limits more strictly the amount of overtime they can be called upon to perform. Additional leaves and breaks are sometimes provided for women, either in the light of the number of children they have, or simply because they are women (in the German Democratic Republic, for example, one day off a month for housekeeping for women aged 40 or over or for married women). — M a r ie -C l a ir e Seg uret “ Women and Working Conditions: Prospects for Improvement?” International Labour Review, May-June 1983, pp. 304. 34 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Child-care services: a national picture As more mothers hold jobs, the demand for child-care services continues to grow especially for infant and toddler care and is exacerbated by brief maternity leaves — — Sh e il a B. K a m er m an In 1983, for the first time, half of all mothers with children under age 6 were in the labor force.1 Out of a cohort of 19.0 million children under age 6, 47 percent had working mothers. In the near future, the majority of preschoolers will very likely have working mothers, as most school-age children already do. How preschool children are cared for while their mothers work is something that relatively little is known about, although what is known suggests a quite complicated picture. What is the picture today of child-care services for pre school aged children? To help the reader visualize the pic ture, four questions are addressed: • Where are the children of working parents being cared for? • What is known about the kinds of child-care services and arrangements that now exist? • What is known about the quality of care now provided and what is happening to it? • What are the current trends, developments, and emerging issues in the child-care services field? For the purposes of this article, child-care services will include: family day care and center care, public and private nursery school and prekindergartens, Head Start centers, Sheila B. Kamerman is a professor of Social Policy and Planning and co director of Cross-National Studies Research Program, Columbia University and currently is a fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavorial Sciences, Stanford, California. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis all-day care, part-day care, and after-school care. (Nonmonetized care by relatives and brief, occasional babysitting are not included.) The discussion is about relatively regular care or attendance: a specific number of hours per day and regular days per week of provision— in families and group arrangements— under both educational and social welfare auspices. Types and amount of available child care Unfortunately, in addition to the child-care picture not being very clear, it is not very complete. National data are not collected in any systematic fashion on: children in outof-home care during the day; child-care arrangements used while parents work; or child-care service programs. To study what exists and who uses which type of care, one must piece together different, sometimes not fully comparable data, collected by different sources at different times. In providing an overview of child-care services for pre school aged children, the types of services can be distin guished by the following: • The age of the child: — infant and toddler care (0 to 2-year-olds) — preschooler care (3 -to 5-year-olds) • The locus of care: — in own home — in a relative’s home — in a nonrelative’s home — in a group facility (center or school) 35 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Child-Care Services • The auspice of care: — education (nursery school, prekindergarten, kinder garten) — social welfare (day-care center) • The source of funds: — direct and indirect public subsidy (for example, public grants of monies to a provider or a tax benefit such as the child-care tax credit) — private subsidy — employer subsidy; parent fees Preschoolers. Although there are no precise figures con cerning the numbers of children in out-of-home care, by age of child and type of care, the most complete data to date are those on preschool children aged 3 to 5. However, even here estimates must be used. The most recent national survey of day-care centers was completed by Abt Associates in 1977;2 the numbers are known to have grown substantially since then. Moreover, these data do not include programs under educational aus pices: nursery schools, prekindergartens, and kindergartens. These are the largest single type of child-care services for children of this age and the most rapidly growing component among child-care services for this age group. The most currently published consumer data on 3- and 4-year-old children of working mothers are from a 1977 Current Population Survey ( c p s ) conducted by the Bureau of the Census.3 Only data on children under age 5 and on the youngest child in the family were included. However, because the survey was carried out in June, when many schools are closed, children in group care programs are significantly underreported. For example, fewer than 21 percent of children of this age with mothers who worked full time in 1977 were reported as enrolled in group care, as contrasted with 31 percent of all children this age in 1976, according to Census Bureau school enrollment data,4 and 37 percent in 1980, as cited by the National Center for Educational Statistics.5 (See tables 1 and 2.) Furthermore, the proportion of youngsters enrolled in preschool programs was significantly higher when their mothers worked (44 T able 1. P opulation of preschoolers, preprim ary school enrollm ent, and labor force status of m other by c h ild ’s age, 1980 N u m b e rs (in m illio n s ) P e rc e n t of to ta l P e rc e n t w ith m o th e rs in la b o r fo rc e 4.91 2.6 2.3 1.4 .9 531 842 37 46 29 57 85 43 52 34 E n ro llm e n t C h ild ’s age (in y e a r s ) T o ta l (in m illio n s ) 3 to 5 ............. 5 .................... 3 to 4 ............. 4 .................... 3 .................... 9.3 3.1 6.2 3.1 3.1 1Preprimary programs only. An additional number are enrolled in primary school (about 3 percent of cohort). 2An additional 9 percent are enrolled in primary school. N ote: Data are for 50 States and District of Columbia. S ource: National Center for Education Statistics, Preprim ary Enrollm ent 1980 (Wash ington, D.C., U.S. Department of Education, 1982). 36 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis percent). Moreover, these data do not report multiple modes of care: the “ packages” of child-care arrangements which are most frequently used by working mothers.6 Such “ pack ages” include some combination of a preschool program, family day care, and relative care; they may involve four or more different care givers during an average week. More extensive child-care data were collected in the 1982 Census Bureau’s national fertility survey, but these data had not yet been published when this article was prepared. Using 1979 school enrollment data7 and data from the 1977 Abt supply study of day-care enrollment, it is found that almost two-thirds of all 3- to 5-year-olds and more than 70 percent of those with working mothers are in some form of group child-care program. These numbers are made up of the following: ninety-three percent of all 5-year-olds were in nursery school, kindergarten, or first grade in 1979. Thirtyfive percent of all 3- to 4-year-olds were in nursery school or prekindergarten. A growing number of these preschool programs are full day; the proportion of 3- to 5-year-olds in a full-day program doubled during the 1970’s, from 17 percent in 1970, to 34 percent in 1980. By 1980, 37 percent of 3- to 4-year-olds were in preprimary programs. Although kindergarten enrollment for 5-year-olds is about the same whether or not mothers work (almost all 5-year-olds are in preschool or primary school), enrollment rates for 3- to 4year-olds are significantly higher when mothers are in the labor force (44 percent, compared with 31 percent in 1980). All-day enrollment is, of course, far higher for children with full-time working mothers. Although these programs may be valued for their educational content, they are often used because they fulfill a needed child-care function. Kindergarten enrollment increased by almost one-third between 1967 and 1980 (from 65 to 85 percent). However, the increase in nursery school enrollment has been even more dramatic, doubling in numbers during the 1970's and more than doubling as a proportion of 3- to-4-year-olds en rolled (from 16 percent in 1969 to 37 percent in 1980). Moreover, not only are children of working mothers more likely to be enrolled in preschool programs, but the enroll ment rates are even higher when mothers have larger in comes and more education. Fifty-three percent of 3- to 4year-old children in families with median or higher incomes attended a preschool program in 1982, as contrasted with only 29 percent of those in lower income families. As noted, enrollment rates increase as mothers’ education levels rise, and increase still more when those mothers are employed. Only for children whose mothers are college graduates is there no difference between those with working and those with nonworking mothers. For example, about half of such 3-year-olds and 72 percent of such 4-year-olds were in a preschool program in 1982.8 Given these data, one could argue that not only is there growing use of preschool as a child-care service for the 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds with working mothers, but there is especially high use by affluent, educated, working families. Table 2. P reprim ary school enrollm ent by ch ild ’s age and labor force status of m other, 1980 [Numbers in thousands] 3 -y e a r -o ld s T o ta l L a b o r fo rc e s ta tu s o f m o th e r E n ro lle d E n ro lle d a ll d a y All children, 3 to 5 years.................................................................. With mother in labor fo rc e ........................................................... Employed full time .................................................................. Employed part t im e .................................................................. Unemployed............................................................................... With mother not in labor force ................................................... Keeping house .......................................................................... Other ......................................................................................... No mother present .................................................................. 4,878 2.480 1,445 811 225 2,266 2,105 85 131 1,551 1,002 713 196 94 491 439 15 57 857 497 292 163 41 339 309 15 21 All children, 3 to 5 years.................................................................. With mother in labor fo rc e ........................................................... Employed full time .................................................................. Employed part t im e .................................................................. Unemployed............................................................................... With mother not in labor force ................................................... Keeping house............................................................................. In school.................................................................................... Other ......................................................................................... No mother present .................................................................. 52.5 57.1 57.4 59.6 48.5 48.9 48.5 63.0 51.1 42.2 16.7 23.1 23.3 14.4 20.3 10.6 10.1 29.5 9.0 12.5 27.3 34.4 35.4 37.2 22.8 21.5 20.9 37.2 26.4 17.8 E n ro lle d 5 -y e a r -o ld s 4 -y e a r -o ld s E n ro lle d a ll d ay 321 260 198 42 20 50 37 3 13 E n ro lle d 1,423 755 457 245 53 628 582 23 39 E n ro lle d a ll d a y E n ro lle d E n ro lle d a ll d a y 467 332 260 44 28 117 102 3 19 2,598 1,229 696 402 131 1,299 1,214 47 70 763 413 255 111 46 325 300 9 26 15.2 22.8 29.9 9.6 21.7 7.7 7.2 (!) (1) 18.8 84.7 85.2 84.6 86.5 85.1 84.5 83.9 95.1 95.9 77.8 24.9 28.6 31.0 23.9 29.9 21.1 20.7 (!) (1) 28.9 E n ro lle d a s p e r c e n t of a g e g ro u p 10.2 18.0 24.0 9.6 11.1 3.2 2.5 (]) (1) 10.8 46.3 51.9 52.5 53.7 41.1 41.5 40.2 56.1 38.3 38.6 1Base too small for presentation of percentage. N ote: Data are for 50 States and District of Columbia. Details may not add to totals because of rounding. S ource: . National Center for Education Statistics, Preprim ary Enrollm ent, 1980 (Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Education, 1982. Because most of these programs are private and relatively expensive, such high use by the more affluent raises serious questions about the consequences for those children in lower income families (below median income) without access to such programs, whether or not their mothers work. According to the Abt survey, in addition to those children in preschool programs, about 10 percent of the cohort (900,000) were in day-care centers (most were 3- or 4-yearolds). Thus, there seems to be a total of 54 percent of the 3- and 4-year-olds with working mothers in some kind of group care for some part of the day. This figure is likely to be higher because nearly a half million children are esti mated to have been enrolled in Title XX funded centers in 1981, a significant increase over the 1977 figures.9 (And 10 States were not included in the 1981 figure because they did not provide data.) Sixty-five percent of these children were 3- to 5-year-olds (and more than half were age 3 or 4); and almost all had working parents (these figures may have decreased in the past year). Also, Head Start serves nearly 400,000 children, largely 3- and 4-year-olds. Federally funded (Title XX) centers have increased in numbers, too: there were an estimated 11,342 in 1981, a significant jump from the 8,100 identified in the Abt sur vey.10 Some of these centers may have closed in the past year as a consequence of cutbacks in funding, but no specific data on closings are available as of this writing. Head Start programs have also expanded since 1977 and about onefifth are full-day programs. More than 40 percent of the day-care centers in the Abt survey were proprietary or forprofit establishments. Both the numbers and the proportion of proprietary child-care services have grown significantly since then. Because most of the large (multicenter) for-profit https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis child-care service companies did not receive Title XX money in 1981, these numbers are additive rather than overlapping. In addition, about 42 percent of 3- to 4-year-olds whose mothers worked full time in 1977 (and 25 percent of those whose mothers worked part time) were cared for in someone else’s home, usually in a nonrelative’s home (family day care).11 There is a significant, if unknown, overlap between the children in preschool programs and those cared for in a home, be it by a relative or nonrelative, part of the child care “ packaging” mentioned above, and particularly im portant for children whose mothers work longer than the preschool or school hours. About 100,000 children were in federally funded family day-care homes in 1981.12 By far, most children in family day care (about 90 percent of the more than 6 million children estimated to be in family day care for 10 hours or more per week in 1975) were in in formal, unregulated care.13 About 6 percent were in licensed care, including 2 percent in care provided in a home but under the sponsorship of an umbrella agency. However, most of these children were under age 3. Infants and toddlers. As difficult as it is to estimate cov erage and type of care provided for preschoolers, the data on infant and toddler care are far less adequate. A planned national survey of infant care, to be carried out by Abt, was cancelled. The much-cited National Consumer Day Care Study was poorly designed and inadequately analyzed. Ac cording to the 1977 Current Population Survey, the primary care arrangement for children under age 3 was family day care, usually in the home of a nonrelative. Estimating from the CPS data, more than one-third of the children with working mothers were in either family day 37 MONTHLY LABOR RHV1HW December 1983 • Child-Care Services care or group care in 1977. More specifically, about onethird of those under age 3 with full-time working mothers and 17 percent of those with part-time working mothers were in family day care; and more than 9 percent of those with full-time working mothers and 5.5 percent of those whose mothers worked part time were in group care. Infant and toddler care has been growing rapidly since the mid1970’s; thus, the coverage data are undoubtedly higher to day. The following rounds out this picture of how children are cared for while parents (especially mothers) are in the labor force: • • • A small proportion of babies with working mothers are cared for, albeit briefly, by mothers on maternity leave. Fewer than 40 percent of working mothers are entitled to some paid leave at the time of childbirth, usually for about 6 to 8 weeks, and a somewhat larger group may remain home on an unpaid but job-protected leave for 3 or 4 months.14 Some parents, especially those with preschool aged chil dren, work different shifts in order to manage child care. Although this method of care has received very little attention thus far, researchers using three different data sets (the Current Population Survey, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, and the Quality of Employment Sur vey) have found that this may be a more significant pattern of work by parents with young children than suspected.15 A very few employers, largely hospitals, provide onsite child-care services (about 230 hospitals; about 50 em ployers), and a few others subsidize payment of care.16 Child-care quality: programming and standards More than half of all nursery schools are private, 66 percent. Eighty-eight percent of the kindergartens are pub lic. There are limited national data available on these pro grams. On the other hand, a much more extensive picture exists regarding the more than 11,000 federally funded day care centers that existed in the fall of 1981. This type of center is discussed here. In early 1980, the Department of Health and Human Services issued proposed day-care regulations concerning group size, staff-to-child ratios, training qualifications for care givers, nutrition, health care, parent participation, and social services, to become effective in October. In the mean time, the Congress, in its Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1980, delayed the effective date of these proposed regulations. Before the proposals could become effective, the Social Services Block Grant Act was enacted. Among other things, this Act amended Federal requirements and standards regarding Title XX day-care centers. This meant that State and local standards, where they existed, were in effect. (Such standards are likely to be below those set by the Federal Government.) The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act mandated the 38 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Department of Health and Human Services to “ assist each State in conducting a systematic assessment of current prac tices in Title XX funded day-care programs and provide a summary report of the assessment to Congress by June 1, 1981.’’17 According to the report, provider practices were in compliance with or surpassed the proposed Federal stand ards. More specifically: • • • • • Despite the fact that 24 of the 47 States reporting have no group size requirements, all stated their centers had groups smaller than those set in the proposed regulations for all but the under-2-year-olds. Staff-to-child ratios were significantly higher than pro posed for children aged 3 and older; however, they were significantly lower for those under 3. Although only half the States required the centers to provide training, nearly all provided such training and three-quarters of centers’ care givers and one-half of family day-care mothers had gone through such a train ing program within the past year. Seventy-five percent of the centers (and half of the homes) provided the Department of Agriculture’s recommended child-care food program. Seventy percent of the States assured children in care funded by Title XX the needed health services and 75 percent assured them needed social services. Federal funding under Title XX has been significantly cut since 1981. Day care was one of the three highest funded Title XX services, representing 18 percent of all Title XX expenditures nationwide. Funding for the child nutrition program, a component of public support of day care, has also been reduced. Few programs have actually closed thus far, but this may occur in the future. Given the large cut backs in Federal grants to States, most States are under growing financial pressure in this area. These States will view themselves as fortunate if they can maintain the quan tity of care; they are unlikely to enforce standards, even if standards exist. A question emerges regarding whether the extent of com pliance that existed in 1981 was not related to the expec tations of Federal standards and enforcement. From now on, the States will have primary responsibility for setting and enforcing standards concerning the health, safety, and developmental needs of children in care. Whether providers will continue to maintain these standards and whether States will monitor what providers do remains to be seen. Thus, day-care regulation joins preprimary school generally as an arena in which the protection of children will depend com pletely on the State. Towards the future The only significant Federal development is the expansion of the child-care tax credit in 1982 and, subsequently, mak ing it available even to those who do not itemize deductions. However, unless the credit is increased, and made refund- able, it will have no— or very little— value to low- and moderate-income families. The Dependent Care Assistance plan and the salary re duction plan for certain private insurance benefits may open the way for some expansion in employer-sponsored child care services.18 However, little has occurred as yet. The major development in the field in recent years has been child-care information and referral services. These have burgeoned, especially in California, where they are publicly funded; this is an area in which more employers are con sidering involvement as well. Finally, concern with the qual ity of education is leading some States and localities to reexamine their preprimary programs. Some are now ini tiating full-day kindergartens; others are establishing pre kindergarten programs; and still others are considering both. The demand for child-care services continues to grow, and most parents of preschoolers want an educational pro gram. Most such programs are private, particularly those below kindergarten level. Unfortunately, good programs are very often expensive. Moreover, there is still a scarcity of full-day programs, so many parents are “ packaging” a group program with one or more other types of care, with con sequences not yet known. The cutbacks in funding group programs are especially significant in their impact on ser vices for low- and middle-income children. Many of these children who were in publicly subsidized preschool pro grams are being transferred into informal and unregulated family day care as subsidies are cut back and programs close or parents lose their eligibility for a subsidy; the children must adapt to a new care giver, and often to the loss of friends. The biggest current demand for child-care services is for infants and toddlers, because it is among their mothers that the increase in labor force participation has been greatest, and the scarcity of services most severe. Paid maternity (disability) leaves are available only to a minority of working women and are usually brief. There is an urgent need to expand and improve maternity-related benefits provided at the workplace.19 Data concerning how babies and toddlers are being cared for and what types of care exist are largely inadequate. Most of these children are in informal family day-care arrangements but, here again, little is known about these services. Although the current child-care picture is hardly com plete, all that is known suggests the likelihood of continuing demand. Accessibility, affordability, and quantity will re main central issues but questions regarding quality will in creasingly come to the forefront. Q FOOTNOTES A c k n o w l e d g m e n t : This article is based on work done as a part of a national study of child-care services sponsored by the Carnegie Corpora tion. 'Elizabeth Waldman, “ Labor force statistics from a family perspec tive,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , December 1983, pp. 14-18. 2U .S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children, Youth, and Families, in collaboration with Abt Associates, Inc. (Cambridge, Mass.), N a t i o n a l D a y C a r e S tu d y (Washington, U.S. Gov ernment Printing Office, 1979), and N a t i o n a l D a y C a r e H o m e S tu d y (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980). 3T r e n d s in C h i l d C a r e A r r a n g e m e n t s o f W o r k in g M o t h e r s , C u r r e n t P o p u la ti o n R e p o r t s , Series P -2 3 , No. 117 (Bureau of the Census, 1982). 4 N u r s e r y S c h o o l a n d K i n d e r g a r t e n E n r o l lm e n t o f C h ild r e n a n d L a b o r F o r c e S t a t u s o f T h e i r M o t h e r s , O c t o b e r 1 9 6 7 to O c t o b e r 1 9 7 6 , C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts , Series P -2 0 , No. 318 (Bureau of the Census, 1978). (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, 1982). 5 P r e p r i m a r y E n r o l lm e n t 1 9 8 0 6Mary Jo Bane, Laura Lein, Lydia O ’Donnell, C. Ann Stueve, and Barbara W ells, “ Child care arrangements of working parents,” M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v i e w , October 1979, pp. 50-56; and Sheila B. Kamerman, P a r e n ti n g I n A n U n r e s p o n s i v e S o c i e t y : M a n a g i n g W o r k a n d F a m i ly L i f e (New York, The Free Press, 1980). 1 S c h o o l E n r o l l m e n t — S o c i a l a n d E c o n o m i c C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f S tu d e n ts : O c to b e r 1 9 7 9 , C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts , o f the Census, 1981); and Series P -2 0 , No. 360 (Bureau N a t i o n a l D a y C a r e S tu d y . "National Center for Education Statistics, unpublished data. 9 R e p o r t t o C o n g r e s s , S u m m a r y R e p o r t o f th e A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t S t a t e P r a c t i c e s in T i tle X X F u n d e d D a y C a r e P r o g r a m s https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (U .S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children, Youth, and Families, 1982). 10Ibid. 11T r e n d s in C h i l d C a r e A r r a n g e m e n t s . 12R e p o r t t o C o n g r e s s . i3UNCO, Inc., N a t i o n a l C h i l d C a r e C o n s u m e r S tu d y : partment of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1977). 1975 (U.S. De 14Sheila B. Kamerman, Alfred F. Kahn, and Paul W. Kingston, M a (New York, Columbia University Press, 1983). te r n ity P o lic ie s a n d W o rk in g W o m en 15Steven L. Nock and Paul W. Kingston, “ The Family Workday,” forthcoming; Harriet B. Presser, “ Working Women and Child Care,” in P.W. Berman and E.R. Ramey, eds., W o m e n : A D e v e l o p m e n t a l P e r s p e c t i v e (Washington, U.S. Govern ment Printing Office, 1982); and Graham L. Staines and Joseph H. Pleck, “ Work Schedules’ Impact on the Family,” Research Monograph, 1982, processed. J o u r n a l o f M a r r i a g e a n d th e F a m i ly , 16Sandra L. Burud, Raymond C. Collins, Patricia Divine-Hawkins, “ Employer-Supported Child Care: Everybody Benefits,” C h ild r e n T o d a y , M ay-June 1983, pp. 2 -7 . 17 See R e p o r t t o C o n g r e s s . The data provided in this report are baseline data for future assessments of the quality of Title XX funded day care once these programs are no longer subject to Federal regulations. 18 For a description of these benefits, see Sheila B. Kamerman, M e e t i n g (White Plains, N .Y ., Work in America, forthcoming). F a m i l y N e e d s : th e C o r p o r a t e R e s p o n s e 19Kamerman, Kahn, and Kingston, M a te r n ity P o lic ie s . 39 How do families fare when the breadwinner retires? Using national longitudinal survey data on the retirement experience o f men, researchers provide some insights on the economic situation o f families in which the major wage earner is retired K e z ia Sp r o a t For 17 years, the National Longitudinal Surveys of Labor Market Experience ( n l s ) have gathered data that illuminate family life when the breadwinner has retired. The n l s were developed in 1965 to answer the question, “ Why are in creasing numbers of men leaving the work force before retirement age?” Because the male traditionally provides the bulk of family income, most retirement studies focus on his experience, but the surveys also include a female cohort who will soon be in retirement. Older men in the n l s , now ages 62 to 76, have been interviewed 11 times in 17 years, and the mature women, now ages 46 to 60, 11 times in 16 years.1 Researchers have used the data to look at predictors and measures of retirement and its relationship to health, family income, family struc ture, and general life satisfaction. Retirement planning and the effects of unexpected retirement have also been studied. (See box, page 42.) This article summarizes some recent NLS-based retirement studies which carry the strongest im plications for the family— why and how the major bread winner enters retirement, sources of family income after retirement, and overall satisfaction with life after retirement. Because family well-being depends largely on why and how the major breadwinner enters retirement, voluntary and in voluntary retirees will be discussed separately. Kezia Sproat is the editor at the Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University. 40 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Routes to retirement Involuntary retirement—A. Poor health. Involuntary re tirees fare much less well than others, especially in the many cases where early withdrawal from the labor force is linked to the male breadwinner’s poor health. In an analysis of 1966-76 data, Herbert Parnes and Gilbert Nestel found that poor health had forced 43 percent of white retirees and 52 percent of black retirees ages 55 to 69 out of the labor force.2 Of retirees under age 62, 60 percent of whites and 67 percent of blacks retired for health reasons. In contrast, only 30 percent of white retirees and 29 percent of blacks in this age group retired voluntarily. More recent data confirm that blacks are more likely than whites to retire for health rea sons.3 Men who retired because of poor health were more likely to have been in a low level occupation and to receive lower retirement income. They were also less likely to have any pension coverage other than social security, which is not available until age 62.4 Thomas Chirikos and Gilbert Nestel reported that even if workers are only moderately impaired, they suffer a 2.5- to 12-percent loss of annual earnings before retirement.5 Several studies confirm that poor health often forces re tirement before the age of pension eligibility. Eric Kingson looked at 10 years of n l s data for a subsample of 240 black men and 405 white men who withdrew permanently from the labor force before age 62. Of these, 85 percent of the whites and 91 percent of the blacks had either reported health problems before withdrawing or were certifiably disabled.6 Of these disabled men, 51 percent of the whites and 55 percent of the blacks received social security disability ben efits. The remaining 34 percent of the whites and 36 percent of the blacks did not, so they and their families faced the multiple hardships that accompany poor health and severely reduced income.7 The deleterious effects of early retirement because of poor health are illustrated by Frank Mott and Jean Haurin in a study of widows from the women’s cohort as well as widows of the older men’s cohort.8 Mott and Haurin estimated that 1 of 5 men ages 45 to 59 in 1966 would die before reaching age 65. The families of men who suffer health problems before dying are concentrated in the lower socio-economic strata, and their economic disadvantages are intensified by medical costs and declining income. From an economic point of view, families of men who die unexpectedly fare better than those whose major breadwinner suffers a long illness. Wives do not enter the labor force in large numbers during their husbands’ last illness. Many do find jobs after their husbands’ death, although their general lack of edu cation and work experience make them liable to earn very low wages. Mott and Haurin found that 29 percent of the white widows live below the poverty line, compared with 19 percent before the death of the husband; among blacks, the corresponding figures are 47 percent before and 67 per cent after.9 B. Unemployment. Unemployment forces many workers into early retirement, according to Sally Bould.10 She found that duration of previous unemployment is a significant in fluence on early retirement. “ Retirement is, perhaps, a mechanism for dealing with long-term chronic unemploy ment . . . a way of managing the spoiled identity that long term unemployment can produce.” Bould’s conclusion is supported by Herbert Parnes, Mary Gagen, and Randall King, whose study focused on men who lost jobs they had held for at least 5 years. Long-term effects on income, psychological health, and occupational status were observed even for those who later found jo b s.11 According to Eric Kingson, events early in life, some of which are uncon trollable (“ choice” of parents, for example), significantly influence retirement prospects. Kingson concluded that a life cycle perspective is required to understand the favorable and unfavorable “ opportunity tracks” which lead some very early retirees and their families to comfort and others to severe poverty.12 Nan Maxwell also found that retirement income and overall well-being are closely linked to prior labor market experiences.13 C. Mandatory plans. Another cause of involuntary early retirement is agreements which specify mandatory retire ment at a certain age, although very few workers are forced out by such plans. Between 1966 and 1976, only 3 percent of retirees in the n l s sample were forced out by mandatory https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis plans. Herbert Parnes and Lawrence Less found that in 1980, fewer than 5 percent of the retirees in the n l s sample, then ages 59 to 73, had been forced to retire. Larger proportions of blacks were forced out than whites, and among these, more nonfarm laborers (13 percent) than any other occu pational group.14 Voluntary retirement. Voluntary early retirement is largely driven by pension availability. The answer to the question that gave rise to the n l s — why the trend to early retire ment?— seems now clearly to be that increasingly attractive pensions make early retirement more feasible financially. More blacks than whites choose to retire early because av erage earnings are lower for blacks and there is less differ ence between their wages and social security and other pensions.15 Postretirement labor market activity Being “ retired” does not preclude labor market activity. Such activity has been analyzed using data from the n l s . Herbert Parnes and others find that conclusions about re tirement will differ depending on whether retirement is mea sured by pension coverage, subjective self-report, or labor market withdrawal. Parnes and Less believe the choice of retirement measures should be governed by the specific questions one aims to illuminate. The number of men ages 57 to 71 who were retired in 1980 ranges from 5.4 to 8.9 million, depending on which measure of retirement is used.16 In this discussion, the subjective self-report definition is used— that is, “ retirees” are those who said at some time during the interviews that they had stopped working at a regular job. About 1 of 6 retirees were in the labor force in 1980. Men forced to retire because of mandatory plans were more likely to be in the labor market; their participation rate was 24 percent, compared with 16 percent for all retirees. Only 10 percent of those who left the labor force for health reasons were still working or looking for a jo b .17 Parnes and Less found that age, health, type of prere tirement job, attitude toward retirement, and family income (exclusive of the retiree’s earnings) all influence post-re tirement labor market activity. Professional and managerial workers are more likely than other occupational groups to continue working after retirement. Marital status and whether the retiree’s wife worked were important: retirees were more likely to work if their wives did. In the 1980 survey, em ployed retirees were asked their main reasons for working during retirement. The two most frequent answers were “ inflation” (30 percent) and “ boredom with retirement” (26 percent).18 Retirees who did not participate in the labor market in 1976 showed little desire to do so: only 2 percent of whites and 5 percent of blacks said they would accept a job if one were offered.19 Data for 1980 and 1981 continued to show 41 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Effects o f Retirement on Families NLS-based studies on retirement Beck, R. W. and S. H. Beck, “ Taking Elderly Parents In: In cidence in Middle and Later Life,” paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Gerontological Society of America, Boston, Mass., November 1982. Beck, S c o tt H., “ Adjustment to and Satisfaction with Retire ment,” J o u rn a l o f G e ro n to lo g y , Vol. 37, No. 5, 1982, pp. 616-24. ------, “ Differences in Expected and Actual Retirement Age” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, 1981). ------, “ The Role of Other Family Members in Intergenerational Occupational Mobility,” S o c io lo g ic a l Q u a rterly, Spring 1983, pp. 273-85. Bould, Sally, “ Unemployment as a Factor in Early Retirement Decisions,” A m erica n J o u rn a l o f E c o n o m ics a n d S o c io l o g y , April 1980, pp. 123-36. Carliner, Geoffrey, S o c ia l S ecu rity a n d the L a b o r S u p p ly o f O ld e r M en , Report No. dlma- 2 1-91-78-56 (U.S. De partment of Labor, 1980). Chirikos, Thomas N. and Gilbert Nestel, “ Impairment and Labor Market Outcomes: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis,” in Herbert S. Parnes, ed., W ork a n d R e tirem en t (Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 1981), pp. 93-131. George, Linda K., Erdman B. Palmore, and Gerda Fillenbaum, “ Predictors of Retirement,” J o u rn a l o f G e ro n to lo g y , Vol. 37, No. 6, 1982, pp. 733-42. Hardy, Melissa A., “ Social Policy and Determinants of Retire ment: A Longitudinal Analysis of Older White Males, 1969— 1975,” S o c ia l F o rc e s, June 1982, pp. 1103-22. Kingson, Eric R., “ Critique of Early Retirement Study Dis puted,” A g in g a n d W ork, Spring 1982, pp. 93-110. ------, “ Disadvantaged Very Early Labor Force Withdrawal,” P o lic y Issu es f o r th e E ld e rly P o o r (Community Services Administration, c s a pamphlet 6172-8), pp. 23-30. ------, “ The Health of Very Early Retirees,” Winter 1981, pp. 11—22. ------, “ Involuntary Early Retirement,” stitu te f o r S o c io e c o n o m ic S tu d ies, A g in g a n d W ork, The J o u rn a l o f the In Autumn 1981, pp. 27- 39. ------, “ Retirement Circumstances of Very Early Retirees: A Life Cycle Perspective,” A g in g a n d W ork, Summer 1981, pp. 161-74. ------and Richard M. Sheffler, “ Aging: Issues and Economic Trends for the 1980s,” In qu iry, Fall 1981, pp. 197-213. that most retirees are not interested in working. In 1980, 93 percent of the retirees who were not working responded negatively to a hypothetical job offer; and in 1981, when a question about part-time work was included, this negative response rate was reduced by only 5 percentage points.20 Family income In 1975, voluntary retirees and their families were making do with a family income one-third less (adjusted for infla 42 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Leigh, Duane E., “ The National Longitudinal Surveys: A Se lective Survey of Recent Evidence, ’’ R e v ie w o f P u b lic D a ta U se, 1982, pp. 185-201. Maxwell, Nan L., “ The Determinants of Postretirement Income: A Segmented Labor Market Approach,” paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Pittsburgh, Penn., March 1983. ------, “ The Retirement Experience: Psychological and Financial Linkages to the Labor Market,” S o c ia l S c ien ces Q u a rterly, forthcoming. Mott, Frank L. and R. Jean Haurin, “ The Impact of Health Problems and Mortality on Family Well-Being,” in Herbert S. Parnes, ed., W ork a n d R e tirem en t (Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 1981), pp. 198-253. Palmore, Erdman B., Linda K. George, and Gerda G. Fillen baum, “ Predictors of Retirement,” J o u rn a l o f G e r o n to l o g y, 1982, pp. 733-42. Parnes, Herbert S., “ Inflation and Early Retirement,” L a b o r R e v ie w , July 1981, pp. 27-30. M o n th ly ------, Mary G. Gagen, and Randall H. King, “ Job Loss Among Long-Servibe Workers,” in Herbert S. Parnes, ed., W ork a n d R etirem en t (Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 1981), pp. 6592. ------and Lawrence Less, F rom W ork to R etirem en t: The E x p e r ie n c e o f a N a tio n a l S a m p le o f M en (Columbus, The Ohio State University, Center for Human Resource Research, 1983). ------, Lawrence Less, and Gilbert Nestel, W ork a n d R e tirem en t D a ta : N a tio n a l L o n g itu d in a l S u rvey s o f M id d le -A g e d a n d O ld e r M en , 1 9 6 6 - 1 9 7 6 (Columbus, The Ohio State Uni versity, Center for Human Resource Research, 1980). ------and Gilbert Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience,” in Her bert S. Parnes, ed., W ork a n d R etirem en t (Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 1981), pp. 155-97. Parsons, Donald O., “ Black-White Differences in Labor Force Participation of Older Males,” in Herbert S. Parnes, ed., W ork a n d R e tir e m e n t (Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 1981), pp. 132-54. Reimers, Cordelia W., ‘‘The Timing of Retirement of American Men” (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1977). Shaw, Lois B., R etirem en t P la n s o f M id d le-A g e d M a rried W om en (Columbus, The Ohio State University, Center for Human Resource Research, 1983). Revised version forthcoming in T he G e r o n to lo g is t. tion) than in the year prior to retirement. The major sources of family income in 1975 were social security (received by 90 percent of those who retired at the normal age, but only 52 percent of those forced out early because of poor health); and disability benefits (received by only 44 percent of those who retired for health reasons). About 21 percent had in come from earnings of their wives, in amounts often as high as the retiree’s own earnings; 12 percent of white retirees and 17 percent of blacks had earnings of their own. Other family members’ earnings contributed to the income of about 10 percent of all retirees, and 8 percent had income from self employment.21 In 1980, the wife’s earnings continued to be a source of family income for about one-fourth of the white married retirees and 18 percent of the blacks. Almost all retirees (90 percent) received social security benefits, and nearly threefifths had other pensions, mostly from private employers; 17 percent had earnings of their own (10 percent from selfemployment); 12 percent had income from other family members; and 7 percent received public assistance, a source of income for 1 of 4 black retirees, but only 1 of 16 whites. Other income, primarily from property, was received by two-thirds of the whites, but only one-sixth of the blacks. Married male retirees were more likely to have property income. Average family income in 1980 for male retirees ages 57 to 71 was $15,300; however, the range was wide— from $16,900 for married whites to $6,900 for unmarried blacks.22 As for amounts from each source, Parnes and Less es timated that in 1980, social security and other pensions accounted for less than three-fifths of total family income for whites, and two-thirds for blacks, whose social security benefits reflect weighting in favor of lower wage workers. Married men, on average, showed 10 percent of family income from wives’ earnings, 8 percent from current earn ings, and 2 percent from wives’ pensions. Among unmarried men, income from other family members accounted for about 11 percent of the average income of whites and 25 percent of that of blacks.23 Parnes and Less found that median family income (ad justed for inflation) of married retirees in 1980 was about half the income they received in the year before retirement. They also saw a downward trend in real family income since 1976 that they attributed to reduced labor market activity of family members. Nonetheless, in 1980, 59 percent of married retirees and 48 percent of the unmarried said their income was adequate or better than adequate, and an ad ditional one-third said they had “just enough to get by.” Only 9 percent of married retirees and 15 percent of the unmarried said they “ cannot make ends meet.” However, Parnes and Less observed “ very profound” differences by race in the responses, particularly among married retirees; 25 percent of the blacks but only 8 percent of whites said they could not make ends meet, while 21 percent of whites but only 3 percent of blacks said they saved regularly.24 Psychological well-being The 1980 survey asked questions about retirees’ use of leisure time, their retirement decisions, and their general satisfaction with life. Most retirees said life in retirement was about what they expected, and about 1 of 4 said it was better, but the strong effect of reason for retirement on well being is illustrated by the fact that among those who had https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis retired for health reasons, more than 30 percent found re tirement worse than they expected. Health, occupational level, and family income positively influenced the extent of purposeful leisure time activities, which, in turn, increased life satisfaction. Participating in the paid labor market and being married to a healthy spouse also significantly in creased life satisfaction for retirees.25 Women’s retirement plans Thus far, the whole family’s well-being in retirement can only be suggested by nils research because of the focus on the male breadwinner. However, some data about retirement planning have recently become available from the women’s cohort. In 1979, women then ages 42 to 56 who were in the labor force or who said they intended to seek jobs were asked their plans for retirement and those of their husbands. Lois B. Shaw analyzed the responses of more than 800 married women who had retirement plans.26 Women who had a planned retirement age were slightly better educated and were more likely to be employed, to be covered by a pension plan, to expect social security from their own em ployment, and to have a husband who had retirement plans as well. Of these women, 36 percent planned to retire before age 62; 22 percent at ages 62 to 64; 19 percent at age 65; 3 percent after age 65; and 20 percent planned never to retire. Most did not plan to retire when their husbands did, except for those with husbands of the same age as them selves. As with the men, women’s retirement plans appeared to have been influenced first by pension eligibility and sec ond by the desire to share the leisure of retirement with a spouse. Women with husbands in poor health were less likely to plan to retire before age 65, but a woman’s own health did not strongly affect her plans.27 Other family members Some recent work by Scott and Rubye Beck suggests additional questions about family life that the n l s can be used to answer. They compared cross-sectional and longi tudinal data and found that estimates of the number of fam ilies who had formed extended households are doubled when longitudinal data are used. Between 1966 and 1976, 20 percent of white and 50 percent of black middle-aged cou ples had taken parents or grandchildren to live in their homes.28 Scott Beck found in another study that paternal grandfather’s and grandmother’s occupations have positive effects on the occupations of men, even when the influence of father’s occupation is taken into account.29 Future researchers will have the benefit of greatly ex panded n l s data. The five n l s cohorts include significant numbers of father-son, mother-daughter, husband-wife, brother-sister, and other sibling pairs. Their experiences promise to be of great value in illuminating many questions about family life. □ 43 MONTHLY LABOR RLV1EW December 1983 • Effects o f Retirement on Families ---------- F O O T N O T E S ---------'In 1966. the older men's cohort included 5,034 respondents; in the most recent survey in 1981,2,832 were interviewed. Of these, 2,286 were married, spouse present; 13 were married, spouse absent; 246 were wid owed; 114 were divorced, 66 were separated; and 107 were never married. As for numbers o f dependents excluding the wife, 2,316 had none and 505 had one or more. The mature women’s cohort began in 1976 with 5,083 respondents, and in 1981, 3,677 were interviewed. In 1981, 2,577 o f the women's cohort were married, spouse present; 7 were married, spouse absent; 387 were widowed; 362 were divorced, 178 were separated; and 166 were previously married. As to the number of dependents ex cluding the husband: 1,817 had none and 1,846 had one or more. Note that the wom en’s cohort is generally 15 years younger than the men’s. Attrition has not significantly changed the representativeness of the sam ples. For a detailed description of the n l s , see T h e N a t i o n a l L o n g it u d i n a l S u r v e y s H a n d b o o k (Columbus, The Ohio State University, Center for Human Resource Research, 1982). 2Herbert S. Pames and Gilbert Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience,” in Herbert S. Pames, ed., W o r k a n d R e t ir e m e n t : A L o n g i t u d i n a l S tu d y o f M e n (Cambridge, Mass., The m i t Press, 1981), pp. 155-97. 3 Herbert S. Pames and Lawrence Less, F r o m W o r k to R e t ir e m e n t : T h e (Columbus, The Ohio State University, Center for Human Resource Research, 1983). E x p e r ie n c e o f a N a tio n a l S a m p le o f M e n 4 Pames and Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience,” p. 166. 5Thomas N. Chirikos and Gilbert Nestel, “ Impairment and Labor Mar ket Outcomes: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis,” in Herbert S. Pames, ed., W o r k a n d R e t i r e m e n t : A L o n g i t u d i n a l S tu d y o f M e n (Cam bridge Mass., The m i t Press, 1981), pp. 93-131. 6Eric Kingson, “ The Health of Very Early Retirees,” A g i n g a n d W o r k , Winter 1981, pp. 11-22. See also Eric Kingson, “ Disadvantaged Very Early Labor Force Withdrawal,” P o l i c y I s s u e s f o r th e E l d e r l y P o o r (Com munity Services Administration, c s a pamphlet 6172-8), pp. 23-30; and “ Critique of Early-Retirement Study Disputed,” A g i n g a n d W o r k , Spring 1982, pp. 9 3 -1 0 0 . 7Eric Kingson, “ Involuntary Early Retirement,” T h e J o u r n a l Autumn 1981, pp. 2 7-39. o f th e I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i o e c o n o m i c S tu d ie s , 8 Frank L. Mott and R. Jean Haurin, “ The Impact of Health Problems and Mortality on Family W ell-Being,” in Herbert S. Pames, ed., W o r k a n d R e t i r e m e n t : A L o n g i t u d i n a l S tu d y o f M e n (Cambridge, Mass., The M IT Press, 1981), pp. 198-253. 9 I b id ., p. 228. 10Sally Bould, “ Unemployment as a Factor in Early Retirement De cisions,” A m e r i c a n J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m i c s a n d S o c i o l o g y , April 1980, pp. 123-26. " Herbert S. Pames, Mary G. Gagen, and Randall H. King, “ Job Loss 44 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Among Long Service Workers,” in Herbert S. Pames, ed., W o r k (Cambridge, Mass., The Press, 1981), pp. 6 5 -9 2 . R e tir e m e n t: A L o n g itu d in a l S tu d y o f M e n and m it 12Eric Kingson, “ Retirement Circumstances of Very Early Retirees: A Life Cycle Perspective,” A g i n g a n d W o r k , Summer 1981, pp. 161-74. 13 Nan L. Maxwell, “ The Supply and Demand Determinants o f Postre tirement Income: A Segmented Labor Market Approach,” paper presented at the annual meetings of the Population Association of America, Pitts burgh, Penn., March 1983; and “ The Retirement Experience: Psycholog ical and Financial Linkages to the Labor Market,” S o c i a l S c ie n c e Q u a r te r l y , forthcoming. l4Pames and Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience,” p. 164; Pames and Less, F r o m W o r k t o R e t i r e m e n t , p. 32. 15This effect in regard to disabled workers is demonstrated in Donald O. Parsons, “ Black-White Differences in Labor Market Participation of Older M ales,” in Herbert S. Pames, ed., W o r k a n d R e t i r e m e n t : A L o n g i t u d i n a l S t u d y o f M e n (Cambridge, M ass., The m i t Press, 1981), pp. 132— 54. 16Pames and Less, F r o m W o r k to R e t i r e m e n t , p. 9. 17I b i d . , p. 25. See also Linda K. George, Erdman B. Palmore, and Gerda Fillenbaum, “ Predictors of Retirement,” J o u r n a l o f G e r o n t o l o g y , Vol. 37, No. 6, 1982, pp. 733 -4 2 . 18Pames and Less, F r o m W o r k to R e t i r e m e n t , pp. 3 7 -4 5 . 14Pames and Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience.” pp. 167-72. 20Pames and Less, F r o m W o r k to R e t i r e m e n t , p. 52. 21 Pames and Nestel, “ The Retirement Experience,” pp. 179-82. 22 Pames and Less, F r o m W o r k to R e t i r e m e n t , pp. 56 ff. 23I b i d . , p. 73. 24I b i d . , pp. 7 2 -7 5 . 35I b i d . , pp. 100-10. 26Lois B. Shaw, R e t i r e m e n t P l a n s o f M i d d l e - A g e d M a r r i e d W o m e n (Columbus, The Ohio State University, Center for Human Resource Re search, 1983). Revised version forthcoming in T h e G e r o n t o l o g i s t . 2'Because Shaw includes only employed women in the sample, those with severe health impairments do not appear. 28Scott and Rubye Beck, “ Taking Elderly Parents In: Incidence in Middle and Later L ife,” paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Gerontological Society of America, Boston, M ass., November 1982. 29Scott H. Beck, “ The Role of Other Family Members in Intergenerational Occupational M obility,” S o c i o l o g i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , Spring 1983, pp. 2 7 3 -8 5 . Productivity Reports Recent productivity measures depict growth patterns since 1980 L a w r e n c e J. F ulco Strong productivity advances and falling unit costs prevailed in the second quarter of 1983, as the U.S. economy entered the expansionary phase of the business cycle. Gains in out put and hours were substantial, while prices rose only mod erately. These results, recently announced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, are part of an update of the information that affected data from 1980 forward, and are shown in table 1. Business productivity advanced at a 5.7-percent annual rate during the second quarter of 1983, the largest gain in more than 2 years. Hourly compensation rose only 3.5 per cent during the same period, the smallest rise in more than a decade. As a result, unit labor costs— compensation per unit of output— declined 2.1 percent, the first drop in 8 years. Unit nonlabor payments (which include indirect busi ness taxes, capital consumption allowances, and profits) rose, but the increase was largely offset by the drop in unit labor costs. This was reflected in slower price gains. The productivity gain during the second quarter of 1983 resulted from a 12.5-percent increase in output and a 6.5percent gain in hours. This provides added evidence that the contraction phase of the cycle has ended. In the first half of 1983, employment in the business sector rose by nearly 1 million persons, and the average workweek in creased from 36.1 to 36.4 hours. The following tabulation summarizes seasonally adjusted annual rates of change in productivity, output, and hours from the first to the second quarter of 1983. S e c to r Business .................. Nonfarm business Manufacturing Durable ---Nondurable . Nonfinancial corporations .. P ro d u c tiv ity O u tp u t H ou rs 5.7 6.1 8.4 10.1 6.1 12.5 12.7 20.5 23.8 16.2 6.5 6.2 11.2 12.4 9.4 5.5 13.5 7.6 Lawrence J. Fulco is a supervisory economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Changes in productivity and cost measures are typically stated as quarterly movements expressed at a compound annual rate. Thus, the 5.7-percent increase reported for pro ductivity in the business sector during the second quarter is the amount by which output per hour of all persons would increase in a year if the performance during the second quarter were to continue. Comparing the current quarter with the same period of the previous year yields a more stable series. The following tabulation shows changes in productivity, output, and hours from the second quarter of 1982 to the second quarter of 1983 Business .............................. Nonfarm business .......... Manufacturing ............ Durable ................... Nondurable.............. Nonfinancial corporations ................ P ro d u c tiv ity O u tpu t H o u rs 3.2 3.3 6.7 7.6 5.5 3.2 3.0 5.4 4.6 6.7 0.0 -0 .3 - 1.2 -2 .8 1.1 3.3 2.7 - 0 .6 The productivity measures in this report show the changes in the output of goods and services produced per hour of all persons. As chart 1 shows, productivity has been virtually flat since 1973 while hourly compensation— and unit labor costs— have increased steadily in each sector. The relatively small productivity gains since 1973 contrast sharply with the growth which occurred from 1947 to 1973. For example, in nonfarm business, output per hour advanced 2.5 percent per year prior to 1973, and 0.6 percent per year thereafter.1 While a large number of potential causes of the slowdown have been investigated, much of it remains unexplained. Although output is related to hours of all persons engaged in a sector, the productivity series do not measure the sep arate contribution of labor, capital, or any other specific factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effects of many influences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level of output; utilization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization of production; managerial skill; and the characteristics and effort of the work force. The updated figures show that productivity in the business sector declined by 0.1 percent during 1982. Compensation and costs Hourly compensation, which measures employer outlays to secure the services of labor, rose at a 3.5-percent annual rate during the second quarter of 1983, the smallest quarterly 45 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Productivity Reports Tab le 1. R evised percent change from preceding quarter in productivity, hourly c om pensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted at annual rate, 1 9 8 0 -8 3 1980 S e c to r a n d m e a s u r e 1981 I II III IV I Business: Output per hour of all persons ............... O utput........................................................ Hours ........................................................ Employment...................................... Average weekly hours....................... Hourly compensation ............................... Real hourly compensation ....................... Unit labor c o s ts ......................................... Unit nonlabor payments ......................... 1.5 1.0 -0 .5 1.4 -1 .9 12.5 -3 .1 10.8 8.1 -2 .9 -1 0 .2 -7 .5 -4 .5 -3 .2 11.9 -1 .8 15.2 4.5 1.3 0.4 -0 .9 -0 .8 '-0 .1 9.5 1.5 8.0 11.5 1.0 6.2 5.1 3.3 1.7 9.5 -2 .6 8.4 14.8 5.9 8.3 2.3 1.7 0.6 11.5 0.8 5.3 24.7 Nonfarm business: Output per hour of all persons ............... O utput........................................................ Hours ........................................................ Employment...................................... Average weekly hours....................... Hourly compensation .............................. Real hourly compensation ....................... Unit labor c o s ts ......................................... Unit nonlabor payments ......................... 0.6 0.8 0.2 1.4 -1 .1 11.8 -3 .7 11.2 13.1 -3 .5 -1 1 .0 -7 .7 -4 .6 -3 .3 11.6 -2 .0 15.7 8.7 2.7 1.6 -1 .1 -0 .9 -0 .2 9.7 1.8 6.9 7.1 1.3 6.4 5.0 3.2 1.8 10.0 -2 .2 8.5 14.3 Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons ............... O utput........................................................ Hours . . ................................................... Employment...................................... Average weekly hours....................... Hourly compensation .............................. Real hourly compensation ....................... Unit labor c o s ts ......................................... 1.4 -0 .3 -1 .7 -1 .1 -0 .6 13.9 -1 .9 12.3 -7 .3 -2 1 .3 -15.1 -11.1 -4 .5 14.2 0.3 23.2 0.0 -6 .5 -6 .5 -6 .6 0.1 13.1 4.9 13.1 Nonfinancial corporations: Output per all employee h o u r .................. O utput........................................................ Employee h o u rs......................................... Employment...................................... Average weekly hours....................... Hourly compensation .............................. Real hourly compensation ....................... Unit p ro fits ................................................ Total unit c o s ts ......................................... Unit labor costs .............................. Unit nonlabor costs ......................... -2 .0 -1 .7 0.3 1.7 -1 .4 11.9 -3 .6 16.6 16.3 14.2 22.5 -2 .3 -1 0 .3 -8 .1 -5 .0 -3 .3 12.0 -1 .6 -2 7 .6 18.2 14.7 28.7 5.9 3.0 -2 .8 -2 .6 -0 .2 10.3 2.3 24.1 5.5 4.1 9.4 IV 2.2 2.3 0.1 1.7 -1 .6 7.4 -1 .0 5.0 6.9 4.7 5.2 0.5 2.0 -1 .4 9.6 -2 .2 4.7 21.0 -4 .1 -7 .8 -3 .9 -2 .7 -1 .3 7.5 0.3 12.2 0.8 5.2 7.8 2.2 2.0 0.4 11.5 0.9 6.0 24.8 0.4 0.8 0.5 1.6 1.1 7.3 -1 .1 6.9 6.0 3.8 4.3 0.5 2.2 -1 .7 9.6 -2 .1 5.6 20.0 13.7 22.3 7.6 4.6 2.8 9.9 -2 .3 -3 .4 5.6 7.2 1.5 0.7 0.7 9.8 -0 .7 4.0 1.4 3.8 2.4 2.6 -0 .1 8.0 -0 .4 6.5 0.1 5.6 5.5 3.5 1.9 9.6 -2 .5 30.3 8.4 9.5 5.5 5.7 8.7 2.8 2.1 0.7 11.4 0.7 65.3 7.4 5.3 13.3 1.4 2.3 0.9 1.9 -1 .0 7.4 -1 .0 -10.1 8.0 5.9 13.8 Nonfarm business sector In the second quarter of 1983, productivity in nonfarm business rose 6.1 percent, reflecting a 12.7-percent gain in output and a 6.2-percent increase in hours of all persons. 46 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1982 III increase since 1971. Including wages, salaries, supple ments, and employer contributions to employee benefit plans, these costs typically account for about two-thirds of the value of output in current dollars. The slow rate of increase in hourly compensation coupled with a faster relative in crease in productivity during the second quarter contributed to the decline in unit labor costs. The 2.1-percent drop in the second quarter of 1983 was the first decrease in this measure since 1975. Real hourly compensation, which takes into account changes in consumer prices, declined during the second quarter, as the modest increase in hourly compensation was more than offset by the rise in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers ( c p i - u ) . During the first quarter of 1983, the seasonally adjusted c p i - u declined somewhat, so real hourly compensation increased faster than the un adjusted series. II I 1983 II III -0 .4 -6 .3 -6 .0 -3 .2 -2 .9 9.4 6.3 9.8 -8 .8 -1 .6 -1 .0 0.6 -1 .0 1.7 6.4 1.1 8.1 -0 .1 1.7 -1 .1 -2 .7 -1 .9 -0 .9 6.7 -1 .0 5.0 -2 .0 -4 .4 8.3 -4 .0 -2 .7 -1 .4 7.6 0.3 12.6 3.4 0.1 -6 .2 -6 .2 -3 .5 -2 .9 10.0 6.8 9.9 -8 .5 -0 .4 -0 .8 1.2 -0 .6 1.8 5.8 0.5 6.2 3.7 2.6 1.3 -1 .3 0.7 -1 .9 7.5 4.0 4.8 -6 .3 -1 6 .8 -1 1 .2 -8 .1 -3 .4 9.8 2.4 17.2 2.8 -1 1 .2 -1 3 .7 -9 .3 -4 .8 13.1 9.8 9.9 0.8 -2 .9 -3 .7 -6 .4 2.9 5.1 -0 .2 4.3 3.6 4.5 0.9 2.2 -1 .3 8.7 -2 .9 37.6 7.4 5.0 14.1 -3 .2 -8 .5 -5 .4 -3 .8 -1 .6 8.0 0.8 -1 5 .4 12.0 11.7 12.9 0.9 -6 .5 -7 .3 -4 .3 -3 .1 10.9 7.7 -4 2 .2 8.8 9.9 6.1 -0 .5 -1 .8 -1 .2 -2 .5 1.3 5.4 0.1 -2 .1 6.0 6.0 6.0 IV I II 3.3 -2 .3 -5 .4 -3 .8 -1 .6 5.7 3.7 2.3 3.2 2.0 4.2 2.1 0.7 1.4 5.4 5.8 3.3 10.5 5.7 12.5 6.5 4.4 2.0 3.5 -0 .7 -2 .1 15.0 2.3 -0 .6 -2 .9 -2 .1 -0 .8 7.2 -0 .6 4.7 -3 .4 1.3 -4 .1 -5 .3 -4 .0 -1 .4 5.8 3.7 4.4 2.0 3.7 4.9 1.2 1.2 6.8 7.2 3.0 0.6 6.1 12.7 6.2 3.9 2.2 4.3 0.1 -1 .6 15.0 9.6 -8 .7 -8 .4 -0 .4 6.5 -1 .2 2.8 1.2 -9 .0 -1 0 .0 -9 .2 -1 .0 4.5 2.5 3.3 8.0 12.7 4.3 0.2 4.1 10.7 11.1 2.5 8.4 20.5 11.2 6.6 4.3 2.1 -2 .1 -5 .9 3.8 -0 .5 -4 .1 -3 .2 -0 .9 6.4 -1 .3 3.8 1.8 2.4 0.1 0.6 -6 .0 -6 .5 -5 .2 -1 .3 5.4 3.4 -3 1 .4 6.7 4.8 11.9 3.4 4.6 1.2 5.5 13.5 7.6 4.7 2.8 2.9 1.3 98.5 -2 .5 -2 .4 -2 .8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 6.0 6.4 79.9 10.0 2.5 -2 .8 Employment and average weekly hours also rose. Hourly compensation rose 4.3 percent in the second quarter, the slowest rise since 1971, and this was reflected in the 1.6-percent annual rate of decline in unit labor costs. Prices of goods and services produced in the nonfarm business sector rose 3.3 percent in the second quarter, compared with a 5.3-percent rise during the first quarter. Manufacturing The manufacturing sector currently employs about 19 million persons, about a quarter of the nearly 80 million engaged in the business sector as a whole. Productivity in manufacturing posted very strong gains during the second quarter of 1983. Output rebounded strongly and hours of all persons increased rapidly; productivity increased 8.4 per cent. Hourly compensation showed a small increase, 2.1 percent, the smallest quarterly gain since 1965, and coupled with the increase in productivity, resulted in a 5.9-percent decline in unit labor costs. Productivity advanced faster— and unit labor costs de clined more rapidly— among durables. The durables sub sector is larger and more volatile than nondurables, accounting Chart 1. Productivity and related m easures in four m ajor sectors in the econom y, 1973-83 R atio scale (1973 = 100) 250 230 210 190 170 150 130 110 90 250 230 210 190 170 150 130 110 90 for about 11 million persons, compared with 8 million in nondurables. Nonfinancial corporations Nearly 55 million persons were employees of nonfinancial corporations in mid-1983. These firms cover a broad spec trum of the economy and are of particular interest because quarterly profit measures are available for them. Their quar terly productivity movements tend to be somewhat different than those of the business sector, partly reflecting the dif fering importance of industries in each sector. But as can be seen in chart 1, the long-term trends are very similar to those of the larger business sectors. Table 2 shows the relative importance of the hours of the major industrial sub https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis divisions in the business, nonfarm business, and nonfinan cial corporate sectors in 1982. Goods-producing industries are relatively more important in the nonfinancial corporate sector than in the nonfarm business sector because these activities are characterized by corporate ownership. In addition, a small number of cor porate farms are included, which are not in the nonfarm sector. In the nongoods-producing subdivision, important exclu sions occur in trade (sole proprietorships and partnerships), finance, insurance, and real estate (stock and commodity brokers, finance and insurance companies, banks and credit institutions), and in services (noncorporate organizations). During the second quarter of 1983, nonfinancial corporate 47 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Productivity Reports Tab le 2. Industry com position of m ajor sector produ c tivity m easures, 1982 H o u rs o f la b o r in p u t S e c to r B u s in e s s N o n fa rm b u s in e s s N o n fin a n c ia l c o r p o ra tio n s B illio n s B illio n s B illio n s P e rc e n t P e rc e n t P e rc e n t of h o u rs o f h o u rs o f h o u rs Total............................ 150.09 100.0 143.70 100.0 102.44 100.0 Goods producing.................... 57.62 38.4 51.23 35.7 45.94 44.9 Farm s................................. Mining................................. Manufacturing.................... Durable............................ Nondurable.................... Construction....................... 6.39 2.61 39.01 23.15 15.86 9.61 4.3 1.7 26.0 15.4 10.6 6.4 0.00 2.61 39.01 23.15 15.86 9.61 0.0 1.8 27.2 16.1 11.1 6.7 0.37 2.41 37.36 (1) (1) 5.80 0.4 2.3 36.5 (1) (1) 5.7 Nongoods producing............. 92.47 61.6 92.47 64.3 56.50 55.1 11.00 38.71 11.20 27.51 7.3 25.8 7.5 18.3 11.00 38.71 11.20 27.51 7.7 26.9 7.8 19.1 9.94 28.43 9.66 18.77 9.7 27.7 9.4 18.3 11.11 28.30 3.35 7.4 18.9 2.2 11.11 28.30 3.35 7.7 19.7 2.3 2.17 15.96 0.00 2.1 15.6 0.0 Transportation, communica tions, and public u tilities............................ Trade.................................... Wholesale....................... R etail............................... Finance, insurance, and real estate....................... Services............................... Government enterprises . . . 1Not available. productivity rose 5.5 percent as output increased 13.5 per cent and hours rose 7.6 percent. Hourly compensation rose 48 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis slowly and unit labor costs declined. Unit nonlabor costs also decreased, but unit profits rose sharply during the sec ond quarter. The 98.5-percent annual rate of growth in unit profits resulted from a 125.2-percent increase in profits cou pled with the gain in output. Profits— which are a residual— tend to be very volatile. However, even after allowing for the steep growth in the first half of 1983, unit profits were only 14 percent higher than in 1977. Unit nonlabor costs (the balance of unit nonlabor payments) increased 64 per cent, and unit labor costs increased 53 percent over the same period.2 The resurgence of profits brought the index of profit per unit of output to 114.1 in the second quarter, the highest level achieved by this index, which covers the 1958 and forward period. The previous peak level (108.6) was at tained during the third quarter of 1981. ---------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1Percent change was calculated using compound rate formula. 2To put these items in perspective, output in nonfinancial corporations during the second quarter of 1983 was nearly $1,890 billion (annual rate); compensation outlays accounted for $1,255 billion, profits were almost $165 billion, and nonlabor costs, $470 billion. Gross domestic product was $3,073 billion during the second quarter. Research Summaries 0 0 Skill level differences in white-collar pay C a r l P r ie s e r Differing duties and responsibilities, as well as skill levels, are major factors contributing to wide variations in pay for the same occupation. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ na tional survey of professional, administrative, technical, and clerical pay ( p a t c ) underscores this observation in relation to two dozen white-collar occupations, spanning 101 work level categories in private industry. The annual survey, cov ering medium and large firms, is used in the pay compar ability process for Federal white-collar employees.1 Engineers, the survey’s most heavily populated occupa Tab le 1. a 0 ü 01 0 tional group, illustrate the effect of skill levels on pay. Recent engineering graduates averaged $2,130 monthly in March 1983 at the first of eight survey work levels; at level VIII, engineers responsible for highly complex engineering programs averaged $5,578 a month. In the clerical occu pations, pay levels for secretaries ranged from $1,228 monthly for individuals following general instructions in carrying out the recurring work of the office (level I) to $1,928 monthly for those independently handling “ the unexpected” for policymakers in large organizations (level V). Other examples of occupations with substantial pay differences across work levels are found in table 1. It should be noted, however, that relatively small differ ences in salary levels were evident for the same level of work in different occupations. The following tabulation shows a 4-percent spread separated the highest paid and lowest A verage m onthly salaries of em ployees in selected w hite-collar occupations in private e stablishm en ts, M arch 1983 All establishments Occupational level and Federal GS grade equivalent 2,500 workers or more Number of employees1 Average monthly salaries Percent of all establishment employment 14,446 24,627 38,490 22,037 7,319 1,423 81,627 1,939 2,279 2,854 3,489 4,317 23 31 25 29 33 56 I (GS—1 1 ) ......................... II (GS—12) ....................... III (GS—1 3 ) ....................... IV (GS—14) ....................... 857 1,195 741 246 2,807 3,472 4,441 5,660 I (GS—5 ) ........................................... II (GS—7) ......................................... III (GS—9 ) ......................................... IV (GS—11) ...................................... 1,578 3,530 4,762 2,431 1,560 1,941 2,354 2,841 10,804 11,168 8,698 5,395 1,556 1,715 2,023 2,428 1,311 2,905 2,343 2,875 Manufacturing Percent of ail establishment salaries Percent of all establishment employment Percent of ail establishment salaries 103 109 105 102 101 100 47 57 58 59 58 63 98 100 100 98 97 98 Accountants and Auditors Accountants Accountants Accountants Accountants Accountants Accountants Chief Chief Chief Chief I (GS—5) ................................... II (GS—7 ) ................................... III (GS—9) ................................. IV (GS—11) .............................. V (GS—12) ................................. VI (GS—13) .............................. accountants accountants accountants accountants Auditors Auditors Auditors Auditors Public accountants Public accountants Public accountants Public accountants I (GS—7 ) .......................... ll (GS—9) ....................... III (GS—11) .................... IV (GS—12) .................... _ _ _ _ — — 11 — 99 — 63 57 — 98 99 — 31 35 37 39 102 103 103 104 25 36 36 51 111 105 103 100 _ _ _ _ — — — — — — — — — — — — 33 28 113 109 Attorneys Attorneys I (GS—9) ......................................... Attorneys ll (GS—1 1 ) ...................................... _ _ 17 108 See footnote at end of table. Carl Prieser is a labor economist in the Division of Occupational Pay and Employee Benefit Levels, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis MONTHLY LABOR REVIHW December 1983 • Research Summaries Tab le 1. C o n tin u ed — A verage m onthly salaries of em ployees in selected w hite-collar occupations in private establishm en ts, M arch 1983 A ll e s ta b lis h m e n ts O c c u p a tio n a l le v e l a n d F e d e r a l G S g ra d e e q u iv a le n t N u m b e r of e m p lo y e e s 1 A v e r a g e m o n th ly s a la r ie s 2 ,5 0 0 w o rk e rs o r m o re M a n u fa c tu r in g P e rc e n t of a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t e m p lo y m e n t P e rc e n t of a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t s a la r ie s P e r c e n t o f a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t e m p lo y m e n t P e r c e n t o f a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t s a la r ie s Attorneys Attorneys Attorneys Attorneys Attorneys III (GS—12) .................................... IV (GS—13) .................................... V (GS—1 4 ) ...................................... VI (GS—15) ................................... 3,518 3,342 1,851 492 $3,523 4,432 5,467 7,076 36 35 45 50 103 102 101 103 29 41 41 48 104 100 102 97 6,726 18,096 16,259 5,366 1,593 1,969 2,419 2,964 20 23 38 61 112 106 102 99 70 85 85 82 100 99 100 98 14,660 35,263 51,033 29,142 9,654 1,648 1,846 2,185 2,620 3,177 35 32 36 47 66 108 107 105 103 103 35 35 38 46 61 105 104 103 103 104 140 443 837 561 1,528 2,659 1,082 308 1.658 1,833 2,202 2,757 2,723 3,504 4,275 5,220 43 39 60 — — 11 44 102 106 103 _ 41 43 76 77 69 54 52 112 108 102 99 99 101 100 Buyers Buyers Buyers Buyers Buyers I (G S -5 ).............................................. II (GS-7) ........................................... III (GS—9 ) ........................................... IV (GS-11) ........................................ Programmers Programmers/analysts Programmers/analysts Programmers/analysts Programmers/analysts Programmers/analysts 1 (G S -5 ).................... II (GS-7) .................. III (G S -9 ).................. IV (G S -1 1 )............... V (GS—12) ............... Personnel Management Job analysts I (GS-5) ................................... Job analysts II (GS-7) : ................................. Job analysts III (GS-9) ................................. Job analysts IV (GS-11) .............................. Directors of personnel I (G S -1 1 ).................. Directors of personnel II (GS—12) ............... Directors of personnel III (GS—13) ............... Directors of personnel IV (GS—14) ............... _ __ 106 104 Chemists and Engineers Chemists Chemists Chemists Chemists Chemists Chemists Chemists I (GS-5) ......................................... II (G S -7 )......................................... III (GS-9) ...................................... IV (GS-11) .................................... V (GS-12) ...................................... VI (GS-13) .................................... VII (GS-14) .................................... 2,653 5,255 9,197 9,413 6,850 2,312 779 1,780 2,028 2,451 2,953 3,574 4,252 5,039 20 30 28 30 33 36 50 108 108 110 107 104 100 102 77 88 89 88 93 91 97 100 99 99 100 101 Engineers Engineers Engineers Engineers I (G S -5 )......................................... II (GS-7) ...................................... III (GS-9) ...................................... IV (GS-11) ................................... 32,588 64,490 131,048 138,684 2,130 2,314 2,609 3,061 51 46 47 51 102 102 102 102 73 75 72 72 99 99 99 99 Engineers Engineers Engineers Engineers V (G S -12)...................................... VI (GS-13) ................................... VII (G S -1 4 )................................... VIII (GS—15) ................................. 99,584 46,426 12,383 3,125 3,643 4,288 4,847 5,578 56 62 58 54 101 101 100 101 67 65 58 50 100 100 101 103 1 (G S -3 ).................. II (GS—4) ............... III (G S -5 )............... IV (G S -7 )............... V (GS-9) ............... 4,996 18,416 31,731 35,260 20,491 $1,304 1,506 1,788 2,088 2,360 23 37 41 52 64 104 105 102 101 101 67 71 79 78 75 100 99 99 99 99 Drafters 1 (GS-2) ........................................... Drafters I I (G S -3 )........................................... Drafters I I I (GS -4) ......................................... Drafters IV (GS-5) ......................................... Drafters V (G S -7 )........................................... 2,029 11,234 22,217 24,714 20,170 1,012 1,302 1,533 1,871 2,316 15 25 25 31 44 109 110 107 104 103 53 54 67 68 68 99 95 97 98 98 Computer Computer Computer Computer Computer Computer 1 (GS-4) ....................... II (G S -5 )....................... III (GS-6) .................... IV (GS-7) .................... V (GS—8 ) ....................... VI (GS-9) .................... 6,003 17,903 29,576 15,171 3,136 477 1,040 1,221 1,416 1,727 2,026 2,100 27 24 26 38 53 — 110 120 113 108 106 — 30 34 45 47 38 105 98 103 103 104 Photographers II (GS-5) .............................. Photographers III (G S -7 ).............................. Photographers IV (G S -9 ).............................. 705 730 397 1,703 2,035 2,235 29 48 76 108 101 97 69 71 84 103 100 101 T Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering Engineering e c h n ic a l S technicians technicians technicians technicians technicians operators operators operators operators operators operators u p p o r t See footnote at end of table. 50 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Tab le 1. C o n tin u ed — A verage m onthly salaries of em ployees in selected w hite-collar occupations in p rivate establishm en ts, M arch 1983 A ll e s ta b lis h m e n ts O c c u p a tio n a l le v e l a n d F e d e r a l G S g ra d e e q u iv a le n t M a n u fa c tu r in g 2 ,5 0 0 w o rk e rs o r m o re P e rc e n t of a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t s a la r ie s P e rc e n t o f a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t e m p lo y m e n t P e r c e n t o f a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t s a la r ie s N u m b e r of e m p lo y e e s 1 A v e r a g e m o n th ly s a la r ie s P e r c e n t o f a ll e s ta b lis h m e n t e m p lo y m e n t Accounting clerks 1 (GS—2 ) ............................ Accounting clerks II (GS—3) ......................... Accounting clerks III (GS—4 ) ......................... Accounting clerks IV (GS—5 ) ......................... File clerks 1 (GS—1) ......................................... File clerks II (GS—2) ...................................... File clerks III (G S -3 )...................................... 26,763 87,578 59,324 21,355 19,738 10,926 3,457 S933 1,122 1,339 1,621 809 911 1,142 13 17 26 39 9 18 24 126 117 111 109 108 113 110 30 40 44 52 13 20 21 105 99 101 101 106 117 124 Key entry operators I (GS-2) ....................... Key entry operators II (G S -3 )....................... Messengers (GS—1 ) ...................................... 52,682 32,483 11,746 1,049 1,255 910 20 29 26 119 113 113 35 42 26 104 106 110 Personnel clerks I (GS-3) ............................ Personnel clerks II (GS—4) ............................ Personnel clerks III (GS—5) ......................... Personnel clerks IV (GS—6) ......................... Purchasing assistants I (GS—4) .................... Purchasing assistants II (GS—5 ) .................... Purchasing assistants III (GS—6) .................. 1,605 3,575 3,234 1,528 3,883 3,987 1,185 1,075 1,286 1,442 1,683 1,236 1,567 2,005 14 18 18 27 20 37 82 106 114 110 116 124 113 104 53 64 64 65 81 87 86 99 100 102 103 100 100 100 I (GS—4) ...................................... II (GS—5 ) ...................................... III (GS—6) .................................... IV (GS—7) .................................... V (GS—8 ) ...................................... 57,779 61,183 102,687 45,266 20,993 1,228 1,336 1,521 1,686 1,928 28 34 37 36 34 115 106 109 107 109 42 45 52 48 54 105 102 102 101 103 Stenographers I (G S -3 )................................. Stenographers II (GS--4) ............................... Typists I (G S -2 ).............................................. Typists II (GS-3) ........................................... 13,635 8,162 26,832 13,827 1,359 1,614 952 1,257 58 64 21 42 103 101 114 108 38 50 29 42 100 102 112 109 C Secretaries Secretaries Secretaries Secretaries Secretaries l e r ic a l 10ccupational employment estimates relate to the total in all establishments within scope of the survey and not to the number actually surveyed. N ote: The following occupational levels were surveyed but insufficient data were ob- paid of the six survey work levels in private industry that equate to a grade level 13 within the Federal white-collar pay system: W o rk le v e ls M o n th ly s a la r y le v e l Chief accountant I I I ................................. Attorney IV .............................................. Accountant V I .......................................... Engineer VI .............................................. Director of personnel III ......................... Chemist VI .............................................. $4,441 4,432 4,317 4,288 4,275 4,252 Thus, skill level can act as a source of wage variation or wage uniformity. Besides skill level, other factors studied that bear on white-collar pay levels include the size of a firm’s workforce and its industrial activity. In addition to presenting overall survey results, table 1 relates occupational employment and salary information separately for large firms (at least 2,500 employees) and for manufacturers to all-industry figures. Salary levels in large establishments were consistently higher than the levels in the survey as a whole. Of the 91 occupational work levels permitting comparison, 37 showed large establishments within 3 percent of the all-establish ment average, 37 were from 4 to 10 percent higher, and the remaining 17, 10 percent or more above the average. Cler ical occupations accounted for 14 of the 17 levels with the largest differences. For manufacturing establishments, salaries were at or https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tained to warrant publication: Chief accountant V; director of personnel V; chemist VIII; personnel assistant V; and photographer I and V. slightly above the all-industry averages for most occupa tions. Salary levels for 70 of the 91 work levels permitting comparisons showed manufacturing within 3 percent of the all-industry average, and 16 of the remaining 21 levels were from 4 to 10 percent higher than the average. The occu pations with the highest relative salaries in manufacturing were lower level-clerical occupations, such as messengers, typists, and file clerks. Although the survey focuses on salary levels, it also per mits a look at salary trends. In this connection, some 100 occupational work levels were grouped into three broad categories of skill levels: Group A equates to grades 1-4 of the Federal Government General Salary ( g s ) Schedule; Group B to grades 5-9; and Group C to grades 11-15. (See Table 2. P ercent increases in average salaries by w ork level category, 1 9 7 3 -8 3 P e rio d 1973-83 ............. G ro u p A (G S g ra d e s 1 - 4 ) G ro u p B (G S g ra d e s 5 - 9 ) G ro u p C (G S g ra d e s 1 1 - 1 5 ) 116.4 113.5 122.0 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 6.2 9.1 7.6 6.9 7.5 5.7 8.6 6.4 6.3 8.0 6.2 8.8 6.5 7.7 8.8 1978-79 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 7.2 9.1 9.8 9.5 7.4 7.5 10.1 9.6 9.4 7.3 8.0 9.3 10.2 10.4 7.2 51 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Research Summaries table 1 for identification of the job classifications that equate to each g s grade for use in the Federal pay setting process.2) In 1982-83, increases in average salaries varied little among these groups— 7.2 to 7.4 percent. Since 1973, cumulative percentage increases have been the highest for the grades 11-15 category and lowest for the middle grades. (See table 2 .) A m o r e d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of white-collar salaries and complete results of this year’s survey are contained in the National Survey o f Professional, Administrative, Technical and Clerical Pay, March 1983, b l s Bulletin 2181. It in cludes salary distributions for 101 occupational work levels, and relative employment and salary levels by industry di vision for the two dozen occupations covered. □ ---------- F O O T N O T E S ---------'The p a t c survey is conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but survey occupations and coverage such as establishment size and the private sector industries to be included are determined by the President’s Pay Agent— the Secretary of Labor and the Directors of the Office of Man agement and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management. The Agent has designated the industrial coverage and minimum size establishment as follows: manufacturing, 100 or 250 employees; transportation, commu nications, electric, gas, and sanitary services, 100 or 250 employees; min ing and construction, 250 employees; wholesale trade, 100 employees; retail trade, 250 employees; finance, insurance, and real estate, 100 em ployees; and selected services, 50 or 100 employees. The pay-setting role o f the p a t c survey is described in George L. Stelluto’s, “ Federal pay comparability: facts to temper the debate,” M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v i e w , June 1979, pp. 18-28. 2In 1983, a total o f 101 work levels produced publishable data out of 107 levels within scope of the survey. Widely varying duties and respon sibilities may be embodied in work levels within each of the broad cate gories o f table 2; for example, Group B includes clerical and technical positions, such as accounting clerk IV and engineering technician IV, as well as the entry and developmental levels of professional occupations. Wages of appliance repair technicians vary widely among metropolitan areas Harry B. W il l ia m s Pay levels for technicians repairing major consumer elec trical products in 19 metropolitan areas averaged from $7.93 an hour in Buffalo to $10.43 in San Francisco-Oakland, according to a November 1981 Bureau of Labor Statistics survey.1 These technicians worked in appliance repair fa cilities operated by electrical repair shops, department stores, retail television and radio stores, appliance retailers, and appliance wholesalers. About two-thirds of the technicians specialized in re pairing either television sets, radios, and tape players (brown Harry B. Williams is an economist with the Division of Occupational Pay and Employee Benefit Levels, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 52 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis goods) or larger household appliances such as refrigerators, freezers, and washers (white goods); their average earnings in individual areas typically were between $7 and $9 an hour. A group of approximately 4,350 technicians— called service technicians— routinely worked on both brown and white goods during the survey period and could not be classified as either television-radio or electrical appliance technicians. Because of their dual skills, service technicians usually averaged more per hour than television-radio or electrical appliance technicians; however, separate data for service technicians met Bureau publication criteria only in Newark, where 208 full-time service technicians employed in combination (inside and outside) work averaged $10.31 an hour. Among the 19 areas surveyed, pay levels were highest for full-time technicians in the San Francisco-Oakland area, where TV-radio repairers averaged $9.87 and electrical ap pliance repairers, $9.72. The lowest averages were found in Memphis at $6.65 for Tv-radio repairers and $6.12 for electrical appliance repairers. (See table 1.) Average wages for part-time workers in the same occupations most fre quently were between $5.75 and $8.75 an hour. Full-time apprentice technicians often earned 30 to 50 percent less, on average, than the qualified technicians. Averages for electrical appliance apprentices, in 9 areas, ranged from $4.58 an hour in Boston to $7.95 an hour in Chicago. Hourly earnings of TV-radio apprentices, in 12 areas, averaged from $4.01 in Memphis to $8.10 in San Francisco-Oakland. TV-radio apprentices averaged more than their electrical appliance counterparts in 4 of 6 areas for which data permit comparison. Electrical appliance technicians, however, usually aver aged more than their TV-radio counterparts. Their pay ad vantages, typically between 2 and 10 percent, were largely explained by three factors: industry, union status, and size of repair facility. To illustrate, nearly one-third of the elec trical appliance technicians worked in department stores or for appliance wholesalers— the two highest-paying industry branches. Such establishments employed slightly more than one-tenth of the television-radio technicians. Also, union contracts covered slightly more than one-third of the sur vey’s white-goods technicians and apprentices compared with one-fourth of those servicing brown goods. The study showed that technicians in shops with union contracts nearly always averaged more per hour than their nonunion coun terparts. Additionally, four-fifths of the white-goods tech nicians, compared with slightly over two-fifths of their browngoods counterparts, were in establishments with at least 10 repairers. Technicians in shops with at least 10 repairers usually averaged more than those in smaller shops. But, when comparisons were limited to establishments employ ing both types of technicians (about 13 percent of the es tablishments studied), brown-goods technicians commonly received as much as, or more than, white-goods technicians. Separate earnings data were developed for three cate- Table 1. N um ber of full-tim e w orkers in selected occupations and average straight-tim e hourly earnings in ap p lian ce repair facilities, N ovem ber 1 9 8 1 _____________________________________________________________ ______________________ E le c tric a l a p p lia n c e a p p re n tic e s E le c tric a l a p p lia n c e te c h n ic ia n s A re a T V -r a d io a p p re n tic e s T V -ra d io te c h n ic ia n s W o rk e rs E a rn in g s 1 W o rk e rs E a rn in g s 1 W o rk e rs E a rn in g s 1 W o rk e rs E a rn in g s 1 106 35 108 71 319 219 $8.01 7.21 8.18 7.63 7.35 8.88 22 — 10 $4.58 — 5.75 — 4.71 6.95 97 105 155 93 611 349 $8.69 6.67 7.58 6.85 7.56 8.41 14 — — 7 68 — $4.88 — — 4.65 5.27 — 90 150 29 108 158 9.01 8.51 6.12 8.42 8.86 — — 5.67 — 5.12 — 154 257 44 154 323 8.96 8.51 6.65 8.23 8.20 — — 14 — 44 — — 8 27 17 — 4.01 5.73 5.35 383 66 102 126 105 9.21 8.86 8.08 8.75 8.98 9 — — — — 7.95 — — — — 594 169 123 157 209 9.02 7.93 8.20 8.65 8.45 48 7 — — 12 6.19 4.97 — — 4.97 112 193 152 8.72 9.38 9.72 — — 14 28 6.56 7.36 218 630 276 8.54 8.78 9.87 34 46 33 5.42 6.29 8.10 N o rth e a s t Boston ............................................................... Buffalo ............................................................... Nassau-Suffolk ................................................... Newark ............................................................... New Y o rk ............................................................. Philadelphia ........................................................ — 57 29 S o u th Atlanta.................................................................. Dallas-Fort Worth .............................................. M em phis............................................................. M ia m i.................................................................. Washington ........................................................ N o rth C e n tra l Chicago............................................................... Cleveland............................................................. Kansas City ........................................................ Minneapolis-St. Paul ......................................... St. L o u is ............................................................. W est Denver-Boulder................................................... Los Angeles-Long Beach................................... San Francisco-Oakland ...................................... information relates to straight-time hourly earnings, excluding premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts, as well as commissions paid for the sale of maintenance contracts, parts, or appliances. Premiums paid for licenses held by employees, if any, are included. Incentive payments, such as those based on flatrate hours, flat-percentages, or other piecework or production bonus systems, and cost- gories of technician jobs— inside (bench), outside (home service calls), and a combination o f the two. Full-time t v radio technicians making outside calls typically averaged less than their counterparts on either inside or combination work. (There were too few comparisons possible among electrical appliance technicians to observe an earnings pat tern.) About three-fifths of the workers covered by the survey were in facilities with formal provisions for paying com missions on the sale of maintenance contracts, parts, or appliances. Commissions for the sale of maintenance con tracts were the most frequent; those for the sale of appliances were least common. Survey wide, 14 percent of the electrical appliance technicians, 7 percent of the TV-radio technicians, and 3 percent of the apprentice technicians received com missions during the payroll period. Technicians and ap prentices who received commissions averaged less than 5 percent above straight-salary personnel in virtually all areas. (Earnings data presented in table 1 exclude commissions, but include earnings under other incentive systems, such as flat-rate hours or piece rates.) Paid holidays, most frequently 6. 10, or 11 days annually, were provided by establishments employing more than seveneighths of the full-time technicians and apprentices in each of the areas studied. Virtually all full-time appliance repair technicians and apprentices covered by the survey were in facilities provid https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis of-living allowances are included as part of the workers' regular pay. Nonproduction bonus payments, such as Christmas and yearend bonuses, are excluded, note : indicates no data reported or data do not meet publication criteria, ing paid vacations after qualifying periods of service. Typ ical vacation plans called for at least 2 weeks of vacation pay after 1 year of service, 3 weeks after 10 years, and 4 weeks after 15 years. About one-half of the workers could receive 5 weeks after 25 years or more. Various health and insurance plans, at least partly paid for by the employer, also were available to large proportions of workers, although the incidence of the plans varied widely by location. Retirement pension plans applied to between one-half and four-fifths of the full-time technicians and ap prentices in each of the areas surveyed. Employers typically paid the entire cost of these pension plans. Summary reports issued shortly after each of the 19 areas was surveyed are available from the Bureau or any of its regional offices. A comprehensive report, Industry Wage Survey: Electrical Appliance Repair, November 1981 ( b l s Bulletin 2177), is for sale by the Superintendent of Docu ments, Washington, D.C. 20402, and by Bureau regional offices. □ 1The survey covered repair facilities employing 16.635 nonsupervisory service workers. About three-fourths of these workers were technicians and apprentices. Earnings data exclude premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts, as well as commissions paid on sales of maintenance contracts, parts, or appliances. Premiums paid for licenses held by employees, if any, are included. For an account of an earlier study, see “ Occupational earnings in ap pliance repair facilities,” M o n t h l v L a b o r R e v i e w , January 1981. pp. 5 7 58. 53 Major Agreements Expiring Next Month This list of selected 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. In d u stry E m p lo y e r a n d lo c a tio n A l d e n ’s . I n c . ( C h i c a g o , I I I .) ...................................................................................................................... R e t a il tr a d e .................................................. A m e r i c a n C y a n a m i d C o . , L e d e r l e L a b o r a t o r ie s D i v i s i o n ( P e a r l R i v e r . N Y . ) C h e m ic a ls A m e r i c a n H o m e F o o d s , I n c . , C h e f B o y - a r - d e e D i v i s i o n ( M i l t o n . P a . ) .............. F o o d p ro d u c ts N um ber of L a b o r o r g a n iz a tio n 1 T e a m s t e r s ( I n d .) w orkers ................................................................. ...................................................... ........................................... F o o d a n d C o m m e r c ia l W o r k e r s .......................... 2 .5 0 0 1 450 1 .450 A s s o c i a t io n o f M o t io n P ic tu r e & T e l e v i s i o n P r o d u c e r s . I n c .. T e l e v i s i o n a n d T h e a t r i c a l A g r e e m e n t ( I n t e r s t a t e ) ............................................................................................. 5 000 A t l a n t i c R i c h f i e l d C o m p a n y a n d A r c o P i p e L in e C o m p a n y ( I n t e r s t a t e ) .............. P e tr o le u m ...................................................... A t l a n t i c R i c h f i e l d C o m p a n y ( C a l i f o r n i a ) ............................................................................................. P e tr o le u m ...................................................... B a k e r ie s , N e w Y o r k C ity a n d v ic in it y ( N e w Y o r k a n d N e w J e r s e y ) 2 .................. F o o d p ro d u c ts ........................................... B a k e r y . C o n fe c tio n e r y an d T o b a c c o ............................................................................................. F o o d p ro d u c ts ........................................... F o o d a n d C o m m e r c ia l W o r k e r s O il. C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s W ork ers B ry a n F o o d s , In c. (W e s t P o in t. M is s .) C ib a -G e ig y C o r p . (M c I n to s h . A la .) .................................................................................................... C o m in g G la s s W o r k s ( C o r n in g , N Y .) ............................................................................................. C h e m ic a ls ...................................................... S t o n e , c l a y , a n d g l a s s p r o d u c ts D e l M o n t e C o r p . , M i d w e s t D i v i s i o n ( I l l i n o i s ) ........................................................................... F o o d p ro d u c ts D o c u m e n t a r y a n d I n d u s t r ia l F i l m s A g r e e m e n t ( I n t e r s t a t e ) 2 A m u se m e n ts ........................................... ........................................... R e t a il t r a d e G e n e r a l T e l e p h o n e C o m p a n y o f W i s c o n s i n ( W i s c o n s i n ) .................................................. C o m m u n i c a t io n G u l f O i l C o m p a n y — U . S . , P o r t A r th u r R e f i n e r y ( P o r t A r t h u r . T e x . ) .................. P e tr o le u m L it t o n S y s t e m s , I n c . , I n g a ll s S h i p b u i ld i n g D i v i s i o n ( P a s c a g o u l a . M i s s . ) T r a n s p o r t a t io n e q u ip m e n t M o b il O il C o r p o r a tio n , B e a u m o n t R e fin e r y (B e a u m o n t , T e x .) ................................ P e tr o le u m M o v e r s ’ A s s o c i a t i o n o f G r e a t e r C h i c a g o , I n d iv id u a l E m p lo y e r s ( I l l i n o i s ) . . . T r u c k in g S h e ll O il C o m p a n y ( C a lif o r n ia ) P e tr o le u m ...................................................................................... ................................................................. .......................... O il. C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s F lin t G l a s s W o r k e r s ............... ...................................................... R e t a il. W h o le s a le a n d D e p a r t m e n t S t o r e . . . . ............................................... F e d - M a r t S t o r e s , I n c . ( S a n D i e g o , C a l i f . ) ...................................................................................... . . . . ............... .................................................. ........................................ ...................................................... .............. ...................................................... .......................................................... ...................................................... 2 .0 5 0 1.200 3 .0 0 0 1.250 1.000 4 .0 0 0 1 .300 so o -> F o o d a n d C o m m e r c ia l W o r k e r s C o m m u n ic a t io n s W o r k e r s .......................... ......................... O il, C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s E le c t r i c a l W o r k e r s ( ib e w ) ............... O il, C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s T e a m s t e r s ( I n d .) ............... 1 .500 1.500 2 .2 5 0 1 000 ............... ................................................... 1.550 1.000 O il. C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s ............... 1.150 O il. C h e m ic a l a n d A t o m ic W o r k e r s . . . . 1 .300 S t a n d a r d O i l C o m p a n y , A m o c o O i l C o m p a n y , T e x a s C i t y R e f in e r y ( T e x a s C i t y , T e x . ) ...................................................................................... ' A f f i l i a t e d w i t h a f l c io e x c e p t w h e r e n o t e d a s i n d e p e n d e n t (In cJ .). i n d u s t r y a re a (g r o u p o f c o m p a n ie s s ig n in g s a m e c o n tr a c t). 54 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Developments in Industrial Relations Machinists-Boeing contract The first settlement in the 1983 round of bargaining in the aerospace industry came when members of the Ma chinists union approved a 3-year contract with the Boeing Co. The contract, covering 26,000 workers in Seattle, Wash., Wichita, Kans., and Portland, Oreg., provided for wage and cost-of-living increases favoring workers in the top pay grades. It also established lower pay structures for new hires in the top grades, and significantly lower structures for those in the bottom grades. Boeing maintained that the moves were necessary to al leviate a narrowing of the percentage pay differential be tween skilled and unskilled workers that had developed over the years. Much of the compression had resulted from the automatic cost-of-living pay adjustment clause, which pro vided that all employees would receive the same adjustment, regardless of grade. The accord does not provide for specified wage increases, but it does provide for “ prepayments” of cost-of-living adjustments. Under this approach, all employees will re ceive an immediate pay increase equal to 3 percent of their previous pay scale (excluding the current cost-of-livin g al lowance of $1.54 an hour). This advance will be “ offset” against the following three automatic quarterly cost-of-liv ing adjustments, which will be determined according to the existing formula of 1 cent an hour for each 0.3-point move ment in the bls Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (1967= 100). A similar 3percent prepayment, effective October 4, 1984, will not apply to lower rated workers (about 39 percent of all em ployees) and another prepayment on October 4, 1985, also will not apply to lower rated employees (about 26 percent of the total). Workers in the lowest pay grade moved to $11.67 an hour, from $11.38, after the October 1983 pre payment, while those in grade 11 (the highest) advanced to $16.17, from $14.98, and they will advance to $16.64 on October 4, 1984, and to $17.11 a year later. Under the revised pay structure for new hires, employees will receive a 30-cent-an-hour progression increase after each succeeding 6 months of service until they attain the maximum for their grades. Minimum and maximum pay rates range from $6.70-$9.70 for grade 1 to $ 12.70—$ 15.70 for grade 11. In another wage provision, all employees will receive https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis annual lump-sum payments (the first payment due by De cember 15, 1983) equal to 3 percent of gross earnings, including overtime pay, during the prior year. Revisions in medical insurance included expanded cov erage for nervous disorders, home health care, vision care, care for the terminally ill, and elective surgery. A union official said that the improved program was designed to encourage outpatient care and discourage hospital emer gency room visits. A joint committee on cost containment was established. Other benefit changes included a pension rate of $20 a month for each year of service after January 1, 1984, up from $16. The rate for service up to 1981 also was increased to $16, from $14. The parties also established a “ new technology clause” under which Boeing will pay training expenses for em ployees who wish to improve their skills after work hours. Shipbuilding settlements A 2-month strike against eight shipyards ended when the Pacific Coast Shipbuilders Association settled with the Pa cific Coast Metal Trades Council, consisting of 11 unions representing 10,000 workers. According to an official of the council, the work stoppage was mainly a delaying action to prevent “ take aways” by the employers. The yards had been seeking a 10-percent wage cut, elimination of the au tomatic cost-of-living pay adjustment formula, removal of jurisdictional lines, and termination of seniority rights. The settlement did not provide for a specified wage in crease, but in the second and third years of the contract, workers’ pay— usually $13.50 an hour— will be subject to possible automatic quarterly cost-of-living adjustments, cal culated at the existing rate of 1 cent an hour for each 1point movement in the bls Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (1967 = 100). There were no changes in supplementary benefits, but employer financing was rearranged to provide for a larger infusion of money in the first year. During that year, em ployees will pay 35 cents per hour worked into the fund, dropping to a 20-cent rate in the second and third years. Under the prior 3-year contract, the rate was 25 cents. The ninth member of the Shipbuilders Association. Ta coma Boatbuilding Co. of Tacoma, Wash., settled about 2 weeks later on the same terms. The company had tempo rarily withdrawn from the association because it contended 55 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Developments in Industrial Relations that it was being “ misrepresented” in the negotiations. The shipyard estimated that only 1,500 of the 2,200 strikers would be recalled because of a reduction in production con tracts and improvements in efficiency instituted by man agement during the stoppage. Tacoma had maintained some production during the strike by hiring 470 replacements, all of whom were terminated according to terms of the settle ment. These settlements were followed by one between the Metal Trades Council and Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construc tion Co. of Seattle, Wash. (Lockheed is not a member of the Shipbuilders Association.) The 39-month contract also did not provide for a specified wage increase and it sus pended the automatic cost-of-living pay adjustment formula. Lockheed indicated that the wage restraint was necessary to aid it in competing with lower cost east and gulf coast shipyards. The 2,400 employees will received lump-sum payments of 25 cents for each hour worked during 6-month periods. The first distribution, in January 1984, will be for hours worked during the second half of 1983. The employees will receive an additional 25-cent-an-hour lump-sum payment under a new “ productivity enhancement program.” Pay ment will be contingent on completion of ships according to time schedules established by Lockheed. On the gulf coast, the Ingalls Shipbuilding Division of Litton Systems, Inc. settled with a Pascagoula (Miss.) Metal Trades Council 4 months before the scheduled termination of the existing contract. An official of one of the unions in the council said the parties settled early to aid Ingalls in bidding on ship work by locking in labor costs for the 40month contract period. The accord provides for $1.18 an hour in “ new” wage increases— 30 cents immediately and in February of 1985 and 1986, 10 cents in August 1985, and 18 cents in August 1986. The settlement also provided for immediate payment of 9 cents in quarterly cost-of-living adjustments scheduled for October 1983 and January 1984 under the supplanted agreement. The adjustments were part of a series that were guaranteed to be put into effect, regardless of the movement of the Consumer Price Index. In a move to hold down costs, new employees will start at $1 an hour below the basic rate for their job, with skilled trades workers advancing to the basic rate after 1 year and other employees receiving a 50-cent-an-hour increase after 1 year and an additional 50 cents after 2 years. Also, periodic pay progression increases for new apprentices were reduced. Hospital-medical-surgical insurance was improved, with Ingalls contributing $135 of the $155-a-month premium cost during the first 4 months of the contract and $154.50 of the $174.50 cost during the balance of the contract. Previously, the shipyard contributed $118 of the $136 cost. Basic pensions, which are based on employees’ career contributions to the plan, were increased, as the percentage of earnings that workers are permitted to contribute was 56 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis raised. The minimum benefit, which applies if it is larger than the basic benefit, was increased to $11 a month (from $10) for each year of credited service. The settlement covered 6,000 workers represented by the nine unions in the trades council and four other unions. After the Ingalls settlement, employees of the Bath (Maine) Iron Works rejected a company request to discuss a “ stretch out” of scheduled wage increases and a possible extension of the current agreement to increase Bath’s ability to com pete with Ingalls for Navy ship contracts. Bath said that its current pay level for production workers was 12 cents an hour higher than at Ingalls and the disparity would rise to $1.07 in January 1985. David Ward, president of Local 6 of the Marine and Shipbuilding Workers, attributed the virtually unanimous rejection of the proposal to an antiunion attitude by man agement. The yard has about 8,000 employees, including 5,200 represented by Local 6. Eastern’s concession proposals rejected by unions Eastern Airlines’ 8-year history of financial and labor difficulties continued, as company chairman Frank Borman informed the 37,000 employees that accelerated operating losses left the airline with three choices: to shut down, to reorganize under protection of Federal bankruptcy law, or to “ reduce the basic cost structure of the airline, and with 78 percent of the controllable costs [attributed to] labor, this is our choice.” Borman’s concession proposal called for all employees to take a 1.5-percent pay cut effective November I, 1983. This would be followed by an additional 5-percent cut on January 1, 1984, if payroll costs could not be reduced through improved productivity. Other aspects of the pro posal to help counter a record $106.4 million loss during the first 7 months of the year included lower pay rates for workers hired after November 1, a 20- to 25-percent re duction in paid vacation time, increased deductibles on med ical insurance, and a profit-sharing plan. The proposal also would terminate existing investment plans and reimburse employees the amounts they had paid. The proposal was approved by 17,000 nonunion em ployees, but drew bitter responses from leaders of the three unions representing the remaining employees. Charles Bryan, head of District 100 of the Machinists union, said the pro posed concessions would “ wipe out” the contract for his I I , 700 members. The 4,000 cockpit crew members, rep resented by the Air Line Pilots Association, also rejected the proposal. Patricia Fink, leader of Local 553 of the Transport Work ers, which represents 5,800 flight attendants, said her union could not consider any type of give-backs until they had a contract. Later, the local ended 18 months of negotiations by settling with Eastern just hours before the employees would have been permitted to strike under provisions of the Railway Labor Act. However, the future of the proposed 3-year accord was uncertain, as the local’s executive board differed with Fink by urging rank-and-file members to reject the contract. The proposed terms included a 13-percent salary increase retroactive to January 1, 1983, a 3-percent increase on No vember 1, 1983, a 6-percent increase on January 1, 1984, and cancellation of a 3.5-percent employee contribution to a variable earnings plan. (See Monthly Labor Review, July 1983, pp. 40-41, for details of the Transport Workers pre vious contract and the Airline Pilots and Machinists settle ments.) The proposal also called for Eastern to lower by attrition the number of foreign nationals on certain South American routes Eastern had obtained from Braniff Airways in 1982, and specified that all new routes in the area would be staffed by Local 553 members. Eastern’s purchase agree ment with Braniff had specified that the 300 positions on the contested routes be filled by residents of the Latin Amer ican countries, but a Federal judge later ordered Eastern to award the work to Transport Workers members or pay them the difference between their pay for domestic routes and the higher paying foreign routes. Before the Transport Workers settlement, Borman had assured the three unions that Eastern would not file for protection under the Bankruptcy Act. In return, the unions, which had formed a committee entitled “ Employees for Positive Action,” agreed to consider the findings of a joint study of the carrier’s financial condition to be conducted by two independent firms. Ford’s steelworkers accept concessions Ford Motor Co. announced plans to close the steelmaking facility in its River Rouge complex in Dearborn, Mich., but reversed the decision after Auto Workers Local 600 agreed to more than $4 an hour in wage-and-benefit concessions. After the settlement, Ford began recalling laid-off workers and announced plans to invest more than $200 million in modernizing the facility. The company had been pressing for concessions for several years, contending that the facility was unable to compete with other steel producers because its wage-and-benefit costs were too high. According to Ford, 1983 costs were $27 to $28 an hour, about $5 higher than at the other companies, and also $5 higher than the com pensation of other UAW-represented auto production workers elsewhere in the complex and at other Ford plants. In 1982, Ford began negotiating with a consortium of Japanese steel companies on a sale of the steelmaking operations, but the talks terminated in May of this year, reportedly because the Japanese companies concluded that the operating costs were too high. Ford then began shutting down parts of the op eration, culminating in the total shutdown announcement that triggered the settlement. The 34-month agreement, which expires July 31, 1986, covered 3,500 steelworkers, but 12,500 workers in the com plex’s engine, glass, and assembly operations also were permitted to vote. The union leaders apparently decided on this course to increase the chances of approval; the steel https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis workers may have been inclined to vote against the proposal because they could have “ bumped” fellow workers out of jobs elsewhere in the complex. The vote tally was 5,154 to 2,799 in favor of the proposals. Provisions of the agreement included: • A 99-cent-an-hour reduction in the incentive rate. • A 20-percent reduction in incentive earnings. • A 25-cent-an-hour reduction in the current cost-of-living allowance for incentive employees and a 10-cent reduc tion for nonincentive employees. • Suspension of quarterly cost-of-living adjustments for in centive employees until December 1985, when they will resume, calculated at 1 cent an hour for each 0.30-point movement in a composite 1967 = 100 consumer price in dex derived from the Canadian and U.S. Government indexes. The 500 nonincentive workers employed in the power plant will be eligible for adjustments in December 1983 and March and June 1984 calculated at the 1 cent per 0.26-point movement that applies to all other Ford workers represented by the union. Thereafter, adjustments will be calculated at 1 cent for each 0.30-point movement in the index. • A slowed pay progression for newly hired workers. • A 1-week reduction in incentive workers’ paid vacation in both 1984 and 1985, to be restored in 1986. • Four fewer paid holidays for incentive workers in 1983 and 1984, to be restored in 1985. • Reduced shift premiums. • Time and one-quarter pay, instead of time and one-half, for nonovertime work on Sunday. • A profit-sharing plan with a more liberal formula than the existing plan for other Ford workers. • An “ equality of sacrifice” provision requiring Ford to apply similar “ economic adjustments” to the 800 non union salaried employees. • A requirement that all wage sacrifices be repaid to the workers if steel production is terminated during the con tract period. • Various commitments by the company regarding capital spending and production levels. Casino employees get 5-year contract In Atlantic City, N.J., Local 54 of the Hotel and Res taurant Employees and nine casino hotels negotiated a 5year contract that specified wage-and-benefit improvements in each of the first 3 years, and provided for bargaining on these issues in each of the last 2 years. The specified wage increases for “ nontipped” employees were 8 percent, or 50 cents an hour, immediately and 50 cents in the second and third years. “ Tipped” employees will receive a 25-cent increase in each of the 3 years. Previously, cocktail and food servers, who make up a majority of the tipped workers, received $3,375 an hour. The parties also agreed to a “ restructuring” of wages for 57 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Developments in Industrial Relations new employees, and extended the probationary period to 90 days, from 60. One new benefit is a plan under which employees will receive a paid day off for every 3 months of good attendance. At the union’s option, the employers will either increase their payment to the pension fund by 5 cents for each hour worked by employees with at least 1 year of service or increase their payment to the health and welfare plan by 3.35 cents for each hour worked by all employees. In the third year of the contract, the union can opt for employers to pay either an additional 4 cents an hour to the severance fund or an additional 2.5 cents to the health and welfare fund. The parties also agreed to a 5-cent-an-hour increase in financing of health and welfare benefits in the third year. The settlement covered more than 11,000 employees. State government settlements In Milwaukee, 5,200 members of the American Feder ation of Teachers were covered by a 3-year agreement that provided for salary increases of 4.75 percent retroactive to July 1, 1982, 5.8 percent retroactive to July 1, 1983, and 5 percent on July 1, 1984. After the 1984 increase, salaries for the 5,300 teachers will range from $16,103 a year for a new teacher with a bachelor’s degree to $32,334 for a teacher with a master’s degree and 64 additional graduate credits. The delay in replacing the previous agreement, which expired in June 1982, was attributed to intensive discussions 58 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis of numerous noneconomic issues. These discussions re sulted in several changes the school board sought, including elimination of provisions specifying class size, the number of art, music, and physical education teachers in grade schools, and the number of teachers’ aides. The State of Wisconsin and its largest bargaining unit agreed on a 2-year contract calling for a wage freeze during the first year and a 3.84-percent salary increase on July 1, 1984. Despite the freeze, the 25,000 workers will receive an immediate increase in pay because the State agreed to assume the entire cost of retirement benefits, which equals 5 percent of employee earnings. Previously, the employees contributed one-fifth of the amount. The workers, who are represented by the Wisconsin State Employees Union, might also realize some monetary or other gain under a new plan to encourage them to switch to health maintenance organizations. During the first year, the State will continue to pay 90 percent of the cost of the existing standard hospital-medical-surgical plan, or it will pay 107 percent of the cost of the least expensive alternate plan, whichever costs less. The employees will have the same choice in the second year, except that the figure will drop to 105 percent. Any resulting savings will be distrib uted to the workers during the contract period. The settlement terms were similar to pay and benefit changes instituted earlier for nonunion employees. Book Reviews Defending the civil servant The Case fo r Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Po lemic. By Charles T. Goodsell. Chatham, N.J., Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1983. 179 pp. $8.95. In this book, Professor Charles T. Goodsell takes on the task of defending bureaucracy. A defense of bureaucracy consisting of mere assertions should be quickly dismissed, but the author, a careful scholar, tackles each myth, accepted wisdom, and bit of folklore, and attacks them with facts and studies in an attempt to lay them to rest. One of every six U.S. workers is a public employment bureaucrat, whether Federal, State, or local, and if private sector bureaucracies were included, the number would be substantially higher, the author points out. As a political and public administration scientist, Goodsell dissects all types of bureaucratic organizations but focuses on govern ment at all levels, primarily because these institutions are viewed in a negative light. As the author clearly underscores, different groups crit icize bureaucracy for varying reasons, almost assuredly placing it and its employees in a no-win position. Liberals are critical because they believe it upholds the status quo while con servatives fear it seeks change for change’s sake. Yet, as studies have indicated, the recipients of government service look favorably on the people and product they receive. Even though the volume is larded with studies and sta tistics, the prose is entertaining and readable (which may contribute to its not being viewed as seriously as it should by academics). For it is this group the author hopes will look at and study the bureaucracy as it really exists, not as a monolith but as individual entities created to fill a need. The author reminds his readers that it is not them against us; rather, the bureaucracy is a creation of the Nation’s elected officials who, in turn, enacted programs into exis tence that the people, in fact, wanted. Only one basic criticism can be leveled, although not against the author personally. Goodsell’s book, published in 1983, is already dated in at least one respect. He writes, “ High level Federal civil servants may be dissatisfied over pay but that sentiment cannot be extrapolated into gener alized dissatisfaction within the Federal work force. In fact, most sampled civil servants endorse their career choice strongly either retrospectively or prospectively.’’ Unfortu https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis nately, this may no longer be true. Recent polls indicate that new high levels of discontent exist among the top level staff over the pay for performance and proposed changes in the benefit program. These, today, are overriding issues which could haster their exodus from government, despite previous good feelings about their career choice. For ex ample, a survey involving 800 members of the Federal Ex ecutive Institute Alumni Association found that about 70 percent said they would advise bright, competent young people to seek careers in the private sector. The few who would recommend a civil service career said it was only because they believed government needs good people, not because it is rewarding. A general (nonscientific) poll con ducted by The Washington Post, to which some 60,000 Federal workers responded, found that when asked if they would work for the government again, the response was a resounding “ no.” Still another report, issued by the Merit Systems Protection Board warned that the future quality of the government’s senior executive corp could diminish over time because it is becoming less attractive to both persons outside government and to the middle managers already in the system. Although not arranged in this order, Goodsell’s book can easily be discussed by looking at three basic questions: what are the myths, who holds them, and why? What are the myths? Poor service, surly attitudes, and truncated personalities are all attributed to bureaucrats. Wel fare and law enforcement are the two areas most branded with these stereotypes. Yet, survey after survey conducted to determine how the recipients of government service view their treatment shows, in fact, that the public rates it good to excellent, is satisfied or very satisfied with it, and is and has been treated courteously. Lest government agencies be accused of conducting self-serving surveys, Goodsell in cludes studies by universities, all showing the same results. Even the much maligned Postal Service receives favorable ratings by those who relate their experience as recipients. While the critics of bureaucracy point to the bigness and badness of it all, Goodsell attempts to dispel this by showing that, disaggregated by size of installation, government op erations are small; 85 percent of the Federal and postal establishments have fewer than 25 employees and very few, 25 units, have 10,000 or more. Some of these large ones include the Veterans Administration’s facilities in Chicago 59 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Book Reviews and Los Angeles, Social Security in Baltimore, the Mint in Philadelphia, and civilian posts in San Diego and outside Dayton, Ohio. When State and local employees are similarly viewed as governmental units, this same fragmentation is seen. What about the bureaucratic mentality, the inflexibility, blind adherence to rules, excessive caution, and risk avoid ance that is bruited as at the heart of the government per sonality? Interestingly, when researchers have looked closely at these “ facts,” they have proven contrary to reality. Who holds bureaucrats in disregard? Apparently public disdain is not uniform across the population, but varies by income, social class, education, race, and sex. While the number of surveys cited are few and dated, an admission made by the author, researchers have found that, while the general public holds favorable opinions, distinctions exist by income, sex, and education. People who have higher income and more education, males more than females, tend to be less favorably disposed toward civil servants. The opinion leaders of the country— writers, journalists, pro fessors, businessmen, and politicians— are in this high in come, well-educated group. Is it any wonder then that this group looks down to what could be described as low-status occupations? Of course, when community leaders believe this, the makeup of the bureaucracy becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy because persons seeking status look elsewhere for an honorable (and profitable) profession. Why the Myth? After dissecting, analyzing, and refuting the conventional wisdom, the author correctly asks why these views continue to prevail. He turns up at least two functions: validation and justification. By validation he means it is simply easier on one’s psyche to blame “ red tape” or the petty functionary than our own failure to get the job, the income tax break, or select an objective of your choice. The second function of the myth is reinforced by justification to convince others. The political officeseeker points to the incompetent bureaucracy as the reason past policies failed to achieve the desired results. One can always point to the overstaffed bureaucracy without risking a rebuttal because it is accepted as a commonplace. Both of these functions interact and, as the author says, are useful in diverting our attention from the factual situ ations, justifying self-righteousness, and silencing critics. Since bureaucracy is ever present and, even worse, contra dicts another myth— the free entrepreneur and self-reliant spirit we all see in ourselves— it serves as a perfect target. In this day of budget deficits, it is an easy and relatively defenseless target. Forgotten, however, is that by econo mizing now, future costs may be much higher when gov ernment (Federal, State, and local) is forced to offer not comparable but higher wages and benefits to attract capable men and women. In the meantime, as the best workers leave, costs also increase because of reduced morale and effi ciency. (A little publicized fact, and one that needs men tioning, is the high productivity growth of the Federal 60 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Government relative to the private (nonfarm) sector, 1.5 percent compared to . 8 percent per year from 1967 to 1981.) To anyone interested in the other side of the bureaucracy story, Charles Goodsell’s volume provides a good alter native— and unfortunately one of the few— to the prevalent negative theme. — L ucre tia D ew ey T an ner Executive Director Advisory Committee on Federal Pay Publications received Economic growth and development Dow, Shelia C., “ Schools of Thought in Macroeconomics: The Method Is the Message,” A u stra lia n E c o n o m ic P a p e r s , June 1983, pp. 30-47. Economic Council of Canada, On the M en d : T w en tieth A n n u al R e v ie w , 19 8 3 . Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Can ada, 1983, 126 pp. $5.95, Canada; $7.15, other countries. Available from Canadian Government Publishing Center, Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa. Reynolds, Lloyd G., “ The Spread of Economic Growth to the Third World: 1850-1980,” The J o u rn a l o f E c o n o m ic L it e ra tu re, September 1983, pp. 941-80. Economic and social statistics Batutis, Michael J., “ Untangling Census Tape,” A m erica n m o g ra p h ics, October 1983, beginning on p. 22. D e Bounpane, Peter A., “ The Census Bureau Looks to 1990,” A m e r ican D e m o g r a p h ic s, October 1983, beginning on p. 28. Delorme, Francois, S e le c tiv e E c o n o m ic S u b sid iza tio n a n d S ta b i liza tio n P o lic y in an In flation ary E n viron m en t: A D yn a m ic A g g r e g a tiv e M o d e l. Ottawa, Ontario. Economic Council of Canada, 1983, 56 pp. (Discussion Paper, 238.) Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ Unemployment Flows: New Statistics,” E m ploym en t G azette, August 1983, pp. 351-58. Pluta, Joseph E., Rita J. Wright, Mildred C. Anderson, T exas F a c t B ook, 1 9 8 4 . Austin, University of Texas, Bureau of Business Research, 1983, 229 pp. $6, paper. Robey, Bryant and Cheryl Russell, “ How Consumers Spend,” A m erica n D e m o g r a p h ic s, October 1983, pp. 16-21. Industrial relations “ Age Discrimination in Employment Act ( a d e a ) : A Symposium on Legal and Practical Considerations for Attorneys and Per sonnel Practitioners,” A g in g a n d W o rk , Vol. 5, No. 4, 1982 pp. 209-305. Beaumont, P. B. and M. Ingham, “ Low Pay, Productivity, and Collective Bargaining in Local Government in Britain, ” J o u r n a l o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o tia tio n s in the P u b lic S ecto r, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp. 243-57. Davis, Charles E. and Jonathan P. West, “ Attitudes of Municipal Personnel Directors Toward Collective Bargaining and Merit: Accommodation or Conflict?” J o u rn a l o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o tia tio n s in th e P u b lic S ecto r, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp 177-88. Fox, Milden J., Jr., and Patsy Cliffene Howard, a n d C o lle c tiv e B a rg a in in g : to ra l R e se a rc h . Metuchen, L a b o r R e la tio n s A B ib lio g ra p h ic G u id e to D o c N.J., The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1983, 281 pp. $19.50. Industrial Relations Research Association, P ro c e e d in g s o f th e 1983 S p rin g M eetin g , H e ld in H on olu lu , H a w a ii, M a r. 1 6 - 1 8 , 1 9 8 3 . Edited by Barbara D. Dennis. Madison, University of Wisconsin, Industrial Relations Research Association, 1983, 95 pp. Kowalski, Theodore J. and Dennis R. Loomis, “ Collective Bar gaining, Union Affiliation, and Teacher Salaries: An Eco nomic Analysis,” J o u rn a l o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o tia tio n s in the P u b lic S ecto r, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp. 189-98. Nicaud, Robert A., Maurice F. Villere, Thomas S. O’Connor, “ Teacher Strikes: An Investigation of Their Phases,” J o u r n a l o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o tia tio n s in the P u b lic S e c to r , Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp. 199-207. Pankert, Alfred, “ Government Influence on Wage Bargain ing: The Limits Set by International Labour Standards,” In tern a tio n a l L a b o u r R e view , September-October 1983, pp. 579-91. Wilson, Bennie J. Ill, William H. Holley, John S. Martin, “ Ef fects of Faculty Unions on Administrators’ Attitudes Toward Issues in Higher Education,” J o u rn a l o f C o lle c tiv e N e g o ti a tio n s in the P u b lic S ecto r, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp. 231 — 42. Industry and government organization Eglington, Peter and Maris Uffelmann, O b s e rv e d C o s ts o f O il a n d G a s R e se r v e s in A lb e rta , 1 9 5 7 - 1 9 7 9 . Ottawa, Ontario, Eco nomic Council of Canada, 1983, 94 pp. (Discussion Paper, 235.) Melnick, R. Shep. R eg u la tio n a n d the C o u rts: The C a se o f the Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1983, 404 pp. $29.95, cloth; $11.95, paper. C lea n A ir A c t. International economics Bemholz, Peter, “ Inflation and Monetary Constitutions in His torical Perspective,” K y k lo s, Vol. 36, 1983, Fasc. 3, pp. 397-419. Carlsson, Bo, “ Industrial Subsidies in Sweden: Macro-Economic Effects and an International Comparison,” The J o u rn a l o f In d u stria l E co n o m ics, September 1983, pp. 1-18. W orking C la ss H istory: A R ep resen ta tive B ibliograph y. New York, R. R. Bowker Co., 1983, 356 pp. $29.95. “ The People’s Republic of China, 1983,” tember 1983, pp. 241-81. C u rren t H isto ry , Sep Labor force Burkhauser, Richard V. and Robert H. Haveman, with the assis tance of George Parsons, D isa b ility a n d W ork: The E c o nom ics o f A m erican P o licy . Baltimore, Md., The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982, 131 pp. (Policy Studies in Employ ment and Welfare, 38.) $14. Cafferty, Pastora San Juan and others, Im m ig ra tio n : The D ilem m a o f A m erica n B e yo n d the G o ld en D o o r . New Brunswick, N.J., Transaction Books, Inc., 1983, 214 pp. $19.95, cloth; $8.95, paper. Ellwood, David T., T een age U n em p lo ym en t: P erm a n en t S ca rs o r T em p o ra ry B lem ish es? Reprinted from The Youth L a b o r M a rk et P ro b le m : Its N a tu re, C a u ses a n d C o n s e q u e n c e s , ed ited by Richard B. Freeman and David A. Wise, pp. 34990. Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re search, Inc., 1983. ( n b e r Reprint Series, 397.) $1.50. ------The S p a tia l M ism a tch H y p o th e sis: A re T h ere T een a g e J o b s M issin g in the G h e tto ? Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1983, 65 pp. Paper Series, 1188.) $1.50. (n b e r Working Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ Equal Opportunities for Women in Employment,” by Michael Webb, E m p lo ym en t G a z e tte , August 1983, pp. 335-37. Hopkins, Anne H., W ork a n d J o b S a tisfa ctio n in the P u b lic S ecto r. Totowa, N.J., Rowman & Allanheld, 1983. 146 pp. Kim, Sookon, Is the J a p a n e se S ystem o f L ifetim e E m p lo ym en t A p p lic a b le to a D e v e lo p in g C o u n try Such a s K o re a ? Seoul, Korea Development Institute, 1983, 28 pp. Lee, Patricia, The C o m p le te G u id e to J o b S h arin g. New York, Walker and Co., 1983, 136 pp., bibliography. $6.95, paper. Prices and living conditions U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, P ro b le m s in M e a su rin g C o n su m e r P ric e s . Prepared by Janet L. Norwood. Washington, 1983, 11 pp., bibliography. (Report 697.) ------ R e la tiv e Im p o rta n ce o f C o m p o n en ts in the C o n su m er P ric e In d ex es, 19 8 2 . Washington, 1983, 36 pp. (Bulletin 2183.) Stock No. 029-001-02764-8. $3.75, Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402. Ingram, James C., “ Food for Employment: 20 Years of the World Food Programme,” In tern a tio n a l L a b o u r R e view , September-October 1983, pp. 549-62. Productivity and technological change Kindleberger, Charles P., “ Standards as Public, Collective, and Private Goods,” K y k lo s, Vol. 36, 1983, Fasc. 3, pp. 37796. Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ A ‘culture of change’ in the Electronics Industry,” by John Pugh, E m p lo ym en t G a ze tte , August 1983, pp. 359-64. Sabolo, Yves, “ Trade Between Developing Countries, Technol ogy Transfers and Employment,” In tern a tio n a l L a b o u r R e view , September-October 1983, pp. 593-608. ------“ Technological Change and the Content of Jobs,” by G. C. White, E m p lo ym en t G a z e tte , August 1983, pp. 329-34. Touraine, Alain and others, M o v em en t: P o la n d , S o lid a rity — The A n a ly sis o f a S o cia l 1 9 8 0 - 1 9 8 1 . New York, Cambridge University Press, 1983, 203 pp., bibliography. Labor and economic history McColloch, Mark, W hite C o lla r W orkers in Transition: The B oom Years, 1 9 4 0 -1 9 7 0 . Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press, 1983, 193 pp. $29.95. (Contributions in Labor History, 15.) $29.95. Neufeld, Maurice F., Daniel J. Leab, Dorothy Swanson, A m erican https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Wages and compensation Australian Government, Youth W ages, E m p lo ym en t a n d the L a b o u r F o rc e . Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service, Bureau of Labor Market Research, 1983, 153 pp. Ross, Stephen, Paul Taubman, Michael Wächter, L ea rn in g by O b s e rv in g a n d th e D istrib u tio n o f W a g e s. Reprinted from S tu d ies in L a b o r M a rk ets, edited by Sherwin Rosen, pp. 35986. Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re search, Inc., 1983. ( n b e r Reprint 395.) $1.50. 61 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Book Reviews U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, In du stry W age S u rvey: P a p e r, a n d P a p e r b o a r d M ills, Ju ly 1982. Prepared P u lp , by Carl Barsky. Washington, 1983, 92 pp. (Bulletin 2180.) Stock No. 029-001-02762-1. $4.50, Superintendent of Docu ments, Washington 20402. ____ N a tio n a l S u rvey o f P ro fessio n a l, A d m in istra tive, T ech n ical, Washington, 1983, 79 pp. (Bulletin 2181.) Stock No. 029-001-02763-0. $4, Super intendent of Documents, Washington 20402. a n d C le r ic a l P a y , M arch 19 8 3 . Vroman, Wayne, W age Inflation: P ro sp e c ts f o r D e c e le ra tio n . Washington, The Urban Institute Press, 1983, 45 pp. $5.95, paper. A note on communications The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be considered for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not po lemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212. 62 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Current Labor Statistics Notes on Current Labor Statistics ..................................................................................................................................................... 64 Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series 64 Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes ......................................................................... 65 65 66 67 68 68 69 69 69 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, selected years, 1950-82 .................................................................... Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States,by sex,seasonally adjusted . . . . Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin,seasonally ad ju sted....................... Selected employment indicators, seasonally ad ju sted ...................................................................................................................... Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally ad ju sted ................................................................................................................. Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................................... Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally ad ju sted .................................................................................. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted............................................................................................................................... Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Employment by industry, selected years, 1950-82 ........................................................................................................................ Employment by State ....................................................................... Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ...................................................... Hours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1950-82 ........................................................................................... Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted .................................................. Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group .................................................................................... Hourly Earnings Index, by industry division ................................................................................................................................... Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group .................................................................................... Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment in creased .................................................................................................. Unemployment insurance data. Definitions............................................................................................................................... 18. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations .................................................................................................... Price data. Definitions and notes 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. ....................................................................................................................................................... Consumer Price Index, 1967-82 .......................................................................................................................................................... Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected it e m s .................................................................... Consumer Price Index, cross-classification of region and population size c l a s s ....................................................................... Consumer Price Index, selected areas ................................................................................................................................................. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing ............................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings .......................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by special commodity grou p in gs............................................................................................................. Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ............................................................................................................................ Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries ............................................................................................... Productivity data. Definitions and notes 28. 29. 30. 31. ..................................................................................................................................... Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1950-82 ........................... Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1972-82 .................................................... Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted .............................. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation,unit costs, and p r ic e s............... Wage and compensation data. Definitions and notes 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. ...................................................................................................... Employment Cost Index, total compensation, by occupation and industry group .................................................................. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group .................................................................. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size ....................................... Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1978 to d a te ....................................................... Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1978 to date ..................... Work stoppage data. Definition ......................................................................................................................................................... 37. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date ............................................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 70 71 71 72 73 74 75 75 76 76 77 77 78 79 79 85 86 87 88 90 90 91 92 92 93 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 99 100 100 NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS This section of the Review presents the principal statistical series collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A brief introduction to each group of tables provides definitions, 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 cover of this issue of the Review. Some general notes applicable to several series are given below. 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. Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate the effect o f such factors as climatic conditions, industry pro duction schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short-term movements o f the statistical series. Tables containing these data are identified as “ sea sonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are computed each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for several preceding years. Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 3 - 8 were revised in the February 1983 issue of the R e v i e w , to reflect experience through 1982. 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 procedure called X -11/ ARIMA, which was developed at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard X -11 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 j u s t m e n t M e t h 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 o f 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 o f the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in tables 11, 13, and 15 were made in August 1981 using the X -l 1 ARIMA seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for productivity data in tables 29 and 30 are usually introduced 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 Availability of information. Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety o f sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published according to the schedule given below. More information from household and establishment surveys is provided in E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s , a monthly publication of the Bureau. Comparable household information is published in a two-volume data b o o k - L a b o r F o r c e S t a t i s t i c s D e r i v e d F r o m th e C u r r e n t P o p u l a t i o n S u r v e y , Bulletin 2096. Comparable establishment information appears in two data books - E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s , U n i t e d S t a t e s , and E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s , S t a t e s a n d A r e a s , and their annual supplements. More detailed information 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 v e l o p m e n t s . More detailed price information is published each month in the periodicals, the C P I D e t a i l e d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P r i c e s a n d P r i c e I n d e x e s . Symbols p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series, pre liminary figures are issued based on representative but in complete returns. r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability of later data but may also reflect other adjustments, n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified. S ch ed u le of release dates for BLS statistical series S e r ie s R e le a s e P e r io d 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 a te co v e re d d a te c o v e re d d a te co v e re d num ber December February 10 January 1-11 Employment situation ...................................... December 2 November January 6 Producer Price Index ...................................... December 16 November January 13 December February 3 January 23-27 Consumer Price In d e x ...................................... December 21 November January 24 December February 24 January 19-22 Real ea rn in g s...................................................... December 21 November January 24 December February 24 January 12-16 January 25 4th quarter February 28 4th quarter Productivity and costs: Major collective bargaining settlements U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes 64 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ... .... 28-31 28-31 January 27 1983 35-36 January 31 4th quarter 32-34 February 8 4th quarter EMPLOYMENT DATA FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY E m p l o 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 selected to represent the U.S population 16 years of age and older. House holds are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months. rate for all civilian workers represents the number unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force. The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. Persons not in the labor force are those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes persons who are 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, sani tariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members o f the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. The labor force participation rate is the proportion of the noninstitutional population that is in the labor force. The employment-population ratio is total employment (including the resident Armed Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional population. Definitions Employed persons include (1) all civilians 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. Members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the em ployed total. 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 overall unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the labor force, including the resident Armed Forces. The unemployment 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 compara bility of historical data presented in table 1. A description of these ad justments and their effect on the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s . Data in tables 2 - 8 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal ex perience through December 1982. E m ploym ent status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1 9 5 0 -8 2 [Numbers in thousands] L a b o r to rc e E m p lo y e d U n e m p lo y e d N o n in s ti t u tio n a l p o p u la tio n N o t in C iv ilia n P e rc e n t o l P e rc e n t of p o p u la t io n p o p u la t io n R e s id e n t P e rc e n t of N o n a g r i- A rm e d F o rce s T o ta l A g r ic u ltu re la b o r fo rc e la b o r c u ltu ra l fo rc e in d u s tr ie s 1950 1955 1960 106,164 111,747 119,106 63,377 67,087 71,489 59.7 60.0 60 0 60,087 64,234 67,639 56.6 57.5 56.8 1,169 2,064 1,861 58,918 62,170 65,778 7,160 6,450 5,458 51,758 55,722 60,318 3,288 2.852 3.852 52 4.3 5.4 42,787 44,660 46,617 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 128.459 130,180 132,092 134,281 136,573 76,401 77,892 79,565 80,990 82,972 59.5 59.8 60.2 60.3 60.8 73,034 75,017 76,590 78,173 80,140 56.9 57.6 58.0 58.2 58.7 1,946 2,122 2,218 2,253 2,238 71,088 72,895 74,372 75,920 77,902 4,361 3,979 3,844 3,817 3,606 66,726 68,915 70,527 72,103 74,296 3,366 2,875 2,975 2,817 2,832 4.4 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.4 52,058 52,288 52,527 53,291 53,602 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 139,203 142,189 145.939 148,870 151,841 84,889 86,355 88,847 91,203 93,670 61.0 60.7 60.9 61.3 61.7 80,796 81,340 83,966 86,838 88,515 58 0 57.2 57.5 58.3 58.3 2,118 1,973 1,813 1,774 1,721 78,678 79,367 82,153 85,064 86,794 3,463 3,394 3,484 3,470 3,515 75,215 75,972 78,669 81,594 83,279 4,093 5,016 4,882 4,355 5.156 4.8 5.8 5.5 48 5.5 54,315 55,834 57,091 57,667 58,171 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 154,831 157,818 160,689 153,541 166.460 95,453 97,826 100,665 103,882 106,559 61.6 62.0 62 6 63.5 64.0 87,524 90,420 93,673 97,679 100,421 56.5 57.3 58.3 59.7 60.3 1,678 1,668 1,656 1,631 1,597 85,845 88,752 92,017 96,048 98,824 3,408 3,331 3,283 3,387 3,347 82,438 85,421 88,734 92,661 95,477 7,929 7,406 6,991 6,202 6,137 8.3 7.6 69 6.0 5.8 59,377 59,991 60,025 59,659 59,900 1980 1981 1982 169,349 171,775 173.939 108,544 110,315 111,872 64.1 65.2 64.3 100,907 102,042 101,194 59.6 59.4 58.2 1,604 1,645 1,668 99,303 100,397 99,526 3,364 3,368 3,401 95,938 97,030 96,125 7,637 8,273 10,578 7.0 7.5 9.5 60,806 61,460 62,067 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 65 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 2. Em ploym ent status of the population, including A rm ed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] 1983 1982 A n n u al a v e ra g e E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s a n d s e x 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. TO TA L Nonlnstitutional population1-2 ......................... Labor force2 .................................................. Participation rate3 ............................ Total employed2 Employment-population4 ................ Resident Armed Forces1 ...................... Civilian e m p lo ye d ................................... Agriculture ......................................... Nonagricultural In d u s trie s ................ U nem ployed............................................... Unemployment rate5 ......................... Not in labor force ......................................... 171,775 110,315 64.2 102,042 59.4 1,645 100,397 3,368 97,030 8,273 7.5 61,460 173,939 111,872 64.3 101,194 58.2 1,668 99,526 3,401 96,125 10,678 9.5 62,067 174,549 112,420 64.4 100,844 57.8 1,668 99,176 3,413 95,763 11,576 10.3 62,129 174,718 112,702 64.5 100,796 57.7 1,660 99,136 3,466 95,670 11,906 10.6 62,016 174.864 112,794 64.5 100,758 57.6 1,665 99,093 3,411 95,682 12,036 10.7 62,070 175.021 112,215 64.1 100,770 57.6 1,667 99,103 3,412 95,691 11,446 10.2 62,806 175,169 112,217 64.1 100,727 57.5 1,664 99,063 3,393 95,670 11,490 10.2 62,952 175,320 112,148 64.0 100,767 57.5 1,664 99,103 3,375 95.729 11,381 10.1 63,172 175,465 112,457 64.1 101,129 57.6 1,671 99,458 3,371 96,088 11,328 10.1 63,008 175,622 112,418 64.0 101,226 57.6 1,669 99,557 3,367 96,190 11,192 10.0 63,204 175,793 113,600 64.6 102,454 58.3 1,668 100,786 3,522 97,264 11,146 9.8 62,193 175,970 113,539 64.5 102,949 58.5 1,664 101,285 3,527 97,758 10,590 9.3 62,431 176,122 113,943 64.7 103,245 58.6 1,682 101,563 3,489 98,074 10,699 9.4 62,179 176,297 114,063 64.7 103,640 58.8 1,695 101,945 3,290 98,655 10,423 9.1 62,234 176,474 113,510 64.3 103,623 58.7 1,695 101,928 3,202 98,726 9,886 8.7 62,965 82,023 63,486 77.4 58,909 71.8 1,512 57,397 4,577 7.2 83,052 63,979 77.0 57,800 69.6 1,527 56,271 6,179 9.7 83,323 64,300 77.2 57,456 69.0 1,524 55,932 6,844 10.6 83,402 64,414 77.2 57,408 58.8 1,516 55,892 7,006 10.9 83,581 64,384 77.0 57,338 68.6 1,529 55,809 7,046 10.9 83,652 63,916 76.4 57,283 68.5 1,531 55,752 6,633 10.4 83,720 63,996 76.4 57,234 68.4 1,528 55,706 6,762 10.6 83,789 63,957 76.3 57,300 68.4 1,528 55,772 6,657 10.4 83,856 64,207 76.6 57,476 68.5 1.530 55,946 6,731 10.5 83,931 64,276 76.6 57,656 68.7 1,528 56,128 6,620 10.3 84,014 64,816 77.1 58,464 69.6 1,525 56,939 6,351 9.8 84,099 64,864 77.1 58,625 69.7 1,521 57,104 6,238 9.6 84,173 64,814 77.0 58,570 69 6 1,538 57,032 6,244 9.6 84,261 64,944 77.1 58,826 69.8 1,549 57,277 6,118 9.4 84,344 64,690 76.7 58,912 69.8 1,543 57,369 5,778 8.9 89,751 46,829 52.2 43,133 48.1 133 43,000 3,696 7.9 90,887 47,894 52.7 43,395 47.7 139 43,256 4,499 9.4 91,226 48,120 52.7 43,388 47.6 144 43,244 4,732 9.8 91,316 48,288 42.9 43,388 47.5 144 43,244 4,900 10.1 91,283 48,410 43.0 43,420 47.6 136 43,284 4,990 10.3 91,369 48,299 52.9 43,486 47.6 136 43,350 4,813 10.0 91,449 48,220 52.7 43,493 47.6 136 43,357 4,727 9.8 91,532 48,191 52 6 3,467 47.5 136 43,331 4,724 9.8 91,609 48,251 52.7 43,653 47.7 141 43,512 4,597 9.5 91,691 48,142 52.5 43,569 47.5 141 43,428 4,572 9.5 91,779 48,784 53.2 43,990 47.9 143 43,847 4,995 9.8 91,871 48,675 53.0 44,324 48.2 143 44,181 4,351 8.9 91,949 49,130 53.4 44,675 48.6 144 44,531 4,455 9.1 92,036 49,119 53.4 44,814 48.7 146 44,668 4,305 8.8 92,129 48,819 53.0 44,712 48.5 152 44,560 4,108 8.4 M e n . 16 y e a rs an d o v er Noninstitutional population1’ 2 ......................... Labor force2 .................................................. Participation rate3 ............................ Total employed2 ......................................... Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident Armed Forces1 ...................... Civilian e m p lo ye d .................................. U nem ployed............................................... Unemployment rate5 ......................... W o m e n , 16 y e a rs an d o ver Noninstitutional population1’ 2 ......................... Labor force2 .................................................. Participation rate3 ............................ Total employed2 ......................................... Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident Armed Forces1 ...................... Civilian e m p lo ye d ................................... U nem p lo ye d ............................................... Unemployment rate5 ......................... 1The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation. 2 Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. 3 Labor force as a percent of the noninstltutional population. 66 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 Total employed as a percent of the noninstltutlonal population. U nem ploym ent as a percent of the labor force (Including the resident Armed Forces). 3. E m ploym ent status of the civilian population by sex, age, race, and H ispanic origin, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] 1982 A n n u al av e ra g e 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. 1983 D ec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. TOTA L Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor fo r c e ......................................... Participation r a t e ............................... Employed .................................................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . A gricu lture............................................... Nonagricultural industries ................... U n e m ployed............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... Not in labor force ......................................... 170,130 108,670 63.9 100,397 59.0 33,68 97,030 8,273 7.6 61,460 172,271 110,204 64.0 99,526 57.8 3,401 96,125 10,678 9.7 62,067 172,881 110,752 64.1 99,176 57.4 3,413 95,763 11,576 10.5 62,129 173,058 111,042 64.2 99,136 57.3 3,466 95,670 11,906 10.7 62,016 173,199 111,129 64.2 99,093 57 2 3.411 95,682 12,036 10.8 62,070 173,354 110,548 63.8 99,103 57.2 3,4l 2 95,691 11,446 10.4 62,806 173,305 110,553 63.7 99,063 57.1 3,393 95,670 11,490 10.4 62,952 173,656 110,484 63.6 99,103 57.1 3,375 95,729 11,381 10.3 63,172 173,794 110,786 63.7 99,458 57.2 3,371 96,088 11,328 10.2 63,008 173,953 110,749 63.7 99,557 57.2 3,367 96,190 11,192 10.1 63,204 174,125 111,932 64.3 100,786 57.9 3,522 97,264 11,146 10.0 62,193 174,306 111,875 64.2 101,285 58.1 3,527 97,758 10,590 9.5 62,431 174,440 112,261 64.4 101,563 58.2 3,489 98,074 10,699 9.5 62,179 174,602 112,368 64.4 101,945 58.4 3,290 98,655 10,423 62,234 174,779 111,815 64.0 101,928 58.3 3,202 98,726 9,886 8.8 62,964 72,419 57,197 79,0 53,582 74.0 2,384 51,199 3,615 6.3 73,644 57,980 78.7 52,891 71.8 2,422 50,469 5,089 8.8 73,984 58,363 78.9 52,649 71.2 2,444 50,205 5,714 9.8 74,094 58,454 78.9 52,589 71.0 2,434 50,155 5,865 10.0 74,236 58,443 78.7 52,534 70.8 2,389 50,145 5,909 10.1 74,339 58,048 78.1 52,452 70.6 2,426 50,025 5,597 9.6 74,434 58,177 78.2 52.428 70.4 2,374 50,054 5,749 9.9 74,528 58,170 78.1 52,589 70.6 2,420 50,169 5,581 9.6 74,611 58,454 78.3 52,752 70.7 2,404 50,348 5,702 9.8 74,712 58,506 78.3 52,901 70.8 2,443 50,458 5,605 9.6 74,814 58,804 78 6 53,516 71.5 2,529 50.987 5,288 9.0 74,927 59,016 78.8 53,808 71.8 2,544 51,264 5,208 8.8 75,012 58,945 78.6 53,771 71.7 2,496 51,275 5,174 8.8 75,115 59,053 78.6 53,928 71.8 2,431 51,497 5,125 8.7 75,216 58,947 78.4 54,121 72.0 2,362 51,758 4,826 8.2 81,497 42,485 52.1 39,590 48.6 604 38,986 2,895 6.8 82,864 43,699 52.7 40,086 48.4 601 39,485 3,613 8.3 83,271 43,936 52.8 40,112 48.2 578 39,534 3,824 8.7 83,385 44,112 52.9 40,123 48,1 590 39,533 3,989 9.0 83,383 44,286 53.1 40,215 48.2 628 39,587 4,071 9.2 83,490 44,201 52.9 40,238 48.2 625 39,613 3,963 9.0 83,593 44,216 52.9 40,291 48.2 657 39,634 3,925 8.9 83,699 44,166 52.8 40,277 48.1 647 39,630 3,889 8.8 83,794 44,238 52.8 40,509 48.3 622 39,886 3,729 8.4 83,899 44,228 52.7 40.484 48.3 597 39,887 3,744 8.5 84,008 44,648 53.1 40,789 48.6 636 40,153 3,859 8.6 84,122 44,685 53.1 41,164 48.9 607 40,557 3,521 7.9 84,224 45,003 53.4 41,394 49.1 630 40,764 3,609 8.0 84,333 45,132 53.5 41,614 49.3 574 41,040 3,518 7.8 84,443 44,930 53.2 41,583 49.2 581 41,002 3,347 7.4 16,214 8,988 55.4 7,225 44.6 380 6,845 1,763 19.6 15,763 8.526 54.1 6,549 41.5 378 6,171 1,977 23.2 15,625 8,453 54,1 6,415 41.1 391 6,024 2,038 24.1 15,579 8,476 54.4 6,424 41.2 442 5,982 2,052 24,2 15,580 8,400 53.9 6,344 40.7 394 5,950 2,056 24.5 15.525 8,299 53.5 6,413 41.3 361 6,052 1,886 22.7 15,478 8,160 52.7 6,345 41.0 362 5,983 1,815 22 2 15.429 8.148 52.8 6,237 40.4 308 5,929 1,911 23.5 15,389 8,094 52.6 6.197 40.3 344 5,853 1.897 23.4 15,342 8,015 52.2 6,172 40.2 327 5,845 1,843 23.0 15,303 8,480 55.4 6,481 42.4 357 6,124 1,999 23.6 15,257 8,173 53.6 6,313 41.4 376 5.937 1.860 22 8 15,204 8,313 54.7 6,397 42.1 362 6,035 1,916 23.0 15,154 8,184 54.0 6,404 42.3 285 6,119 1,780 21.8 15,120 7,938 52.5 6,225 41.2 259 5,966 1,713 21.6 147,908 95,052 64.3 88,709 60.0 6,343 6.7 149,441 96,143 64.3 87,903 58.8 8,241 8.6 149,838 96,453 64.4 98,477 58.4 8,976 9.3 149,887 96,719 64.5 87,435 58.3 9,284 9.6 150,056 96,864 64.6 87,443 58.3 9,421 9.7 150,129 96,176 64.1 87,466 58.3 8,711 9.1 150,187 95,987 63.9 87,194 58.1 8,793 9.2 150,382 95,996 63.8 87,324 58.1 8,672 9.0 150,518 96,287 64.0 87,709 58.3 8,577 8.9 150,671 96,362 64.0 87,777 58.3 8,585 8.9 150,810 97,250 64.5 88,880 58 9 8,370 8.6 150,959 97,341 64.5 89,382 59 2 7,959 8.2 151,003 97,602 64.6 89,573 59.3 8,029 8.2 151,021 97,605 64.6 89,719 59.4 7,885 8.1 151,175 97,300 64.4 89,798 59.4 7,502 7.7 18,219 11,086 60.8 9,355 51.3 1,731 15.6 18,584 11,331 61.0 9,189 49.4 2,142 18.9 18,692 11,398 61.0 9,102 48.7 2,296 20.1 18,723 11,475 61.3 9,159 48.9 2,316 202 18,740 11,522 61.5 9,127 48.7 2,395 20.8 18,768 11,542 61.5 9,142 48.7 2,400 20.8 18,796 11,548 61.4 9,276 49.4 2,271 19.7 18,823 11,554 61.4 9,253 49.2 2,302 19.9 18,851 11,631 61.7 9,209 48.8 2,423 20.8 18,880 11,672 61.8 9,270 49.1 2,402 20.6 18,911 11,783 62.3 9,352 49.5 2,432 20 6 18,942 11,764 62.1 9,469 50.0 2,295 19.5 18,966 11,745 61.9 9,398 49.6 2,347 20.0 18,994 11,729 61.7 9,505 50.0 2,224 19.0 19,026 11,502 60.5 9,420 49.5 2,082 18.1 9,310 5,972 64.1 5,348 57.4 624 10.4 9,400 5,983 63.6 5,158 54.9 825 13.8 9,474 5,973 63.0 5,075 53.6 898 15.0 9,355 5,923 63.3 5,012 53.6 911 15.4 9,301 5,898 63.4 4,998 53.7 900 15.3 9,328 5,981 64.1 5,053 54.2 929 15.5 9,368 5,992 64.0 5,042 53.8 950 15.8 9,551 6,074 63.6 5,088 53.3 986 16.2 9,665 6,206 64.2 5,304 54.9 902 14.5 9,747 6,167 63.3 5,318 54.6 849 13.8 9,738 6,253 64.2 5,379 55.2 874 14.0 9,640 6,079 63.1 5,331 55.3 748 12.3 9,690 6,124 63.2 5,333 55.0 790 12.9 9,700 6,200 63.9 5,390 55.6 811 13.1 9,745 6,142 63.0 5,385 55.3 756 12.3 9 .3 M e n , 2 0 y e a rs an d o ver Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor f o r c e ......................................... Participation r a te ............................... Employed ............................................... Employment-population ratio2 . . . . A griculture............................................... Nonagricultural industries ................... U nem p lo ye d ............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... W o m e n , 2 0 y e a rs an d o ver Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor f o r c e ......................................... Participation r a t e ............................... Employed ............................................... Employment-population ratio2 . . . . A griculture............................................... Nonagricultural industries ................... U nem p lo ye d ............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... B o th s e x e s , 1 6 to 1 9 y e a r s Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor f o r c e ......................................... Participation r a t e ............................... Employed ............................................... Employment-population ratio2 . . . . A griculture............................................... Nonagricultural industries ................... U nem ployed............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... W h ite Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor fo r c e ......................................... Participation r a t e ............................... Employed .................................................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . U n e m ployed ............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... B la c k Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor f o r c e ......................................... Participation r a te ............................... Employed .................................................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . U n e m ployed......................... Unemployment rate ................ H is p a n ic o r ig in Civilian noninstitutional population1 ................ Civilian labor f o r c e ......................................... Participation r a t e ............................... Employed ............................................... Employment-population ratio2 . . . . U nem p lo ye d ............................................... Unemployment rate ......................... ^The population figures are not seasonally adjusted. ¿Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population. NOTE: for the “ other races” groups are not presented and Híspanles are included in both the white and black population groups. Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because data https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 67 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 4. S elected em ploym ent indicators, seasonally adjusted [N um bers in thousands] A n n u al av e ra g e 1982 1983 S e le c t e d c a t e g o r ie s 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. C H A R A C T E R IS T IC Civilian employed, 16 years and over ...................... 100,397 99,526 99,176 99,136 99,093 99,103 99,063 99,103 99,458 99,557 100,786 101,285 101,563 101,945 101,928 M e n ......................................................................... W o m e n .................................................................. Married men, spouse p re s e n t............................ Married women, spouse p r e s e n t...................... Women who maintain families ......................... 57,397 43,000 38,882 23,915 4,998 56,271 43,256 38,074 24,053 5,099 55,932 43,244 37,852 24,081 5,107 55,892 43,244 37,641 23,985 5,025 55,809 43,284 37,507 24,155 4,985 55,752 43,350 37,450 24,205 5,038 55,706 43,357 37,428 24,070 5,050 55,772 43,331 34,452 24,171 5,097 55,946 43,512 37,523 24,371 4,944 56,128 43,428 37,560 24,229 4,942 56,939 43,847 37,925 24,335 5,016 57,104 44,181 38,293 24,640 5,088 57,032 44,531 38,308 24,972 5,104 57,277 44,668 38,253 24,996 5,124 57,369 44,560 38,241 24,971 5,187 Agriculture: Wage and salary w o r k e r s ................................... Self-employed workers ...................................... Unpaid family w o rk e rs ......................................... 1,464 1,638 266 1,505 1,636 261 1,576 1,621 229 1,584 1,628 241 1,547 1,627 224 1,637 1,587 231 1,624 1,541 223 1,515 1,585 260 1,560 1,607 c208 1,595 1,558 229 1,636 1,608 263 1,663 1,583 259 1,664 1,566 245 1,585 1,473 237 1,481 1,514 224 Nonagricultural industries: Wage and salary w o r k e r s ................................... G overnm ent................................................... Private in d u s trie s ......................................... Private households ............................ Other ...................................................... Self-employed workers ...................................... Unpaid family w o rk e rs ......................................... 89,543 15,689 73,853 1,208 72,645 7,097 390 88,462 15,562 72,945 1,207 71,738 7,262 401 88,064 15,436 72,628 1,216 71,412 7,332 403 87,936 15,514 72,422 1,221 71,201 7,349 382 87,976 15,477 72,499 1,163 71,336 7,335 383 87,813 15,386 72,427 1,162 71,265 7,465 380 87,794 15,501 72,293 1,232 71,061 7,385 353 87,912 15,452 72,459 1,235 71,225 7,453 342 88,187 15,518 72,668 1,205 71,463 7,528 353 88,395 15,523 72,872 1,228 71,644 7,408 335 89,354 15,498 73,856 1,317 72,539 7,493 345 89,765 15,615 74,150 1,286 72,864 7,598 320 89,995 15,697 74,299 1,290 73,009 7,658 376 90,813 15,549 75,265 1,295 73,969 7,660 376 90,663 15,594 75,069 1,291 73,778 7,703 415 91,377 74,339 4,499 1,738 2,761 12,539 90,552 72,245 5,852 2,169 3,683 12,455 90,232 71,394 6,903 2,381 4,022 12,435 90,238 71,442 6,411 2,228 4,183 12,385 90,219 71,499 6,425 2,153 4,272 12,295 90,903 71,786 6,845 2,200 4,645 12,271 90,207 71,564 6,481 2,097 4,384 12,162 90,271 71,878 6,202 1,927 4,275 12,191 92,267 73,594 6,082 1,871 4,211 12,592 90,941 72,975 5,928 1,685 4,243 12,038 90,539 72,978 5,729 1,702 4,027 11,833 92,253 74,004 5,636 1,809 3,826 12,614 91,986 73,495 5,789 1,718 4,071 12,701 93,737 74,883 6,106 1,798 4,309 12,748 93,324 75,167 5,670 1,575 4,095 12,488 M A J O R IN D U S T R Y A N D C L A S S O F W O R K E R PERSONS AT W O RK1 Nonagricultural in d u s trie s ............................................ Full-time schedules ............................................ Part time for economic reaso ns......................... Usually work full time ................................ Usually work part t im e ................................ Part time for noneconomic reasons................... 1 Excludes persons “ with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes. 5. S elected unem ploym ent indicators, seasonally adjusted [U nem ploym ent rates] A n n u al av e ra g e 1982 1983 S e le c t e d c a te g o r ie s 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. C H A R A C T E R IS T IC Total, all civilian w o rk e rs ............................................ 7.6 9.7 10.4 10.7 10.8 10.4 10.4 10.3 10.2 10.1 10.0 9.5 9.5 9.3 8.8 Both sexes, 16 to 19 y e a r s ................................ Men, 20 years and o v e r ...................................... Women, 20 years and o v e r ................................ 19.6 6.3 6.8 23.2 8.8 8.3 24.1 9.8 8.7 24.2 10.0 9.0 24.5 10.1 9.2 22.7 9.6 9.0 22.2 9.9 8.9 23.5 9.6 8.8 23.4 9.8 8.4 23.0 9.6 8.5 23.6 9.0 8.6 22.8 8.8 7.9 23.0 8.8 8.0 21.8 8.7 7.8 21.6 8.2 7.4 White, t o t a l............................................................ Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ...................... Men, 16 to 19 years ......................... Women, 16 to 19 years ................... Men, 20 years and o v e r ............................. Women, 20 years and over ...................... 6.7 17.3 17.9 16.6 5.6 5.9 8.6 20.4 21.7 19.0 7.8 7.3 9.3 21.5 23.0 19.9 8.8 7.6 9.6 21.2 22.6 19.8 9.1 8.0 9.7 21.6 22.8 20.4 9.2 8.1 9.1 20 0 21.2 18.7 8.4 7.8 9.2 19.7 21.1 18.2 8.7 7.7 9.0 21.4 22.9 19.7 8.5 7.4 8.9 20.4 21.7 19.0 8.6 7.2 8.9 19.8 20.2 19.4 8.6 7.3 8.6 20.0 19.8 20.2 7.8 7.4 8.2 19.5 20.4 18.5 7.7 6.7 8.2 19.8 21.1 18.4 7.7 6.7 8.1 17.9 18.7 17.1 7.8 6.6 7.7 18.5 20.1 16.7 7.3 6.3 Black, t o t a l ............................................................ Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ...................... Men, 16 to 19 years ......................... Women, 16 to 19 years ................... Men, 20 years and o v e r ............................ Women, 20 years and over ...................... 15.6 41.4 40.7 42.2 13.5 13.4 18.9 48.0 48.9 47.1 17.8 15.4 2.1 47.7 49.2 45.9 19.6 16.2 20.2 49.8 53.0 46.2 19.2 16.5 20.8 49.5 52.5 46.2 20.5 16.5 20.8 45.7 45.9 45.5 19.7 18.2 19.7 45.4 45.3 45.4 18.7 17.0 19.9 43.5 44.5 42.3 18.8 17.7 20.8 49.0 48.0 50.0 20.3 17.0 20.6 48.2 53.1 42.3 19.8 17.1 20.6 50.6 51.1 50.0 19.2 17.0 19.5 48.1 47.6 48.8 18.7 16.0 20.0 53.0 56.8 48.9 18.4 16.4 19.0 52.0 54.8 48.7 16.9 16.1 18.1 48.3 43.9 53.3 16.0 15.8 Hispanic origin, to ta l............................................ 10.4 13.8 15.0 15.4 15.3 15.5 15.8 16.2 14.5 13.8 14.0 12.3 12.9 13.1 12.3 Married men, spouse p re s e n t............................. Married women, spouse present ...................... Women who maintain families ......................... 4.3 6.0 10.4 6.5 7.4 11.7 7.5 7.9 11.3 7.6 8.2 12.5 7.8 8.2 13.2 7.1 7.8 13.2 7.2 7.6 13.0 7.1 7.5 13.5 7.1 7.3 13.2 7.0 7.5 12.9 6.6 7.8 12.8 6.1 7.0 11.6 6.3 6.9 11.6 6.1 6.8 12.2 5.8 6.3 11.1 Full-time w o rke rs................................................... Part-time workers ............................................... Unemployed 15 weeks and over ...................... Labor force time lost1 ......................................... 7.3 9.4 2.1 8.5 9.6 10.5 3.2 11.0 10.5 10.3 3.8 12.0 10.6 11.3 4.1 12.4 10.8 11.1 4.3 12.7 10.3 10.6 4.2 11.7 10.4 10.1 4.2 12.0 10.3 10.5 4.2 11.8 10.2 10.6 3.9 11.4 9.9 11.0 4.1 11.5 9.7 12.1 4.1 10.8 9.4 10.2 3.9 10.4 9.4 10.1 3.6 10.6 9.2 10.0 3.4 10.6 8.7 9.8 3.2 10.0 7.7 6.0 15.6 8.3 8.2 8.4 5.2 8.1 5.9 4.7 12.1 10.1 13.4 20.0 12.3 13.3 10.8 6.8 10.0 6.9 4.9 14.7 11.0 17.9 22.3 14.1 16.0 11.2 7.9 10.4 7.1 4.9 13.3 11.4 18.1 21.8 14.8 17.0 11.4 8.3 10.6 7.7 5.1 15.6 11.6 18.1 22.0 14.8 17.1 11.4 8.0 11.0 7.9 5.1 16.5 10.8 17.1 20.0 13.0 14.7 10.5 7.8 10.8 7.6 5.7 16.0 10.8 18.4 19.7 13.3 14.7 11.4 8.0 10.9 7.3 6.0 16.4 10.8 18.6 20.3 12.8 14.1 11.1 7.8 11.2 7.2 5.9 16.3 10.5 20.3 20.3 12.4 13.5 10.8 7.7 10.4 7.3 6.1 17.2 10.5 22.7 20.4 12.3 13.5 10.5 7.0 ,10.1 7.5 5.8 17.0 10.0 18.2 18.1 11.5 12.2 10.4 7.8 10.2 7.2 5.1 17.0 9.6 16.6 18.0 10.5 11.2 9.6 7.0 9.7 7.3 5.5 14.2 9.8 14.8 18.1 11.2 11.6 10.6 8.0 9.8 7.2 5.0 14.6 9.4 17.2 18.2 10.2 10.9 9.2 7.4 9.6 7.1 4.9 16.1 9.0 11.3 15.2 9.5 10.2 8.5 7.4 9.9 6.9 5.0 17.1 IN D U S T R Y Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers . . Mining .................................................................. Construction ......................................................... Manufacturing ...................................................... Durable goods ............................................ Nondurable goods ...................................... Transportation and public u tilitie s ...................... Wholesale and retail tra d e ................................... Finance and service Industries ......................... Government workers ................................................... Agricultural wage and salary workers ...................... 1Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours. 68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6. U nem ploym ent rates by sex and age, seasonally adjusted [Civilian workers] 1983 1982 A n n u al av e ra g e Sex and age 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. Total, 16 years and over ............................................ 16 to 24 years ......................................................... 16 to 19 y e a r s ...................................................... 16 to 17 y e a rs .................................................. 18 to 19 y e a rs .................................................. 20 to 24 years ...................................................... 25 years and over ................................................... 25 to 54 years ................................................... 55 years and over ............................................ 7.6 14.9 19.6 21.4 18.4 12.3 5.4 5.8 3.6 9.7 17.8 23.2 24.9 22.1 14.9 7.4 7.9 5.0 10.5 18.7 24.1 26.1 22 9 15.8 8.1 8.7 5.5 10.7 19.0 24.2 26.3 22.8 16.3 8.3 8.9 5.7 10.8 18.9 24.5 27.4 22.7 16.0 8.6 9.1 5.8 10.4 18.3 22 7 24.1 21.7 16.1 8.1 8.7 5.4 10.4 18.3 22.2 23.4 21.5 16.3 8.2 8.7 5.4 10.3 18.1 23.5 25.1 22 7 15.4 8.1 8.7 5.4 10.2 18.1 23.4 26 3 21.8 15.4 8.0 8.5 5.6 10.1 18.1 23.0 26 2 21.1 15.6 7.9 8.5 5.3 10.0 17.6 23 6 25 8 22 4 14.4 7.9 8.3 5.6 9.5 16.8 22.8 25.3 21.1 13.8 7.4 7.8 5.3 9.5 17.4 23.0 24.7 22.0 14.5 7.3 7.8 5.1 9.3 16.5 21.8 23 9 20.4 13.8 7.3 7.7 5.1 8.8 16.3 21.6 23.9 20.3 13.7 6.8 7.2 5.0 Men, 16 years and o v e r ...................................... 16 to 24 y e a rs ................................................... 16 to 19 years ............................................ 16 to 17 y e a r s ......................................... 18 to 19 y e a r s ......................................... 20 to 24 years ............................................ 25 years and over ............................................ 25 to 54 y e a r s ......................................... 55 years and over ................................... 7.4 15.7 20.1 22.0 18.8 13.2 5.1 5.5 3.5 9.9 19.1 24.4 26.4 23.1 16.4 7.5 8.0 5.1 10.9 20.2 25.6 28.8 23.4 17.4 8.5 9.1 6.0 11.1 20.6 25 7 28 2 24.1 18.0 8.6 9.2 6.2 11.2 20.5 25.8 29.0 24.0 17.8 8.8 9.4 6.3 10.6 19.7 23.9 24.4 23.5 17.6 8.2 8.7 5.8 10.8 19.8 23.6 23.6 23.4 17.8 8.5 9.1 5.7 10.7 19.5 25.3 26.0 24.8 16.6 8.4 9.0 5.8 10.7 19.4 24.4 27.0 22.8 17.0 8.5 8.9 6.3 10.6 19.7 23.9 27.4 22.0 17.6 8.2 8.8 5.8 10.0 18.4 23.7 25.4 22 9 15.7 7.8 8.4 5.4 9.8 18.4 23.8 27.9 21.2 15.7 7.6 8.1 5.4 9.9 18.8 24.7 26.2 23.7 15.9 7.5 8.0 5.3 9.7 17.6 22.9 23.5 22.5 15.0 7.6 8.1 5.6 9.2 17.4 22.7 24.0 21.9 14.8 7.0 7.4 5.4 Women, 16 years and o v e r ................................ 16 to 24 y e a rs .................................................. 16 to 19 years ............................................ 16 to 17 y e a r s ......................................... 18 to 19 y e a r s ......................................... 7.9 14.0 19.0 20.7 17.9 9.4 16.2 21.9 23.2 21.0 9.9 17.0 22.5 22.9 22.3 10.2 17.2 22.6 24.2 21.4 10.3 17.1 23.0 25.6 21.3 10.0 16.7 21.5 23.7 19.8 9.8 16.6 20.7 23.2 19.3 9.8 16.6 21.5 24.2 20.5 9.6 16.5 22.4 25.5 20.7 9.5 16.2 21.9 24.7 20.2 9.9 16.6 23.4 26.2 21.9 9.0 14.9 21.6 22.3 21.0 9.1 15.9 21.2 23.1 20.3 8.4 15.1 20.4 23.8 20 to 24 years ............................................ 25 years and over ............................................ 25 to 54 y e a r s ......................................... 55 years and over ................................... 11.2 5.9 6.3 3.8 13.2 7.3 7.7 4.8 14.0 7.6 8.2 4.8 14.4 7.9 8.5 4.9 14.0 8.2 8.8 5.1 14.2 7.9 8.7 4.8 14.5 7.7 8.2 4.9 14.1 7.7 8.3 4.7 13.5 7.4 7.9 4.5 13.3 7.6 8.2 4.6 12.9 7.9 8.2 5.8 11.5 7.2 7.6 5.3 13.0 7.0 7.5 4.7 8.8 15.2 20.5 24.3 17.9 18.5 12.5 6.8 7.3 4.4 12.5 6.4 6.8 4.4 O c t. 7. U nem ployed persons by reason for unem ploym ent, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] 1982 A n n u al av e ra g e 1983 R e a s o n fo r u n e m p lo y m e n t Job losers ..................................................................... On layoff ............................................................... Other job losers .................................................. Job leave rs..................................................................... R ee n tra n ts..................................................................... New en tra n ts.................................................................. 1981 1982 4,257 1,430 2,837 923 2,102 981 6,258 2,127 4,141 840 2,384 1,185 100.0 51.6 17.3 34.3 11.2 25.4 11.9 3.9 .8 1.9 9 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. 7,325 2,519 4,806 803 2,322 1,296 7,369 2,531 4,838 794 2,546 1,244 7,295 2,468 4,827 826 2,529 1,288 6,704 2,131 4,573 839 2,623 1,174 6,809 2,024 4,784 848 2,491 1,161 6.823 1,945 4,878 901 2,426 1.155 6,750 1,948 4,803 815 2,488 1,245 6,766 1,943 4,823 801 2,365 1,251 6,513 1,822 4,691 782 2,425 1,440 6,193 1,719 4,474 738 2,429 1,225 6,202 1,658 4,545 767 2,524 1,214 6,002 1,591 4.411 866 2,351 1,247 5,542 1,373 4,169 889 2,375 1,102 100.0 58.7 19.9 38.8 7.9 22.3 11.1 100.0 62.4 21.4 40.9 6.8 19.8 11.0 100.0 61.5 21.2 40.5 6.6 21.3 10.4 100.0 60.6 20.5 40.1 6.9 21.8 10.7 100.0 59.1 18.8 40.3 7.4 23.1 10.4 100.0 60.2 17.9 42.3 7.5 22.0 10.3 100.0 60.4 17.2 43.1 8.0 21.5 10.2 100.0 59.7 17.2 42.5 7.2 22.0 11.0 100.0 60.5 17.4 43.1 7.2 21.1 11.2 100.0 58.4 16.3 42.0 7.0 21.7 12.9 100.0 58.5 16.2 42.3 7.0 22.9 11.6 100.0 57 9 15.5 42.4 7.2 23 6 11.3 100.0 57.3 15.2 42.1 8.3 22.5 11.9 100.0 55 9 13.9 42.1 9.0 24.0 11.1 5.7 .8 2.2 1.1 6.6 .7 2.1 1.2 6.6 .7 2.3 1.1 6.6 .7 2.4 1.2 6.1 .8 2.4 1.1 6.2 .8 2.3 1.1 6.2 .8 2.2 1.0 6.1 .7 2.2 1.1 6.1 .7 2.1 1.1 5.8 .7 2.2 1.3 5.5 .7 2.2 1.1 5.5 .7 2.2 1.1 5.3 .8 2.1 1.1 5.0 8 2.1 1.0 P E R C E N T D IS T R IB U T IO N Total u n e m p lo ye d ......................................................... Job losers ..................................................................... On layoff ............................................................... Other job losers .................................................. Job leave rs..................................................................... R een trants..................................................................... New entra nts.................................................................. PERCENT OF C IV IL IA N L A B O R F O R C E Job losers ..................................................................... Job leave rs..................................................................... R ee n tra n ts......................................................... New en tra n ts .................................................................. 8. D uration of unem ploym ent, seasonally adjusted [Num bers in thousands] 1982 A n n u al av e ra g e 1983 W e e k s o f u n e m p lo y m e n t Less than 5 w eeks............................................ 5 to 14 w e e k s ............................................ 15 weeks and over ...................................................... 15 to 26 w e e k s............................................ 27 weeks and over ............................................... Mean duration in w e e k s ......................................... Median duration in w e e k s ............................................ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. 3,449 2,539 2,285 1,122 1,162 13.7 6.9 3,883 3,311 3,485 1,708 1,776 15.6 8.7 3,930 3,511 4,167 1,951 2,216 17.1 9.6 3,963 3,549 4,524 2,191 2,333 17.3 10.0 4,019 3,460 4,732 2,125 2,607 18.0 10.1 3,536 3,328 4,634 1,928 2,706 19.4 11.5 3,731 3,106 4,618 1,928 2,689 19.0 9.6 3,440 3,140 4,615 1,875 2,740 19.1 10.3 3,547 3,154 4,356 1,662 2,694 19.0 11.3 3,519 2,979 4,517 1,731 2,786 20.4 12.3 3,655 2,915 4,589 1,638 2,951 22.0 11.8 3,498 2,794 4,417 1,830 2,587 21.7 9.9 3,660 3,026 4,020 1,573 2,447 19.9 8.9 3.774 2,810 3,850 1,344 2,506 20.2 9.1 3,512 2,746 3,613 1,363 2,250 20.1 9.3 69 EMPLOYMENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA FROM ESTABLISHMENT SURVEYS E , , in this section are com piled from payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by 189,000 establishments representing all industries except ag riculture. In most industries, the sampling probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An establishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for example, or warehouse.) Selfemployed 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 sur veys. m p l o y m e n t h o u r s a n d e a r n in g s d a t a Definitions Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holiday and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 percent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establishment which reports them. Production workers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker su pervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with produc tion operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 include production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construc tion; and nonsupervisory workers in transportation and public utilities; in wholesale and retail trade; in finance, insurance, 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 re ceive 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 reflect the effects of changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). The Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from average 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 70 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 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 low-wage industries. Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsuper visory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the portion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular hours and for which overtime premiums were paid. The Diffusion Index, introduced in table 17 of the May issue, represents the percent of 186 nonagricultural industries in which employment was rising over the indicated period. One-half of the industries with unchanged employment are counted as rising. In line with Bureau practice, data for the 3-, 6-, and 9-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while that for the 12-month span is unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measuring the dispersion of economic gains or losses and is also an economic indi cator. Notes on the data Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are pe riodically adjusted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called “ benchmarks” ). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release of May 1983 data, published in the July 1983 issue of the R e v i e w . Con sequently, data published in the R e v i e w prior to that issue are not necessarily comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to April 1981; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January 1978. Unadjusted data from April 1982 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1979 forward are subject to revision in future bench marks. Earlier comparable unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a S u p p l e m e n t to E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s (unadjusted data from April 1977 through February 1983 and seasonally adjusted data from January 1974 through February 1983) and in E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s , U n i t e d S t a t e s , 1 9 0 9 - 7 8 , BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods). A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “ Com paring employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v i e w , December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 . See also B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e t h o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). 9. E m ploym ent by industry, selected years, 1 9 5 0 -8 2 [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] G o o d s -p r o d u c in g S e r v ic e - p r o d u c in g T ra n s p o r P riv a te Year W h o le s a le a n d r e ta il tra d e C o n s tru c s e c to r T o ta l M a n u fa c M in in g T o ta l tio n p u b lic in s u ra n c e , W h o le and tu rin g G o v ern m en t F in a n c e , ta tio n T o ta l R e t a il T o ta l s a le tra d e tra d e u tilitie s S e r v ic e s and real S ta te a n d T o ta l F e d e ra l lo c a l e s ta te 1950 ................................... 1955 .................................. I9 6 0 1 ............................... 1964 .................................. 1965 .................................. 45,197 50,641 54,189 58,283 60,765 39,170 43,727 45,836 48,686 50,589 18,506 20,513 20,434 21,005 21,926 901 792 712 634 632 2,364 2,839 2,926 3,097 3,232 15,241 16,882 16,796 17,274 18,062 26,691 30,128 33,755 37,278 38,839 4,034 4,141 4,004 , 3,951 4,036 9,386 10,535 11,391 12,160 12,716 2,635 2,926 3,143 3,337 3,466 6,751 7,610 8,248 8,823 9,250 1,888 2,298 2,629 2,911 2,977 5,357 6,240 7,378 8,660 9,036 6,026 6,914 8,353 9,596 10,074 1,928 2,187 2,270 2,348 2,378 4,098 4,727 6,083 7,248 7,696 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 ................................... ................................... ................................... ................................... ................................... 63,901 65,803 67,897 70,384 70,880 53,116 54,413 56,058 58,189 58,325 23,158 23,308 23,737 24,361 23,578 627 613 606 619 623 3,317 3,248 3,350 3,575 3,588 19,214 19,447 19,781 20,167 19,367 40,743 42,495 44,160 46,023 47,302 4,158 4,268 4.318 4,442 4.515 13,245 13,606 14,099 14,706 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 1 9 7 1 ................................... 1972 ................................... 1973 .................................. 1974 .................................. 1975 ................................... 71,214 73,675 76,790 78,265 76,945 58,331 60,341 63,058 64,095 62,259 22,935 23,668 24,893 24,794 22,600 609 628 642 697 752 3,704 3,889 4,097 4,020 3,525 18,623 19,151 20,154 20,077 18,323 48,278 50,007 51,897 53,471 54,345 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 4,045 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 90,406 64,511 67,344 71,026 73,876 74,166 23,352 24,346 25,585 26,461 25,658 779 813 851 958 1,027 3,576 3,851 4,229 4,463 4,346 18,997 19,582 20,505 21,040 20,285 56,030 58.125 61.113 63,363 64,748 4,582 4,713 4,923 5,136 5,146 17,755 18,516 19,542 20,192 20.310 4,546 4,708 4,969 5,204 5,275 13,209 13,808 14,573 14,989 15,035 4,271 4,467 4,724 4,975 5,180 14,551 15,303 16,252 17,112 17,890 14,871 15,127 15,672 15,947 16,241 2,733 2,727 2,753 2,773 2,866 12,138 12,399 12,919 13,147 13,375 1 9 8 1 ................................... 1982 ................................... 91,156 89,596 75,126 73,793 25,497 23,907 1,139 1,143 4,188 3,911 20,170 18,853 65,659 65,689 5,165 5,081 20.547 20,401 5,358 5,280 15,189 15,122 5,298 5,340 18.619 19,064 16,031 15,803 2,772 2,739 13,259 13,064 1 Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. 10. E m ploym ent by S tate [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] S ta te S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 2 August 19 83 S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 3 P S ta te S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 2 A ugust 1983 Alabama............... Alaska .................. Arizona ............... Arkansas ............ California ............ 1,306.3 216.8 1,022.5 727.2 9,803.2 1,311.6 230.3 1,011.7 724.9 9,800.3 1,312.0 224.5 1,052.7 743.4 9,973.7 M ontana................................................... Nebraska .................................................. Nevada ......................................................... New H am pshire............................................... New J e r s e y ......................................... 275.9 605.6 410.8 399.9 3,099.2 266.2 592.6 419.1 402.2 3,123.2 272.0 597.5 424.3 403.8 .23.2 Colorado ............ Connecticut . . . . Delaware ............ District of Columbia Florida.................. 1,308.0 1,429.5 262.2 590.6 3,707.3 1,330.1 1,407.0 264.5 600.3 3,786.8 1,345.8 1,442.1 263.8 588.6 3,882.5 New M e xic o ...................................... New Y o r k ...................................................... North Carolina ................................................ North D a k o ta ......................................... O h io .................................................................. 477.7 7,224.6 2,346.7 254.1 4,153.3 482.3 7,161.6 2,329.3 252.2 4,085.6 487.1 7,212.6 2,392.6 256.3 4,158.7 Georgia............... Hawaii.................. Idaho ................. Illinois.................. Indiana ............... 2,207.7 394.0 320.4 4,582.9 2,022.5 2,236.7 400.7 315.9 4,511.8 1,988.8 2,267.3 388.7 326.5 4,540.6 2,018.6 O kla hom a................................................... Oregon ......................................................... Pennsylvania ...................................... Rhode Is la n d ............................................... South Carolina ...................................... 1,229.9 967.7 4,535.1 394.5 1,158.1 1,195.7 948.3 4,456.0 392.3 1,164.6 1,214.2 966.4 4,481.7 396.4 1,182.9 Iow a.................... Kansas ............... Kentucky ............ Louisiana ............ M a in e .................. 1,033.6 911.8 1,170.3 1,606.2 417.5 993.3 897.2 1,155.9 1,573.2 428.0 1,023.1 916.4 1,175.3 1,585.9 422.9 South D a k o ta ............................................... Tennessee ............................................... Texas ............................................................ U ta h ............................................................ V e rm o n t............................................ 232.1 1,686.4 6,233.4 564.7 204.2 234.4 1,681.1 6,112.9 559.3 204.7 237.8 1,704.1 6,168.4 572.4 208 1 Maryland ............ Massachusetts . Michigan ............ Minnesota ............ Mississippi . . . . Missouri............... 1,663.9 2,625.4 3,190.8 1,716.1 795.0 1,929.2 1,673.7 2,585.6 3,165.9 1,712.4 776.8 1,909.2 1,684.4 2,636.1 3,235.7 1,735.3 794.8 1,931.8 Virginia ...................................................... W ash ington............................................ West V ir g in ia ............................................ W isco nsin......................................... Wyoming ............................................ 2,139.0 1,582.7 605.3 1,882.6 221.7 2,147.8 1,570.2 591.4 1,851.3 214.6 2,179.6 1,595.7 588.9 1,872.0 219.2 35.5 35.6 34.2 Virgin Is la n d s ............................................... S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 3 P p = preliminary. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 71 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 11. E m ploym ent by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group, seasonally adjusted [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] 1983 1982 A n n u al a v e ra g e In d u s t r y d iv is io n a n d g r o u p TOTAL • P R IV A T E S E C T O R G O O D S -P R O D U C IN G M i n i n g .............................................................................................................................. 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. 91,156 89,596 88,938 88,785 88,665 75,126 73,793 73,158 73,013 72,907 25,497 23,907 23,287 23,131 23,061 1,139 1,143 1,082 1,066 1.053 Feb. M a r. 88,885 88,746 88,814 73,132 73,004 73,090 23,186 23,049 23,030 1,037 1,014 1,006 Jan. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t .P O c l.P 89,101 89,421 89,844 90,152 89,735 90,753 91,073 73,377 73,677 74,123 74,472 74,074 75,000 75,395 23,159 23,347 23,518 23,724 23,830 23,943 24,167 997 994 1,003 1,017 1,023 1,027 1,038 4,188 3,911 3,847 3,843 3,815 3,905 3,790 3,757 3,786 3,860 3,933 3,974 4,014 4,040 4,089 20.170 14,020 18,853 12,790 18,358 12,368 18,222 12,252 18,193 12,241 18,244 12,291 18,245 12,303 18,267 12,323 18,376 12,435 18,493 12,531 18,582 12,615 18,733 12,756 18,793 12,803 18,876 12,867 19,040 13,036 Production w o rke rs...................................... 12,109 8,294 11,100 7,350 10,685 6,992 10,577 6,900 10,559 6,892 10,594 6,931 10,608 6,949 10.617 6,961 10,689 7,035 10,788 7,115 10,844 7,169 10,961 7,278 11,022 7,329 11,084 7,383 11,227 7,520 Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ............................... Furniture and fixtures ......................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal indu stries...................................... Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ................................... 666 464 638 1,122 1,590 603 433 578 922 1,435 605 426 565 840 1,378 608 427 559 823 1,362 614 429 554 816 1,359 625 430 557 817 1,364 631 427 557 810 1,364 638 433 559 816 1,362 651 440 565 820 1,369 662 446 570 828 1,379 679 450 573 830 1,384 688 459 577 839 1,391 699 457 582 840 1,410 704 459 585 849 1,412 712 464 589 861 1,430 Machinery, except e le ctrica l............................... Electric and electronic equipm ent...................... Transportation e q u ip m e n t.................................. Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ...................... Miscellaneous m a n u fa ctu rin g ............................ 2,498 2,094 1,898 730 408 2,267 2,016 1,744 716 386 2,122 1,976 1,691 705 377 2,088 1,975 1,661 700 374 2,066 1,957 1,696 695 373 2,048 1,974 1,710 695 374 2,042 1,981 1,729 693 374 2,030 1,988 1,723 691 377 2,031 1,999 1,743 690 381 2,064 2,010 1,757 689 383 2,066 2,030 1,762 687 383 2,094 2,047 1,794 687 385 2,109 2,043 1,807 692 383 2,115 2,081 1,803 696 380 2,135 2,110 1,839 701 386 Production w o rke rs...................................... 8,061 5,727 7,753 5,440 7,673 5,376 7,645 5,352 7,634 5,349 7,650 5,360 7,637 5,354 7,650 5,362 7,687 5,400 7,705 5,416 7,738 5,446 7,772 5,478 7,771 5,474 7,792 5,484 7,813 5,516 Food and kindred products ............................... Tobacco m anufactures......................................... Textile mill p ro d u c ts ............................................ Apparel and other textile products ................... Paper and allied p ro d u c ts .................................. 1,671 70 823 1,244 689 1,638 68 750 1,164 662 1,636 66 733 1,148 653 1,632 63 727 1,141 654 1,626 69 727 1,140 653 1,626 69 726 1,150 653 1,620 67 726 1,148 652 1,619 67 730 1,143 652 1,633 66 733 1,149 654 1,632 66 736 1.153 656 1,643 65 745 1,159 657 1,638 65 746 1,180 658 1,627 62 752 1,175 659 1,633 63 752 1,178 661 1,611 64 758 1,191 666 Printing and publishing ...................................... Chemicals and allied prod ucts............................ Petroleum and coal products ............................ Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products Leather and leather products ............................ 1,266 1,109 214 737 238 1,269 1,079 201 701 221 1,265 1,066 201 689 216 1,263 1,064 200 685 216 1,263 1,059 199 685 213 1,266 1,057 200 688 215 1,265 1,056 199 691 214 1,269 1,056 199 699 216 1,274 1,058 199 707 214 1,276 1,058 198 716 214 1,281 1,056 198 721 213 1,284 1,059 197 732 213 1,289 1,056 195 739 217 1,290 1,061 195 742 217 1,298 1,062 194 752 217 C o n s t r u c t io n M a n u f a c t u r i n g ......................................................................................................... Production w o rke rs...................................... D u ra b le g o o d s N o n d u r a b le g o o d s 65,659 65,689 65,651 65,654 65,604 65,699 65,697 65,784 65,942 66,074 66,326 66,428 65,905 66,810 66,906 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s ............................................... 5,165 5,081 5,033 5,019 5,008 4,979 4,966 4,963 4,988 4,993 4,992 4,984 4,341 5,027 5,034 W h o l e s a l e a n d r e t a i l t r a d e .................................................................... 20,547 20,401 20,344 20,320 20,256 20,355 20,343 20,350 20,329 20,356 20,494 20,529 20,580 20,613 20,669 5,358 5,280 5,237 5,212 5,192 5,185 5,181 5,176 5,180 5,197 5,222 5,229 5,249 5,273 5,284 15,189 15,122 15,107 15,108 15,064 15,170 15,162 15,174 15,149 15,159 15,272 15,300 15,331 15,340 15,385 5,298 5,340 5,350 5,356 5,367 5,374 5,384 5,391 5,423 5,435 5,451 5,465 5,488 5,496 5,501 S E R V IC E - P R O D U C IN G W h o le s a le tra d e R e ta il tra d e .............................................................................................................. F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , a n d r e a l e s ta te S e r v ic e s 18,619 19,064 19,144 19,187 19,215 19,238 19,262 19,356 19,478 19,546 19,668 19,770 19,835 19,921 20,024 G o v ern m en t 16,031 2,772 13,259 15,803 2,739 13,064 15,780 2,742 13,038 15,772 2,746 13,026 15,758 2,747 13,011 15,753 2,748 13,005 15,742 2,742 13,000 15,724 2,742 12,982 15,724 2,749 12,975 15,744 2,756 12,988 15,721 2,742 12,979 15,680 2,738 12,942 15,661 2,733 12,928 15,753 2,741 13,012 15,678 2,732 12,946 Federal .................................................................. State and lo c a l...................................................... p = preliminary. NOTE: See “ Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 72 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 12. H ours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1 9 5 0 -8 2 [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls] Year A v e ra g e A v erag e A v e ra g e A v e ra g e A v e ra g e A v erag e A v erag e A v erag e A v e ra g e w e e k ly w e e k ly h o u r ly w e e k ly w e e k ly h o u r ly w e e k ly w e e k ly h o u r ly w e e k ly w e e k ly h o u r ly e a rn in g s h o u rs e a rn in g s e a rn in g s h o u rs e a rn in g s e a rn in g s h o u rs e a r n in g s e a r n in g s h o u rs e a r n in g s A v e ra g e P riv a te s e c to r A v e ra g e M in in g C o n s tr u c tio n A v erag e M a n u f a c t u r in g 1950 1955 I9 6 0 1 1964 196è $53.13 67.72 80.67 91.33 95.45 39.8 39.6 38.6 38.7 38.8 $1.34 1.71 2 09 2.36 2.46 $67.16 89 54 105.04 117.74 123.52 37.9 40.7 40.4 41.9 42.3 $1.77 2.20 2.60 2.81 2.92 $69.68 90.90 112.57 132.06 138.38 37.4 37.1 36.7 37.2 37.4 $1.86 2.45 3 07 3.55 3.70 $58.32 75.30 89.72 102.97 107.53 40.5 40.7 39.7 40.7 41.2 $1.44 1.85 2.26 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 6.66 273.90 301.20 332.88 365.07 397.06 42.4 43.4 43.4 43.0 43.3 6.46 6.94 7.67 8.49 9.17 283.73 295.65 318.69 342.99 367.78 36.8 36.5 36.8 37.0 37.0 7.71 8.10 8.66 9.27 9.94 209.32 228 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 1981 1982 255.20 266.92 35.2 34.8 7.25 7.67 439.75 459.23 43.7 42.6 10.04 10.78 299.26 426.45 36.9 36.7 10.82 11.62 318.00 330.65 39.8 38.9 7.99 8.50 T r a n s p o lia tio n a n d u b lic 1950 1955 I9 6 0 1 1964 1965 F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d W h o le s a le a n d re ta il tra d e u t ilitie s S e r v ic e s r e a l e s ta te $118.78 125.14 41.1 41.3 $2.89 3.03 $44.55 55.16 66.01 74.66 76.91 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 128.13 130.82 138.85 147.74 155.93 41.2 40.5 40.6 40.7 40.5 3.11 3.23 3.42 3.63 3.85 79.39 82.35 87.00 91.39 96.02 37.1 36.6 36.1 35.7 35.3 2.14 2.25 2.41 2.56 2.72 92.13 95.72 101.75 108.70 112.67 37.3 37.1 37.0 37.1 36.7 2.47 2 58 2.75 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 . . . . 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 5.48 155.43 165.26 173.00 190.77 209.60 36.4 36.4 36.4 36.2 36.2 4.27 4.54 4.89 5.27 5.79 143.52 153.45 163.67 175.27 190.71 33 3 33.0 32 8 32.7 32.6 4 31 4 65 4 99 5 36 5.85 1981 . 1982 . 382.18 401.70 39.4 39.0 9.70 10.30 190.62 198.10 32.2 31.9 5.92 6.21 229.05 245.44 36.3 36.2 6.31 6.78 208.97 224.94 32.6 32.6 6 41 6.90 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 40.5 39.4 38.6 37.9 37.7 $1.10 1 40 1.71 1.97 2.04 $50 52 63 92 75 14 85.79 88.91 37 7 37 6 37 2 37.3 37.2 2 n? 2.30 2.39 $70.03 73.60 36.1 35.9 $1.94 2.05 ' 1 Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 73 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 13. W eekly hours, by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group, seasonally adjusted [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] 1982 A n n u al av e ra g e 1983 In d u s t r y d iv is io n a n d g r o u p 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t.F O c t. F 35.2 34 8 34.7 34.7 34.8 35.1 34.5 34.8 34.9 35.1 35.1 35.0 35.0 35.2 35.2 39.8 2.8 38.9 2.3 38.9 2.3 39.0 2.3 39.0 2.3 39.7 2.4 39.2 2.4 39.5 2.6 40.1 2.9 40.0 2.7 40.1 2.9 40.2 3.0 40.3 3.1 40.8 3.3 40.6 3.3 Overtime h o u r s ............................................ 40.2 2.8 39.3 2.2 39.2 2.1 39.3 2.1 39.3 2.2 40.1 2.2 39.7 2.3 39.9 2.5 40.5 2.8 40.4 2.6 40.6 2.8 40.8 3.0 40.8 3.1 41.4 3.4 41.2 3.4 Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ............................... Furniture and fixtures ......................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal indu stries...................................... Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts .................................. 38.7 38.4 40.6 40.5 40.3 38.0 37.2 40.0 38.6 39.2 38.1 37.5 40.2 38.2 39.0 38.7 37.6 40.2 38.3 39.2 38.8 37.8 40.1 38.8 39.2 40.5 38 6 41.4 38.9 39.9 39.5 37.9 40.5 39.1 39.6 39.5 38.'3 40.6 39.4 39.7 40.0 39.3 41.0 39.9 40.5 39.8 39.2 41.2 40.3 40.4 40.0 39.6 41.6 40.3 40.5 39.9 39.7 41.7 40.8 40.7 40.2 39.7 41.7 40.9 40.9 40.4 40.1 42.0 41.2 41.6 40.2 40.0 41.8 41.7 41.3 Machinery, except e le ctrica l............................... Electric and electronic equipm ent...................... Transportation e q u ip m e n t.................................. Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ...................... 40.9 40.0 40.9 40,4 39.7 39.3 40.5 39.8 39.3 39.2 40,4 39.6 39.3 39.3 40.9 39.4 39.3 39.4 40.1 39.7 39.6 39.9 41.6 40.4 39.4 39.5 41.2 39.7 39.7 39.8 41.7 40.0 40.2 40.4 42.3 40.5 40.0 40.3 41.6 40.4 40.4 40.5 41.9 40.1 40.7 40.8 42.0 40.7 40.7 40.7 41.8 40.4 41.2 41.2 43.5 40.8 41.2 41.1 42.5 40.5 Overtime h o u r s ............................................ 39.1 2.8 38.4 2.5 38.5 2.6 38.6 2.5 38.6 2.5 39.1 2.6 38.5 2.6 39.0 2.7 39.5 3.0 39.4 2.9 39.6 3.0 39.5 3.0 39.5 3.1 40.0 3.1 39.7 3.1 Food and kindred products ............................... 39.7 39.4 39.5 39.4 39.1 39.3 39.0 39.2 39.6 39.4 39.8 39.4 39.6 40.0 39 8 Textile mill p ro d u c ts ............................................ 39.6 37.5 38.3 38.8 38.9 39.7 39.0 39.6 40.6 40.4 40.7 40.7 40.9 41.3 40.7 Apparel and other textile products ................... 35.7 34.7 35.1 35.0 35.1 36.6 35.2 35.6 36 2 36.1 36.1 35 8 36.2 36.8 36.4 Paper and allied p ro d u c ts .................................. 42.5 41.8 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.8 41.4 42.1 42.4 42.7 42.8 42.9 42.9 43.2 43.1 Printing and publishing ...................................... Chemicals and allied prod ucts............................ Petroleum and coal products ............................ Leather and leather products ............................ 37.3 41.6 43.2 36.7 37.1 40.9 43.9 35.6 37.1 40.8 43.8 35.4 37.1 40.7 44.1 35.8 37.1 40.9 44.4 35.8 37.5 41.0 44.5 36.3 37.1 41.0 44.4 34.9 37.4 41.2 44.9 36.0 37.7 41.5 43.5 37.0 37.4 41.6 43.6 36.8 37.6 41.9 43.8 36.8 37.7 41.8 43.7 37.4 37.5 41.6 43.5 37.2 37.8 41.8 43.2 37.8 38.0 41.5 43.8 37.3 T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S 39.4 39.0 38.8 38.9 38.9 38.6 38 6 38.8 38.8 38.9 38.9 38.9 39.3 39.4 39.4 W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E 32.2 31.9 31.9 31.8 32.1 31.9 31.4 31.7 31.7 31.9 32.0 31.9 31.8 31.7 31.9 P R IV A T E S E C T O R M A N U F A C T U R IN G Overtime h o u r s ............................................ D u ra b le g o o d s N o n d u r a b le g o o d s W HOLESALE TRADE 38.5 38.4 38.4 38.4 38.4 38.5 38.2 38 4 38.5 38.6 38.7 38.6 38.5 38.7 38.6 R E T A IL T R A D E 30.1 29.9 29.9 29.8 30.1 29.9 29.3 29.7 29.6 29 9 29.9 29 8 29.7 29.6 29.9 S E R V IC E S 32.6 32 6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.9 32.5 32.7 32.7 32.9 32.7 32 6 32 7 32.8 32.8 p = preliminary. NOTE: See “ Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 74 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 14. H ourly earnings, by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] A n n u al a v e ra g e 1982 1983 In d u s t r y d iv is io n a n d g r o u p 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. $7.25 (1) $7.67 (1) $7.79 7.76 $7.81 7.78 $7.82 7.82 $7.90 7.88 $7.92 7.91 $7.90 7.91 $7.94 7.95 $7.97 7.97 $7.97 8.00 $8.00 8.03 $7.94 7.98 $8.11 8.08 $8.15 8.13 M IN IN G 10 04 10.78 10.96 11.01 11.03 11.21 11.25 11.19 11.28 11.20 11.25 11.29 11.28 11.35 11.35 C O N S T R U C T IO N 10.82 11.62 11.88 11.72 11.96 11.95 12.00 11.95 11.90 11.80 11.74 11.78 11.84 12.00 12.03 7.99 8.50 8.56 8.61 8.68 8.71 8.75 8.74 8.77 8.78 8.81 8.86 8.79 8.90 8.91 Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................... Furniture and fix tu re s ................................... Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ................ Primary metal in d u s trie s ............................ Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ......................... 8.54 6 99 5.91 8.27 10.81 8.19 9.06 7.46 6.31 8.86 11.33 8.78 9.13 7.57 6.40 9.03 11.41 8.85 9.17 7.59 6.43 9.04 11.49 8.90 9.24 7.55 6.46 9.08 11.49 8.96 9.26 7.68 6.49 9.10 11.56 8.98 9.31 7.72 6.50 9.10 11.53 9.04 9.29 7.68 6.51 9.13 11.24 9.05 9.31 7.74 6.51 9.16 11.25 9.07 9.34 7.78 6.52 9.20 11.28 9.08 9.37 7.85 6.60 9.28 11.23 9.11 9.40 7.82 6.65 9.34 11.37 9.10 9.34 7.83 6.67 9.31 11.28 9.12 9.48 7.84 6.73 9.42 11.31 9.22 9.47 7.83 6.73 9.37 11.28 9.20 Machinery, except e le c tric a l...................... Electric and electronic e q u ip m e n t............. Transportation equipment ......................... Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ............. Miscellaneous manufacturing ................... 8.81 7.62 10.39 7.42 5.97 9.29 8.21 11.12 8.10 6.43 9.36 8.41 11.29 8 26 6.50 9 38 8.45 11.34 8.31 6.56 9.43 8.51 11.43 8.38 6.67 9.40 8.53 11.40 8.42 6.72 9.44 8.56 11.49 8.48 6.73 9.46 8.60 11.49 8.47 6.75 9.48 8.60 11.53 8.46 6.76 9.59 8.60 11.52 8.48 6.82 9.63 8.63 11.63 8.48 6.81 9.65 8.69 11.62 8.57 6.82 9.61 8.64 11.53 8.53 6.81 9.71 8.74 11.81 8.61 6.85 9.76 8.72 11.82 8.57 6.87 7.18 7.44 8 88 5.52 4.97 8.60 7.73 7.89 9.78 5.83 5.20 9.32 7.80 7.88 9.50 5.88 5.21 9.53 7.88 8.00 10.16 5.92 5.24 9.60 7.95 8.06 9.63 6.04 5.28 9.65 7.97 8.09 9.87 6.08 5.33 9.65 7.99 8.11 9.96 6.10 5.33 9.65 8.00 8.16 10.43 6.11 5.33 9.67 8 03 8.20 10.61 6.14 5.35 9.72 8.03 8.18 10.74 6.14 5.33 9.81 8.04 8.17 10.91 6.16 5.36 9.91 8.11 8.17 10.84 6.17 5.35 10.06 8.05 8.12 10.24 6.19 5.35 10.02 8.10 8.13 9.86 6.23 5.39 10.09 8.12 8.15 9.79 6.24 5.40 10.07 8.19 9.12 11.38 8.75 9.96 12.46 8.89 10.22 12.57 8.92 10.26 12.68 9.00 10.32 12.71 8.97 10.34 13.16 8.99 10.41 13.25 9.03 10.39 13.28 9.03 10.43 13.27 9.05 10.50 13.17 9.06 10.52 13.17 9.10 10.58 13.20 9.14 10.61 13.16 9.25 10.67 13.35 9.29 10.73 13.35 7.17 4 99 7.65 5.32 7.74 5.39 7.81 5.41 7.91 5.44 7.91 5.50 7.91 5.50 7.92 5.52 7.95 5.52 7.97 5.51 7.96 5.49 8.06 5.52 8.03 5.50 8.08 5.57 8.10 5.57 T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S 9.70 10.30 10.48 10.59 10.62 10.69 10.72 10.68 10.72 10.74 10.73 10.86 10.68 10.97 11.00 W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E 5.92 6.21 6.27 6.30 6.27 6.42 6.45 6.43 6.45 6.46 6.46 6.48 6.47 6.54 6.56 W H O LESA LE TRA DE 7.56 8.02 8.13 8.14 8.20 8.31 8.28 8.27 8.34 8.36 8.35 8.42 8.41 8.48 8.54 5.71 5.77 5.77 P R IV A T E S E C T O R Seasonally adju sted ...................................... M A N U F A C T U R IN G D u r a b le g o o d s N o n d u r a b le g o o d s Food and kindred products ...................... Tobacco m anu factures................................ Textile mill products ................................... Apparel and other textile p ro d u cts............. Paper and allied products ......................... Printing and publish in g ................................ Chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts ................... Petroleum and coal products ................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics p ro d u cts...................................... Leather and leather products ................... S e p t.F O c t.P R E T A IL T R A D E 5.25 5.47 5.53 5.56 5.54 5.65 5.69 5.68 5.69 5.71 5.71 5.72 F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E 6.31 6.78 6.97 7.00 7.01 7.19 7.22 7.19 7.23 7.31 7.26 7.30 7.25 7.33 7.43 S E R V IC E S 6.41 6.90 7.04 7.08 7.12 7.18 7.19 7.17 7.20 7.23 7.20 7.18 7.18 7.31 7.40 1 Not available. p = preliminary. 15. NOTE: See “ Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision, H ourly E arnings Index, for production w orkers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry [1977 = 100] N o t s e a s o n a lly a d ju s t e d S e a s o n a lly a d ju s te d P erce n t P erce n t change In d u s try P R IV A T E S E C T O R ( in c u r r e n t d o ll a r s ) Mining ........................................................ Construction............................................... Manufacturing............................................ Transportation and public utilities ............ Wholesale and retail trade ....................... Finance, insurance, and real estate............ Services ..................................................... P R IV A T E S E C T O R ( in c o n s t a n t d o ll a r s ) Aug. S e p t. O c t. fro m : O c t. June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. fro m : 1983 1983 F 1983P O c t. 1 9 8 2 1982 1983 1983 1983 1983P 1983P S e p t. 1 9 8 3 to to O c t. 1 9 8 3 O c t. 1 9 8 3 150.8 154.6 156.2 156.9 4.1 150.7 154.8 155.2 155.0 155.9 156.8 0.5 162.1 144.6 154.7 151.6 146.7 152.0 150.4 167.3 144.8 157.6 155.5 152.0 158.2 154.7 168.1 146.9 158.4 159.0 153 2 159.8 156.9 168.4 146.9 158.7 159.7 153.5 162.0 158.4 3.9 1.6 2.6 5.4 4.6 6.5 5.3 (1) 142.9 154.7 151.1 147.1 (1) 150.6 (1) 144.6 157.8 156.8 151.6 (1) 155.5 (1) 144.0 158.2 157.9 152.2 (1) 155.6 (1) 144.1 158.1 155.4 152.3 (1) 155.9 (1) 145.3 158.3 158.0 153.0 (1) 157.1 (1) 145.0 158.7 159.2 153.9 (1) 158.6 <1) -.2 .2 8 .6 (1) 1.0 93.2 93.7 94.3 (2) (2) 93.1 94.8 94.7 94.0 94.2 (2) (2) 1This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small relative to the trendcycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be separated with sufficient precision. 2Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis change O c t. 1982 p = preliminary, NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 75 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 16. W eekly earnings, by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] A n n u al a v e ra g e 1982 1983 In d u s t r y d iv is io n a n d g r o u p 1981 1982 O c t. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t.F $255.20 (1) 170.13 $266.92 (1) 167.87 $270.31 269.27 167.06 $271.01 269.97 167.81 $273,70 272.14 170.11 $273.34 276.59 169.88 $270.86 272.90 168.24 $274.13 275.27 169.85 $275.52 277.46 169.55 $278.15 279.75 170.33 $280.54 280.80 171.37 $283.20 281.05 172.37 $281.08 279.30 170.35 $286 28 284.42 172.77 287.70 286 18 (1) O c t.P P R IV A T E S E C T O R Current d o lla rs ..................................................... Seasonally a d ju s te d ......................................... Constant (1977) d o lla r s ...................................... M IN IN G 438.75 459.23 459.22 458 02 465.47 476.43 464.63 467.74 469 25 472 64 478.13 475.31 481 66 489 19 492.59 C O N S T R U C T IO N 399.26 426.45 440.75 423.09 440.13 440.96 424.80 434.98 436.73 441.32 444.95 450.00 449.92 454.80 447.52 318.00 212.00 330.65 207.96 333.84 206.33 338.37 209.52 344.60 214.17 341.43 212.20 339.50 210.87 346.10 214.44 349.05 214.80 350.32 214.53 355.04 216.88 354.40 215.70 353.36 214.16 363.12 219.14 362 64 (1) Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ............................... Furniture and fixtures ......................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal indu stries...................................... Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts .................................. 343.31 270.51 226.94 335.76 437.81 330.06 356.06 283.48 234.73 354.40 437.34 344.18 357.90 289.93 243.20 366.62 431.30 346.04 363.13 292 97 244.34 366.12 440.07 350.66 371.45 293.70 250.00 366.83 450.41 359.30 367.62 300.29 243.38 364.91 450.84 354.71 366.81 299.54 243.10 358.54 450.82 354.37 372.53 302.59 251.29 368.85 456.23 361.10 375.19 308.05 253.89 374.64 451.13 364.61 377.34 312.76 254.28 380.88 452.33 366.83 382 30 320.28 263.34 390.69 454.82 371.69 379.76 313.58 258.69 391.35 460.49 365.82 380.14 319.46 267.47 391.95 457.97 372.10 391.52 318 30 271.22 398.47 468.23 381.71 391.11 316.33 273.24 395.41 464.74 380.88 Machinery except electrical ............................... Electric and electronic equipm ent...................... Transportation e q u ip m e n t.................................. Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ...................... Miscellaneous m an u fa ctu rin g ............................ 360.33 304.80 424.95 299.77 231.64 368.81 322.65 450.36 322.38 247.56 365.98 329.67 457.25 327.10 253.50 371.45 334.62 467.21 331.57 256.50 380.97 342 95 474.35 338.55 260.13 372.24 338.64 468.54 337.64 260.06 371.94 336.41 469.94 335.81 253.72 377.40 344.00 480.28 340.49 263 25 379.20 344.86 484.26 339.25 263.64 382.64 345.72 482.69 341.74 264 62 388.09 350.38 491.95 340.90 264.91 386.97 350.21 484.55 344.51 264.62 387.28 349.92 475.04 343.76 266.27 399.08 359.21 505.47 351.29 270.58 400.16 358.39 503.53 347.09 274.11 280.74 295.37 344.54 218.59 177.43 365.50 296.83 310.87 369.68 218.63 180.44 389.58 301.08 312.05 370.50 227.56 183.91 397.40 305.74 317.60 386.08 231.47 184.97 402.24 310.85 319.18 364.98 236.77 186.38 410.13 307.64 315.51 360.26 237,12 188.68 402.41 305.22 312.24 339.64 236.07 185.48 396.62 311.20 316.61 378.61 242.57 190.28 406.14 313.97 318.98 395.75 246.83 192.07 410.18 315.58 321.47 401.68 248.67 192.41 415.94 319.19 325 17 420.04 253 18 196.18 425.14 319.53 322.72 398.91 248.03 193.14 429.56 319.59 324.80 386.05 254.41 195.81 428.86 324.81 329.27 379.61 257.92 198 35 437.91 323 99 325.19 374.96 256.46 198.18 434.02 305.49 379.39 491.62 324.63 407.36 546.99 329.82 416.98 555.59 332.72 420.66 564.26 341.10 427.25 563.05 332.79 421.87 572.46 330.83 425.77 573.73 338.63 428.07 584.32 337.72 432.85 581.23 337.57 435.75 575.73 338.84 440.79 579.48 341.25 440.13 584.76 344.58 439.25 572.46 351.50 448.14 591.41 353.02 445.30 588.74 288.95 183.13 302.94 189.39 304.18 189.73 309.28 194.22 319.56 196.38 317.19 196.90 314.03 190.30 321.55 197.06 326.75 201.48 327.57 204.42 328.75 207.52 329.65 207.00 330.84 206.25 338.55 209.43 338.58 206.09 415.64 419.54 425.71 421.86 432.22 433.40 M A N U F A C T U R IN G Current d o lla rs ..................................................... Constant (1977) d o lla r s ...................................... D u ra b le g o o d s N o n d u ra b le g o o d s Food and kindred products ............................... Tobacco m anufactures......................................... Textile mill p ro d u c ts ............................................ Apparel and other textile products ................... Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ................................... Printing and publishing ...................................... Chemicals and allied products............................ Petroleum and coal p ro d u c ts ............................ Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ............................................ Leather and leather products ......................... T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S 382,18 401.70 406.62 413.01 416.30 409 43 411.65 413.32 413.79 W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E 190.62 198.10 199.39 199.71 203.15 201 59 199.31 201.90 203.18 205.43 207.37 210.60 209.63 208 63 209 26 W HO LESALE TRADE 291.06 307.97 313.01 313.39 317.34 318.27 313.81 316.74 319.42 321.86 323.15 326.70 325.47 328.18 330.50 R E T A IL T R A D E 158.03 163.55 164.79 164.58 168.97 164.98 163.30 166.42 167.29 169.59 171.87 175.03 174.16 171.95 171.95 F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E 229.05 245.44 252.31 253.40 254.46 262.44 260.64 258.84 261.00 265.35 262 09 264.99 261.73 263.88 271.20 S E R V IC E S 208.97 224.94 228 80 230.10 232.11 234.79 232.96 233.74 234.72 236 42 236.88 237.66 237 66 239 04 241 98 Not available. p = preliminary. 17. MOTE; see "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision Ind exes of d ffusion: ndustries in w hich em ploym ent increased [In percent] T im e Year span Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. Nov. Dec. Over 1-month span 1981 1982 1983 .... .... .... 57.8 28.5 56.5 52.4 45.4 45.7 52.2 36.0 62.4 65.6 39 0 69.1 60.2 47.6 71.0 58.9 32.8 64.5 62.6 38.4 68.5 49.5 37.1 68.0 42.2 34.1 P61.0 33.3 29.3 P67.2 29 3 32.0 30 9 42 2 Over 3-month span 1981 1982 1983 .... ... .... 58.3 25.3 45.4 54.6 28 8 55.1 59.1 32.0 65.6 65.9 34.1 75.8 67.5 32.5 76.1 66.7 33.6 77.2 60.5 27.2 73.9 50.5 27.2 P79.3 33.3 26.1 P79.3 30.1 25.5 24 5 24.7 23 4 40 6 Over 6-month span 1981 1982 1983 .... .... .... 68.5 20.2 50.5 65.3 23.7 63.2 63.7 25.3 73.4 69.4 29.8 76.3 64.2 26.1 79.3 58.6 26.1 P83.1 45.7 23 4 P82.8 34.4 19.1 - 29.6 21.2 - 24.2 26.1 25 0 26 6 22 0 35 8 Over 12-month span 1981 1982 1983 .... .... .... 74.5 22.0 48.9 71.2 20.7 58.3 70.4 18.0 P62.4 58.1 19.4 P73.4 47.6 18.3 41.4 20.7 34.9 20.7 - 29.8 22.8 - 27.4 24.2 23 7 31.5 25 3 37 6 44 1 — p = preliminary. NOTE: Figures are the percent of Industries with employment rising. (Half of the unchanged components 76 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis - are counted as rising.) Data are centered within the span . See the "Defi nitions" in this section. See "Notes” on the data” for a description of the mos recent benchrr ark revision. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DATA N a t i o n a l 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 are compiled monthly by the Employment and Training Administration of the U.S. De partment of Labor from monthly reports of unemployment insur ance activity prepared by State agencies. Railroad unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board. persons in unemployment insurance programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiving compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The rate of insured unemployment expresses the number of in sured unemployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a 12-month period. Definitions Average weekly seasonally adjusted insured unemployment data are computed by BLS’ Weekly Seasonal Adjustment program. This procedure incorporated the X -l 1 Variant of the Census Method II Seasonal Adjust ment program. Data for all programs represent an unduplicated count of insured un employment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation for ExServicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act. An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the beginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no application is required for subsequent periods in the same year. Number of payments are payments made in 14-day registration periods. The average amount of benefit payment is an average for all compensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or settlement of underpayments. However, total benefits paid have been adjusted. Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs for civilian em ployees, insured workers must report the completion of at least 1 week o f unemployment before they are defined as unemployed. 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. Initial claims are notices filed by 18. U nem p loym ent insurance and em ploym ent service operations [All item s except average benefits am ounts are in thousands] 1982 1983 Ite m S e p t. All programs: Insured unem ploym en t............................ State unemployment insurance program:1 Initial claims2 ............................................ Insured unemployment (average weekly v o lu m e )...................................... Rate of insured unem ploym ent................ Weeks of unemployment compensated... Average weekly benefit amount for total unemployment ...................... Total benefits paid ................................... State unemployment insurance program:1 (Seasonally adjusted data) Initial claims2 ............................................ Insured unemployment (average weekly v o lu m e )...................................... Rate of insured unem ploym ent................ Unemployment compensation for exservicemen:3 Initial claims1 ...................... ...................... Insured unemployment (average weekly v o lu m e )...................................... Weeks of unemployment compensated... Total benefits paid ................................... Unemployment compensation for Federal civilian employees:4 Initial c la im s ................................................ Insured unemployment (average weekly v o lu m e )...................................... Weeks of unemployment compensated.. Total benefits paid ................................... Railroad unemployment insurance: A p p lic a tio n s ................................................ Insured unemployment (average weekly v o lu m e )...................................... Number of p a y m e n ts ................................ Average amount of benefit payment . . . Total benefits paid ................................... Employment service:5 New applications and renew als................ Nonfarm placements ................................ O c t. Nov. O ec. Jan. M a r. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t .P r4,282 4,391 4,635 5,074 5,459 5,437 5,134 4,642 3,947 3,481 3,275 2,917 2,580 r2,344 2,443 2,661 3,080 3,143 2,065 2,075 1,874 1,666 1,740 1,804 1,668 1,401 3,712 4.2 r14,523 3,828 4.4 13,786 4,156 4.7 15,170 4,581 5.2 17,873 4,923 5.6 18,307 4,759 5.5 16,895 4,401 5.0 19,529 3,906 4.5 14,986 3,361 3.9 13,133 3,063 3.5 12,819 3,049 3.5 10,959 2,766 3.2 11,302 2,449 2.8 9,503 rS121.03 $122.81 $123.43 $123.42 $124.29 $124.47 $125.47 $124.85 $124.49 $123.44 $121.59 $121.46 $122.05 '$1,711,306 $1,647,343 $1,820,019 $2,135,302 $2,205,551 $2,052,415 $2,367,752 $1,816,539 $1,587,888 $1,549,758 $1,298,189 $1,337,417 $1,124,988 2,902 2,688 2,680 2,586 2,187 2,138 2,148 1,952 1,993 1,836 r1,723 1,841 1,688 4,446 5.1 4,680 5.3 4,618 5.3 4,355 5.0 3,980 4.6 3,979 4.6 3,884 4.5 3,774 4.3 3,538 4.1 3,301 3.8 r3,303 r3.8 3,026 3.5 3,088 3.6 11 10 17 24 21 16 18 15 14 16 16 19 17 8 25 r$2,897 9 28 $3,366 14 33 $4,006 26 90 $11,191 37 132 $16,807 37 143 $18,032 34 156 $19,588 30 117 $14,776 26 104 $13,111 25 107 $13,588 25 94 $12,118 26 108 $13,850 27 105 $13,492 13 16 14 15 16 10 11 10 9 13 12 11 11 26 111 r$12,317 28 110 $12,144 31 126 $14,023 33 146 $16,114 35 142 $16,045 33 131 $15,083 31 146 $16,871 26 109 $12,422 22 93 $10,603 21 90 $10,272 23 85 $9,640 22 94 $10,759 22 83 $9,548 14 20 17 17 20 7 8 94 4 30 55 14 9 61 137 $216.14 $31,123 82 159 $212.35 $31,638 81 162 $216.55 $35,061 83 172 $217.00 $39,500 102 219 $220.32 $44,514 72 158 $214.54 $33,100 65 169 $213.44 $36,243 79 172 $203.87 $27,783 90 183 $215.15 $29,411 49 123 $203.54 $14,984 49 92 $199.87 $17,551 46 107 $214.21 $21,789 41 103 $214.77 $20,239 14,320 2,804 4,527 642 11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican sugarcane workers. E xcludes transition claims under State programs. E xcludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs. 4 Excludes data or claims and payments made jointly with State programs. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Feb. 8,381 1,184 11,987 1,921 13,136 2,521 Cum ulative total for fiscal year (October 1-September 30). Data computed quarterly. NOTE: Data for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands included. Dashes indicate data not available, p = preliminary. r = revised. 77 PRICE DATA P 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). r ic e d a t a Definitions The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure of the average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and services. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began pub lishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. It introduced a CPI for All Urban Consumers, covering 80 percent of the total noninstitutional pop ulation, and revised the CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covering about half the new index population. The All Urban Consumers index covers in addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, managerial, 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, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and ser vices that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only price changes will be measured. Data are collected from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000 tenants 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 ex penditures o f two population groups in 1972-73, they may not accurately reflect the experience of individual families and single persons with dif ferent buying habits. Though the CPI is often called the “ Cost-of-Living Index,” it measures only price change, which is just one of several important factors affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period. Producer Price Indexes measure average changes in prices received in primary markets of the United States by products of commodities in all stages o f processing. The sample used for calculating these indexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all commodities 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 o f fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure organizes products by sim ilarity of end-use or material composition. 78 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price Indexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the United States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. Most prices are ob tained directly from producing companies on a voluntary 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 various commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights repre senting their importance in the total net selling value of all commodities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, durability of product groupings, and a number of special composite groupings. Price indexes for the output of selected SIC industries measure av erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries, as defined in the S t a n d a r d I n d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n M a n u a l 1 9 7 2 (Washing ton, 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 industrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Notes on the data Regional CPI’s cross classified by population size were introduced in the May 1978 R e v i e w . These indexes 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 appropriate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified indexes are published bimonthly. (See table 20.) For details concerning the 1978 revision of the CPI, see T h e C o n s u m e r P r i c e I n d e x : C o n c e p t s a n d C o n te n t O v e r th e Y e a r s . Report 517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978). As of January 1976, the Producer Price Index incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 values of shipments. Additional data and analyses of price changes are provided in the C P I D e t a i l e d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P r i c e s a n d P r i c e I n d e x e s , both monthly publications of the Bureau. For a discussion of the general method of computing producer, and industry price indexes, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e t h o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 7. For consumer prices, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e t h o d s f o r S u r v e y s a n d S t u d i e s (1976), chapter 13. See also John F. Early, “ Improving the measurement of producer price change,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , April 1978. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “ Industry and Sector Price Indexes,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , August 1965. C onsum er Price Index for Urban W age Earners and C lerical W orkers, annual averages and changes, 1 9 6 7 - 82 19. [1967 = 100] A p p a re l an d Food and H o u s in g A ll Ite m s T ra n s p o rta tio n O th e r g o o d s M e d ic a l c a re E n t e r ta in m e n t upkeep b e v e ra g e s a n d s e rv ic e s Year P erce n t P erce n t In d e x In d e x change P e rc e n t In d e x P e rc e n t P erce n t In d e x change change In d e x change P e rc e n t In d e x change P erce n t In d e x change P e rc e n t 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 m o.o 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 5.1 100.0 105.2 110.4 115.8 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 3.3 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 8.0 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 4 219.4 240.1 287.2 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 1981 1982 272.3 288.6 10.2 6.0 267.8 278.5 7.7 4.0 293.2 314.7 11.4 7.3 186.6 190.9 5.2 2.3 281 3 293.1 12.3 4.2 295.1 326 9 10.4 10.8 219.0 232.4 7.5 6.1 233.3 257.0 9.2 10.2 20. C onsum er Price Index for All Urban C onsum ers and revised CPI for Urban W age E arners and C lerical W orkers, U.S. city average— general sum m ary and groups, subgroups, and selected item s [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 1982 S e p t. 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 1983 A p r. 1982 1983 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. A ll ite m s 293.3 295.5 297.1 298.1 299.3 300.3 301.8 292.8 294.9 296 3 297.2 298.2 299.5 300 8 Food and beverages .............................................................................................. Housing .................................................................................................... Apparel and u p k e e p .............................................................................................. Transportation....................................................................................................... Medica c a r e ........................................................................................................... Entertainment ....................................................................................................... Other goods and se rvic e s .................................................................................... 280.1 319.7 194.9 295.3 336.0 238.3 266 6 284.6 320.3 195.5 292 3 353.5 244.6 283.2 285.0 321.8 196.1 296.2 354.3 244.8 283.6 284.7 323.1 195.6 298.3 355.4 245.4 284.5 284.7 324.5 195.0 300.4 357.7 246.0 287 5 284.9 324.8 197.3 302.4 360.0 246.6 289.0 285.3 326.4 200.4 303.7 361.2 247.5 294.4 280.4 320.0 194.1 296.9 333.9 234.8 262.8 284.9 320.3 194.8 293.5 351.2 241.1 281.4 285.4 321.3 195.3 297.5 352.1 241.3 281 8 285.0 322.3 194.7 299 6 353.3 241.9 282.8 285.0 323.1 194.0 301.9 355.6 242.5 286 4 285.1 324.3 196.3 304.1 357.9 243.1 288.0 285.6 325.3 199.3 305.5 359.2 244.1 292.0 Com m odities........................................................................................ Commodities less food and b eve rages..................................................... Nondurables less food and beve rages.................................................. D u ra b le s.............................................................................. 266 6 256.1 269.9 244.1 269.2 257.3 267.8 248.7 270.9 259.7 271.3 249.5 271.6 260 9 272.3 251.2 272.5 262.3 273.5 252.9 273.4 263.6 274.7 254.3 274.5 265.1 275.8 256.4 267.0 256.8 271.8 243.6 270.9 260.3 269.7 251.2 272.7 262.7 273.3 252.8 273.3 263.7 274.4 253.7 274.2 264.9 275.7 254.8 275.1 266.1 276.9 256.0 275.9 267.2 277.9 257.0 Services ..................................................................................... Rent, resid ential........................................................................................ Household services less rent of shelter (12/82 = 1 0 0 ) ................ Transportation s e rv ic e s .................................................................. Medical care s e rv ic e s .................................................................. Other services ........................................................................... 339.7 226.9 341.2 234.5 102.0 300.8 382.8 274.2 342.6 235.1 103.2 301 2 383.5 274.7 344.0 235.9 104.2 301.4 384.6 275.6 345.6 237.1 104.8 302 3 387.2 276.3 346.8 238.2 104.8 304.0 389.8 276 9 349.0 239.5 105.1 305.4 391.0 282 5 340.5 226.4 339.5 234.0 340.1 234.6 341.4 235.3 342.8 236 5 344.8 237.6 346.9 238.9 296.9 361.1 264.0 297.2 379.7 272.0 297.6 380.5 272.6 297.5 381.7 273.5 298.4 384.4 274.2 300.2 387.0 274.8 301.4 388.3 279.6 294.7 101.0 296.5 101.6 297 8 101.9 299.3 102.3 300.5 102 7 292.8 294.4 296 1 297.2 298 5 300.0 301.5 279 0 254.7 266.5 305.6 277.2 279.7 258.2 265.0 303.5 278.4 281 7 260.6 268.4 308.2 280 4 283.5 261.6 269.3 309.9 280.8 285.3 262.7 270.6 312.1 281.4 286.3 263.9 271.7 312.7 282.1 287.5 264.9 272.8 312.8 282 8 335.8 267.0 280.7 425.6 433.8 281.9 279.2 233 6 334.8 333.0 269.0 280.7 410.8 404.3 285.6 282.6 241 2 332.7 333 5 269.6 283.0 422.1 417.3 286.1 283.2 242.3 332.6 334.9 268.7 279 8 428.1 421.7 286.5 283.8 242.9 333.2 336.1 268.5 277.2 430.9 424.5 287 4 284.9 243.8 334.5 338 1 268.0 271.6 430 7 424.9 288 8 286.6 245.1 336.8 340.2 268.1 268 9 430 2 423.4 290.3 288 3 246.4 339.0 $0,342 $0,339 $0,337 $0,336 $0,335 $0,334 $0,332 298.7 364.0 266.3 S p e c ia l in d e x e s : All items less fo o d ............................................................ All items less homeowners' costs ............................ All items less mortgage interest c o s ts .................................. Commodities less food ............................... Nondurables less food ......................................... Nondurables less food and appa rel...................................... N ond urables.................................................. Services less rent of shelter (12/82 = 100) ......................... Services less medical care ............................................... Domestically produced farm fo o d s ............................ Selected beef c u t s ............................................... Energy' ............................................................ Energy c o m m o d itie s'............................................ All items less energy ............................... All items less food and e n e rg y ................... Commodities less food and e n e r g y ............................ Services less e n e r g y ......................................... Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 = $1 292.9 334.8 268.0 279.3 424.4 433.3 283.1 280.4 234.1 334.2 255.4 263 0 302.1 277.3 101.6 334.5 269.9 279.4 410.0 403 2 287.0 284.0 240.2 334.8 257.6 266.3 306.7 279.3 102.2 336.0 270.6 281.5 421.3 416.3 287.6 284.7 240.8 335.6 258 9 267.3 308.4 279.7 102.7 337.4 269.6 278.5 427.3 420.7 288.2 285.5 241.5 336.4 260.2 268.4 310.4 280.3 103.1 338.9 269.6 275.8 430.1 423.4 289.2 286.8 242.7 337.9 261.4 269 6310.9 281.0 103.5 339.9 269.2 270.5 429.8 423.7 290.3 288.2 244.2 339.3 302.3 103 2 276.7 262.9 270 6 311.0 281.8 104.2 342.2 269 2 267.5 429.3 422.1 292.1 290.2 246.2 341.6 $0,341 $0,338 $0,337 $0,335 $0,334 $0,333 $0,331 253.9 264.6 304.2 276.2 See footnotes at end of table. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 79 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. C o n tin u ed — C onsum er Price In dex— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e rs G e n e ra l s u m m a ry FOOD AN D BEVERAG ES ........................................................................................................................................ 1982 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 1983 1982 1983 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. 280.1 284.6 285.0 284.7 284.7 284.9 285.3 280.4 284.9 285.4 285.0 285.0 285.1 285.6 287.6 291.9 292.4 292.0 292.0 292.2 292.6 287.7 292.1 292.6 292.2 292.1 292.2 292.6 Food at home ........................................................................................................ Cereals and bakery products ...................................................................... Cereals and cereal products (12/77 = 100) ................................... Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... Cereal (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 = 100) ............................ Bakery products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................................... White b r e a d .................................................................................. Other breads (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................................... Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 = 100) ................ Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 = 100) ............................ Cookies (12/77 = 100) ............................................................ Crackers, 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) . . . . 280.6 284.6 154.3 141.4 166.9 148.2 149.4 246.1 147.1 149.5 150.3 150.9 140.8 149.2 283.4 291.1 156.1 140.2 173.8 145.8 153.3 252.1 148.8 152.5 154.9 156.8 147.2 153.7 283.8 291.7 157.0 141.3 175.7 144.8 153.5 252.6 149.7 152.0 154.7 156.1 147.9 154.0 283.0 292.4 157.9 142.2 176.4 146.2 153.7 253.1 149.8 151.7 154.6 155.7 149.5 153.7 282.8 293.7 158.3 142.8 176.7 146.5 154,4 254.3 149.5 153.2 155.4 157.0 150.3 154.1 282.5 294.0 158.6 143.9 177.2 145.6 154.5 253.1 150.1 153.4 154.9 157.6 151.4 155.3 282.5 293.7 158.5 142.9 177.5 146.0 154.4 252.9 149.8 152.6 155.2 157.6 148.3 155.9 279.7 283.4 155.2 141.8 169.0 149.4 148.2 241.9 149.0 145.6 148.7 152.1 142.3 151.8 282.5 289.6 156.9 140.4 175.9 146.8 152.0 247.6 150.7 148.4 153.3 157.6 148.7 156.2 282.9 290.2 157.7 141.7 177.8 145.8 152.2 248.2 151.8 147.9 153.0 156.8 149.5 156.7 282.1 291.0 158.7 142.7 178.5 147.3 152.4 248.8 151.8 148.0 152.9 156.4 151.0 156.6 281.8 292.3 159.2 143.3 178.8 147.7 153.2 249.9 151.6 149.6 153.6 157.9 151.8 156.9 281.5 292.5 159.5 144.6 179.5 146.8 153.3 248.7 152.2 149.6 153.3 158.5 152.8 158.0 281.5 292.3 159.3 143.4 179.7 147.1 153.1 248.5 151.9 148.7 153.5 158.6 149.5 158.6 154.7 157.1 157.4 158.8 159.4 159.4 161.3 148.1 150.2 150.5 152.0 152.5 152.5 154.3 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs .................................................................. Meats, poultry, and f i s h ...................................................................... Meats ............................................................................................ Beef and v e a l............................................................................ Ground beef other than cann ed......................................... Chuck roast ......................................................................... Round r o a s t ......................................................................... Round s te a k ......................................................................... Sirloin s te a k ......................................................................... Other beef and veal (12/77. = 100) ................................ P o r k ............................................................................................ Bacon .................................................................................. Chops .................................................................................. Ham other than canned (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................... Sausage ............................................................................... Canned ham ......................................................................... Other pork (12/77 = 100) ............................................... Other meats ............................................................................ Frankfurters ......................................................................... Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 = 100) . . . . Other lunchmeats (12/77 = 100) ................................... Lamb and organ meats (12/77 = 100) ......................... P o u ltry ............................................................................................ Fresh whole chick e n ............................................................ Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............. Other poultry (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................ Fish and seafood ......................................................................... Canned fish and seafood ................................................... Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 100) . . . E g g s ........................................................................................................ 267.8 275.3 278.4 279.1 265.4 286.9 245.4 262.0 285.2 169.3 277.1 315.5 252.5 122.1 341.2 259.7 153.8 272.1 275.3 156.6 138.9 140.5 196.2 194.8 127.1 127.9 369.4 139.3 141.5 175.2 264.2 271.4 273.3 279.4 267.0 291.2 251.1 263.9 274,8 168.3 262.1 276.6 241.8 116.7 332.5 272.0 143.5 268.6 267.4 154.4 139.7 137.0 191.0 184.5 125.7 127.2 379.4 137.9 148.4 174.9 263.8 270.5 272.7 281.3 266.9 289.5 249.6 268.8 284.3 170.2 257.3 272.5 237.7 112.0 330.6 266.6 141.4 267.7 266.7 154.2 137.7 139.1 192.0 187.7 126.6 125.4 372.6 137.2 144.7 181.8 261.5 268.7 270.2 278.6 264.5 277.4 245.6 262.1 286.1 170.5 254.1 267.4 234.3 110.3 326.5 260.9 141.7 267.4 265.8 155.6 136.6 139.3 193.6 192.1 126.3 125.3 371.2 138.6 143.0 173.8 260.4 267.2 267.8 275.8 261.4 277.6 240.7 257.8 285.2 168.8 251.2 267.3 232.9 108.3 318.9 256.8 140.0 266.9 265.9 154.0 137.1 138.4 198.1 198.7 129.6 126.0 368.9 135.7 143.3 177.9 258.8 265.0 264.2 270.7 256.5 272.4 232.4 250.3 280.9 166.6 249.6 264.7 232.4 109.6 313.9 254.0 138.4 264.6 266.7 153.2 136.4 133.8 200.5 202.1 131.7 125.7 372.7 135.9 145.5 183.7 258.7 264.2 262.6 268.0 254.3 269.5 230.3 247.4 277.3 164.8 250.2 269.5 229.6 111.0 311.3 252.8 139.0 262.6 259.8 153.0 136.1 133.9 204.4 209.6 135.9 122.9 372.6 133.9 146.7 193.3 267.7 275.1 277.9 279.8 267.0 295.9 249.2 260.6 286.7 167.6 276.3 320.7 250.6 119.1 342.5 263.5 153.0 271.7 274.7 156.6 136.7 143.6 194.2 192.5 125.4 127.4 368.4 138.7 141.3 176.1 263.9 271.0 272.9 280.0 268.0 300.2 254.0 262.0 276.0 166.8 261.7 281.4 239.7 113.9 333.1 277.1 142.8 268.3 266.4 154.3 137.7 140.0 189.0 182.3 124.2 126.6 377.5 137.4 147.7 175.8 263.6 270.2 272.1 282.0 268.3 298.8 252.3 267.7 285.9 168.6 256.8 276.8 235.9 109.3 331.1 271.6 140.6 267.3 265.2 154.1 135.8 142.2 190.1 185.7 124.9 124.9 371.5 136.8 144.4 182.7 261.3 268.3 269.7 279.2 265.7 285.7 249.1 260.5 287.5 169.1 253.9 271.9 232.5 107.5 327.3 266.4 141.1 266.9 264.9 155.6 134.6 142.3 191.8 190.4 124.7 124.7 369.8 138.1 142.5 174.8 260.1 266.8 267.3 276.5 262.7 286.3 243.8 256.5 287.5 167.4 250.8 271.6 231.1 105.5 320.0 262.6 139.3 266.6 264.9 154.1 135.2 141.6 196.1 196.6 127.7 125.3 367.3 135.2 142.8 178.7 258.4 264.4 263.7 271.1 258.0 280.6 235.0 248.5 281.8 165.1 249.3 268.8 230.5 106.8 315.3 259.8 137.8 264.4 265.9 153.3 134.5 136.6 198.5 200.0 129.9 125.1 370.8 135.4 144.8 184.6 258.4 263.8 262.2 268.7 255.9 277.4 232.8 245.7 280.1 163.7 249.7 273.6 227.9 108.1 312.2 258.8 138.2 262.4 258.6 152.9 134.2 136.9 202.6 207.2 134.2 122.7 370.7 133.4 146.0 194.3 Dairy products ..................................................................................... Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................... Fresh whole m i l k ..................................................................... Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) ...................... Processed dairy pro d u cts............................................................ B u tte r ......................................................................................... Cheese (12/77 = 100) ......................................................... Ice cream and related products (12/77 = 100) ................ Other dairy products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................................... 247.0 135.1 220.8 135.6 146.1 252.2 144.9 149.3 141.1 250.1 136.6 223.5 136.7 148.1 253.9 146.5 152.0 144.5 250.3 136.5 223.2 136.8 148.6 254.4 146.5 153.6 144.6 249.8 136.3 222.9 136.8 148.1 252.7 146.0 154.0 143.1 249.8 136.2 222.8 136.4 148.2 253.3 146.9 151.6 144.5 250.2 136.5 223.2 136.8 148.4 254.2 146.4 152.5 145.9 250.2 136.1 222.6 136.4 149.0 253.9 146.8 154.4 146.0 246.3 134.5 219.9 135.0 146.3 254.7 145.2 148.4 141.8 249.4 136.1 222.7 136.1 148.4 256.5 146.8 151.1 145.3 249.6 136.0 222.3 136.3 148.8 256.9 146.8 152.7 145.3 249.1 135.9 222.1 136.3 148.3 255.4 146.3 153.0 143.7 249.0 135.7 222.0 135.8 148.5 255.8 147.3 150.7 145.1 249.4 135.9 222.3 136.2 148.6 256.8 146.7 151.5 146.5 249.4 135.5 221.7 135.8 149.3 256.4 147.1 153.5 146.5 Fruits and vegetables............................................................................ Fresh fruits and vegetables......................................................... Fresh f r u i t s ............................................................................... Apples .................................................................................. Bananas ............................................................................... Oranges ............................................................................... Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... Fresh v e g e ta b le s...................................................................... Potatoes ............................................................................... L e ttu c e .................................................................................. Tomatoes ............................................................................ Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ 284.1 283.5 329.0 285.5 240.7 516.3 152.1 241.0 272.4 236.1 184.9 134.0 294.9 304.3 291.9 259.9 295.1 301.3 155.8 316.0 258.7 316.0 327.5 186.9 298.2 311.0 300.6 266.4 312.5 297.2 162.4 320.8 282.3 340.9 307.8 184.1 298.2 310.9 310.5 281.9 318.1 309.1 166.3 311.3 304.7 363.5 262.3 169.4 298.7 310.6 326.5 287.5 325.2 347.9 173.3 295.8 320.7 280.5 243.1 167.6 299.4 310.7 328.9 310.0 291.0 359.8 173.2 293.8 342.2 293.9 200.5 163.6 297.6 306.6 316.7 320.2 278.6 337.0 164.1 297.2 336.1 337.0 212.2 158.0 278.8 275.2 313.6 286.6 238.5 466.8 146.4 240.6 269.6 237.9 187.9 133.5 291.1 298.9 282.2 260.5 293.0 274.4 150.9 314.0 253.3 311.6 332.1 186.4 294.5 305.5 290.6 266.8 311.1 270.2 156.9 319.2 277.3 338.0 313.2 183.4 294.5 305.4 299.7 283.4 316.7 280.1 160.0 310.8 301.3 360.8 267.1 169.5 294.7 304.8 315.3 288.8 323.1 321.5 166.6 295.5 318.2 280.6 247.3 167.3 295.1 304.3 317.5 311.9 290.7 329.9 166.3 292.5 338.2 294.2 204.0 162.5 293.3 300.3 305.9 321.3 276.5 307.1 157.7 295.4 330.9 338.2 216.2 156.3 Processed fruits and veg e ta b le s............................................... Processed fruits (12/77 = 100) ......................................... Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................... Fruit juices other than frozen (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................ Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................... Processed vegetables (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................... Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100) ................................... 287.4 149.0 144.1 152.0 149.8 139.8 148.1 287.1 150.6 143.9 155.7 150.8 138.0 150.9 286.7 150.3 142.3 155.7 151.3 137.9 151.2 286.9 149.7 140.0 155.1 152.0 138.7 151.4 288.2 150.6 140.6 156.4 152.6 139.0 151.7 289.5 150.7 141.1 155.6 153.5 140.2 152.8 290.2 151.0 142.2 155.2 153.8 140.6 152.4 285.3 148.6 143.2 151.0 150.4 138.6 149.5 284.8 150.2 143.0 154.6 151.4 136.8 152.5 284.6 150.0 141.4 154.7 151.8 136.8 152.8 284.7 149.3 139.0 154.0 152.6 137.5 153.1 285.9 150.2 139.8 155.4 153.1 137.9 153.3 287.4 150.4 140.3 154.7 153.8 139.1 154.5 288.0 150.6 141.4 154.2 154.3 139.4 153.9 F o o d ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 80 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20. C ontinued— C onsum er 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 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 1982 1983 1982 1983 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. Fruits and vegetables— Continued Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77 = 100) Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77 = 100) . . . . Other foods at h o m e .................................................................................... Sugar and sweets .............................................................................. Candy and chewing gum (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................... Sugar and artificial sweeteners (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) ...................... Other sweets (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................... Fats and oils (12/77 = 100) ........................................................... Margarine .................................................................................... Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (12/77 = 100) . . . Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............ Nonalcoholic beverages ..................................................................... Cola drinks, excluding diet cola ............................................... Carbonated drinks, including diet cola (12/77 = 100) . . . . Roasted coffee.............................................................................. Freeze dried and instant co ffe e .................................................. Other noncarbonated drinks (12/77 = 100) ......................... Other prepared fo o d s ........................................................................... Canned and packaged soup (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................ Frozen prepared foods (12/77 = 100) .................................. Snacks (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................................. Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish (12/77 = 100) . . . Other condiments (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................ Miscellaneous prepared foods (12/77 = 100) ...................... Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12/77 = 100) . 141.3 134.8 333.6 371.2 149.7 167.5 151.1 258.4 259.3 151.2 129.4 424.2 305.0 144.6 362.9 343.1 138.3 269.9 137.9 148.9 153.0 155.3 152.2 149.7 145.9 139.6 130.6 339.2 373.2 150.8 168.3 151.4 258.6 259.6 151.5 129.5 431.8 313.1 146.8 361.4 349.5 140.6 276.9 140.9 155.0 159.2 159.3 155.3 151.6 147.4 138.4 130.8 339.1 373.1 151.0 167.2 152.0 258.3 257.1 150.7 130.2 431.1 311.5 147,3 360.8 351.6 140.1 277.2 141.6 154.4 160.6 159.3 155.6 152.0 146.2 140.5 131.2 338.8 374.5 151.3 168.5 152.5 258.3 259 3 149.4 130.1 431.0 312.3 146.3 359.3 352.2 140.5 276.1 141.6 153.8 159.0 158.6 155.4 151.2 146.2 140.9 131.7 338.7 376.1' 151.8 169.7 153.0 259.0 259.5 150.5 130.3 428.7 310.3 145.1 356.6 351.4 140.4 276.8 141.9 154.4 159.3 158.5 156.1 151.6 146.8 142.0 132.9 339.1 375.8 151.6 169.7 152.8 258.1 257.2 149.8 130.3 430.7 312.4 146.3 356.0 352.3 140.5 276.9 141.8 155.1 159.3 158.3 156.0 151.5 146.5 141.8 134 0 340.7 376.4 151.9 170.3 152.7 264.8 259.3 148.9 136.9 431.2 312.7 147.6 353.7 348.3 141.0 277.8 141.4 155.7 159.9 158.9 156.3 152.2 147.2 138.8 133.3 334.5 371.3 149.8 169.0 148.9 258.3 258.5 149.5 130.0 425.9 302.8 142.3 357.9 342.5 139.0 271.7 139.5 148.4 155.0 154.4 154.0 149.9 147.3 137.1 129.2 340.0 373.0 150.8 169.7 149.1 258.4 258.1 149.9 130.1 433.5 310.4 144.5 356.2 349.0 140.9 278.5 142.7 154.2 161.2 158.3 157.1 151.8 148.7 136.2 129.5 339.8 372.9 151.0 168.7 149.6 258.2 255.5 149.1 130.8 432.4 308.5 144.9 355.6 351.0 140.4 278.8 143.6 153.7 162.7 158.4 157.4 152.3 147.5 138.1 129.8 339.5 374.1 151.2 169.8 150.2 258.0 257.5 147.7 130.7 432.6 309.7 143.9 354.3 351.6 140.7 277.7 143.4 153.1 161.1 157.6 157.2 151.5 147.6 138.6 130.2 339.3 376.0 151.8 171.0 150.8 258.7 257.6 148.8 130.9 430.3 307.8 142.6 351.7 350.7 140.7 278.4 143.7 153.5 161.3 157.5 157.9 151.8 148.0 139.5 131.5 339.9 375.7 151.6 171.0 150.6 257.8 255.1 148.1 130.9 432.5 309.9 144.1 350.8 351.5 140.8 278.5 143.7 154.2 161.4 157.4 157.9 151.8 147.7 139.3 132.6 341.5 376.2 151.8 171.6 150.5 264.7 257.3 147.2 137.5 433.1 310.2 145.3 348.4 347.5 141.3 279.4 143.3 154.9 162.0 158.1 158.2 152.5 148.4 Food away from home ....................................................................................... Lunch (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................. Dinner (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................. Other meals and snacks (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................. 309.8 150.7 149.2 151.5 318.0 154.4 152.5 157.1 318.6 154.6 152.7 157.9 319.3 154.9 153.1 158.2 319.8 154.9 153.4 158.6 321.0 155.4 153.9 159.5 322.2 155.9 154.9 159.4 312.9 152.3 150.9 152.1 321.3 156.1 154.2 157.7 321.9 156.2 154.4 158.4 322.5 156.5 154.8 158.7 323.0 156.5 155.1 159.1 324.3 157.1 155.6 160.0 325.4 157.5 156.6 159.9 F O O D A N D B E V E R A G E S — C o n tin u e d F o o d — C o n tin u e d Food at home— Continued A lc o h o lic b e v e r a g e s 210.1 216.1 216.6 217.0 217.2 217.1 218.4 212.2 218.5 219.1 219.6 219.8 219.7 221.3 Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Beer and a.e ................................................................................................. W hiskey.......................................................................................................... Wine .............................................................................................................. Other alcoholic beverages (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77 = 100) .................................. 135.9 211.4 149.8 237.5 120.3 142.5 139.7 222.5 151.4 236.3 121.5 146.5 140.0 222.7 151.3 239.1 121.5 147.0 140.3 224.1 151.6 236.3 122.1 147.1 140.7 224.8 152.1 237.1 121.7 146.1 140.3 224.4 151.6 234.8 122.4 147.3 141.2 225.4 153.7 235.7 122.5 148.4 137.2 210.5 150.5 246.2 120.4 143.9 141.3 221.2 151.9 243.9 121.3 147.7 141.7 221.5 151.9 247.0 121.4 148.2 142.0 222 8 152.1 244.1 122.0 148.3 142.5 223.6 152.6 245.2 121.8 147.1 142.1 223.2 152.1 242.4 122.4 148.5 143.2 224.8 154.2 243.7 122.3 149.6 H O U S IN G 319.7 320.3 321.8 323.1 324.5 324.8 326.4 320.0 320 3 321.3 322.3 323.1 324.3 325.3 S h e lte r ( C P I- U ) 342.6 341.7 342.7 343.6 345.3 346.6 348.5 344.7 226.9 343.0 101 8 234.5 343.7 101 7 102 2 235.1 347.5 102 0 102 5 235.9 347.9 102 2 103 1 237.1 352.3 102 7 103 7 238.2 355.8 103 0 104 4 239.5 361.3 103 5 226.4 341.1 101 7 101 9 102 2 102 7 103 0 103 5 102.0 343.6 382.8 258.7 102.4 344.3 382.7 260.0 102.4 345.1 381.6 262.3 102.7 346.1 383.3 262.6 103.5 347.9 388.6 261.2 104.0 346.6 387.6 259 9 347 5 Rent, residential ........................................................................................... Other renters' costs .................................................................................... Household insurance.................................................................................... Maintenance and repairs .................................................................................... Maintenance and repair services ............................................................... Maintenance and repair com m odities........................................................ 338.4 372.5 257.7 334.6 373.4 251.8 S h e lte r ( C P I-W ) 341.1 342.4 342.9 343.3 344.1 346.4 Rent, resid e n tia l.................................................................................... 233 1 234.0 234.6 235.3 236.5 237.6 238.9 Other renters’ costs ........................................................................... Lodging while out of to w n ..................................................................... Tenants’ insurance (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................... 339.0 353.1 152.6 342.3 358.2 153.2 345.5 363.0 154:0 345.8 363.5 153.5 350.4 370.7 153.8 354.0 375.7 155.4 358.6 374.8 156.2 H om eow nership................................................................................................. Home purchase .............................................................................. Financing, taxes, and insurance............................................... Property in s u ra n c e ..................................................................... Property taxes ........................................................................ Contracted mortgage interest c o s t s ......................................... Mortgage interest ra te s ............................................ Maintenance and re p a irs ........................................................ Maintenance and repair services.................................. Maintenance and repair com m odities.................................................. Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................. Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............ Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling supplies (12/77 = 100) ............................................... Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............ 379.9 298.9 491.8 419.2 231.7 625.7 207.5 337.5 376.6 254.2 381 2 301.0 492.2 422.3 232.9 625.5 206.0 339.0 378.9 253.9 381.7 303.9 489.1 426.3 233.8 620.1 202.4 339.9 379.5 255 6 381.9 303.5 490.0 430.6 234.6 620.8 203.0 341.0 380.0 257.5 382.5 303.3 491.3 430.8 235.1 622.5 203.8 342.0 381.4 258 0 385.2 304.1 496.6 430.8 237.1 629.8 205.5 344.3 385.1 257.5 386.1 303.4 500.0 434.9 238.5 634.2 207.2 343.7 385.5 255.2 146.0 124.1 145.7 123.4 148.1 124.3 149.4 124.2 149.2 125.8 147.6 126.8 145.8 125.3 137.5 142.4 137.4 143.1 138.0 141.3 138.8 144.1 138.7 143.3 139.5 143.3 140.7 142.2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 81 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. C ontinued— C onsum er 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 rs G e n e ra l s u m m a ry Fuel a n d o th e r u t ilitie s ........................................................................................................................................ 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 1983 1982 1982 S e p t. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. 359.5 363.6 369.3 373.6 375 5 375.1 1983 S e p t. A p r. M ay June J u ly Aug. S e p t. 376.4 361.0 365.1 370.8 375 5 377.3 376.8 378.1 459.3 612.8 620.4 187.7 420.1 319.3 576.5 468.2 623.4 631.8 189.7 428.5 324.2 591.0 475.6 622.4 630.7 189.5 437.4 337.9 588.8 477.9 621.7 629.5 190.2 440.3 341.6 589.5 476.6 621.5 628 9 190.8 438.7 341.2 585.8 478.3 625.6 633.7 191.0 440.0 342.6 586.4 458.5 662.8 685.9 176.8 409.2 332.5 517.6 459.2 610.6 618.4 186.7 420.5 319.9 578.3 468.3 621.0 629.6 188.6 429.1 324.7 593.9 475.2 620.0 628.5 188.6 437.4 337.4 591.8 477.7 619.3 627.2 189.3 440.5 341.1 593.0 476.5 619.0 626.5 190.0 439.1 340.7 589.8 478.3 623.2 631 2 190.2 440.5 342.3 590.5 458.4 665.4 688.1 178.0 408.6 332.5 514.5 Other utilities and public services ..................................................................... Telephone services........................................................................................ Local charges (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................... Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Water and sewerage maintenance............................................................... 203.6 165.5 134.3 119.7 110.1 332.4 211.7 171.9 139.9 121.8 116.6 347.5 212.5 172.8 140.9 121.8 117.1 348.2 213.2 173.4 141.8 121.8 117.4 348.9 214.2 173.8 141.8 121.9 118.2 353.5 214.8 173.9 142.1 121.9 118.3 355.9 215.4 174.4 142.6 121.9 118.6 356.8 204.3 165.9 134.8 120.1 109.7 335.4 212.5 172.4 140.3 122.3 116.6 350.8 213.4 173.2 141.3 122.3 117.1 351.8 214.1 173.9 142.2 122.2 117.4 352.6 215.3 174.3 142.3 122.3 118.2 357.7 215.9 174.5 142.6 122.4 118.3 360.2 216.4 175.0 143.1 122 3 118.7 361.0 H o u s e h o ld fu r n is h in g s a n d o p e ra tio n s 234.2 239.9 238.4 238.6 238.9 238.0 238.9 231.0 236.0 235.4 235.5 235.8 234.8 235.8 Housefurnishings ................................................................................................. Textile housefurnishings.............................................................................. Household linens (12/77 = 100) ..................................................... Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Furniture and b e d d in g ........................................................................................... Bedroom furniture (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Sofas (12/77 = 100) ........................................................................ Living room chairs and tables (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................... Other furniture (12/77 = 100) ........................................................ Appliances including TV and sound equipment ...................................... Television and sound equipment ..................................................... Television ..................................................................................... Sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Household appliances ........................................................................ Refrigerators and home fre e z e rs ............................................... Laundry e q u ip m e n t..................................................................... Other household appliances (12/77 = 100) ......................... Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing machines (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................. Office machines, small electric appliances, and air conditioners (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................... Other household equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................ Floor and window coverings, infants', laundry, cleaning, and outdoor equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric kitchenware (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................ Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 = 100) ........................................................... 194.3 222.1 135.4 198.7 229.4 134.2 197 6 228.7 136.2 197.8 226.8 135.4 198.1 227.3 134.4 196.7 226.1 133.4 197.6 231.2 138.1 192.4 225.0 136.4 196.7 233.6 135.3 195.8 232.7 137.3 195.9 230.5 136.4 196.1 231.1 135.6 194.7 229 6 134.5 195.6 234.6 139.0 141.6 213.3 145.5 117.2 123.1 137.8 151.5 108.2 103.7 113.2 184.7 190.2 137.6 124.0 152.4 221.6 152.9 118.9 126.2 144.6 152.3 107.1 100 9 113.6 188.5 193.3 142.7 125.4 149.4 220.0 151.9 118.1 123.9 144.5 151.2 106.1 100.2 112.3 187.8 194.1 143.5 124.3 147.7 220.0 152.3 118.0 124.2 143.8 151.4 105.9 100.8 111.6 188.4 194.0 144.6 124.7 149.3 220.5 156.5 117.7 123.9 141.1 150.9 105.2 100.1 110.8 188.6 192,7 143.0 125.6 149.0 217.2 151.3 117.3 123.5 139.8 150.6 105.1 100.1 110.6 188.0 191.4 142.0 125.4 150.5 217.9 152.5 117.6 124.2 139.4 151.0 105.1 99.6 111.1 189.2 192.4 142.7 126.2 144.8 210.3 142.1 117.7 123.4 134.1 151.4 107.4 102.6 112.5 185.1 196.1 137.9 122.0 157.8 218.1 149.4 119.1 126.6 140.2 152.4 106.2 99.7 112.6 188.9 199.2 143.6 123.5 154.1 216.7 148.8 118.6 124.5 139.8 151.7 105.1 99.0 111.3 188.9 200.3 144.6 122.6 152.1 216.5 148.9 118.3 124.9 139.0 151.9 105.0 99.6 110.5 189.5 200.2 145.2 123.2 154.0 217.6 153.0 118.0 125.0 137.1 151.2 104.3 99.0 109.8 189.0 199.2 143.5 123.6 153.3 214.3 148.2 117.6 124.5 135.6 150.8 104.3 99.0 109.7 188.0 197.2 142.8 123.4 154.8 215.1 148.9 118.1 125.2 135 8 151.2 104.2 98.3 110.2 189.1 198.0 143.6 124.2 F u e s ....................................................................................................................... Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ..................................................................... Fuel oil .................................................................................................. Other fuels (6/78 = 100) .................................................................. Gas (piped) and e lectricity........................................................................... E le c tric ity .............................................................................................. Utility (piped) gas .............................................................................. H O U S IN G F u e l a n d o th e r u tilitie s 123.4 125.0 123 2 123.9 124.0 123.7 125.4 121.5 123.3 121.7 122 8 122.6 122.1 123.6 124.6 137.8 126.1 140.4 125.5 139.9 125.7 141.2 127.3 142.0 127.2 141.2 127.3 141.0 122.5 135.6 123.8 138.4 123.6 138.0 123.7 139.0 124.8 139.7 124.8 138.9 124.9 138.8 143.3 129.7 143.2 133.3 143.2 132.5 142.2 133.0 145.1 133.6 144.4 132.3 144.2 132.9 135.9 124.9 135.3 128.3 135.5 128.3 134.3 128.8 137.3 129 3 136.4 128.3 136.0 128.4 141.6 145.5 145.1 149.2 149.1 148.7 147.7 137.6 142.0 141.6 145.0 144.9 144.4 143.6 133.4 135.9 135.1 135.0 135.5 134.2 134.7 138.8 141.4 140.2 139.9 140.4 139.3 140.2 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 = 100) Miscellaneous household products (12/77 = 100) ............ Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................... 289.2 282.8 145.6 148.0 136.8 150.2 143.8 296.9 294.5 150.6 148.8 139.6 154.5 147.2 296.6 294.5 150.3 148.0 139.8 154.4 147.3 296.3 294.9 151.5 147.3 139.9 154.0 145.8 296.8 294.6 151.4 148.1 140.3 153.9 146.6 295.8 294.4 151.0 148,1 139.5 154,1 144.6 295.7 296 1 152.0 148.0 139.5 154.9 140.8 285.7 278.9 144.5 147.9 140.0 145.0 136.4 293.9 290.4 149.5 148.9 142.7 149.2 141.4 293.6 290.6 149.2 148.0 142.9 149.1 141.4 293.2 290.9 150.4 147.4 142.8 148.7 139.4 293.5 290.3 150.2 148.2 143.2 148.6 139.7 292.7 290.2 149.8 148.1 142.5 148.8 137.8 293.1 292.0 150 9 148.2 142.6 149.5 134.9 Housekeeping services ........................................................ P ostage..................................................................................... Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and drycleaning services (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................ 313.4 337.5 317.1 337.5 318.0 337.5 318.5 337.5 318.7 337.5 319.3 337.5 320.9 337.5 312.7 337.5 316.5 337.5 317.5 337.5 318.0 337.5 318.3 337.5 319.1 337.5 320.8 337.5 156.6 138.3 160.8 141.7 161.7 142.9 162.3 143.3 162.2 144.0 162.8 144.9 165.9 145.4 156.8 136.7 160.8 140.0 161.7 141.2 162.3 141.6 162.3 142.2 163.1 143.1 166.0 143.6 APPAREL AND UPKEEP 194.9 195.5 196.1 195.6 195.0 197.3 200.4 194.1 194.8 195.3 194.7 194.0 196.3 199.3 A p p a r e l c o m m o d i t i e s .................................................................... 184.1 183.7 184.2 183 6 182.8 185.3 188.5 183.8 183.5 183.9 183.2 182.4 184.7 188.0 180.4 186.5 117.7 110.6 103.7 138.6 123 8 111.4 120.2 113.7 132.6 120.3 163.6 108.7 169.7 165.1 179.4 187.8 117.9 110 3 100.0 142.8 122.0 112.0 123.5 115.2 134.9 125.5 160.6 106.5 168.1 161.5 180.2 189 5 119.2 110 9 101.1 144.5 124.6 113.2 123.3 115.4 136.1 124.4 160.1 106.1 164.7 162.7 179.7 189.1 118.8 111.2 100.7 144.3 122.6 113.0 123.7 116.3 135.8 124.7 159.7 106.1 164.7 164.3 179 3 188.2 118.3 110.7 98.2 145.3 120.9 112.8 123.0 114.9 134.9 124.6 158.8 105.5 164.8 161.4 181.9 188.3 118.5 111.4 99.5 144.8 121.6 112.3 122.6 115.4 134.2 123.5 164.2 109.5 171.6 171.4 185.3 190.8 120.1 112.3 104.4 145.4 125.6 112.4 124.1 119.0 135.1 123.7 168.8 112.8 176.6 176.7 179.9 186.6 118.2 103.5 106.4 135.8 126.2 116.9 118.3 114.6 128.6 117.3 165.7 110.5 176.9 151.2 179.4 187.9 118.3 103.5 102.4 138 6 125.0 117.7 121.5 115.7 130.4 122.6 163.1 108.3 177.1 145.7 179.8 189.7 119.9 103.9 104.3 140.4 127.6 119.1 121.4 116.1 131.6 121.7 162.4 107.6 172.7 146.7 179.2 189.0 119.2 103.9 103.3 140.3 125.8 118.6 121.6 116.6 131.2 121.9 161.5 107.4 171.8 148.8 178.7 188.1 118.7 103.3 100.7 141.3 124.2 118.4 120.9 115.5 130.4 121.6 160 8 107.0 169.4 147.2 181.2 188.3 118.9 104.4 101.7 140.8 124.7 118.1 120.7 116.2 129 9 120.7 165.8 111.1 175.3 158.7 184.6 191.1 120.7 105.5 107.5 141.6 128.6 118.2 122.4 120.5 130.7 120.8 170.2 114.3 181.6 162.6 Apparel commodities less fo o tw e a r................... Men’s and boys’ .................................................. Men's (12/77 = 100) ............................................... Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) Coats and ja c k e ts .................................. Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 = 100) . Shirts (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................... Dungarees, leans, and trousers (12/77 = 100) Boys' (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 = 100) . Furnishings (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) Women’s and girls’ ............................................ Women’s (12/77 = 100) .................................. Coats and ja c k e ts ...................................... Dresses ..................................................................... 82 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . . 20. C o n tinued— C onsum er 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 A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e rs G e n e ra l s u m m a ry 1983 1982 1983 1982 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. A P P A R E L A N D U P K E E P — C o n tin u e d A p p a r e l C o m m o d it ie s — C o n tin u e d Apparel commodities less footwear— Continued Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ............................ Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100) ............ Suits (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................. Girls' (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) ........................................................................... Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............... Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ............................ Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and accessories (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................. Infants' and toddlers’ .................................................................................. Other apparel commodities ........................................................................ Sewing materials and notions (12/77 = 100) ............................... Jewelry and luggage (12/77 = 100) ............................................... 102.0 129.9 88.6 109.9 104.5 106.0 100.1 131.1 80.5 108.2 97.1 107.5 98.1 133.0 77.8 108.4 96.3 108.1 97.7 132.8 77.2 106.5 96.3 103.5 96.3 131.7 81.0 106.2 100.1 99.8 99.4 133.2 87.3 107.7 101.9' 102.0 102.5 135.1 94.3 104.5 101.6 106.3 102.9 129 6 106.7 108.7 102.3 105.2 101.0 130.8 99.4 109.2 98.5 109.1 98.9 132.7 95.9 109.4 97.3 110.3 98.4 132.4 93.9 107.4 96.5 106.1 96.9 131.4 99.8 106.6 100.0 101.3 99.7 132.9 108.1 106.8 98.7 102.9 102.9 134.8 115.0 108.3 98.5 106.8 126.0 275.8 213.1 119.3 145.6 127.8 280.4 214 4 121.8 145.8 128.6 280.7 215.0 122.9 145.9 128.6 283.0 214.0 122.4 145.1 127.7 282.4 215 9 123.0 146.7 127.8 281.9 216.2 121.6 147.5 128.4 287.4 217.4 121.9 148.5 125.1 286.8 201.7 117.7 136.2 126.9 291.0 202 5 119.4 136 2 127.4 290 9 203.3 120.6 136.5 127.5 293.4 203.0 120.5 136.2 126.8 293.1 204.6 121.0 137.4 126.7 292.3 204.6 119.8 138.0 127.0 297.9 205.9 120.2 139.0 F o o tw e a r................................................................................................................. Men’s (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................. Boys’ and girls' (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................................. Women’s (12/77 - 100) ........................................................................... 206.8 133.2 129.5 126.9 207.5 133.9 130.7 126.5 208.0 133.7 131.7 126.9 206.8 133.7 130.7 125.6 203.8 132.8 128.9 122.9 205.7 132.3 130.3 125.3 208.0 134.8 130.4 126.8 206.7 135.0 132.1 122.8 207.2 135.6 133.4 122.0 207.7 135.4 134.3 122.5 206.6 135.5 133.1 121.3 203.7 134.7 131.0 118.9 205.5 134.2 132.6 121.1 207.6 136.7 132.9 122.3 A p p a r e l s e r v ic e s .................................................................................................................................................................. 281.3 288.7 290.3 290.9 291 8 292.3 293.4 279.7 287.1 288.6 289 2 290.0 290 4 291.5 Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 = 100) ............ Other apparel services (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................................... 167.2 148.2 171.7 152.0 172.8 152.5 173.5 152.4 174.1 152.7 174.5 152.7 174.4 153.7 165.8 149.3 170.3 153.1 171.3 153.7 171.9 153.7 172.5 153.9 172.9 153.9 173.3 154.8 T R A N S P O R T A T IO N 295.5 292.3 296.2 298.3 300.4 302.4 303.7 297.0 293.5 297.5 299.6 301.9 304.1 305.5 291.1 287.5 291.7 293.8 296.0 298 0 299.2 293.8 289.9 294.1 296.3 298.6 300.8 302.2 New c a r s ................................................................................................................. Used cars .............................................................................................................. Gasoline ................................................................................................................. Automobile maintenance and repair .................................................................. Body work (12/77 = 100) ........................................................................ Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous mechanical repair (12/77 = 100) ........................................................ Maintenance and servicing (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... 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) ......................... T ir e s .............................................................................................. Other parts and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ Other private transportation s e rv ic e s ........................................................ Automobile insurance ........................................................................ Automobile finance charges (12/77 = 100) ................................... Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) . , State registration ........................................................................ Drivers' licenses (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... Vehicle inspection (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................ Other vehicle-related fees (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................... 197.7 306.7 390.6 321.9 160.4 201.1 312.7 367.6 327.4 164.7 201.6 317.1 380.9 328.7 165.5 201.6 322.7 386.1 329.5 166.4 201.4 329 6 389.3 329.8 166.6 202.1 336.8 389.5 331.0 167.1 202.7 343.9 387.1 332.3 167.7 197.4 306.7 391.9 322.6 159.4 200 7 312.7 369.3 328.1 163.4 201.3 317.1 382 4 329.4 164.3 201.2 322.7 387.4 330.2 165.3 201.0 329.6 390.6 330.4 165.6 201.7 336.8 391.0 331.7 166.0 202.3 343 9 388 8 333.0 166.5 153.2 149.3 154.3 261.4 214.4 151.9 136.7 189.6 135.4 276.4 283.9 185.2 138.8 183.7 132.8 128.5 154 2 157.3 151.0 156.2 258.4 212.2 156.1 134.5 186.4 133.4 273.1 299.0 157.3 141.4 186.6 133.9 131.1 157.6 157.7 151.7 156.8 258.7 210.9 155.1 133.6 185.1 132.7 273.9 301.2 154.5 143.8 192.3 133.9 131.2 158.5 157.7 152.2 157.0 258.1 210.4 156.0 133.2 184.3 132.7 273.3 301.1 152.2 144.7 192.3 150.3 131.2 159.0 158.3 152.0 157.3 258.6 209.6 155.3 132.7 183.5 132.3 274.1 302.4 151.7 145.6 194.8 152.9 139.0 157.9 158.9 152.8 157.5 260.0 208.9 153 5 132.4 183.4 131.6 276.0 302 9 155.4 146.0 194.6 153.0 139.0 158.8 160.7 152.6 158.4 260.8 208.3 154 2 131.9 181.7 132.9 277.3 303.8 156.4 146.9 195.3 153.0 139.8 160.5 157.2 148.6 153.8 264.1 216.9 151.0 138.6 193.2 135.4 279.1 283.2 184.6 139.8 183.2 133.1 129.9 162.7 161.2 150.4 155.7 259.3 214.7 155.0 136.4 190.1 133.4 273.7 298.2 156.6 142.2 186 3 134.1 132.4 165.4 161.6 151.0 156.3 259 6 213.3 153.9 135.4 188.8 132.4 274.4 300.5 153.8 144.9 192.1 134.1 132.5 166.5 161.7 151.5 156.4 258.9 212.9 154.8 135.0 187.9 132.5 273.6 300 5 151.4 146.0 192.1 150.6 132.5 167.0 162.2 151.3 156 6 259.4 212.1 154.1 134.5 187 2 132.1 274.5 302.0 151.1 146 9 194.7 153.4 139 8 165.5 162.8 152.2 156.9 261.1 211.2 152.6 134.1 186.9 131.3 276.8 302.5 155.0 147.2 194.5 153.4 139.8 166.3 164.5 151.9 157.8 261 8 210 9 153.2 133.8 185.4 132.8 277.8 303 4 155.8 147.9 195 2 153.4 140.5 167.8 P u b lic .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 356 3 361.1 359.1 361.2 363.2 365.0 366.6 348.2 353.3 351.2 352.7 354.4 355.7 357.2 Airline f a r e .............................................................................................................. Intercity bus fare Intracity mass transit ........................................................................................... Taxi fare ................................................................................................................. Intercity train f a r e ................................................................................................. 413.7 370.6 315.2 300.2 338.4 417.2 394.6 320.2 302.0 352.0 411.2 401.7 321.7 302.1 352.3 415.4 403.9 321.7 301.0 353.2 418.8 404.2 322.6 301.0 361.3 420.7 412.8 323.7 302.4 364.5 423.3 415.1 324.6 303.5 364.8 411.1 372.5 314.7 309.9 338 4 415.9 396.9 319.1 311.4 352.5 407.4 403.0 320.1 311.6 352.7 410.9 405.2 320.6 311.0 353.6 415.9 404.1 320.7 311.0 362.3 417.1 412.7 321.6 311.8 365.2 419.5 415.3 322.5 312.7 365 4 M E D IC A L C A R E 338.7 353.5 354.3 355.4 357.7 360.0 361.2 336.5 351.2 352.1 353.3 355.6 357.9 359.2 M e d ic a l c a re c o m m o d itie s 211.6 221.2 222.5 223.2 224.2 225 4 226.3 212.1 221.6 222.8 223.6 224.5 225.8 226.7 Prescription d ru g s ................................................................................................. Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................... Tranquilizers and sedatives (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and prescription medical supplies (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................... Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ................................... Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and respiratory agents (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................ 199.4 149.1 161.5 140.3 211.6 155.2 174.7 153.4 212.9 155.8 176.3 153.5 213.7 156.6 177.0 153.3 214.5 157.2 177.6 154.0 215.7 157.9 179.1 155.4 216.7 158.1 179.9 155.8 200.5 151.2 161.1 142.8 212.8 157.2 174.5 153.2 214.1 157.8 176.1 153.4 214.8 158.8 176.7 153.2 215.6 159.2 177.2 153.9 216.9 160.1 178.7 155.4 218.0 160.3 179.7 155.7 183.5 161.7 196.1 171.7 197.8 172.3 198.1 173.3 198.1 175.1 199.2 175.7 200.0 177.5 185.1 163.6 198.1 173.4 199.7 174.1 199.9 175.1 199.8 176.8 201.1 177.5 201.9 179.4 152.3 159.4 160.7 161.8 162 3 162.6 163.8 152.4 159.7 161.0 162.0 162.5 162.9 164.1 Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................... Eyeglasses (12/77 = 100) ........................................................................ Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs ..................................... Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 = 100) . . . 149.2 132.6 240.7 144.1 153.8 135.1 248 7 149.4 154.7 134.8 250.9 150.0 155.2 135.0 251.9 150.4 155.9 135.8 253.5 150.3 156.7 136.2 255.0 151.0 157.3 137.7 255.6 151.2 149.8 131.4 241.9 145.1 154.6 133.9 250.2 150.6 155.4 133.8 252.1 151.3 156.0 133.9 253.3 151.4 156.7 134.6 254.9 151.3 157.5 135.1 256.3 152.4 159.1 136.7 256.9 152.3 ............................................................................................................................................................. P riv a te M e d ic a l c a re s e r v ic e s ........................................................................................................................................ Professional services ........................................................................................... Physicians' s e rv ic e s ..................................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 366.9 382.8 383.5 384.6 387.2 389.8 391.0 363.9 379.7 380.5 381.7 384 4 387.0 388.3 306 6334.2 318.0 348.2 319.7 349.4 322.0 351.7 324.2 353.9 326.0 354.9 327.6 356.5 306.9 337.4 318 4 351.8 320.0 353.9 322.2 355.3 324 6 357.6 326.5 358.8 328.0 360.5 83 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. C ontinued— C onsum er 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 1982 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 1983 1982 1983 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. Professional services— Continued Dental se rv ic e s .............................................................................................. Other professional services (12/77 = 100) ............................................ 287.0 146.1 295.7 151.9 298.6 151.8 301.2 152.3 303.8 153.0 306.5 154.0 308.3 154.3 285.0 143.0 293.4 148.5 296.1 148.5 298.9 148.7 301.6 149.6 304.3 150.5 306.1 150.8 Other medical care services.................................................................................. Hospital and other medical services (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................. Hosp tai room .............................................................................................. Other hospital and medical care services (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... 439.8 180.9 576.8 176.0 461.1 190.2 608.0 186.3 460.5 190.8 609.6 187.0 460.4 191.5 609.6 188.3 463.3 193.8 619.1 189.9 466.9 196.7 627.6 193.0 467.8 197.8 633.8 193.3 435.6 178.3 569.1 174.7 456.9 188.4 600.7 184.9 456.4 189.0 601.8 185.6 456.4 189.6 602.2 186.8 459.4 191.9 611.2 188.4 462.9 194.6 619.5 191.2 463.9 195.7 626.1 191.4 E N T E R T A IN M E N T 240.3 244.6 244.8 245.4 246.0 246.6 247.5 236.5 241.1 241.3 241.9 242 5 243.1 244.1 E n t e r ta in m e n t c o m m o d itie s 242.9 246.0 246.3 246.3 246.7 248.0 248.0 236.6 240.5 240.7 240.7 241.4 242.5 242.6 Reading materials (12/77 = 100) ..................................................................... Newspapers ................................................................................................. Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 = 100).................................. 153.1 290.4 159.2 158.4 300.2 164.8 159.7 301.6 166.8 158.5 302.0 164.2 158.5 302.7 163.6 160.9 303.5 168.4 161.2 304.0 168.6 152.4 290.1 159.2 157.8 300.4 164.8 159.1 301.7 167.0 158.0 302.0 164.2 158.0 302.7 163.6 160.2 303.4 168.5 160.5 303.9 168.8 Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............ B icyc les........................................................................................................ Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ 134.3 137.1 120.6 198.7 131.9 133.6 136.3 121.3 196.1 132.0 133.2 135.7 120.5 196.6 132.2 134.0 136.7 119.9 199.2 132.2 134.2 137.1 118.6 199.8 132.8 134.1 136.4 118.5 199.9 133.1 134.6 137.4 118.6 200.1 134.6 125.8 123.6 118.3 199.9 132.1 127.5 126.7 118.9 197.4 132.0 127.3 126.5 118.0 197.9 132 3 127.7 126.8 117.6 200.2 132 2 128.3 127.8 116.4 200.7 132 7 128 3 127.8 116.6 200.7 132.9 128.9 128.5 116.3 200 9 134.5 Toys, hobbies, and other entertainment (12/77 = 100) ............................... Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Pet supplies and expenses (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................... 137.1 136.4 129.6 143.9 138.5 137.3 131.6 145.8 138.4 137.4 131.7 145.1 138.6 137.4 131.4 145.9 139.0 137.7 131.6 146.6 139.3 137.7 131.6 147.5 138.8 136.7 131.0 148.5 136.1 133.0 130.6 145.0 137.2 133.4 132.6 146.9 137.1 133.5 132.6 146.1 137.3 133.6 132.4 146.9 137.7 134.0 132.7 147.6 138.0 133.9 132.8 148.6 137.7 133 0 132.1 149.6 E n t e r ta in m e n t s e rv ic e s 237.2 243.1 243.2 244.7 245.4 245.0 247.2 237.6 243.3 243.5 245.1 245.8 245.4 247.8 Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................... Admissions (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................. Other entertainment services (12/77 = 100) ............................... 148.0 136.6 129.6 151.3 141.7 131.6 150.8 142.4 131.9 151.3 144.7 131.8 151.8 146.4 130.6 152.2 145.4 129.8 154.4 145.2 131.0 149.4 135.6 130.5 152.4 140.7 132.4 152.1 143.7 132.6 152.5 143.7 132.6 152.8 145.4 131.4 153.2 144.5 130.7 155.5 144.2 132 3 286.4 288.0 292.0 M E D IC A L C A R E — C o n tin u e d M e d ic a l c a r e s e r v ic e — C o n tin u e d O T H E R G O O D S A N D S E R V IC E S 271.2 283.2 283.6 284.5 287.5 289.0 294.4 267.8 281.4 281.8 282.8 T o b a c c o p ro d u c ts 257.3 284.9 285.3 285.9 294.6 297.7 298,0 256.6 284.3 284.8 285.4 294.3 297.5 297.8 262.3 142.9 292 0 149.6 292.4 149.6 293.1 149.9 302.8 150.5 306.1 150.9 306.4 151.2 261.4 143.1 290.9 149.5 291.5 149.6 292.0 149.8 301.7 150.5 305.2 150.9 305.5 151.2 ................................................................................................................... C.garettes ........................................................................ Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 = 100) 252.9 259.1 259.4 260.9 261.3 262.1 263.0 250.9 257.1 257.3 259.0 259 4 260.1 260.9 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 = 1 0 0 ) ............. Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100) . 251.5 147.8 155.2 258 5 150.9 160.5 258.6 150.8 161.2 261.4 151.7 162.5 262.3 152.5 162 6 261.9 152.8 160.0 262.4 153.0 160.8 252.1 146.9 153.5 259.3 150.3 158.9 259.3 150.0 159.6 262.1 150.9 160.8 263 0 151.7 160.8 262 6 151.9 158.5 263.0 152 0 159.1 141.4 142.2 145.6 146.0 145.1 146.7 148.5 147.1 148.8 147.9 148.6 148.9 148.3 149.9 142.1 145.8 146.3 149.8 145.7 150.3 149.2 150.7 149.5 151.6 149 2 152.4 148 9 153.4 Personal care services ............................ Beauty parlor services for women ................... Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100) . . . 255.1 258.3 141.0 260.7 264.2 143.8 261.1 264.5 144.1 261.6 265.0 144.4 261.5 264.3 145,1 263.3 266.5 145.6 264.6 268.1 146.0 250.0 251.6 139.8 255.4 257.2 142.7 255.7 257.4 143.0 256.3 258.0 143.2 256.4 257.5 143.9 258.1 259.7 144.4 259.3 261 1 144.8 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 319.3 324.9 325 6 326.0 327.2 328.1 344.6 320.4 326.8 327.7 328 1 329 4 330.5 345.6 Schoolbooks and supplies ............ Personal and educational services . . . . Tuition and other school f e e s ............ College tuition (12/77 = 100) . . Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 = 100) Personal expenses (12/77 = 100) . 283.0 327.7 167.2 164.9 168.7 169.4 292.5 332.7 167.6 167,4 168.8 183.1 292.9 333.5 167.7 167.4 168.9 185.1 293 6 333 8 167.6 167.3 168.9 186.1 294.2 335.1 168.0 167.8 168.9 187.9 294.6 336.2 168.2 168.0 169.2 189.8 306.6 353.5 178.6 180.7 170.9 192.6 286.8 328.7 167.7 166.9 169.6 171.7 296.5 334.5 168.2 167.5 169.8 183.1 296 8 335.5 168.2 167.5 169.9 185.3 297 6 335.8 168.2 167.4 169.9 186.2 298.3 337.3 168.5 167 9 169.9 188.3 298.8 338 6 168 8 168 0 170 3 190.4 310 8 354 3 178 4 180 5 172 7 193.0 385.7 363.4 376.2 381.2 384.3 384.5 382.3 326.5 355.0 333.4 357.3 337.2 358.2 341.5 358.6 343.6 358.9 343.6 360.1 344.7 361.6 386.9 433.9 325.4 355.7 365.0 411.6 332.6 359 5 377.6 410.0 336 5 360.3 382.4 410.2 341.1 360.8 385.4 411 4 343 1 361.7 385.9 415 6 342 9 364.2 383.9 418 2 343 8 365.2 P e rs o n a l c a re ......................................................................... S p e c ia l in d e x e s : Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products Insurance and fin a n c e ................ Utilities and public transportation................ Housekeeping and home maintenance services 1Excludes motor oil, coolant, and other products as of January 1983. 84 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 21. C onsum er Price Index for All Urban C onsum ers: Cross classification of region and popu lation size class by expenditure category and com m o dity and service group [December 1977 = 100] S iz e c la s s A S iz e c la s s B S iz e c la s s C S iz e c la s s D ( 1 .2 5 m illio n o r m o r e ) ( 3 8 5 , 0 0 0 - 1 . 2 5 0 m illio n ) (7 5 ,0 0 0 -3 8 5 ,0 0 0 ) ( 7 5 , 0 0 0 o r le s s ) C a te g o ry a n d g ro u p 1983 A p r. June 1983 Aug. A p r. June 1983 Aug. A p r. 1983 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 .............................................................................................................. H o u s in g .................................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .............................................................................................................. Transportation ....................................................................................................................... Medical care ........................................................................................................................... Entertainm ent.......................................................................................................................... Other goods and services .................................................................................................... 153.1 147,0 158.0 122.6 160.1 159.6 143.1 156.2 153.9 147.4 158.9 122.6 161.7 160.9 144.1 156.7 155.0 147.5 159.6 123.2 164.2 164.4 144.3 160.3 159.0 146.2 169.1 1 122.4 165.4 163.0 139.1 158.6 160.8 146.8 170.7 124.4 169.2 163.5 138.8 159.8 161.5 147.4 169.7 125.8 171.4 167.1 139.6 162.8 163.5 151.1 176.4 128.5 164.3 166.0 139.8 162.3 164.2 150.6 176.7 128.9 166.6 166.7 142.1 163.1 165.5 151.6 176.7 128.6 169.5 171.2 143.8 165.9 158.2 145.8 165.1 130.2 164.3 165.8 146.5 162.1 158.5 146.3 163.9 129.5 166.7 168.5 148.1 162.2 160.0 147.7 164.2 128.8 169.7 171.9 149.3 166.7 148.4 149.0 159.0 149.1 150.0 160.0 150.1 141.6 161.3 153.0 155.7 168.2 154.8 158.3 169.8 156.0 159.8 169.8 153.6 154.3 179.4 154.3 155.8 180.1 155.4 156.8 181.7 151.3 153.4 168.5 152.3 154.8 167.9 153.9 156.3 169.2 C O M M O D IT Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P C om m odities.................................................................................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .............................................................................. Services.............................................................................................................................................. N o r th C e n t r 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 .............................................................................................................. H o u s in g .................................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .............................................................................................................. Transportation ....................................................................................................................... Medical care ........................................................................................................................... E ntertainm ent........................................................................................................................... Other goods and services .................................................................................................... 163.6 145.4 181.9 117.9 161.7 165.3 141.9 156.2 165.2 145.0 185.3 116.8 164.2 166.1 141.9 156.7 166.6 144.5 186.3 119.5 167.4 168.4 143.3 158.1 161.1 144.1 171.7 128.8 164.0 168.3 136.7 167.4 162.0 143.8 172.2 129.2 167.1 168.5 136.9 168.5 162.2 143.6 171.7 128.9 168.6 172.4 131.8 170.4 157.3 145.6 164.1 128.4 163.9 165.8 145.9 152.6 158.3 145.0 165.2 127.0 167.1 166.3 147.3 153.8 159.6 145.0 165.7 129.9 169.8 167.5 148.4 158.3 158.1 150.9 163.8 123.5 161.2 172.2 136.5 165.2 159.3 151.7 163.9 122.2 165.7 173.1 137.1 166.3 160.7 151.9 165.2 125.4 167.8 175.4 136.6 169.3 152.7 155.9 179.9 153.5 157.5 182.4 154.7 159.7 184.3 151.7 154.6 176.1 152.8 156.8 176.8 153.1 157.1 176.8 149.1 150.3 170.7 150.0 152.2 171.7 151.5 154.5 172.8 148.5 147.3 173.0 149.9 149.0 174.1 151.3 151.0 175.6 C O M M O D IT Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P C om m o d itie s.................................................................................................................................... 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 .............................................................................................................. H o u s in g .................................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ........................................................................................................ Transportation .............................................................................................. Medical care ........................................................................................................................... Entertainm ent.............................................................................................. Other goods and services ........................................................................................ 159.1 150.5 163.5 128.7 163.8 168.7 138.6 158.4 161.2 150.9 168.5 129.8 166.8 169.0 139.4 159.3 162.4 150.9 169.7 131.8 168.7 170.0 140.7 162.1 160.9 149.2 166.9 126.2 167.1 167.9 169.0 154.5 161.7 148.9 167.9 124.6 170.3 167.5 153.0 162.9 162 9 149.9 168.4 126.2 172.2 169.0 154.4 164.9 160.2 147.4 167.8 123.1 165.9 177.5 146.5 153.5 161.2 147.3 168.7 123.0 168.5 178.5 146.1 160.0 162.3 147.8 169.5 124.1 170.3 180.0 146.2 161.6 160.8 149.9 169.9 112.5 162.9 183.0 145.6 160.4 162.0 150.7 170.3 113.9 166.0 184.4 145.5 161.0 162.8 150.7 171.9 111.3 167.3 184.2 146.4 162.9 152 3 152.7 168.6 153.7 154.8 171.5 155.0 156.8 172.7 153.8 155.5 171.6 154.5 156.8 172.6 155.6 157.9 173.9 151.0 152.4 174.4 152.0 154.1 175.3 153.7 156.4 175.6 151.1 151.4 175.3 153.0 153.8 175.7 153.2 154.2 177.1 C O M M O D IT Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P C om m o d itie s........................................................................................ 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 ..................................................... H o u s in g ..................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ............................................ Transportation ..................................................................... Medical care ..................................................... Entertainm ent...................................................... Other goods and services ......................................... 159.2 151.8 164.0 121.0 165.1 175.3 139.7 163.5 161.4 151.2 166.2 121.8 171.3 176.7 139.6 155.5 162.7 150.9 168.3 123.3 173.0 177.3 139.8 165.0 159.5 152.8 163.5 121.7 165.8 171.5 145.6 162.8 161.8 153.7 165.1 128.4 171.6 172.6 145.9 163.4 162.5 152.8 165.4 126.9 174.4 175.8 146.7 165.5 152.2 148.6 151.8 122.7 162.4 174.8 139.6 158.1 153.5 148.6 151.2 123.3 167.7 176.4 144.8 158.0 155.2 148.3 152.9 122.8 170.6 180.0 148.7 161.2 157.0 153.1 154.4 139.8 161.1 175.0 157.0 169.3 160.0 154.4 159.1 142.9 165.6 177.5 157.3 169.2 162.2 154.1 163.2 142.4 167.8 179.2 158.5 173.4 149.9 147.0 170.7 152.4 148.6 171.6 152.6 153.6 175.9 151.7 150.1 169.0 154.6 150.7 170.2 155.2 156.4 172.6 149.8 148.6 154.0 152.1 149.6 155.3 153.3 155.4 157.6 149.0 146.8 172.5 151.2 147.0 168.8 152.4 151.7 176.6 C O M M O D IT Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P C om m odities............................................... Commodities less food and beverages . . Services......................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 85 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 22. C onsum er Price Index— 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 rs A re a 1 1982 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 is e d ) 1983 1982 1983 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 ........................................................................... 293.3 295.5 297.1 298.1 299.3 300.3 301.8 292.8 294.9 296.3 297.2 298.2 299.5 300.8 Anchorage, Alaska (10/67 = 100) ............................................... Atlanta, Ga............................................................................................ Baltimore, Md...................................................................................... Boston, Mass....................................................................................... Buffalo, N.Y.......................................................................................... 263.4 Chicago, III.-Northwestern Ind........................................................... Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind..................................................................... Cleveland, O h io .................................................................................. Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex.......................................................................... Denver-Boulder, Colo.......................................................................... 294.0 300.2 Detroit, Mich........................................................................................ 294.9 294.9 288.2 272.8 316.7 295.9 289.5 Miami, Fla. (11/77 - 100) ............................................................ Milwaukee, Wis.................................................................................... Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-W is...................................................... New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N .J.................................................... Northeast, Pa. (S c ra n to n )............................................................... 295.3 288.2 294.1 325.6 San Francisco-Oakland, Calif............................................................. Seattle-Everett, Wash.......................................................................... Washington, D C. Md Va.................................................................. 302.2 286.5 283.0 296.6 292.0 271.4 321.3 297.5 293.6 159.4 308.8 309.4 286.5 283.5 305.2 287.4 281.7 284.3 312.6 288.1 286 1 305 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 298.8 294.5 273.5 324.0 301.3 295.2 289.1 283.4 288 3 303.0 1The 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 Area is used for New York and Chicago. 86 298.4 316.2 289.5 289.9 310.2 291.5 299.3 335 2 300.9 292.6 ,288.8 282.7 303.0 314.6 292 9 302 8 339.4 331.3 299.2 291.2 295 0 296.4 291.7 276.9 317 6 293.5 290.2 162.9 313.9 157.5 306.3 292.1 297.2 278.9 277.1 291.4 282.1 293.3 302.0 340.4 285.8 293.1 321.1 308.8 297.0 298.3 291.9 293.6 295.8 300 7 292.1 273 4 319 7 298.3 292.1 161.4 315.4 286 8 300.7 286.5 311.8 285 9 288.7 299.5 337.3 303.8 303.7 304.6 293.2 278.2 321.6 299.3 293.7 296.7 286.1 286.5 291.1 164.3 329.1 308.5 288 4 293.3 304 2 286 4 296 7 320.0 298.6 290.4 297.5 299.1 311.2 317.6 309.0 162.8 325.0 283.8 294.0 314.8 294.7 297.4 331.7 298.9 283.8 282.9 299 5 288.6 285.1 296.4 308.0 316.8 306.3 331.9 312.4 282 2 260.8 304.3 297.4 288.0 283.3 294 8 309 5 315.4 301.7 ^Average of 85 cities. 257.5 302.0 296.7 285.1 278.4 306.0 306.3 296.8 254.7 300.1 327.3 315.9 160 8 310.1 288.5 295.4 332.0 299.3 301.6 335.8 294.9 258.9 302.9 290 6 285.9 299.6 312.4 325.5 314.1 334.7 156.1 302.4 Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J.......................................................................... Pittsburgh, Pa...................................................................................... Portland, Oreg.-Wash......................................................................... St. Louis, M o.-Ill................................................................................. San Diego, Calif................................................................................... 298.6 276.9 303.9 300.4 289.1 284.3 296.3 311.3 320.6 308.6 324.5 280.7 276.0 265.8 302.3 296.5 287.3 282.5 Honolulu, H a w a ii............................................................................... Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas ............................................................... Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif........................................ 262.5 297.6 289.2 282.9 288 1 290.0 294.2 288.2 299.1 323.8 301.6 294.2 300.0 297.7 300.9 23. P roducer Price Indexes, by stage of processing [1967 = 100] A nnual C o m m o d it y g r o u p in g 1983 1982 av e ra g e 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Feb. Jan. M ar. A p r. M ay June1 J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. F IN IS H E D G O O D S Finished g o o d s .................................................................................. 280.6 284.1 284.9 285.5 283.9 284.1 283.4 283.1 284.2 285.0 285.7 286.2 285.1 287.9 Finished consumer goods ...................................................... Finished consumer foods .................................................. C ru d e .................................................................................. Processed ........................................................................ Nondurable goods less f o o d s ............................................ Durable goods ..................................................................... Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy . . . Capital equip m e n t..................................................................... 281.0 259.3 252.7 257.7 333.6 226.7 223.8 279.4 284.3 257.7 232.4 257.9 340.0 231.0 227.8 283.2 285.3 257.4 236.1 257.2 342.5 231.2 228.4 283.8 285.6 258.3 247.6 257.1 342.2 232.0 229.2 284.9 283.5 258.4 ?32.9 258.5 336.6 231.7 228.3 285.2 283 7 261.0 240.8 260.7 333.7 232.9 228.9 285.6 282.7 261.1 247.9 260.1 332.0 231.9 229.4 285.6 282 3 262.9 265.8 260.5 328 7 232.2 230.1 286.2 283.6 262.6 267.2 260.1 332.0 232.9 230.3 286 5 '284.6 r261.2 r251.2 '260.0 r335.7 '233.1 r230.7 '286.7 285.2 260.8 249.7 259.6 337.8 233.1 232.2 287.4 285.6 261.0 262.4 258.7 338.4 233.5 232.3 288.0 285.1 263.3 269.8 260.5 338.6 228.9 232.8 285.4 287.1 264.3 289.8 259.9 337.9 235.4 233.3 290.9 Intermediate materials, supplies, and com ponents...................... 310.4 309.9 309.9 310.1 309.2 309 9 309.5 308 7 309.7 r311.3 313.0 314.4 315.7 316.0 Materials and components for m anufacturing...................... 289.8 289.4 288.7 288.3 288.6 291.1 290.2 291.0 291.9 292.4 293.4 294.8 296.3 296.4 Materials for food m anu fa ctu rin g ...................................... Materials for nondurable manufacturing ......................... Materials for durable manufacturing ............................... Components for m an u fa ctu rin g ......................................... 255.1 284.4 310.1 273.9 254.2 280.4 309.8 276.7 251.0 279.2 309.3 276.9 249.8 278.0 309.4 277.3 250.9 277.0 312.0 276.8 254.1 277.0 319.2 277.6 252.8 276.6 315.7 278.3 255.1 277.3 316.6 278.9 257.0 277.7 318.4 279.4 r257.0 r277.7 r319.0 '280.3 257.3 278.3 320.1 281.8 260 8 281.4 320.6 281.7 269.3 281.9 322.8 281.8 264.0 283.5 322.2 282.2 Materials and components for c o n s tru ctio n ......................... 293.7 293.7 293.6 294.7 296.5 298.8 299.6 300.9 301.2 '302.4 302.9 303.6 302.8 303.5 Processed fuels and lu b ric a n ts............................................... Manufacturing indu stries...................................................... Nonmanufacturing industries ............................................ 591.7 497.8 674.3 590.0 496.6 672.1 593.0 500.4 674.2 595.0 502.2 676.4 577.9 485.2 659.4 565 4 475.5 644 6 564.2 480.6 637.2 543.3 460.4 615.9 547.8 462.9 622.2 '562.0 r475 9 '637.5 572.7 487.7 647 0 576.4 491.1 650.9 579.2 495.4 652.1 579.9 498.7 650.4 C ontainers.................................................................................. 285.6 285.1 284.9 285.0 285.0 285 3 285.2 284.8 285.8 285.9 286 5 286 8 287.3 288.3 S u p p lie s ..................................................................................... Manufacturing indu stries..................................................... Nonmanufacturing industries ............................................ Feeds .................................................................................. Other s u p p lie s .................................................................. 272.1 265.8 275.7 207.0 289.8 272.0 266.9 274.9 192.9 291.9 272.8 266.9 276.1 199.8 291.9 273.0 267.2 276.3 204.7 291.1 273.1 267 4 276.4 206.5 290.9 273.5 267 8 276 8 207 4 291 2 273.9 268 1 277 1 207 7 291.6 275.5 268.6 279 3 219.8 291.9 275.6 268.9 279.3 218.1 292.2 '275.6 '269 8 r278 8 '213.4 '292.5 276.4 270.4 279.8 216.1 293 1 278.0 270.6 282.0 230 2 293 1 280 1 271.2 285.0 247.1 293.5 280.4 271.8 285 1 245.6 293.9 Crude materials for further processing ......................................... 319.5 312.0 313.2 312.7 313.9 320 2 321 6 325.8 325.8 '323.3 320 6 326.9 328.3 324.5 Foodstuffs and fe e d stu ffs......................................................... 247.8 236.3 236.3 237.1 239.6 249 3 249 1 256.8 256.5 252.1 248 6 256.6 257.4 253.9 Nonfood m aterials..................................................................... 473.9 474.8 478.6 475.3 473.6 473.0 477.7 474.6 475.4 '476.8 475.5 478 4 481.1 476.7 Nonfood materials except f u e l ............................................ 376.8 371.9 369.2 365.8 368.0 366.0 366 8 367 0 369.0 '370.5 370.5 374 2 3 8 7 .2 3 8 2 .2 3 7 9 .2 3 7 5 .0 3 7 7 .6 3 7 5 .1 375 9 3 7 6 .1 3 7 8 .3 '3 7 9 .9 3 7 9 .6 3 8 3 .9 375.3 385.1 272.6 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 C ons tru ctio n ..................................................................... 270.3 266.3 265.6 268.1 267.5 269.1 269.3 270 0 270.3 '271.3 272.9 272.5 376.6 386.5 273.1 Crude fu e l............................................................................... Manufacturing industries ............................................... Nonmanufacturing in d u s trie s ......................................... 886.1 1,034.8 782.2 917.2 1,075.3 805.9 954.7 1,125.5 834.2 952.2 1,121.4 832.2 930.7 1,093.8 815.5 937.7 1,103 9 820.0 961.8 1,134.3 839 2 941.6 1,107.6 824.0 935.9 1,100.9 819.1 '936.7 1,102.3 '819.4 929 1 1,091.9 814.1 926.8 1,089.5 811.7 931.2 1,094.7 815.7 911.2 1,067.9 800 9 Finished goods excluding fo o d s ...................................................... Finished consumer goods excluding foods ......................... Finished consumer goods less e n e rg y.................................. 285.8 287.8 244.1 290.8 293.3 246.5 292.0 294.8 246.7 292.5 295.0 247.6 290.3 291.4 247.1 289 6 290.3 248.7 288.7 288.9 248 6 287.7 287 3 249.5 289.3 289.4 249.7 290.8 '291.6 '249.4 291 9 292.7 249.8 292.4 293 2 250.1 290.3 291.3 249.6 293.7 293.8 252.2 Intermediate materials less foods and feeds ............................... Intermediate materials less e n e rg y...................................... 315.7 290.4 315.5 290.1 315.5 289.8 315.7 290.0 314.6 290.5 315.2 292.4 314.8 292.1 313.6 293.2 314.6 293.9 '316.4 '294.4 318.1 295.3 319.2 296.6 319.8 297.8 320.4 298.1 M a n u fa c t u r in g in d u s tr ie s .................................................................. S P E C IA L G R O U P IN G S Intermediate foods and feeds ......................................................... 239.4 234.4 234.4 235.1 236.4 238.8 238.0 243.6 244.4 '242.8 243.8 250.9 262.2 258.2 Crude materials less agricultural products ......................... Crude materials less energy ............................ 536.3 240.4 537.2 230.0 541.9 229.2 537.4 229.9 536.0 232.5 535.1 241.4 539 7 242.7 536.1 248.6 536.2 249.0 537.5 '246.2 536.3 243.7 539.0 250.9 541.7 252.2 537.4 249.1 1Data for June 1983 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 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised, 87 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 24- Producer Price Indexes, by com m odity 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 itie s ........................................................................................................................................ = 100) F a r m p r o d u c ts a n d p r o 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 itie s 1983 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June1 J u ly Aug. 299.3 317.6 299.8 318.1 300.3 318.6 300 7 319.0 299.9 318.2 300 9 319.3 300 6 318 9 300.6 318.9 301.5 319.9 r302 4 r320.8 303.2 321 7 304.9 323.5 305 3 323.9 306 3 325.0 248.9 312.3 243.8 314.3 243.9 315.0 244.8 315.2 245.8 313.9 250.4 313.9 250.6 313.5 254.7 312.4 254.7 313.6 r252.5 r315.3 251.6 316 6 255 7 317.5 259.2 317.2 257.9 318 7 1982 A ll c o m m o d itie s ( 1 9 5 7 - 5 9 1982 av erag e S e p t. O c t. FAR M PRO DU CTS AND 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 p ro d u cts........................................................................................ Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables............................................ G ra in s ................................................................................................. Livestock ........................................................................................... Live p o u ltry ........................................................................................ Plant and animal fibers .................................................................. Fluid m i l k ........................................................................................... E g g s .................................................................................................... Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ........................................................ Other farm p ro d u c ts ........................................................................ 242.4 253.7 210.9 257.8 191.9 202.9 282.5 178.7 212.8 274.5 299.2 223.0 183.2 248.5 177.1 198.1 285.0 177.9 194.3 274.0 230.7 233.4 198.6 239.1 181.6 195.3 285.9 172.5 204.8 276.3 232.6 248.8 262 3 237.2 177.8 200.6 285.5 170.0 209.0 280.1 233.2 227.6 206.3 242.3 177.1 201.7 284.5 170.0 212.4 279.9 240.7 227.8 222.4 251.1 200.1 206.4 284.3 170.0 217.9 281.2 241.5 234.9 227.4 251.4 177.8 217.0 282.9 170.0 217.8 280.3 250.5 266.6 243.8 260.6 170.8 213.6 280.8 170.0 226.3 279.2 250.4 260.1 242.2 258.0 186.9 223 8 279.8 185.1 227.3 281.0 r247.4 r264.4 r241.5 r251 7 199.3 229.7 278.6 169 3 213 3 284 4 244.3 258 0 236.7 240.7 214 5 230 4 278 7 177.2 227.3 282 5 253.5 269.9 251.8 242.2 221.4 240.7 281.7 189.5 262.8 285.7 256.3 275.5 258.0 231.5 242.2 238.7 284.4 200.1 297.8 287.3 255.2 307.6 253.7 229.4 208.5 234.5 284.1 (2) 288 8 283.7 02 02-1 02-2 02-3 02-4 02-5 02-6 02-7 02-8 02-9 Processed foods and fe e d s .................................................................. Cereal and bakery p ro d u c ts ........................................................... Meats, poultry, and f i s h .................................................................. Da ry products ................................................................................. Processed fruits and vegetables..................................................... Sugar and confectionery.................................................................. Beverages and beverage materials ............................................... Fats and oils ..................................................................................... Miscellaneous processed f o o d s ..................................................... Prepared animal fe e d s ..................................................................... 251.5 253.8 257.6 248.9 274.5 269.7 256 9 215.1 248.6 211,3 250.8 253.0 256.9 249.8 273.4 276.3 257.9 213.8 247.9 199.8 250.2 254.2 251.6 250.2 272.8 280.4 258.4 207.2 247.8 206.0 250.5 256.2 249.9 250.8 275.7 280.1 258 8 203.0 248.6 210.1 251.7 257.3 252.3 250.7 274.8 282.1 260.1 201.7 248.8 211.6 254.7 256.8 261.0 250.9 274.3 286.4 261 3 205.3 249.3 212.3 254.5 256.9 260.7 250.7 274 9 283 7 262 0 206.0 248.5 212.4 256 0 258.8 259.1 251.0 273.7 287.4 263.0 214.6 249 9 222.8 256.1 259.1 257.8 250.9 275.3 289.9 263 6 220 0 249.9 221.3 r254.3 r260 3 r250.2 250.4 r277.1 296.0 r263.0 r219.3 r251.5 r217.1 254.6 261.9 248 2 250.3 277.0 296.4 263.0 222.7 253.9 219 9 255 8 262.6 245.1 250.4 278.2 298.9 263.4 245.7 251.8 232.6 259.7 263.2 244.3 250.5 278.1 300 1 264.5 303.7 257.5 247.2 258.3 264.6 239.6 251.0 280.0 297.7 265.1 287.4 259.7 247.7 03 03-1 03-2 03-3 03-4 03-81 03-82 Textile products and a p p a re l.............................................................. Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................... Processed yarns and threads (12/75 = 100) ............................ Gray fabrics (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................. Finished fabrics (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................... Apparel .............................................................................................. Textile housefurnishings.............................................................. 204.6 162.1 138.3 145.3 124.6 194.4 238.5 204.1 161.1 136.5 143.7 123.2 195.7 236.2 203.9 161.2 136.7 143.1 123.0 195.4 236.2 202.6 159.7 136.7 143.3 122.8 193.0 236.2 202.7 156.7 134.7 144.4 122.2 194.4 236.5 202.6 153.1 135.0 144.3 122.3 195.0 234.3 203.4 153.9 135.8 145.1 122.4 196.1 234.2 203.5 153.8 136.0 145.8 123.1 195.8 234.2 204.3 155.6 137.4 146.2 122.8 196.5 237.6 r204 7 r155.9 137.6 145.8 122 5 r197.9 r235.2 205.1 159.1 138 5 146.0 122.4 197.1 238.9 205.7 158.4 140.2 146.6 123.5 197.3 238.5 205.8 158 6 140.5 147.1 123.3 197.4 238.6 206.4 160.4 140.7 148.9 123.8 197.3 238.5 04 04-2 04-3 04-4 Hides, skins, leather, and related p ro d u c ts ...................................... Leather ........................................................................ Footwear ............................................ Other leather and related products ............................ 262 6 311.4 245.0 247.4 263.2 309.5 248.0 247.2 263.2 312.8 249.1 247.1 264.1 314.4 247.7 249.1 266 7 314.4 251.5 250.8 264.3 312.8 247.7 251.0 264.9 316.2 248.1 250.9 267.4 320.5 250.0 251.0 269.4 326 6 248.7 251.7 r271.2 r335 9 r249.9 r251.7 272.7 333 3 249.9 257.4 275.5 345.7 250.1 257 6 275 3 341.8 250.9 257.0 274.7 337.1 251.2 256.9 05 05-1 05-2 05-3 05-4 05-61 05-7 Fuels and related products and p o w e r...................... C o a l........................................................................ C oke................................................................................. Gas fuels3 .............................................................. Electlrc power ............................................ Crude petroleum4 ..................................................... Petroleum products, refined5 ............................ 693.2 534.7 461.7 06 06-1 06-21 06-22 06-3 06-4 06-5 06-6 06-7 Chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts ............................... Industrial chemicals6 ............................................... Prepared paint Paint materials ..................................... Drugs and pharmaceuticals ........................................ Fats and oils, in e d ib le ......................... Agricultural chemicals and chemical products . Plastic resins and m a te ria ls ................ Other chemicals and allied products . . . . 292.3 352 6 262.8 304.6 210.1 267.1 292.4 283.4 270.1 289 9 345.8 264.7 303.0 214.9 242 3 288.8 281.3 268.6 290.5 345.2 264.7 302.4 215.5 239 6 286.5 282.2 272.3 289.6 342.4 264.7 301.7 216.0 240.8 285.2 282.5 272.0 289 3 339.3 264.7 301.5 218.6 242.0 283.2 283.8 272.8 290.5 340.1 264.7 299.5 222.2 253.4 283.3 283.1 274.4 289.8 338.8 264.7 298.4 222 9 262.2 284.2 282.1 272 0 291 3 338.7 264.7 299.8 225 1 278.3 282.8 285.4 274.7 291.1 338.8 264.7 300.2 225 2 287 1 282.4 288.0 272.0 r290.8 r338.5 r264.7 r299.5 r225.2 r276 9 r280 6 289.1 r272 4 291.3 338.8 265.6 300.4 227.5 263.6 278.6 290.6 273.6 294 9 348.5 265.7 305.5 227 8 277.8 277.6 294.1 274.4 294.8 346 3 264.5 316 0 228.0 305 5 276.0 293.1 274.5 296 4 348.6 264.1 316 6 229.7 319.5 276.8 297.5 273.9 07 07-1 07-11 07-12 07-13 07-2 Rubber plastic products ...................... Rubber and rubber prod ucts................... Crude rubber .................................. Tires and tu b e s ...................................... Miscellaneous rubber products ............. Plastic products (6/78 = 100) ................... 241.4 267.8 278 9 255.2 276.9 132.3 242.2 268.9 272.5 255.7 281.4 132.7 241.7 267.9 2709 254.5 280.7 132.7 242.2 268.2 271.1 256.0 279.7 133.0 242.9 269.6 271.1 259.1 284.5 133.0 242.3 268.3 274.3 250.5 289.6 133.1 241.8 267.1 281.2 246.6 285.8 133.2 243.0 267.0 281.3 246.5 285.7 134.6 243 2 267.0 280.6 246.3 286.0 134.8 r243.1 r265.6 r280.2 r243.7 r285.9 r135.5 244.4 267.6 283.1 242.7 291.5 135.9 244.6 267.2 284.4 242.4 290.6 136.3 244.5 266.8 284.3 242.5 289.3 136.4 245.1 267.1 284.3 242.7 289 9 137.0 08 08-1 08-2 08-3 08-4 Lumber and wood products . . . . L u m b e r.................................. M illw o rk ......................................... P lyw o od......................................... Other wood p rod ucts............................ 284.7 310.8 279.4 232.1 236.2 279.4 305.6 278 6 224.0 235.8 279.9 305.1 280.3 227.8 233.0 285.6 312.6 286.5 231.2 231.2 293.3 326.8 293.7 235.3 232.0 303.1 344.7 300 5 239.5 233.2 305.8 349.3 304.0 238.9 231.6 307.2 354.2 302.8 239.4 230.8 308.0 358.6 299.0 241.1 231.1 r314.8 '372.8 '294.9 '255.5 229.6 314.5 372.5 296.1 252.5 229.7 313.9 366.6 307.7 244,8 229.3 306.0 348.2 305.7 242.4 229.6 306.1 345.8 307.1 246 5 229.6 IN D U S T R IA L C O M M O D IT IE S See footnotes at end of table. 88 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 406.5 733.4 761 2 698.8 706.1 538.1 539.6 452.3 562.3 1,130.1 1,190.0 408.7 404.9 735.3 733.6 754.6 758.0 703 4 683.6 668.6 658.0 644.8 651.9 r665 5 671.6 674 3 675.7 672.7 538.7 533.4 535.6 538.6 538.0 535.2 r534.1 535.5 534.0 536.1 536.7 452.3 450.9 450.9 447.3 438.4 M38.4 447.3 438.4 434.6 453.9 453.5 1,181.2 1,147.3 1,154.7 1,180.0 1,156.1 1.156.7 r1,155.1 1,151.2 1,148.2 1,149.3 1,130.7 409.9 410.8 410.8 411,4 409.2 412.2 r419.4 425.1 425.9 428.2 423.9 720.0 719.7 692.9 678.0 678.0 678.0 r677.9 676.1 675.5 676.1 676.1 754 2 720.6 692 8 666.6 645.9 659.3 r684.2 694.9 702.4 701.1 701.8 24. [1967 C on tin u ed — P roducer Price Indexes, by com m odity groupings 100 unless otherwise specified] 1982 A nnual C o m m o d ity g ro u p a n d s u b g ro u p Code 1983 av erag e 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June1 J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. IN D U S T R IA L C O M M O D IT IE S — C o n tin u e d 09 09-1 09-11 09-12 09-13 09-14 09-15 09-2 Pulp, paper, and allied p ro d u c ts ........................................................ Pulp, paper,and products,excluding building paper and board W o od pulp........................................................................................... W astepaper........................................................................................ Paper ................................................................................................. Paperboard ........................................................................................ Converted paper and paperboard p ro d u c ts .................................. Building paper and board ............................................................... 288.7 273.2 379.0 <2) 286.3 254.9 264.4 239.5 289.8 270.3 350.4 (2) 285.4 248.0 264.0 242.1 289.8 269.4 347.3 (2) 280.6 247.6 264.7 241.0 290.5 268.8 347.2 (2) 279.2 244,1 264.8 242.0 293.6 269.8 346.6 (2) 279.3 243.3 265.0 241.1 294.2 268.7 345.7 <2) 278.8 244.1 265.1 241.4 294.8 268.7 343.0 (2) 278.4 246.3 265.1 244.2 295.4 268.5 342.5 (2) 278.5 248.1 264.2 247.0 296.0 268.7 343.2 (2) 279.0 248.7 264.1 249.3 r297.0 r269.2 r344.9 (2) r279.5 r249.4 r264 5 255 7 297.7 269.9 347.5 (2) 281.7 249.5 264.5 256.2 298.0 270.1 348.2 (2) 281.0 250.4 265.0 252.1 299.1 271.7 348.4 (2) 285.3 252.8 265.3 252.8 300.4 273.0 348.6 (2) 286.6 255.5 266.5 254.7 10 10-1 10-17 10-2 10-3 10-4 10-5 10-6 10-7 10-8 Metals and metal p ro d u c ts .................................................................. Iron and s te e l..................................................................................... Steel mill p ro d u c ts ........................................................................... Nonferrous m e ta ls ........................................................................... Metal containers .............................................................................. H a rd w a re ........................................................................................... Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings ............................................ Heating e q u ip m e n t........................................................................... Fabricated structural metal products ............................................ Miscellaneous metal p ro d u c ts ........................................................ 301.6 339.0 349.5 263.6 328.5 280.3 278.7 237.2 304.8 282.3 301.6 337.6 349.8 262.9 329.7 283.0 277.8 238.4 305.9 284.1 300.5 335.9 348.6 261.7 329.0 283.1 278.3 238.8 305.3 283.4 299.9 332.8 344.7 263 2 328.3 285.8 279.2 239.3 304.7 283.2 300.3 333.3 343.7 267.0 327.9 287.2 280.6 240.7 303.6 279 1 304.7 339.9 351.1 275.8 331.1 287.9 283.5 240.7 302.8 279.0 304.4 341.6 349.8 270.6 331.4 288.2 285.6 241.1 303.7 280.4 304.6 341.5 349.7 271.8 331.9 288.6 287.7 242.3 302.5 280.7 306.1 340.9 349.8 277.7 337.1 288.5 289.1 242.7 302.1 280.8 r306.3 r341.3 r350.1 r275.7 r337.4 r291.5 r290 8 r243.0 r302.0 r283.4 307.4 341.3 349.9 277 6 337.4 289.7 292 1 249.0 302 2 287.4 308.5 342.8 351.4 279.6 338.0 289.8 291.9 244.8 302.8 287 6 310.9 347.6 357.7 282 1 338.3 289.8 291.5 244.7 303.8 287 7 310.7 348.2 358.1 279 8 338.3 290 0 292 7 245.0 304.4 288 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 equipm ent......................................... Metalworking machinery and e q u ip m e n t...................................... General purpose machinery and equipment ............................... Special Industry machinery and equipm ent.................................. Electrical machinery and equipm ent............................................... Miscellaneous machinery ............................................................... 278.8 311.1 343.9 320.9 304.0 325.1 231.6 268.4 281.1 317.5 347.6 323.1 305.9 327.8 232.6 271.6 281.8 318.7 347.9 323.5 306.4 329.1 233.7 272.0 282.4 320.7 348.1 323.6 307.0 329.9 234.2 272.3 283.3 322.4 348.3 324.1 307.4 331.8 235.2 272.9 284.3 323 3 349.3 325.2 307.9 332.6 237.2 272.7 284.7 323.5 349.6 325.5 307.5 333.6 237.5 273.7 285.4 323 9 350 9 326.2 308.2 334.5 238.4 274.2 286.0 326.4 352.3 326.7 308.4 335.8 238.5 275.3 r286 2 r326.4 352.5 r327 0 r308 4 r336.7 r238 8 r275.0 286.9 326 2 352.7 326.5 308.4 337.8 240.8 274.9 287.1 327.1 352.8 326.1 308.2 338.9 241.2 275.0 287.5 328.0 353.4 326.3 308.1 339.7 242.1 274.5 287.8 327 9 353.5 326.5 308.3 340.5 242 5 274.9 12 12-1 12-2 12-3 12-4 12-5 12-6 Furniture and household d u ra b le s ..................................................... Household furniture ........................................................................ Commercial fu rn itu re ........................................................................ Floor c o ve rin g s ................................................................................. Household appliances ..................................................................... Home electronic equipment ........................................................... Other household durable g o o d s ..................................................... 206.9 229.8 275.5 181.2 199.1 88.1 289.3 208.9 231.2 278.3 181.6 201.3 87.8 296.5 208.9 231.4 278.6 181.3 201.2 87.0 297.2 209.2 232.0 278.5 181.5 201.8 87.1 298.1 210.7 231.9 281.1 182.2 203.9 87.3 302.8 212.5 232.6 282.2 182.1 204.9 87 0 314.8 212.3 231.1 285.1 182.0 205.0 87.0 312.9 212.8 231.8 286.2 182.2 206.3 86.6 312.0 213.6 234.4 285.9 182.1 207.5 86.4 312.7 r214.0 r235.0 r286.9 M81.4 r207 5 r86 5 r314.3 214.4 235.3 287.9 185.1 207.4 86.1 313.5 214.5 235.4 287 2 188.1 207.3 86.0 312.3 214.9 236.3 287.7 188.2 207.6 85.8 313.0 215.1 237.1 287.9 188.1 207.6 85.8 313.1 13 13-11 13-2 13-3 13-4 13-5 13-6 13-7 13-8 13-9 Nonmetallic mineral products ........................................................... Fat g la s s ........................................................................................... Concrete in g re d ie n ts ........................................................................ Concrete products ........................................................................... Structural clay products, excluding refractories ......................... Refractories........................................................................................ Asphalt ro o fin g ................................................................................. Gypsum products ........................................................................... Glass containers .............................................................................. Other nonmetallic minerals ........................................................... 320.2 221.5 310.0 297 8 260.8 337.1 298.4 256.1 355.5 471.8 321.1 221.1 309.9 298.6 264.0 340.8 406.7 255.1 358.5 470.4 321.2 225.3 310.0 298.2 264.8 337.2 399.0 255.0 357 8 471.3 320.5 225 3 306.7 298.5 264.8 337.2 397.0 253 9 357.6 471.0 321.5 229.7 307.2 299.4 264.9 337.7 393.7 263.1 356.6 471.5 322.3 229.7 310.0 300.1 264.3 337.7 380.4 267.4 355.8 476.1 322.0 229 7 308.5 300.4 270.7 337.7 374.7 265.9 354.1 476.4 324.1 229.7 312.8 301.0 275.7 338.2 384.0 271.9 353.5 478.7 324.1 229.7 313.7 301.1 277.6 338.2 380.0 275.7 351 8 478.5 r324.5 229.7 r314 2 r301.6 r281.5 r336 8 r379.6 r273.8 r351 8 r479.5 325.4 229.8 315.4 302 2 281.7 338.7 383.9 276.0 351.7 480.8 326.2 229.8 317.2 302 3 281.7 339.9 381.9 289 2 351 3 481.5 327.2 229.6 318.9 302.8 281.7 340.7 385.7 295.7 351.2 482.4 327.9 229 5 318.8 303 3 282.8 345.6 385.0 304.3 351.1 482.7 14 14-1 14-4 Transportation equipment (12/68 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................... Motor vehicles and equipm ent........................................................ Railroad equipm ent........................................................................... 249.7 251.3 346.5 256.0 257.8 350.8 256.3 257.8 350.8 257.5 258.1 350.8 256.3 257.0 350.8 255.8 256.3 350.5 255.2 255.4 350 3 255.6 255.9 350.0 255.8 256.2 350.4 r256.1 r256.7 r350.1 256.4 256.7 358.1 257.0 256.9 357.8 250.3 248.9 357.5 261 2 261.1 355.4 15 15-1 15-2 15-3 15-4 15-5 15-9 Miscellaneous p ro d u cts..................................................................... Toys, sporting goods, small arms, a m m u n itio n ......................... Tobacco products ........................................................ N o tio n s .................................................. Photograhic equipment and supplies ............................................ Mobile homes (12/74 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................... Other miscellaneous p ro d u c ts ............................... 276.4 221.5 323.1 277.0 210.4 161.9 338.3 285.4 221.2 365.4 280.1 209.7 162.6 345.2 285.2 221.3 364.5 279.8 209.7 161.6 345.1 290.4 223.7 382.9 279.8 210.0 161.7 351.6 285.7 222.7 356.2 280.5 210.0 161.8 350.8 288.8 225 3 356.4 280.6 211.8 161.7 359.8 287.4 225.7 353.8 280.6 216.6 162.9 350.5 287.4 226 3 354.1 280.3 216.6 162.3 350 3 287.1 226.0 353.8 280.3 216.6 162.4 349.2 288 0 r225.9 r352.1 280.3 r216.5 r163 1 r353.4 291.7 224.8 373.5 280.3 216.8 163.4 353.5 291.5 225.0 373.3 279.7 216.9 163.5 352.3 291.3 225 3 376.5 79.7 216.9 164.0 349.0 291.2 225.3 376.7 279.7 217.1 164.2 347.9 'Data for June 1983 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. 6Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month. r = revised. 89 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 25. P roducer Price Indexes, for special com m odity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] A nnual C o m m o d it y g r o u p in g 1982 A ll c o m m o d itie s — le s s (a r m p ro d u c ts A ll fo o d s P r o c e s s e d fo o d s Industrial commodities less f u e l s .................................................. Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... Hosiery .............................................................................................. Underwear and nightwear ............................................................... Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber and fibers and y a rn s ..................................................................... 1982 1983 av e ra g e 303.0 254,4 256.0 272.8 138.2 138.3 217.6 O c f. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. 304.7 252.8 256.2 274.4 137.4 138.7 220.1 305.1 251.9 254.7 274.4 137.1 139.7 219.7 305.4 252 7 254.7 274.9 136.8 139.7 219.7 304.4 252.4 255.8 275.4 136.7 141.7 223.3 304 9 255.7 259.3 277.0 136.8 144.5 222 6 304.5 255.8 258.9 276.9 137.2 144.5 223.8 303.8 258.2 259.5 277.6 137.4 144.5 223.4 304.8 258.2 259.6 278 2 137.7 144.5 223.5 '306.0 r256.6 '257.9 '278 7 r137 4 144.5 '222.7 M ay June1 J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. 307.1 256 4 258.0 279.5 137 7 144.5 223.2 308.2 257.5 258.1 280 4 138.8 145.6 223.5 308.4 261.0 261.3 279.8 138.7 145.6 224.4 309.5 261.1 259.3 281.8 139.2 145.6 224.2 283.8 281.8 282 3 281.4 280.8 281.4 280.7 281.8 281.6 r281.5 282.5 285.5 285.0 286.4 Pharmaceutical preparations............................................................ Lumber and wood products, excluding m lllw o rk ......................... Steel mill products, including fabricated wire products ............ Finished steel mill products, excluding fabricated wire products ........................................................................................ Finished steel mill products, including fabricated wire products ........................................................................................ 206.0 288.8 349.4 211.7 282.5 349.1 212.3 283.4 348.5 212.8 289.6 344.8 215.8 300.7 343.1 219.4 314.3 349.9 220.3 317.2 348.4 223.3 ' 320.8 348.4 223 5 324 3 348.5 '223.6 r338.8 r348 7 226.0 337.6 348.4 226.6 331.0 349.8 227.2 317.6 355.4 229.5 317.4 355.8 348.4 348.6 348.0 344.0 342.1 349 8 348.3 348.4 348.5 '348.8 348.5 350.1 356.7 357.2 348.1 347.8 347.2 343.3 341.6 348.5 347.0 347.0 347.1 '347.4 347.0 348.4 354.4 354.8 Special metals and metal products ............................................... Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ............................................................... Copper and copper p rod ucts............................................................ Machinery and motive p ro d u c ts ...................................................... Machinery and equipment, except electrical ............................... 286.6 291.6 185.5 272.1 306.4 289.5 293.0 178.8 276.4 309.4 288.9 292 5 181.2 277.0 310.0 288 7 292.5 181.8 277.9 310.6 288.6 291.1 190.7 277.8 311.3 290.9 291.3 201.5 278.2 311.9 290 3 292.3 198.9 278.1 312.2 290.7 292 2 200.9 278.7 312.9 291.7 292.6 206.7 279.2 313.8 '292.0 r294 0 r201.3 r279.4 r313.9 292 7 295.5 202.2 279.9 313.9 293.5 295.9 201.2 280 3 314.1 291.5 296 2 198.0 277.5 314.2 296.5 296.7 190.5 282 6 314 5 Agricultural machinery, including tractors .................................. Metalworking m a ch in e ry.................................................................. Total tractors ..................................................................................... Agricultural machinery and equipment less p a rts ......................... 323.1 350.4 355.0 313.8 330.6 354.1 361.4 320.1 332.2 354.2 361.4 321.5 335 1 354.1 364.2 324.3 337.0 354.6 365.6 325.9 337.7 355.7 365.6 326.6 337.8 355.6 365.7 326.8 338.2 356.3 366.1 327.1 341.7 358.0 370.5 330.1 r341.8 '357.8 370.6 '330.2 341.4 357.7 370.7 329.8 342.4 357.6 369.9 330.9 343.5 357.3 372.5 332 0 343.2 357.2 372.6 331.9 Farm and garden tractors less parts ............................................ Agricultural machinery, excluding tractors less parts ................ Construction m a te ria ls ..................................................................... 327.8 319.6 288 0 336.1 326.4 288.0 336.1 329.3 287.8 340.3 331.1 287.9 342 2 333.1 290.3 342 2 334.4 294.6 342.2 334.5 295.0 342.2 335.2 296 1 348.8 336.2 296.8 348.8 r336.4 '298.6 348.8 335.6 299.1 347.6 338.4 299.8 350.6 337.9 299 8 350.7 337.3 300 4 Aug. S e p t. O c t. 'D ata for June 1983 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. 26. r = revised, P roducer 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 1982 1983 av erag e 1982 O c t. Nov. D ec. Jan. Feb. M a r. A p r. M ay June' J u ly Total durable goods ........................................................................ Total nondurable goods .................................................................. 279.0 315.3 281.2 314.3 281.2 315.3 282.0 315.3 282 6 313.3 284.8 313.4 284.6 313.0 285.3 312.4 286.0 313.5 '286.7 r314.5 287.3 315.5 287.8 318.2 286.7 319 9 289.2 319.5 Total m anufactures........................................................................... Durable ..................................................................................... Nondurable .............................................................................. 292.7 279.8 306.4 293.8 282.3 306.0 293.9 282.4 306.1 294.3 283.2 305.9 293.5 283.7 303.8 293.9 285.7 302 5 293.2 285.3 301.4 292.7 286.0 299.7 293.7 286.7 301.0 r295.0 r287 3 '303.1 296.1 287.9 304.7 297.1 288.3 306.4 297 3 287.1 308.1 298.8 289 7 308.3 Total raw or slightly processed goods ......................................... Durable ..................................................................................... Nondurable ........................................................................... 331.2 233.8 337.3 327.9 224.2 334.5 330.9 219.2 338.1 331.6 217.4 339.0 330.4 224.2 337.2 335.2 235.4 341.5 337.3 243.3 343.2 340.4 244.1 346.5 340.9 246.1 346.8 '339.0 '249.4 '344.6 338.3 250 7 343.7 343.7 257.6 348 9 346.0 261.5 351.1 343.6 260.6 348 6 'Data for June 1983 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. 90 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised, 27. P roducer P rice Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] 1972 A nnual In d u s t r y d e s c r ip t io n code 1982 1983 av erag e O c t. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. M ar. A p r. M ay June1 J u ly Aug. S e p t. O c t. 175.2 312.2 925.8 151.2 177.1 312.5 945.9 151.7 177.1 308.3 969.0 151.7 177.1 312.5 958.4 151.7 177.1 306.2 945.2 153.6 177.1 289.5 931.2 156.3 177.1 285.4 934.4 158.4 177.1 272.9 922.1 164.3 177.1 268.7 921.8 164.3 177.1 254.1 '924.2 164.3 177.1 237.5 917.4 164.3 177.1 231.2 916 6 164.3 177.1 243.3 920.8 164.3 177.1 283.3 908.0 171.7 1982 M IN IN G 1011 1092 1311 1455 Iron ores (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................... Mercury ores (12/75 = 100) ...................................... Crude petroleum and natural gas ............................... Kaolin and ball clay (6/76 = 1 0 0 ) ............................... 2021 2044 2067 Creamery b u tle r ............................................................... Rice milling ..................................................................... Chewing g u m .................................................................. 276.0 185.1 304.1 276.8 183 0 304.8 276.5 175.2 306.0 277.8 196.1 306.1 275 5 191.3 326.0 275.6 183.0 326.0 275.6 183.0 326.1 275.6 188.9 326.1 275.6 191.3 326.1 275.6 194.5 327.2 275 6 193.7 327.2 276.1 198.1 327.3 278.4 201.1 327.3 278.1 196.7 327.3 2074 2083 2091 2098 Cottonseed oil m ills ......................................................... Malt .................................................................................. Canned and cured seafoods (12/73 = 100) ............ Macaroni and sp a g h e tti................................................... 168.3 256.9 187.0 258.5 157.6 251 2 186.3 255.5 '164.1 240.6 186.4 255.5 169.4 240.6 186.6 255.5 157.5 232.6 182.8 255.5 173.4 232.6 179.2 255.5 167.1 232.6 177.9 255.5 186.8 232.6 177.7 255.5 186.2 232 6 175.7 255.5 179.2 232.6 173.4 255.5 192.4 232.6 173.7 255.5 220.6 232.6 169.4 255.5 265.6 232.6 169.8 255.5 256.5 232.6 170.2 258.6 2251 2261 2262 2284 2298 Women’s hosiery, except socks (12/75 = 100) . . . Finishing plants, cotton (6/76 = 100) ...................... Finishing plants, synthetics, silk (6/76 = 100) . . . . Thread mills (6/76 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................ Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100) ............................ 116.8 139.5 128.2 157.2 141.5 116.9 136.8 127.5 157.9 142.6 118.5 136.2 127.8 157.9 142.6 118.3 136.1 127.3 157.8 142.6 118.5 135.3 125.7 157.9 142.6 122 6 136.0 126.7 161.9 142.7 122.7 136.1 126 2 165.6 142.8 122.7 139.8 127.2 165.7 137.6 122.7 138.0 126.9 165.7 137.6 '122.7 132.9 '125.9 165.7 137.6 122.9 132.6 125.1 165.7 137.6 123.0 133.8 127.2 165.7 137.6 123.0 133.5 125.8 166.1 139.0 123.0 134.2 127.2 166.1 139.0 2323 2361 2381 Men's and boys’ neckwear (12/75 = 100) ............. Children’s dresses and blouses (12/77 = 100) . . . . Fabric dress and work gloves ...................................... 119.5 120.6 292.1 121.3 118.6 287.4 121.3 117.0 287.4 121.3 117.0 287.4 121.3 117.0 288.8 121.3 117.0 288.8 121.3 115.5 288.8 121.3 115.5 291.0 121.3 115.5 291.7 121.3 117.0 291.7 121.3 117.0 296.3 121.3 117.0 296.3 123.5 117.0 296.3 123.5 117.0 296.3 2394 2396 2448 2521 Canvas and related products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............ Automotive and apparel trimmings (12/77 = 100) Wood pallets and skids (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... Wood office fu rn itu r e ...................................................... 145.4 131.0 145.6 270.3 147.3 131.0 144.3 271.4 147.3 131.0 144.2 271.4 147.3 131.0 144.6 271.4 148.7 131.0 144.6 271.4 148 7 131.0 145.2 273.4 146.2 131.0 145.7 279.6 146.2 131.0 146.9 282 5 146.2 131.0 148.5 282.5 '146.2 131.0 '149.5 '282.5 146.8 131.0 150.8 284.7 146.8 131.0 151.2 284.7 146.8 131.0 150.9 284.7 148.5 131.0 151.4 284.7 2654 2655 2911 2952 Sanitary food containers ............................................... Fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) Petroleum refining (6/76 = 100) ............................... Asphalt felts and coating (12/75 = 100) ................... 259.7 177.8 278.3 173.5 261.7 177.9 278.3 177.2 261.7 180.7 280.1 173.7 261.7 183.8 278.3 172.9 261.7 183,8 267.2 171.4 261.7 183.8 257.4 165.8 265.1 183.8 250.4 163.2 265.2 185.6 240.6 166.9 265.2 185.6 246.0 165.1 '265.2 185.9 '254.0 '164.9 268 6 187.7 256.3 166.8 268.7 187.7 258.1 165.8 269.3 187.7 257.8 167.4 270.6 187.8 258.0 167.1 3251 3253 3255 3259 Brick and structural clay tile ......................................... Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) ................ Clay refractories............................................................... Structural clay products, n.e.c........................................ 307.4 140.6 352.8 219.7 314.0 140.7 357.0 219.0 315.5 140.7 350.3 218.9 315.5 140.7 350.3 219.0 315.7 140.7 351.1 219.0 315.6 140.7 351.1 215.7 328.3 140.7 351.2 215.7 332.2 140.7 352.2 232.7 333.8 142,4 352.2 234.7 '334.6 '149.6 '349.4 '234.7 337.5 146.8 353.0 235.4 337.5 146.8 355.3 235 4 337.5 146.8 356.8 235.5 339.5 146.8 366.0 235.7 3261 3262 3263 3269 3274 Vitreous plumbing fix tu r e s ............................................ Vitreous china food utensils ......................................... Fine earthenware food u te n s ils ...................................... Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ................... Lime (12/75 = 100) ...................................................... 265.0 357.8 318.2 167.3 186.3 269.1 360.8 323.5 169.6 187.7 270.3 370.2 324.8 171.9 187.5 269.7 377.7 326.0 173.7 185.7 272.1 380.1 365.7 186.5 187.3 273.3 380.1 365.7 186.6 185.5 275.1 380.1 365.7 186.6 185.1 275.3 380.1 365.7 186.6 187.8 276.1 380.1 365.9 186.6 185.2 276.9 369.2 '366.5 '186.6 '186.2 277.2 369.2 364.3 183.8 187.3 277.2 369.2 364.3 183.8 187.9 281 3 369.2 364.3 183.8 186.6 283.7 369.2 364.3 183.8 186.2 3297 3482 3623 Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 1 0 0 ) ............................ Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ...................... Welding apparatus, electric (12/72 = 1 0 0 ) ................ 201.8 164.2 239.6 203.8 150.1 243.0 203.7 150.6 243.3 203.6 174.1 243.3 203.7 175.1 243.6 203.6 175.1 244.0 203.6 181.6 243.4 203.8 181.6 243.3 203.6 181.6 243.1 '203.6 '181.6 '242.3 203.8 187.6 238.4 203.8 187.6 238.4 203.8 187.6 238.5 204.0 187.6 238.7 3636 3641 3648 3671 3942 Sewing machines (12/75 = 100) ................................ Electric la m p s ................................................................... Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ................ Electron tubes, receiving type ...................................... Dolls (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................................... 154.6 294.0 170.0 382.1 136.7 154.2 302.9 171.3 380.3 136.8 154.2 303.0 171.3 414.0 136.8 154.2 303.4 171.4 414.1 136.5 154.2 306.0 171,4 431.6 137.1 154.4 311.5 171.5 432.0 136.8 155.0 311.4 171.6 431.9 . 136.8 156.8 313.8 172.6 432.1 137.7 156.8 313.8 172.6 432.1 137.7 '156.8 316.7 173.1 432.2 '137.7 156.1 319.4 173.4 432.4 137.3 156.1 319.8 173.4 432.4 137.3 156.1 332.4 173.6 432.6 137 3 156.1 332.7 173.7 432.9 137.3 3944 3955 3995 3996 Games, toys, and children’s vehicles ......................... Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 100) . . . Burial caskets (6/76 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................... Hard surface floor coverings (12/75 1 0 0 ) ............. 234.0 140.0 148.4 155.9 235.3 139.3 150.8 158.9 235.3 139.2 150.8 158.9 235.5 139.4 150.8 156.8 235.3 139.2 147.0 159.2 243.4 139.2 152.1 159.2 241.8 139.2 152.1 159.2 242.2 139.2 152.1 159.7 242.2 139 2 152.1 159.6 '242.2 139.2 152.1 '159.6 231.9 139.2 155.4 162.0 231.9 139.2 155.4 163.4 232.1 139.2 155.4 163.5 232.1 139.3 156.0 163.5 M A N U F A C T U R IN G 1Data for June 1983 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 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised, 91 PRODUCTIVITY DATA P r o d u c t i v i t y d a t a arc compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from establishment data and from estimates of compensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board. the components of unit nonlabor payments except unit profits. Unit profits Definitions estimate of gross product by the constant dollar estimate, making the include corporate profits and inventory valuation adjustments per unit of output. The implicit price deflator is derived by dividing the current dollar deflator, in effect, a price index for gross product of the sector reported. Output is the constant dollar gross domestic product produced in a given period. Indexes o f output per hour of labor input, or labor productivity, Hours of all persons describes the labor input of payroll workers, self- measure the value o f goods and services produced per hour of labor. employed persons, and unpaid family workers. Output per all employee Compensation per hour includes wages and salaries of employees plus hour describes labor productivity in nonfinancial corporations where there employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plants. are no self-employed. 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 compensation per hour is com pensation per hour adjusted by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. Unit labor cost measures the labor compensation cost required to pro duce one unit o f output and is derived by dividing compensation by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, interest, and in direct taxes per unit of output. They are computed by subtracting com pensation o f all persons from the current dollar gross domestic product and dividing by output. In these tables, unit nonlabor costs contain all 28. Notes on the data In the 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 man ufacturing 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. A nnual indexes of productivity, hourly com pensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1 9 5 0 -8 2 [1977 = 100] Ite m Business sector: Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ............................ Compensation per h o u r ......................................... Real compensation per hour ............................... Unit labor c o s t s ..................................................... Unit nonlabor paym ents......................................... Implicit price d e fla to r ............................................ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ............................ Compensation per h o u r ......................................... Real compensation per hour ............................... Unit labor c o s t s ..................................................... Unit nonlabor paym ents......................................... Im plicit price d e fla to r ............................................ Nonfinance corporations: Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ............................ Compensation per h o u r ......................................... Real compensation per h o u r ............................... Unit labor c o s t s ..................................................... Unit nonlabor paym ents...................................... Im plicit price d e fla to r............................................ Manufacturing: Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ............................ Compensation per h o u r ......................................... Real compensation per hour ............................... Unit labor costs ............................................ Unit nonlabor paym ents...................... Im plicit price d e fla to r ............................................ 1 Not available. 92 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 50.4 20.0 50.5 39.8 43.4 41.0 58.3 26.4 59.6 45.2 47.6 46.0 65.2 33.9 69.5 52.1 50.6 51.6 78.3 41.7 80.1 53.3 57.6 54.7 86.2 58.2 90.8 67.5 63.2 66.0 94.5 85.5 96.3 90.5 90.4 90.4 97.6 92.9 98.9 95.1 94.0 94.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.6 108.6 100.9 108.0 106.7 107.5 99.4 118.7 99.1 119.5 112.8 117.2 98.9 131.2 96.5 132.7 119.0 128.1 101.3 143.9 95.9 142.1 136.2 140.1 101.2 155.1 97.4 153.3 136.9 147.7 56.3 21.8 55.0 38.8 42.7 40.1 62.7 28.3 64.0 45.1 47.8 46.0 68.3 35.7 73.0 52.3 50.4 51.6 80.5 42.8 82.2 53.2 58.0 54.8 86.8 58.7 91.5 67.6 63.8 66.3 94.7 86.0 96.8 90.8 88.5 90.0 97.8 93.0 99.0 95.1 93.5 94.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.6 108.6 100.9 108.0 105.3 107.1 99.1 118.4 98.9 119.5 110.4 116.5 98.4 130.7 96.1 132.8 118.5 128.1 100.3 143.5 95.6 143.0 135.0 140.4 100.2 154.7 97.1 154.4 137.0 148.6 (1) <1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) <1) 68.0 37.0 75.8 54.4 54.6 54.5 81.9 43.9 84.3 53.5 60.8 56.1 87.4 59.4 92.7 68.0 63.1 66.3 95.5 86.1 96.9 90.2 90.8 90.4 98.2 92.9 98.9 94.6 95.0 94.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.9 108.5 100.7 107.5 104.2 106.4 100.7 118.7 99 1 117.8 106.9 114.1 99.8 130.9 96.3 131.2 117.4 126.4 102.3 143.6 95.7 140.3 134.4 138.3 102.8 154.8 97.2 150.6 137.6 146.1 r49.9 21.5 54.0 r43.0 r54.9 46.6 r56.8 28.8 65.1 r50.7 r59.0 53.2 r60.3 36.7 75.1 r60.8 r61.9 61.1 r74.7 42.8 82.3 r57.4 r69.1 61.0 79.1 57.6 89.8 7 2 .8 r65.2 70.5 r93.3 85.4 96.2 91.5 87.3 90.3 97.5 92 3 98.3 r94.7 93.7 94.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.8 108.3 100.6 107.4 102.5 106.0 101.5 118.8 99 2 117.0 99.9 112.0 101.7 132.7 97.6 130.5 97.7 120.9 105.3 145.8 97.2 138.5 110.2 130.2 106.5 158 2 99.3 148.5 109.2 137.0 r = revised. 29. Annual changes in productivity, hourly com pensation, unit costs, and prices, 1 9 7 2 -8 2 Annua Year ra te of ch an g e Ite m Business sector: Output per hour of all persons ................ Compensation per h o u r ............................ Real compensation per hour ................... Unit labor costs ......................................... Unit nonlabor p a ym e n ts............................ Im plicit price deflator ............................... Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons ................ Compensation per h o u r ............................ Real compensation per hour ................... Unit labor costs ......................................... Unit nonlabor p a ym e n ts............................ Implicit price deflator ............................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all em ployees............. Compensation per h o u r ............................ Real compensation per hour ................... Unit labor costs ......................................... Unit nonlabor p a ym e n ts............................ Implicit price deflator ............................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons ................ Compensation per h o u r ............................ Real compensation per hour ................... Unit labor costs ......................................... Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts ............................ Implicit price deflator ............................... 1979 1980 1981 1982 1 9 5 0 -8 2 1 9 7 2 -8 2 35 6.5 3.1 2.9 4.5 3.4 2.6 8.0 1.6 5.3 5.9 5.5 - 2 .4 9.4 - 1 .4 12.1 44 9.5 2.2 9.6 0.5 7.3 15.1 9.8 3.3 8.6 2.6 5.1 4.0 4.7 2.4 7.7 1.2 5.1 6.4 5.6 0.6 8.6 0.9 8.0 6.7 7.5 - 1 .2 9.4 - 1 .7 10.7 5.8 9.0 - 0 .5 10.5 - 2 .6 11.1 5.5 9.2 2.4 9.7 -0 .6 7.1 14.4 9.4 - 0 .1 7.7 1.5 7.9 0.5 5.4 2.2 6.6 2.1 4.3 3.7 4.1 0.2 7.9 6.8 7.6 3.7 6.7 3.3 2.8 3.2 3.0 2.4 7.6 1.3 5.0 1.3 3.8 - 2 .5 9.4 - 1 .4 12.2 5.9 10.2 2.0 9.6 0.4 7.5 16.7 10.3 3.2 8.1 2.2 4.8 5.7 5.1 2.2 7.5 1.0 5.2 6.9 5.7 0.6 8.6 0.9 8.0 5.3 7.1 - 1 .5 9.0 -2 .0 10.7 4.8 8.8 -0 .7 10.4 -2 .8 11.1 7.4 10.0 1.9 9.8 -0 .6 7.7 13.9 9.6 - 0 .1 7.8 1.6 7.9 1.4 5.8 1.8 6.3 1.8 4.4 3.7 4.2 0.8 8.8 0.1 8.0 6,8 7.6 2.9 5.7 2.4 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.4 7.5 1.2 4.9 1.5 3.8 - 3 .7 9.4 - 1 .5 13.6 7.1 11.4 2.9 9.6 0.4 6.5 20.1 10.9 2.9 7.9 2.0 4.9 4.6 4.8 1.8 7.6 1.1 5.7 5.3 5.6 0.9 8.5 0.7 7.5 4.2 6.4 - 0 .2 9.4 - 1 .7 9.6 2.6 7.2 -0 .9 10.3 - 2 .8 11.3 9.8 10.8 2.5 9.7 - 0 .6 7.0 14.5 9.4 0.5 7.8 1.6 7.3 2.4 5.7 (1> <1> (1) (1) (1> (1) 0.9 8.8 r4.9 5.4 2.0 '0.4 r0.6 0.5 5.4 7.2 '1.0 1.7 '- 3 . 1 0.3 - 2 .4 10.6 - 0 .3 13.3 '- 1 . 3 9.0 '3.1 11.9 2.5 '8.6 '25.7 13.1 4.4 8.0 2.1 3.4 '7.3 4.6 '2.6 8.3 1.8 '5.6 6.7 6.0 '0.9 8.3 0.6 '7.3 '2.8 6.0 0.7 9.7 - 1 .4 9.0 '- 2 . 1 5.7 '0.3 11.7 - 1 .6 '11.4 '- 1 . 1 7.9 3.5 9.9 '- 0 . 4 6.1 12.8 7.7 '1.3 8.5 2.2 '7.1 '- 0 . 2 5.2 2.4 6.4 1.9 3.9 2.2 3.4 1.9 9.4 0.6 7.4 4.1 6.5 0.9 0.0 7.8 7.1 7.6 r = revised. 1 Not available. 30. 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 Q uarterly indexes of productivity, hourly com pensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted [1977 = 100] Q u a r te r ly in d e x e s A nnual av e ra g e It e m Business sector: Output per hour of all persons ......................... Compensation per hour ...................................... Real compensation per h o u r ............................... Unit labor c o s ts ..................................................... Unit nonlabor payments ...................................... Implicit price d e fla to r............................................ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons ......................... Compensation per hour ...................................... Real compensation per h o u r ............................... Unit labor c o s ts ...................................................... Unit nonlabor payments ...................................... Im plicit price d e fla to r............................................ Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all e m p lo ye e s...................... Compensation per hour ...................................... Real compensation per h o u r ................................ Total unit c o s ts ...................................................... Unit labor c o s ts ............................................ Unit nonlabor c o s ts ...................................... Unit profits ............................................................ Implicit price d e fla to r............................................ Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons ......................... Compensation per hour ...................................... Real compensation per h o u r ................................ Unit labor c o s ts ..................................................... 1982 1981 I II III IV I II 1983 III IV 1 II III 1981 1982 101.3 143.9 95 9 142.1 136.2 140.1 101.2 155.1 97.4 153 3 136.9 147.7 100.5 139.7 96.3 139.0 131.2 136.3 101.1 142.2 96.1 140.7 133.4 138.2 102.3 145.5 95.6 142.3 139.9 141.5 101.2 148.2 95.6 146.4 140.2 144.3 101.1 151.6 97.1 149.9 137.0 145.5 100.7 153.9 97.4 152.9 137.0 147.5 101.1 156.5 97.1 154.7 136.3 148.5 101.9 158.7 98.0 155.6 137.4 149.4 102.5 160.7 99.4 156.9 140.8 151.5 103.8 162.1 99.2 156.2 145.8 152.7 105.0 164.3 99.5 156.5 148.2 153.7 100.3 143.5 95 6 143.0 135.0 140,4 100.2 154.7 97.1 154.4 137.0 148.6 100.1 139.3 96.0 139.2 130.3 136.2 100.1 141.8 95.8 141.6 132.2 138.4 101.1 145.1 95.3 143.5 138.3 141.8 99.9 147.7 95.4 147.8 139.5 145.0 100.0 151.3 96.9 151.3 136.4 146.4 99.9 153.5 97.1 153.6 137.7 148.3 100.4 156.1 96.9 155.4 136.5 149.1 100.8 158.3 97.8 157.1 137.2 150.5 101.7 161.0 99 5 158.3 140.7 152.4 103.3 162.7 99.6 157.4 145.9 153 6 104.5 164.5 99.5 157.3 149.3 154.6 102.3 143.6 95.7 142.7 140.3 149.4 104.1 138.3 102.8 154.8 97.2 153.5 150.6 161.8 88.9 146.1 101.8 139.5 96.2 138.4 137.0 142.3 103.0 134.3 102.1 142.0 95.9 141.1 139.0 147.0 100.3 136.4 103.0 145.0 95.2 143.6 140.7 151.9 108.6 139.6 102.2 147.8 95.4 147.7 144.6 156.6 104.2 142.7 102.4 151.7 97.2 150.9 148.1 158.9 90.8 144.0 102.3 153.7 97.2 153.1 150.2 161.2 90.3 145.9 103.2 156.1 96.9 153 8 151.1 161.3 91.2 146.6 103.4 158.1 97.7 156.3 152.9 165.9 83.0 147.9 104.3 160.4 99 2 156.7 153.9 164.7 96.1 149.7 105.9 161.6 98.9 155.3 152.5 163.1 115.0 150.7 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) <1) (1> 105.3 145.8 97.2 138.5 106.5 158.2 99.3 148.5 105.1 141.6 97.6 134.8 105.4 144.3 97.5 136 9 106.1 147.0 96.5 138.5 104.4 150.5 97.1 144.1 105.1 155.1 99.4 147.6 105.3 157,1 99.4 149.1 107.8 159.6 99.1 148.1 108.1 161.4 99.7 149.3 110.2 165.5 102.3 150.2 112.6 166.4 101.8 147.8 115.8 167.6 101.4 144.7 1Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 93 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Productivity 31. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly com pensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted at annual rate Q u a rte r ly p e rc e n t c h a n g e a t a n n u a l ra te Ite m Business sector: Output per hour of all persons................. Compensation per hour............................. Real compensation per h o u r.................... Unit labor costs......................................... Unit nonlabor payments .......................... Implicit price deflator................................ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons.................. Compensation per hour............................. Real compensation per h o u r.................... Unit labor costs......................................... Unit nonlabor payments .......................... Implicit price deflator................................ Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees ............ Compensation per hour............................. Real compensation per h o u r.................... Total units 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 h o u r.................... Unit labor costs...................................... 1Not available. 94 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11982 II 1 9 8 2 III 1 9 8 2 P e rc e n t c h a n g e fro m IV 1 9 8 2 11983 II 1 9 8 3 I1 1981 III 1 9 8 1 IV 1 9 8 1 s a m e q u a rte r a y e a r ag o 1 1982 II 1 9 8 2 to to to to to to to to to to to to I1 19 82 III 1 9 8 2 IV 1 9 8 2 1 1983 II 1 9 8 3 III 1 9 8 3 II 1 9 8 2 III 1 9 8 2 IV 1 9 8 2 I 1983 II 1 9 8 3 III 1 9 8 3 - 1 .6 6.4 1.1 8.1 - 0 .1 5.5 1.7 6.7 - 1 .0 5.0 - 2 .0 2.7 3.3 5.7 3.7 2.3 3.2 2.6 2.0 5.4 5.8 3.3 10.5 5.5 5.4 3.5 - 0 .7 - 1 .8 15.0 3.3 4.8 5.6 0.8 6.7 2.7 -0 .4 8.2 1.3 8.7 2.7 6.7 - 1 .1 7.5 1.6 8.7 - 2 .6 4.9 0.7 7.1 2.5 6.3 -2 .0 3.5 1.3 6.1 2.4 4.7 2.8 4.1 3.1 5.3 1.9 2.2 6.5 3.5 3.9 5.0 2.4 1.1 8.8 35 - 0 .4 5.8 0.5 6.2 3.7 5.4 2.3 7.2 - 0 .6 4.7 - 3 .4 2.2 1.3 5.8 3.7 4.4 2.0 3.7 3.7 6.8 7.2 3.0 10.6 5.3 6.6 4.3 0.1 - 2 .1 15.7 3.2 5.0 4.5 - 0 .3 - 0 .5 9.2 2.5 -9 3 8.2 1.3 8.5 4.2 7.1 - 0 .6 7.6 1.7 8.3 - 1 .3 5.2 0.8 7.2 2.6 6.3 -1 .6 3.7 1.7 6.4 2.7 4.6 3.1 4.1 3.4 6.0 2.6 2.5 6.0 3.6 4 1 53 27 1.2 93 37 - 0 .5 5.4 0.1 6.0 6.0 6.0 - 2 .1 5.4 3.8 6.4 - 1 .3 1.8 2.4 0.1 3.8 1.9 0.6 5.4 3.4 6.7 4.8 11.9 -3 1 .4 3.6 3.4 6.0 6.4 1.0 2.5 - 2 .8 79.9 5.1 6.5 2.9 - 1 .2 - 3 .5 - 3 .4 - 3 .8 104.7 2.5 (1) (1) (1) <1) (1) (1) (1) <1) 0.1 8.2 1.3 8.5 8.1 9.7 - 9 .9 7.0 0.2 7.6 1.7 7.1 7.4 6.2 -1 6 .1 5.0 1.2 7.0 2.4 5.8 5.7 6.0 20.3 3.6 1.8 5.8 2.1 3.8 3.9 3.7 5.8 4.0 36 52 17 1.4 1.5 1.2 27 3 33 0.8 5.1 - 0 .2 4.3 9.6 6.5 - 1 .2 - 2 .8 1.2 4.5 2.5 3.3 8.0 10 7 11.1 2.5 9.0 21 -2 1 12.1 3.1 - 1 .6 -8 .0 - 0 .1 8.8 1.9 8.9 1.6 8.6 2.6 6.9 3.5 7.3 2.7 3.6 4.8 6.7 3.0 1.8 69 59 25 -6.4 -0.9 III 1 9 8 2 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) 75 24 - 2 .3 WAGE AND COMPENSATION DATA D a t a f o r t h e e m p l o y m e n t c o s t i n d e x are reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics by a sample of 2,000 private nonfarm estab lishments and 750 State and local government units selected to represent total employment in those sectors. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensation information on five well-specified occupations. Data on negotiated wage and benefit changes are obtained from contracts on file at the Bureau, direct contact with the parties, and secondary sources. Definitions The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is a quarterly measure of the average change in the cost of employing labor. The rate of total compensation, which comprises wages, salaries, and employer costs for employee ben efits, is collected for workers performing specified tasks. Employment in each occupation is held constant over time for all series produced in the ECI, except those by region, bargaining status, and area. As a consequence, only changes in compensation are measured. Industry and occupational employment data from the 1970 Census of Population are used in deriving constant weights for the ECI. While holding total industry and occupational employment fixed, in the estimation of indexes by region, bargaining status, and area, the employment in those measures is allowed to vary over time in accord with changes in the sample. The rate of change (in percent) is available for wages and salaries, as well as for total compensation. Data are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey months o f March, June, September, and December. The statistics are neither an nualized nor adjusted for seasonal influence. Wages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions, ex cluding premium pay for overtime, work on weekends and holidays, and shift differentials. Production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-of-living adjustments are included; nonproduction bonuses are included with other supplemental pay items in the benefits category; and payments-in-kind, free room and board, and tips are excluded. B e n e f its include supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and savings plans, and hours-related and legally required benefits. Data on negotiated wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry collective bargaining agreements covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on compensation changes apply only to those agreements covering 5,000 workers or more. F i r s t - y e a r wage or compensation changes refer to average negotiated changes for workers covered by settlements reached in the period https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and implemented within the first 12 months after the effective date of the agreement. C h a n g e s o v e r th e lif e o f th e a g r e e m e n t refer to all adjustments specified in the contract, expressed as an average annual rate. These meas ures exclude wage changes that may occur under cost-of-living adjustment clauses, that are triggered by movements in the Consumer Price Index. W a g e - r a t e c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earn ings; c o m p e n s a t i o n c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of total wages and benefits. Effective wage adjustments reflect all negotiated changes implemented in the reference period, regardless of the settlement date. They include changes from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from contracts negotiated in an earlier period, and cost-of-living adjustments. The data also reflect contracts providing for no wage adjustment in the period. Effective adjustments and each of their components are prorated over all workers in bargaining units with at least 1,000 workers. Notes on the data The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quarter of 1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in the private nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee benefits were in cluded in 1980, to produce a measure of the percent change in employers’ cost for em ployees’ total compensation. State and local government units were added to the ECI coverage in 1981, providing a measure o f total compensation change in the civilian nonfarm economy. Data for the broad white-collar, blue-collar, and service worker groups, and the manufacturing, nonmanufacturing, and service industry groups are presented in the ECI. Additional occupation and industry detail are pro vided for the wages and salaries component of total compensation in the private nonfarm sector. For State and local government units, additional industry detail is shown for both total compensation and its wages and salaries component. Historical indexes (June 1981 = 100) of the quarterly rates of changes presented in the ECI are also available. For a more detailed discussion of the ECI, see chapter 11, “ The Em ployment Cost Index,” of the BLS H a n d b o o k o f M e t h o d s (Bulletin 2 1 3 4 1), and the M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w articles; “ Employment Cost Index; a measure of change in the ‘price of labor,” ’ July 1975; “ How benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost Index,” January 1978; and “ The Employment Cost Index: recent trends and expansion.” May 1982. Additional data for the ECI and other measures of wage and compen sation changes appear in C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e l o p m e n t s , a monthly publi cation of the Bureau. 95 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data 32. E m ploym ent Cost Index, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] P erce n t ch an g e 1981 S e r ie s C i v i l i a n w o r k e r s ' ....................................................................................................................................................... 1982 1983 3 m o n th s 1 2 m o n th s ended ended S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. 102.6 104.5 106.3 107.5 110.1 111.4 113.2 114.5 116.5 1.7 5.8 S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 3 Workers, by occupational group White-collar w o rk e rs .............................................................................. Blue-collar workers .............................................................................. Service workers ..................................................................................... Workers, by industry division Manufacturing ........................................................................................ N onm anufacturing................................................................................. Servces .............................................................................................. Public administration2 ..................................................................... 102.7 102.3 102 8 104.9 104.1 104.2 106.5 105.7 107.2 107.7 107.1 108.3 110.7 109.2 110.8 111.9 110.5 112.4 113.7 112.3 114.3 114.9 113.6 115.1 117.6 114.8 116.7 2.3 1.1 1.4 6.2 5.1 5.3 102.1 102.8 104.4 104.3 104.0 104.8 107.1 106.0 106.0 106.4 108.2 108.1 107.2 107.7 109.2 109.1 109.3 110.5 113.5 112.8 110.4 111.8 115.0 113.6 112.5 113.5 116.6 116.2 113.5 114.9 117.1 117.0 115.0 117.2 121.1 119.8 1.3 2.0 3.4 2.4 5.2 6.1 6.7 6.2 P r i v a t e i n d u s t r y w o r k e r s ' .............................................................................................................................. 102.0 104.0 105.8 107.2 109.3 110.7 112.6 113.9 115.6 1.5 5.8 101.8 102.2 101.9 104.0 104.0 103.1 105.8 105.6 106.7 107.2 107.0 107.9 109.5 109.0 109.6 110.8 110.3 111.8 112.8 112.1 113.8 114.2 113.5 114.6 116.5 114.6 115.1 2.0 1.0 .4 6.4 5.1 5.0 102.1 102.0 104.0 103.9 106.0 105.7 107.2 107.1 109.3 109.3 110.4 110.8 112.5 112.6 113.5 114.2 115.0 116.0 1.3 1.6 5.2 6.1 c 105.3 107.4 108.8 109.3 114.3 115.1 116.5 117.1 120.8 3.2 5.7 «105.7 104.2 107.8 105.9 109.1 108.2 109.5 108.9 114.9 112.7 115.8 113.0 117.0 114.9 117.5 115.8 121.5 118.0 3.4 1.9 5.7 4.7 105.8 106.0 106.3 105.0 104.3 107.9 107.9 108.3 107.8 106.0 109.0 108.9 109.3 109.5 108.1 109.4 109.1 109.5 110.3 109.1 114.9 114.8 115.6 115.3 «112.8 115.9 115.8 116.6 116.0 113.6 116.8 116.6 117.2 117.5 116.2 117.4 116.9 117.4 118.8 117.0 121.7 121.9 123.3 121.1 119.8 3.7 4.3 5.0 1.9 2.4 5.9 6.2 6.7 5.0 6.2 Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ........................................................................ Blue-collar workers ........................................................................... Service w o rk e rs ................................................................................. Workers, by industry division M anufacturing..................................................................................... Nonm anufacturing.............................................................................. S t a t e a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ........................................................................ Blue-collar workers ........................................................................... Workers, by Industry division Services .............................................................................................. S c h o o ls ........................................................................................... Elementary and secondary ..................................................... Hospitals and other services3 ..................................................... Public administration2 ..................................................................... 'Excludes farm, household, and Federal workers. C ons ists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities. 96 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in clu d e s, for example, library, social, and health services. c = corrected. 33. E m ploym ent C ost Index, w ages and salaries, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] P e rc e n t ch an g e 1982 1981 S e r ie s 1983 3 m o n th s 1 2 m o n th s ended ended S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 3 S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. ....................................................................................................................................................... 102.5 104.4 106.3 107.3 109.7 110.9 112.2 113.4 115.3 1.7 5.1 Workers, by occupational group White-collar w o rk e rs .............................................................................. Blue-collar workers .............................................................................. Service workers .................................................................................... 102.6 102.4 102.5 104.7 104.0 103.6 106.7 C105.5 106.8 107.6 106.7 107.9 110.4 108.6 110.1 111.4 109.8 111.8 113.0 110.8 113.2 114.2 112.0 113.9 116.7 113.1 115.1 2.2 1.0 1.1 5.7 4.1 4.5 Workers, by industry division Manufacturing ........................................................................................ Nonm anufacturing................................................................................. Services .............................................................................................. Public administration2 ..................................................................... 102.1 102.7 104.4 103.8 104.0 104.5 106.6 C105.5 105.9 106.5 108.6 107.5 107.0 107.5 109.5 108.4 108.8 110.1 113.2 111.9 109.8 111.3 114.4 112.6 111.0 112.7 115.8 114.6 112.0 114.0 116.3 115.4 113.3 116.1 120.1 118.2 1.2 1.8 3.3 2.4 4.1 5.4 6.1 5.6 C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 1 . 102.0 103.8 105.9 107.1 109.0 110.3 111.6 112.9 114,5 1.4 5.0 Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ........................................................................ Professional and technical w o r k e r s ............................................ Managers and administrators ..................................................... Salesworkers ................................................................................. Clerical w o rke rs.............................................................................. Blue-collar workers ........................................................................... Craft and kindred w o rk e rs ............................................................ Operatives, except tra n s p o rt........................................................ Transport equipment ope ra tive s.................................................. Nonfarm la b o re rs ........................................................................... Service w o rk e rs ................................................................................. Workers, by industry division M anufacturing..................................................................................... Durables........................................................................................... Nondurabies ................................................................................. Nonm anufacturing.............................................................................. Construction ................................................................................. Transportation and public u tilitie s ............................................... Wholesale and retail tr a d e ............................................................ Wholesale trade ........................................................................ Retail tra d e ................................................................................. Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ............................................ Services ........................................................................................... 101.8 103.3 101.6 98 0 102.7 102.3 102.9 102.1 101.0 101.5 101.8 103.9 105.5 102.8 101.9 104.2 103.9 104.3 104.1 102.7 103.3 102.7 106.2 108 0 105.8 102.2 107.0 105.4 106.2 105.4 103 2 104.1 106.7 107.3 109.4 107.2 101.8 108.3 106.6 107.6 106.6 104.1 105.1 107.9 109.4 111.8 108.5 104.5 110.3 108.5 109.6 108.3 106.0 106.5 109.3 110.6 112.9 109.3 106.2 111.6 109.7 111.2 109.3 106.9 107.8 111.4 112.2 114.8 112.0 105.7 113.4 110.7 112.2 110.0 108.0 109.0 112.9 113.6 115.9 114.0 107.1 114.6 111.9 113.4 111.1 110.3 109.8 113.5 115.9 119.9 114.8 108.4 116,7 112.9 114.3 112.3 110.7 110.8 113.7 2.0 3.5 .7 1.2 1.8 .9 .8 1.1 .4 .9 .2 5.9 7.2 5.8 3.7 5.8 4.1 4.3 3.7 4.4 4.0 4.0 102.1 102.1 102.0 102.0 103.0 102.0 101.3 102.0 101.0 98.3 103.6 104.0 104.5 103.1 103.8 104.3 103.6 102.3 103.4 101.9 102.3 105.8 105.9 106.3 105.3 105.9 105.9 105.7 103.9 106.3 103 0 103.7 108.8 107.0 107,4 106.3 107.1 107.3 106.9 105.8 108.9 104.5 102.4 110.0 108.8 109.0 108.5 109.1 109.1 109.5 106.5 109.0 C105.5 106.1 112.5 109.8 110.3 109.1 110.5 109.7 111.1 107.2 109.8 106.1 109.0 114.3 111.0 111.1 110.9 112.0 110.4 112.9 108.5 111.8 107.2 110.6 116.0 112.0 111.8 112.3 113.4 112.1 114.7 110.8 114.1 109.4 111.1 116.6 113.3 112.9 113.9 115.2 112.2 115,7 111.5 115.7 109.9 113.5 120.4 1.2 1.0 1.4 1.6 .1 .9 .6 1.4 .5 2.2 3.3 4.1 3.6 5.0 5.6 2.8 5.7 4.7 6.1 4.2 7.0 7.0 S t a t e a n d l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s ......................................................................................... 105.0 107.0 108.2 108.7 113.5 114.0 115.1 115.7 119.2 3.0 5.0 105.4 103.9 107.5 105.5 108.5 107.5 108.9 107.9 114.2 111.5 114.6 112.0 115.6 113.3 116.1 114.3 119.8 116.4 3.2 1.8 4.9 4.4 105.5 105 7 106.0 104.6 103.8 107.6 107.7 107.9 107.3 105.5 108.4 108.3 108.7 108.8 107.5 108.8 108.5 108.8 109.5 108.4 114.2 114.2 114.9 114.3 111.9 114.6 114.5 115.1 114.9 112.6 115.5 115.2 115.6 116.5 114.6 115.9 115.4 115.8 117.7 115.4 119.8 119.9 121.1 119.7 118.2 3.4 3.9 4.6 1.7 2.4 4.9 5.0 5.4 4.7 5.6 P r iv a te in d u s try w o r k e rs Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ........................................................................ Blue-collar workers ........................................................................... Workers, by industry division Services .............................................................................................. S c h o o ls ........................................................................................... Elementary and secondary ..................................................... Hospitals and other services3 ........................................................ Public administration2 ..................................................................... 1Excludes farm, household, and Federal workers. C onsists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis inclu d e s, for example, library, social and health services. c = corrected. 97 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data 34. E m ploym ent Cost Index, private industry w orkers, by bargaining status, region, and area size [June 1981 = 100] P erce n t ch an g e 1981 S e r ie s 1982 1983 3 m o n th s 1 2 m o n th s ended ended S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. D ec. M a rc h June S e p t. Workers, by bargaining status1 Union ........................................................................................................... Manufacturing ........................................................................................ Nonm anufacturing.................................................................................. 102.5 102.3 102.7 104.8 104.6 105.0 106.5 106.3 106.8 108.4 108.0 108.7 110.6 110.3 111.0 112.3 111.8 112.8 114.5 114.0 114.9 116.0 114.8 117.1 117.8 116.3 119.2 1.6 1.3 1.8 6.5 5.4 7.4 Nonunion .................................................................................................... Manufacturing ........................................................................................ N onm anufacturing................................................................................. 101.7 101.8 101.7 103.5 103.5 103.5 105.3 105.7 c 105.2 106.5 106.6 106.4 108.5 c108.4 108.6 109.7 109.2 109.9 111.5 111.2 111.6 112.8 112.3 113.0 114.4 113.8 114.7 1.4 1.3 1.5 5.4 5.0 5.6 Workers, by area size1 Metropolitan areas ..................................................................................... Other areas ................................................................................................. 102.1 101.8 104.1 103.2 105.7 106.2 107.2 107.0 109.4 108.6 110.9 109.1 112.9 110.8 114.2 112.3 116.0 113.4 1.6 1.0 6.0 4.4 Workers, by bargaining status1 Union ........................................................................................................... Manufacturing ........................................................................................ N onm anufacturing.................................................................................. 102.7 102.6 102.8 105.0 104.7 105.2 106.5 105.9 107.0 108.1 107.3 108.8 110.3 109.5 111.1 111.8 110.8 112.7 112.9 111.4 114.3 114.2 112.3 116.0 116.0 113.7 118.3 1.6 1.2 2.0 5.2 3.8 6.5 Nonunion .................................................................................................... Manufacturing ........................................................................................ N onm anufacturing................................................................................. 101.6 101.7 101.6 103.2 103.3 103.2 105.6 105.9 105.5 106.5 106.7 106.4 108.3 108.2 108.3 109.5 109.1 109.6 110.9 110.7 111.0 112.2 111.8 112.4 113.7 113.0 114.0 1.3 1.1 1.4 5.0 4.4 5.3 Workers, by region1 Northeast .................................................................................................... South ........................................................................................................... North Central .............................................................................................. W e s t.............................................................................................................. 101.7 101.9 101.6 103.2 104.4 102.8 103.3 105.1 106.1 105.7 104.7 107.9 106.7 107.4 106.1 108.6 109.7 108.8 107.6 110.7 111.5 109.8 108.6 112.0 112.0 111.4 110.1 114.1 113.6 112.5 111.5 114.9 115.3 114.3 112.8 116.5 1.5 1.6 1.2 1,4 5.1 5.1 4.8 5.2 Workers by area size1 Metropolitan areas ..................................................................................... Other areas ................................................................................................. 102.1 101.8 104.0 103.1 105.9 106.0 107.1 106.8 109.1 108.3 110.5 108.8 111.9 110.1 113.2 111.4 114.9 112.3 1.5 .8 5.3 3.7 S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 3 C O M P E N S A T IO N W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S 1The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see BLS H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 1910. 98 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis c = corrected, 35. W age and com pensation change, m ajor collective bargaining settlem ents, 1978 to date [In percent] 36. Effective w age adjustm ents in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 w orkers or m ore, 1978 to date Y e a r an d q u a rte r Year M e a s u re 1981 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983P 1982 IV I II III IV I II III Average percent adjustment (including no change): All in d u s trie s ........................................................................................... M anu facturing..................................................................................... Nonm anufacturing.............................................................................. 8.2 8.6 7.9 9.1 9.6 8.8 9.9 10.2 9.7 9.5 9.4 9.5 6.8 5.2 7.9 1.5 1.9 1.1 1.0 .9 1.1 2.0 1.0 2.7 2.4 1.7 2.9 1.3 1.5 1.2 0.3 -.4 .9 1.3 1.0 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 From settlements reached in p e rio d ..................................................... Deferred from settlements reached in earlier p e r io d ......................... From cost-of-living clauses .................................................................. 2,0 3.7 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.6 3.5 2.8 2.5 3.8 3.2 1.7 3.6 1.4 .4 .4 .6 .2 .6 .3 .4 1.4 .2 .5 1.3 .6 .6 4 .3 -.2 .4 .1 .2 1.0 .1 .2 .8 .2 — — — 8,648 7,852 3,225 2,878 3,423 3,760 3.441 2,998 3.139 2,883 Total number of workers receiving wage change (in thousands)1 ................................................................................. From settlements reached in p e r io d .............................................................................................. Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period .................................................................. From cost-of-living clauses .................................................................. Number of workers receiving no adjustments (in th o u sa n d s).................................................................................... — — — 2,270 1,907 604 204 511 620 825 444 542 444 — — — — — — 6,267 4,593 4,846 3,830 882 2,179 1,001 1,920 1,594 1,568 2,400 2,251 860 1,970 828 2,050 1,413 1.376 1,328 1,216 — — — 145 483 5,568 5,457 4,912 4,575 4,895 5,047 4,906 5,163 1The total number of workers who received adjustments does not equal the sum of workers that received each type of adjustment, because some workers received more than one type of adjustment during the period. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis p = preliminary, 99 WORK STOPPAGE DATA Estimates of days idle as a percent of estimated working time measures only the impact of larger strikes (1,000 workers or more). Formerly, these estimates measured the impact of strikes involving 6 workers or more; that is, the impact of virtually all strikes. Due to budget stringencies, collection of data on strikes involving fewer than 1,000 workers was discontinued with the December 1981 data. include all known strikes or lockouts involving 1,000 workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data are based largely on newspaper accounts and 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. W o r k stoppages 37. W ork stoppages involving 1,000 w orkers or m ore, 1947 to date N u m b e r o f s to p p a g e s M o n th a n d y e a r W o r k e r s in v o lv e d B e g i n n i n g in B e g i n n i n g in In e f f e c t m o n th o r y e a r d u r in g m o n th D a y s id le In e f f e c t m o n th o r y e a r d u r in g m o n th ( in th o u s a n d s ) (in th o u s a n d s ) P erce n t of N um ber e s t im a t e d n th o u s a n d s ) w o r k in g t im e 1947 1948 1949 1950 ........................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... 270 245 262 424 1,629 1,435 2,537 1,698 25,720 26,127 43,420 30,390 22 .38 .26 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 ................................................................................. ........................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... 415 470 437 265 363 1,462 2,746 1,623 1,075 2,055 15,070 48,820 18,130 16,630 21,180 .12 .38 .14 .13 .16 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 ................................................................................. ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................... 287 279 332 245 222 1 370 887 1 587 1,381 896 26,840 10,340 17,900 60,850 13,260 .20 .07 .13 .43 .09 1 9 6 1 ....................................................................................................... 1962 ....................................................................................................... 1963 ....................................................................................................... 1964 ....................................................................................................... 1965 ....................................................................................................... 195 211 181 246 268 1,031 793 512 1,183 999 10,140 11,760 10,020 16,220 15,140 .07 .08 .07 .11 .10 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... 321 381 392 412 381 1 300 2,192 1 855 1,576 2 468 16,000 31,320 35,567 29,397 52,761 .10 .18 .20 .16 .29 1 9 7 1 ....................................................................................................... 1972 ....................................................................................................... 1973 ....................................................................................................... 1974 ....................................................................................................... 1975 ....................................................................................................... 298 250 317 424 235 2 516 975 1 400 1 796 965 35,538 16,764 16,260 31,809 17,563 .19 .09 .08 .16 09 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... 231 298 219 235 187 1 519 1 212 1 006 1 021 795 23,962 21,258 23,774 20,409 20,844 .12 .10 .11 09 09 1 9 8 1 ........................................................................................................ 1982 ........................................................................................................ 145 96 729 656 16,908 9,061 .07 .04 1982 January ..................................................................... February ........................................................................ March .................................................................. April .............................................................................. May ........................................................................ June .............................................................................. J u ly .................................................................. A u g u s t........................................................................... S eptem ber..................................................................... October ..................................................................... 2 3 4 14 15 18 13 9 14 3 4 7 9 21 23 27 25 23 27 13 6.1 3.9 13.3 59.5 42.7 42.8 38.4 18.8 390.0 38.1 11.4 15.3 26.1 79.1 66.1 66.9 65.9 58.0 427.0 67.6 202.8 241.1 357.0 533.1 657.6 907.2 844.7 754.3 2,088.8 904.8 .01 .01 02 .03 .04 05 .04 .04 .11 .05 1983 b January ........................................................ February ........................................................................ March ........................................................... Apri .............................................................................. May ........................................................ June ............................................................... J u ly ........................................................................... A u g u s t........................................................................... S eptem ber.................................................................. October ........................................................................ 1 5 5 2 11 15 10 7 r7 10 3 7 10 9 16 24 23 19 r19 17 1.6 14.0 10.5 2.8 23.6 59.8 49.9 675.8 r21.7 62.9 38.0 50.4 54.9 52.4 32.9 79.7 85.1 730.4 r50 8 79.6 794.8 844.4 1,131.5 789.5 493.9 689.0 1,198.1 10,655.7 r574.6 1,152.2 .04 .05 05 .04 .03 .03 .07 .51 .03 .06 p = preliminary. 100 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis , = revised. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW Index of Volume 106 January 1983 through December 1983 101 INDEX OF VOLUME 106 JANUARY 1983 THROUGH DECEMBER 1983 ACCIDENTS (See Work injuries and illnesses.) ciation, December 1982. Papers from. 1983 Mar. 31-35. 1983 Apr. 25-29. AGRICULTURE CONSTRUCTION Employment and wages reported by California farmers in 1982. 1983 Oct. 27-31. APPRENTICESHIP (See Education and training.) Employment changes in construction: secular, cyclical, and seasonal. 1983 Mar. 11-17. Recent employment trends in the lumber and wood products industry. 1983 Aug. 20-24. ARBITRATION (See also Collective bargaining.) CONSUMER PRICE INDEX An experiment in the mediation of grievances. 1983 Mar. 23-30. Arbitrating discrimination grievances in the wake of Gardner-Denver. 1983 Oct. 3-10. for local areas. 1983 Mar. 2. Inflation patterns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Oct. 22-26. Reconciling the c p i -U and the pce Deflator: 3rd quarter. 1983 Feb. 37-38. c p i’ s ARMED FORCES DISABILITY Military spending. 1983 June. 43. Work disability. 1983 Oct. 2. AUTOMATION (See Technological change.) EARNINGS & WAGES BARGAINING (See Collective bargaining.) General BENEFITS (See Supplemental benefits.) BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS The AFL and a national BLS: labor’s role is crystallized. A centennial view, 1982 Mar. 21-29. CANADA Task force encourages diffusion of microelectronics in Canada. 1983 Oct. 25-29. Unemployment experience in Canada: a 5-year longitudinal analysis. 1983 Apr. 36-38. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (See also Arbitration.) Collective bargaining in 1982: results dictated by economy. 1983 Jan. 2837. Collective bargaining in 1983: a crowded agenda. 1983 Jan. 3-16. Do the 1982 concessions by unions mark a turning point in bargaining? 1983 Mar. 31-32. Implications of concession bargaining: lessons from the public sector. 1983 Mar. 33-35. Reforming the U.S. system of collective bargaining. 1983 Mar. 18-22. Will union concessions expand areas for bargaining? 1983 Mar. 32-33. COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ACT Job Training Partnership Act: new help for the unemployed. 1983 Mar. 3-10. CONFERENCES & CONVENTIONS Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Asso 102 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Comparable worth. 1983 Oct. 33. Comparing annual and weekly earnings from the Current Population Sur vey. 1983 Apr. 32-36. Compensation cost increases: slowdown continues in 1982. 1983 June 3941. Do the 1982 concessions by unions mark a turning point in bargaining? 1983 Mar. 31-32. Employment effects of minimum wages. 1983 Oct. 33-34. Married couples: work and income patterns. 1983 Dec. 26-29. Skill level differences in white-collar pay. 1983 Dec. 49-52. Role of education in lifetime earnings. 1983 Oct. 32-33. Wage rates before and after leaving school. 1983 Oct. 31-32. Work experience, earnings, and family income in 1981. 1983 Apr. 1320 . Specified industries and occupations Employment and wages reported by California farmers in 1982. 1983 Oct. 27-31. Hourly pay of contract cleaners lags but sweeps past weekly gains. 1983 Mar. 37-40. Pay in petroleum refineries outpaces manufacturing rise. 1983 Feb. 4243. Pay levels in hosiery manufacturing. 1983 Mar. 36-37. Wages of appliance repair technicians vary widely among metropolitan areas. 1983 Dec. 52-53. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for growth. 1983 Nov. 11-23. Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983. 1983 Aug. 8-14. R&D— productivity link. 1983 June. 42-43. EDUCATION AND TRAINING Helping ex-offenders enter the labor market. 1983. July. 25-30. Recent trends in higher education and labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 3941. Role of education in lifetime earnings, The. 1983 Oct. 32-33. Wage rates before and after leaving school. 1983 Oct. 31-32. Trends in major medical coverage during a period of rising costs. 1983 July. 11-16. HOURS OF WORK Job-creating performance of employee-owned firms. 1983 Aug. 15-19. Effects of selected variables on work hours of young women. 1983 July. 31-34. Industry diffusion indexes for average weekly hours. 1983 May. 33-36. Job commitment in America: is it waxing or waning? 1983 July. 17-24. Short workweeks during economic downturns. 1983. June. 3-11. EMPLOYMENT (See also Labor force.) HOUSING (See Construction.) Economic status. 1983 Aug. 2. Employment changes in construction: secular, cyclical, and seasonal. 1983 Mar. 11-17. Employment effects of minimum wages. 1983 Oct. 33-34. Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983. 1983 Aug. 8-14. High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 55-58. International comparisons of labor force participation, 1960-81. 1983 Feb. 23-36. Job outlook through 1995: industry output and employment. The. 1983 Nov. 24-36. Labor market contrasts: United States and Europe. 1983 Aug. 3-7. Married couples: work and income patterns. 1983 Dec. 26-29. Military spending. 1983 June. 43. Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. Recent employment trends in the lumber and wood products industry. 1983 Aug. 20-24. Short workweeks during economic downturns. 1983 June. 3-11. Trends in employment and unemployment in families. 1983 Dec. 21-25. U.S. Employment Service at 50: it too had to wait its turn, The. 1983 June. 12-19. Using a leading employment index to forecast unemployment in 1983. 1983 May. 30-32. Youth labor force marked turning point in 1982. 1983 Aug. 29-34. IMPORTS (See Foreign trade.) EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Arbitrating discrimination grievances in the wake of Gardner-Denver. 1983 Oct. 3-10. Comparable worth. 1983 Oct. 33. EUROPE INCOME (See Earning and wages.) INDEXES Compensation cost increases: slowdown continues in 1982. 1983 June. 39-41. Industry diffusion indexes for average weekly hours. 1983 May. 33-36. Reconciling the c p i -U and the pce Deflator: 3rd quarter. 1983 Feb. 37-38. U.S. foreign trade prices in 1982: import index falls, export indexes mixed. 1983 May. 20-29. U.S. import and export price indexes show declines during the first half. 1983 Jan. 17-23. Using a leading employment index to forecast unemployment in 1983. 1983 May. 30-32. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (See Labor-management relations.) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Asso ciation, December 1982. Papers from. 1983 Mar. 31-35. 1983 Apr. 25-29. INFLATION (See also Prices.) Inflation patterns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Oct. 22-26. INJURIES (See Work injuries.) INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS Labor market contrasts: United States and Europe. 1983 Aug. 3-7. International comparisons of labor force participation, 1960-81. 1983 Feb. 23-36. EXPORTS (See Foreign trade.) JAPAN FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT Japan’s low unemployment: economic miracle or statistical artifact? 1983 July. 3-10. Evolution of fair labor standards: a study in class conflict, The. A Review Essay. 1983 Aug. 25-28. FOREIGN TRADE Import prices decline, export indexes mixed in the first 6 months of 1983. 1983 Nov. 57-70. U.S. foreign trade prices in 1982: import index falls, export indexes mixed. 1983 May. 20-29. U.S. import and export price indexes show declines during the first half. 1983 Jan. 17-23. FRINGE BENEFITS (See Supplemental benefits.) HEALTH AND INSURANCE PLANS and other health plans: coverage and employee premiums. 1983 June. 28-33. h m o ’s https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT Job Training Partnership Act: new help for the unemployed. 1983 Mar 3-10. LABOR AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Evolution of fair labor standards: a study in class conflict. The. A Review Essay. 1983 Aug. 25-28. U.S. Employment Service at 50: it too had to wait its turn. The. 1983 June. 12-19. LABOR FORCE Aging of the U.S. population: human resource implications. The. 1983 May. 13-19. 103 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Index of Volume 106 Effects of selected variables on work hours of young women. 1983 July. 31-34. Estimating annual hours of labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 13-22. Helping ex-offenders enter the labor market. 1983 July. 25-30. International comparisons of labor force participation, 1960-81. 1983 Feb. 23-36. Japan’s low unemployment: economic miracle or statistical artifact? 1983 July. 3-10. Labor force statistics from a family perspective. 1983 Dec. 16-20. Labor market problems of older workers, The. 1983 May. 3-12. Married couples: work and income patterns. 1983 Dec. 26-29. Most women who maintain families receive poor labor market returns. 1983 Dec. 30-34. New method for estimating job separations by sex and race, A. 1983 June. 20-27. 1995 labor force: a second look, The. 1983 Nov. 3-10. Recent trends in higher education and labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 3941. Roll call. 1983 Feb. 2. Trends in employment and unemployment in families. 1983 Dec. 21-25. Unemployment continued to rise in 1982 as recession deepened. 1983 Feb. 3-12. Work and work force characteristics in the nonprofit sector. 1983 Apr. 3 12. Work experience, earnings, and family income in 1981. 1983 Apr. 1320 . Youth labor force marked turning point in 1982. 1983 Aug. 29-34. LABOR LAW Arbitrating discrimination grievances in the wake of Gardner-Denver. 1983 Oct. 3-10. Evolution of fair labor standards: a study in class conflict. The. A Review Essay. 1983 Aug. 25-28. State labor legislation enacted in 1982. 1983 Jan. 44-56. LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS Implications of concession bargaining: lessons from the public sector. 1983 Mar. 33-35. Origins and operation of area labor-management committees. The. 1983 May. 37-41. Reforming the U.S. system of collective bargaining. 1983 Mar. 18-22. Regulatory system encourages employers to take the offensive. 1983 Apr. 25-26. Task force encourages diffusion of microelectronics in Canada. 1983 Oct. 25-29. Will union concessions expand areas for bargaining? 1983 Mar. 32-33. LABOR MARKET Labor market contrasts: United States and Europe. 1983 Aug. 3-7. Labor market segmentation theory: critics should let paradigm evolve. 1983 Apr. 26-28. Short workweeks during economic downturns. 1983 June. 3-11 NONPROFIT SECTOR Work and work force characteristics in the nonprofit sector. 1983 Apr. 3 12. OCCUPATIONS Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. OLDER WORKERS Aging of the U.S. population: human resource implications. The. 1983 May. 13-19., Labor market problems of older workers, The. 1983 May. 3-12. PENSIONS (See Supplemental benefits.) PRICES Import prices decline, export indexes mixed in the first 6 months of 1983. 1983 Nov. 59-70. Inflation patterns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Oct. 22-26. Reconciling the CPI-U and the PCE Deflator: 3rd quarter. 1983 Feb. 37-38. U.S. foreign trade prices in 1982: import index falls, export indexes mixed. 1983 May. 20-29. U.S. import and export price indexes show declines during the first half. 1983 Jan. 17-23. PRODUCTIVITY Instruments to measure electricity: industry's productivity growth rises. 1983 Oct. 11-17. Modest productivity gains in State Unemployment Insurance Service. 1983 Jan. 24-27. Multifactor productivity: a new bls measure. 1983 Dec. 3-15. Productivity growth in plastic lower than all manufacturing. 1983 Oct. 17 - 21. Productivity improvements in two fabricated metals industries. 1983 Oct. 18- 24. Job outlook through 1995: industry output and employment projections. The. 1983 Nov. 24-36. Recent productivity measures depict growth patterns since 1980. 1983 Dec. 45-48. R&D— productivity link. The. 1983 June. 42-43. Service-producing sector: some common perceptions reviewed. The. 1983 Apr. 21-24. PROJECTIONS Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for growth. 1983 Nov. 11-23. High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 55-58. Job outlook through 1995: industry output and employment. The. 1983 Nov. 24-36. 1995 labor force: a second look. The. 1983 Nov. 3-10. Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. QUALITY OF WORKLIFE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS Quality of worklife. 1983 Oct. 2. Labor organizations directory for 1979-80 is published. 1983 Apr. 38. Origins and operations of area labor-management committees, The. 1983 May. 37-41. QUIT RATE MEDIATION REHABILITATION An experiment in the mediation of grievances. 1983 Mar. 23-30. Helping ex-offenders enter the labor market. 1983 July. 25-30. 104 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A new method for estimating job separations by sex and race. 1983 June. 20-27. RETIREMENT UNION MEMBERSHIP AND ELECTIONS How do families fare when the breadwinner retires? 1983 Dec. 40-44. NLRB vs. Yeshiva University: a positive perspective. 1983 July. 34-37. SALARIES (See Earnings and wages.) WAGES (See Earnings and wages.) SERVICE SECTOR WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS Service-producing sector: some common perceptions reviewed. The. 1983 Apr. 21-24. WHOLESALE PRICE INDEX (See Prices; Indexes.) WOMEN STATE GOVERNMENT Worker’s compensation in 1982: significant legislation enacted. 1983 Jan. 57-63. State labor legislation enacted in 1982. 1983 Jan. 44-56. Unemployment insurance laws: legislative revisions in 1982. 1983 Jan. 38-43. Child-care services: a national picture. 1983 Dec. 35-39. Effects of selected variables on work hours of young women. 1983 July. 31-34. Most women who maintain families receive poor market returns. 1983 Dec. 30-34. WORK EXPERIENCE STATISTICAL PROGRAMS AND METHODS Handbook of methods. 1983 Jan. 2. Work experience, earnings, and family income in 1981. 1983 Apr. 1320 . SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS WORK INJURIES AND ILLNESSES Employee benefits. 1983 July. 2. Workers’ compensation in 1982: significant legislation enacted. 1983 Jan. 57-63. Number of occupational deaths remained essentially unchanged in 1981. 1983 May. 42-44. Motion-related wrist disorders traced to industries, occupational groups. 1983 Oct. 13-16. TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 55-58. Task force encourages diffusion of microelectronics in Canada. 1983 Oct. 25-29. Technological impact. 1983 Apr. 2. TRADE UNIONS (See Labor organizations.) TRAINING (See Education and training.) UNEMPLOYMENT (See also Employment; Labor force.) Benchmark unemployment. 1983 June. 42. Employment changes in construction: secular, cyclical, and seasonal. 1983 Mar. 11-17. Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983. 1983 Aug. 8-14. Japan’s low unemployment: economic miracle or statistical artifact? 1983 July. 3-10. Labor market problems of older workers, The. 1983 May. 3-12. Layoffs and permanent job losses: workers’ traits and cyclical patterns. 1983 Oct. 3-12. Roll call. 1983 Feb. 2. Trends in employment and unemployment in families. 1983 Dec. 21-25. Unemployment continued to rise in 1982 as recession deepened. 1983 Feb 3-12. Unemployment experience in Canada: a 5-year longitudinal analysis. 1983 Apr. 36-38. Using a leading employment index to forecast unemployment in 1983. 1983 May. 30-32. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE Modest productivity gains in State Unemployment Insurance Service. 1983 Jan. 24-27. Unemployment insurance laws: legislative revisions in 1982. 1983 Jan 38-43. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis WORKING LIFE A further adjustment needed to estimate lost earning capacity. 1983 Oct. 3 0 - 31. Estimating annual hours of labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 13-22. Labor force participation rates are not the relevant factor. 1983 June. 3638. Use of worklife tables in estimates of lost earning capacity. The. 1983 Apr. 30-31. Using the appropriate worklife estimate in court proceedings. 1983 Oct. 3 1 - 32. Worklife estimates should be consistent with known labor force partici pation. 1983 June. 34-36. WORK STOPPAGES Are long-duration contracts insurance against strikes? 1983 Apr. 28-29. YOUTH (See Labor force.) DEPARTMENTS Anatomy of Price Change. September and February issues. Book Reviews. Each issue. Communications. June, April, and October issues. Conference Papers. April and March issues. Current Labor Statistics. Each issue. Developments in Industrial Relations. Each issue, except January. Labor Month in Review. Each issue. Major Agreements Expiring Next Month. Each issue. Productivity Reports. December issue. Research Notes. June and October issues. Research Summaries. Each issue except October and November. Technical Notes. May issue. BOOK REVIEWS (listed by author of book) Baily, Martin Neil, ed. Workers, Jobs, and Inflation. 1983 Feb. 52. Bain, David. The Productivity Prescription: The Manager’s Guide to Im- 105 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1983 • Index of Volume 106 proving Productivity and Profits. 1983 Sept. 43-44. Blanpain, Roger. The oecd Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Labor Relations, 1976- 79: Experience and Review. 1983 May. 51-53. Bruehl, Margaret E. and Roy W. Pneuman. Managing Conflict—A Com plete Process-Centered Handbook. 1983 Mar. 49. Buvinic, Mayra, Margaret A. Lycette, and William Paul McGreevey, eds. Women and Poverty in the Third World. 1983 Nov. 77-78. Dimmock, Stuart J. and Amarjit Singh Sethi, eds. Industrial Relations and Health Services. 1983 Sept. 42-43. Edwards, P. K. Strikes in the United States, 1881-1974. 1983 Apr. 4546. Eller, Ronald D. Miners, Mil/hands and Mountaineers: Industrialization of the Appalachian South, 1880-1930. 1983 Mar. 48. Famularo, Joseph J. Handbook o f Personnel Forms, Records, and Reports. 1983 Jan. 67. Fosh, Patricia. The Active Trade Unionist: A Study o f Motivation and Participation at Branch Level. 1983 Aug. 41. Freeman, Richard B. Implications o f the Changing U.S. Labor Market for Higher Education. 1983 Aug. 43. Fuchs, Victor R. An Economic Perspective on Americans from Birth to Death. 1983 Nov. 76-77. Fulmer, William E. Union Organizing: Management and Labor Conflict. 1983 Aug. 41-43. Ginsburg, Flelen. Full Employment and Public Policy: The United States and Sweden. 1983 June 49-50. Galenson, Walter. The International Labor Organization: An American View. 1983 Jan. 65-66. Goodsell, Charles T. The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic. 1983 Dec. 59-60. Greenwald, Douglas, ed. Encyclopedia o f Economics. 1983 Jan. 66-67. Johnstone, Ronald L. The Scope of Faculty Collective Bargaining: An Analysis of Faculty Union Agreements at Four-Year Institutions of Higher Education. 1983 Apr. 46-47. Kassalow, Everett M. and Benjamin Martin, eds. Labor Relations in Ad vanced Industrial Societies: Issues and Problems. 1983 May. 51-53. Lycette, Margaret A., Mayra Buvinic, and William Paul McGreevey, eds. Women and Poverty in the Third World. 1983 Nov. 77-78. Martin, Benjamin and Everett M. Kassalow, eds. Labor Relations in Ad vanced Industrial Societies: Issues and Problems. 1983 May. 51-53. Martin, Philip L. Labor Displacement and Public Policy. 1983 Oct. 4243. McGreevey, William Paul, Mayra Buvinic, and Margaret A. Lycette, eds. Women and Poverty in the Third World. 1983 Nov. 77-78. Patrick, Pamela K. S. Health Care Worker Burnout: What It Is, What to Do About It. 1983 Jan. 66. Pneuman, Roy W. and Margaret E. Bruehl. Managing Conflict—A Com plete Process-Centered Handbook. 1983 Mar. 49. Ruble, Blair A. Soviet Trade Unions: Their Development in the 1970’s. 1983 June. 50-51. Sakurabayshi, Makoto. Wages in Japan Today. 1983 July. 45-46. Sealander, Judith. As Minority Becomes Majority: Federal Reaction to the Phenomenon o f Women in the Work Force, 1920-1963. 1983 Oct. 4142. Sethi, Amarjit Singh and Stuart J. Dimmock, eds. Industrial Relations and Health Services. 1983 Sept. 42-43. Siegel, Irving H. and Edgar Weinberg. Labor-Management Cooperation: The American Experience. 1983 Mar. 46-48. Solomon, Lewis C. and others. Underemployed Ph.D.’s. 1983 Aug. 43. Taggart, Robert. Hardship— The Welfare Consequences o f Labor Market Problems: A Policy Discussion Paper. 1983 Feb. 51-52. Tufte, Edward R. The Visual Display of Quantitative information. 1983 Oct. 43-44. Weinberg, Edgar and Irving H. Siegel. Labor-Management Cooperation: The American Experience. 1983 Mar. 46-48. Woronoff, Jon. Japan’s Wasted Workers. 1983 July. 44. 106 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AUTHORS Andreassen, Arthur J ., Norman C . Saunders, and Betty W . Su. Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for economic growth. 1983 Nov. 11-23. Bailey, William R. Compensation cost increases: slowdown continues in 1982. 1983 June. 39-41. Banks, Robert F. Book review. 1983 May. 51-53. Bednarzik, Robert W. Layoffs and permanent job losses: workers' traits and cyclical patterns. 1983 Sept. 3-12. ------ . Short workweeks during economic downturns. 1983 June. 3-11. Bingham, Barbara. Instruments to measure electricity: industry’s pro ductivity growth rises. 1983 Oct. 11-17. Bloch, Farrell. Book review. 1983 Feb. 52. Block, Richard N. and Myron J. Roomkin. Regulatory system encour ages employers to take the offensive. 1983 Apr. 25-26. Blostin, Allan and William Marclay. h m o ’ s and other health plans: cov erage and employee premiums. 1983 June. 28-33. Boudreaux, Kenneth J. A further adjustment needed to estimate lost earning capacity. 1983 Oct. 30-31. Bowers, Norman. Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983. 1983 Aug. 8-14. Brand, Horst. The evolution of fair labor standards: a study in class conflict, a review essay. 1983 Aug. 25-28. ------ and Clyde Huffstutler. Productivity improvements in two fabricated metals industries. 1983 Oct. 18-24. Brett, Jeanne M. and Stephen B. Goldberg. An experiment in the me diation of grievances. 1983 Mar. 23-30. Bullock, Paul. Book review. 1983 June. 49-50. Bunn, Julie A. and Jack E. Triplett. Reconciling the cpi u and the pce Deflator: 3rd quarter. 1983 Feb. 37-38. Burgan, John U., Richard Riche, and Daniel E. Hecker. High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 5558. Bussey, Ellen M. Book review. 1983 Nov. 77-78. Callahan, David, Douglas Robertson, and Lorie Scheibel. Inflation pat terns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Sept. 22-26. Carlson, Norma W. Hourly pay of contract cleaners lags but sweeps past weekly gains. 1983 Mar. 37-40. Coleman, John O. Book review. 1983 Mar. 49. Davis, William M. Collective bargaining in 1983: a crowded agenda. 1983 Jan. 3-16. Deitsch, Clarence R. and David A. Dilts. nlrb v . Yeshiva University: a positive perspective. 1983 July. 34-37. Dilts, David A. and Clarence R. Deitsch. nlrb v . Yeshiva University: a positive perspective. 1983 July. 34-37. Dreijmanis, John. Book review. 1983 Apr. 46-47. ------ . Book review. 1983 Aug. 43. Einstein, Marcus E., George T. Silvestri, and John M. Lukasiew icz. Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. Eleey, Michael F. and Richard D. Leone. The origins and operations of area labor-management committees. 1983 May. 37-41. Englander, Frederick. Helping ex-offenders enter the labor market. 1983 July. 25-30. Esposito, Richard and Kenneth Shipp. Industry diffusion indexes for average weekly hours. 1983 May. 33-36. Evans, Robert, Jr. Book review. 1983 July. 45-46. Finch, John L. Worklife estimates should be consistent with known labor force participation. 1983 June. 34-36. Fisk, Donald M. Modest productivity gains in State Unemployment In surance Service. 1983 Jan. 24-27. Fitzpatrick, Blanche. Book review. 1983 Oct. 41-42. Flaim, Paul. Book review. 1983 Nov. 76-77. Fulco, Lawrence. Recent productivity measures depict growth patterns since 1980. 1983 Dec. 45-48. Fullerton, Howard N , Jr. and John H. Tschetter. The 1995 labor force: a second look. 1983 Nov. 3-10. Goldberg, Joseph P. Book review. 1983 Jan. 65-66. Goldberg, Stephen B. and Jeanne M. Brett. An experiment in the me diation of grievances. 1983 Mar. 23-30. Gray, Lois S. Book review. 1983 Aug. 41. Green, Gordon, Sheldon E. Haber, and Enrique J. Lamas. A new method for estimating job separation by sex and race. 1983 June. 20-27. Guttman, Robert. Job Training Partnership Act: new help for the un employed. 1983 Mar. 3-10. Guzda, Henry P. The U.S. Employment Service at 50: it too had to wait its turn. 1983 June. 12-19. Haber, Sheldon E., Enrique J. Lamas, and Gordon Green. A new method for estimating job separation by sex and race. 1983 June. 20-27. Hackett, Edward J. and Philip H. Mirvis. Work and work force char acteristics in the nonprofit sector. 1983 Apr. 3-12. Hayghe, Howard. Married couples: work and income patterns. 1983 Dec. 26-29. Hecker, Daniel E., Richard W. Riche, and John U. Burgan. High tech nology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 55-58. Hedger, Douglas and Donald Schmitt. Trends in major medical coverage during a period of rising costs. 1983 July. 11-16. Hedges, Janice Neipert. Job commitment in America: is it waxing or waning? 1983 July. 17-24. Hewson, Marillyn A. and Michael A. Urquhart. Unemployment contin ued to rise in 1982 as recession deepened. 1983 Feb. 3-12. Hoyman, Michele M. and Lamont E. Stallworth. Arbitrating discrimi nation grievances in the wake of Gardner-Denver. 1983 Oct. 3-10. Huffstutler, Clyde and Horst Brand. Productivity improvements in two fabricated metals industries. 1983 Oct. 18-24. Jacoby, Sanford M. and Daniel J. B. Mitchell. Are long-duration con tracts insurance against strikes? 1983 Apr. 28-29. Jain, Harish C. Task force encourages diffusion of microelectronics in Canada. 1983 Oct. 25-29. Jensen, Roger C., Bruce P. Klein, and Lee M. Sanderson. Motion-related wrist disorders traced to industries, occupational groups. 1983 Sept. 13lb. Johnson, Beverly L. and Elizabeth Waldman. Most women who maintain families receive poor labor market returns. 1983 Dec. 30-34. Johnson, Mark J. Import prices decline, export indexes mixed in the first 6 months of 1983. 1983 Nov. 59-70. ------ . U.S. foreign trade prices in 1982: import index falls, export in dexes mixed. 1983 May. 20-29. ------ . U.S. import and export price indexes show declines during the first half. 1983 Jan. 17-23. Johnston, Gary and Philip L. Martin. Employment and wages reported by California farmers in 1982. 1983 Sept. 27-31. Kamerman, Sheila B. Child-care services: a national picture. 1983 Dec. 35-39. Kassalow, Everett M. Will union concessions expand areas for bargain ing? 1983 Mar. 32-33. Klein, Bruce P., Lee M. Sanderson, and Roger C. Jensen. Motion-related wrist disorders traced to industries, occupational groups. 1983 Sept. 13lb. Klein, Deborah Pisetzner. Trends in employment and unemployment in families. 1983 Dec. 21-25. Klein, Katherine and Corey Rosen. Job-creating performance of em ployee-owned firms. 1983 Aug. 15-19. Krislov, Joseph. Book review. 1983 June. 50-51. Kutscher, Ronald E. and Jerome A. Mark. The service-producing sector: some common perceptions reviewed. 1983 Apr. 21-24. Lamas, Enrique J ., Gordon Green, and Sheldon E. Haber. A new method for estimating job separations by sex and race. 1983 June. 20-27. Leet, Bruce M. Book review. 1983 Sept. 42-43. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Leone, Richard D. and Michael F. Eleey. The origins and operations of area labor-management committees. 1983 May. 37-41. Lewin, David. Implications of concession bargaining: lessons from the public sector. 1983 Mar. 33-35. Lowenstem, Henry. Book review. 1983 Oct. 43-44. L ukasiew icz, John M ., George T. S ilvestri, and M arcus E. E in stein. Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. ------ and John Tschetter. Employment changes in construction: secular, cyclical, and seasonal. 1983 Mar. 11-17. Macon, Janet. Number of occupational deaths remained essentially un changed in 1981. 1983 May. 42-44. Magun, Sunder. Unemployment experience in Canada: a 5-year longi tudinal analysis. 1983 Apr. 36-38. Marclay, William and Allan Blostin. h m o ’ s and other health plans: cov erage and employee premiums. 1983 June. 28-33. Mark, Jerome A. and William H. Waldorf. Multifactor productivity: a new bls measure. 1983 Dec. 3-15. ------ and Ronald E. Kutscher. The service-producing sector: some com mon perceptions reviewed. 1983 Apr. 21-24. Martin, Philip L. and Gary Johnston. Employment and wages reported by California farmers in 1982. 1983 Sept. 27-31. Mirvis, Philip H. and Edward J. Hackett. Work and work force char acteristics in the nonprofit sector. 1983 Apr. 3-12. Mills, D. Quinn. Reforming the U.S. system of collective bargaining. 1983 Mar. 18-22. Mitchell, Daniel J. B. Do the 1982 concessions by unions mark a turning point in bargaining? 1983 Mar. 31-32. ------and Sanford M. Jacoby. Are long-duration contracts insurance against strikes? 1983 Apr. 28-29. Moore, Geoffrey H. Using a leading employment index to forecast un employment in 1983. 1983 May. 30-32. Morrison, Malcolm H. The aging of the U.S. population: human resource implications. 1983 May. 13-19. Mott, Frank L. and David Shapiro. Effects of selected variables on work hours of young women. 1983 July. 31-34. Moye, William T. Book review. 1983 Mar. 48. Nelson, David M. The use of worklife tables in estimates of lost earning capacity. 1983 Apr. 30-31. Nelson, Richard R. State labor legislation enacted in 1982. 1983 Jan. 44-56. Norwood, Janet L. Labor market contrast: United States and Europe. 1983 Aug. 3-7. Personick, Valerie A. The job outlook through 1995: industry output and employment projections. 1983 Nov. 24-36. Piore, Michael J. Labor market segmentation theory: critics should let paradigm evolve. 1983 Apr. 26-28. Preiser, Carl. Skill level differences in white-collar pay. 1983 Dec. 4 952. Raisian, John. Book review. 1983 Oct. 42-43. Riche, Richard W., Daniel E. Hecker, and John U. Burgan. High tech nology today and tomorrow: a small slice of employment pie. 1983 Nov. 55-58. Robertson, Douglas, Lorie Scheibel, and David Callahan. Inflation pat terns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Sept. 22-26. Rones, Phillip L. The labor market problems of older workers. 1983 May. 3-12. Roomkin, Myron J. and Richard N. Block. Regulatory system encour ages employers to take the offensive. 1983 Apr. 25-26. Rosen, Corey and Katherine Klein. Job-creating performance of em ployee-owned firms. 1983 Aug. 15-19. Ruben, George. Collective bargaining in 1982: results dictated by econ omy. 1983 Jan. 28-37. Runner, Diana. Unemployment insurance laws: legislative revisions in 1982. 1983 Jan. 38-43. Ryscavage, Paul M. Book review. 1983 Feb. 51-52. 107 MONTHLY LABOR REVILW December 1983 • Index of Volume 106 Rytina, Nancy. Comparing annual and weekly earnings from the Current Population Survey. 1983 Apr. 32-36. Sanderson, Lee M., RogerC. Jensen, and Bruce P. Klein. Motion-related wrist disorders traced to industries, occupational groups. 1983 Sept. 1316. Saunders, NormanC., Arthur J. Andreassen, and Betty W. Su. Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for economic growth. 1983 Nov. 11-23. Scaggs, Mary Beth W. Recent employment trends in the lumber and wood products industry. 1983 Aug. 20-24. Scheibel, Lorie, Douglas Robertson, and David Callahan. Inflation pat terns in the initial stages of recovery. 1983 Sept. 22-26. Schmitt, Donald and Douglas Hedger. Trends in major medical coverage during a period of rising costs. 1983 July. 11-16. Shapiro, David and Frank L. Mott. Effects of selected variables on work hours of young women. 1983 July. 31-34. Sheifer, Victor J. Book review. 1983 Apr. 45-46. Shipp, Kenneth and Richard Esposito. Industry diffusion indexes for average weekly hours. 1983 May. 33-36. Siegel, Irving H. Book review. 1983 Sept. 43-44. S ilvestri, George T ., John M. Lukasiew icz, and M arcus E. E in stein. Occupational employment projections through 1995. 1983 Nov. 37-49. Smith, Shirley J. Estimating annual hours of labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 13-22. ------ . Labor force participation rates are not the relevant factor. 1983 June. 36-38. ------ . Using the appropriate worklife estimate in court proceedings. 1983 Oct. 31-32. Sorrentino, Constance. International comparisons of labor force partic ipation, 1960-81. 1983 Feb. 23-36. Sproat, Kezia. How do families fare when the breadwinner retires? 1983 Dec. 40-44. Stallworth, Lamont E. and Michele M. Hoyman. Arbitrating discrimination grievances in the wake of Gardner-Denver. 1983 Oct. 3-10. Stepp, John R. Book review. 1983 Mar. 46-48. 108 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ------ . Book review. 1983 Aug. 41-43. Su, Betty W ., Arthur J. Andreassen, and NormanC. Saunders. Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for economic growth. 1983 Nov. 11-23. Taira, Koji. Japan’s low unemployment: economic miracle or statistical artifact? 1983 July. 3-10. Tanner, Lucretia Dewey. Book review. 1983 Dec. 59-60. Terry, Sylvia Lazos. Work experience, earnings, and family income in 1981. 1983 Apr. 13-20. Tinsley, LaVeme C. Workers’ compensation in 1982: significant legis lation enacted. 1983 Jan. 57-63. Triplett, Jack E. and Julie A. Bunn. Reconciling the CPi-U and the PCE Deflator: 3rd quarter. 1983 Feb. 37-38. Tschetter, John H. and Howard N Fullerton, Jr. The 1995 labor force: a second look. 1983 Nov. 3-10. ------ and John Lukasiewicz. Employment changes in construction: sec ular, cyclical, and seasonal. 1983 Mar. 11-17. Urquhart, Michael A. and Marillyn A. Hewson. Unemployment contin ued to rise in 1982 as recession deepened. 1983 Feb. 3-12. Waldorf, William H. and Jerome A. Mark. Multifactor productivity: a new bls measure. 1983 Dec. 3-15. Waldman. Elizabeth. Labor force statistics from a family perspective. 1983 Dec. 16-20. ------ and Beverly L. Johnson. Most women who maintain families receive poor labor market returns. 1983 Dec. 30-34. Williams, Harry B. Pay levels in hosiery manufacturing. 1983 Mar. 3637. ------ . Wages of appliance repair technicians vary widely among met ropolitan areas. 1983 Dec. 52-53. Wool, Harold. Book review. 1983 July. 44. York, James D. Productivity growth in plastics lower than all manufac turing. 1983 Sept. 17-21. Young, Anne McDougall. Recent trends in higher education and labor force activity. 1983 Feb. 39-41. ------ . Youth labor force marked turning point in 1982. 1983 Aug. 2934. LABOR-MANAGEMENT COOPERATION: RECENT EFFORTS AND RESULTS The past decade has posed new problems for labor and management, both in the workplace and in the marketplace. How well have they coped with the challenges? How successfully have they experimented with new forms of labormanagement cooperation? What lessons have they learned from abroad? A score of prominent scholars and practitioners answer these questions in this new book of readings, based on articles from the Monthly Labor Review. Ideal as a supplementary text for the classroom, as a source of ideas for negotiators and administrators, and as a reference tool for the library. Published jointly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Labor-Management Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor. 138 pages. $6. CONTENTS PART I. PROBLEMS OF THE WORKPLACE American workers evaluate the quality of their jobs Graham L. Staines and Robert P. Quinn Worker dissatisfaction: a look at the causes George Strauss Worker dissatisfaction: a look at the economic effects Peter Henle Work, stress, and individual well-being Robert L. Kahn How American workers view labor unions Thomas A. Kochan PART II. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN LABOR-MANAGEMENT COOPERATION Labor-management cooperation: a report on recent initiatives Edgar Weinberg Helping labor and management see and solve problems John R. Stepp, Robert P. Baker, and Jerome T. Barrett How quality-of-worklife projects work for General Motors Stephen H. Fuller How quality-of-worklife projects work for the United Auto Workers Irving Bluestone The quality-of-worklife project at Bolivar: an assessment Barry A. Macy Altering the social structure in coal mining: a case study Ted Mills Labor-management panels: three case studies James W. Driscoll Dynamics of establishing cooperative quality-of-worklife projects Edward E. Lawler III and John A. Drexler, Jr. Flexible schedules: problems and issues Janice Neipert Hedges The process of work restructuring and its impact on collective bargaining Leonard A. Schlesinger and Richard E. Walton Drug company workers like new schedules Robert T. Golembiewski and Richard J. Hilles The problem of job obsolescence: working it out at River Works Robert Zager Union-management committees in the Federal sector James E. Martin Labor-management panel seeks to help laid-off State workers Todd Jick The perceptions of participants in a joint productivity program Anna C. Goldoff Employee-owned companies: is the difference measurable? Michael Conte and Arnold S. Tannenbaum PART III. IMPROVING WORKLIFE ABROAD Improving working life—the role of European unions Joseph Mire White-collar unions and the work humanization movement Everett M. Kassalow Workers’ morale in Japan Joseph Mire Worker participation in West German industry David T. Fisher Industrial democracy in the Netherlands Arthur S. Weinberg Six American workers assess job redesign at Saab-Scania Arthur S. Weinberg U.S. longshoremen evaluate work conditions in Rotterdam Herbert A. Perry ORDER FORM copies of Labor-Management Cooperation: Recent Efforts and Results. BLS Bulletin 2153 LMSA Publication 6, GPO Stock No. 029-001-02744-3 at $6 per copy.* Please send The following BLS regional offices will expedite orders: 1603 JFK Building Boston, MA 02203 Suite 3400 1515 Broadway New York, NY 10036 □ 2nd Floor 555 Griffin Square Bldg. Dallas, TX 75202 911 Walnut St. Kansas City, MO 64106 Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents. □ 450 Golden Gate Ave. Box 36017 San Francisco, CA 94102 P.O. Box 13309 Philadelphia, PA 19101 MasterCard** _____________________________ *GPO prices are subject to change without notice. Date __ __ ___ __ t-A p . □ V is a * * ______________________________ Date * ‘ Available only on orders sent directly to Superintendent of Documents. Organization Name Street Address https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis You may also send your order directly to: Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Charge to my GPO Account no. exp. Charge my: □ 1371 Peachtree St., N.E. Atlanta, GA 30367 9th Floor Federal Office Building 230 South Dearborn St. Chicago, IL 60604 City S ta te _________Zip U.S. Department of 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 tor private use, $300 RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis HLK LIBRA442L ISSÜUE004R LIBRARY F £ ü RESERVE BANK OF ST L O U I S PO BOX 4 4 2 SAINT LO UIS MÜ 6 3 1 6 6 j
@FedFRASER