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
William E. Brock, Secretary
Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I—Boston:
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner
The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, DC 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year—$16 domestic; $20 foreign.
Single copy $4.75 domestic; $5.94 foreign.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-1818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Second-class postage
paid at Washington, DC, and at additional mailing addresses.
Anthony J. Ferrara
Kennedy Federal Building, Suite 1603
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 565-2331
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II—New York:
Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, NY 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region III—Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis
3535 Market Street
P.0 Box 13309, Philadelphia, PA 19101
Phone: (215) 596 1154
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region IV—Atlanta:
Donald M. Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30367
Phone: (404) 347-4418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V—Chicago: Lois L. Orr
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI—Dallas:
Bryan Richey
Federal Building, Room 221
525 Griffin Street, Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII—Kansas City: Gunnar Engen
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone:(816)374-2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Regions IX and X—San Francisco:
December cover:
“ Skating in Central Park, 1877,“
an engraving by Schell & Hogan,
from Harper’s Weekly, February 24, 1877.
Cover design by Richard L. Mathews
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Sam M. Hirabayashi
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
DECOMBER 1986
VOLUME 109, NUMBER 12
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor
Jerome A. Mark
3 Measuring single-factor and multifactor productivity
Development of new data sources, better use of existing sources, and broader coverage
are some of the ways in which b l s has improved its productivity measures
Arthur Neef
12 International trends in productivity, labor costs in manufacturing
U.S. output per hour exceeded the rates of gain in 8 of 11 other industrial nations in 1985,
but U.S. unit labor costs rose 2.7 percent relative to dollar-adjusted, trade-weighted average
Lawrence J. Fulco
18 U.S. productivity growth: the post-recession experience
Productivity increases for the current upturn are more modest than those recorded
for similar postwar periods, although the manufacturing sector is performing well
Norman C. Saunders
23 Sensitivity of
bls
economic projections to exogenous variables
The 1995 macroeconomic model has been most responsive to changes in fiscal spending
and foreign economic activity; energy assumptions have had little effect on the estimates
REPORTS
Maria L. Roca
Howard V. Hayghe
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
30 Women veterans total 1 million in first half of 1986
31 Military and civilian wives: update on the labor force gap
DEPARTMENTS
2
30
35
36
41
45
93
Labor month in review
Research summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics
Index to volume 109
Labor M onth
In Review
JOB SAFETY REPORT. The Bureau of
Labor Statistics reported results of its survey
of work-related injuries and illnesses in
1985. The report shows that job-related in
juries and illnesses occurred at virtually the
same rate in 1985 as in the previous year.
The injury and illness rate was 7.9 per 100
full-time workers in 1985, compared with
8.0 in 1984. While the number of injuries
and illnesses rose from 5.4 million in 1984
to 5.5 million in 1985, the rate remained
stable because of increases in the number
of employees and hours of work.
In releasing the new data, Commissioner
of Labor Statistics Janet L. Norwood called
the survey both comprehensive and welldesigned, but expressed concern about the
completeness of the recordkeeping upon
which the survey is based. Norwood
reported that BLS has taken the following
steps to address this problem:
• BLS has revised and clarified the record
keeping guidelines to provide better explana
tions to employers and workers about report
ing obligations under the law. Nearly
400.000 copies of revised guidelines have
been distributed. The Bureau also has
launched an extensive effort to increase
understanding of the requirements through
seminars and other training activities.
• BLS has scientifically selected a sample
and is providing other technical assistance
to the Occupational Safety and Health Ad
ministration for a special pilot survey involv
ing on-site evaluation of the records in 100
establishments in each of two States. BLS
will evaluate the results of the survey.
• BLS has asked the National Academy of
Sciences’ Committee on National Statistics
to establish a panel of experts to review the
entire safety and health statistics system.
BLS has requested that the panel make
recommendations on techniques to evaluate
the accuracy of recordkeeping as well as
methods to develop more comprehensive
statistical estimates of occupational illnesses.
The BLS survey data show that in 1985
there were 3,750 work-related deaths in
2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
establishments with 11 or more em
ployees—about the same number as that in
1984. Two-thirds of all fatalities occurred
in construction, m anufacturing, and
transportation and public utilities industries.
As in previous years, the leading cause of
death was over-the-road motor vehicle ac
cidents, accounting for nearly one-third of
fatalities in 1985.
Occupational injuries. Occupational in
juries occurred at a rate of 7.7 per 100 full
time workers during 1985. About 46 per
cent of the recorded injuries were serious
enough to require injured workers to take
time off from work or to be restricted in
work activity beyond the day of injury.
While the overall injury rate was about the
same in 1985 as in 1984, there was a marked
decrease in injury rates in mining
industries—from 9.5 in 1984 to 8.3 in 1985.
In contrast, the injury rate increased in ser
vice industries—from 5.0 in 1984 to 5.3 in
1985. Injury rates varied by establishment
size in 1985, as they have in previous years.
Injury rates for small and large private sec
tor establishments continued to be lower
than the rate for mid-size establishments.
Occupational illnesses. The number of oc
cupational illnesses measured by the annual
survey is the number of new illness cases
occurring during a year, not the prevalence
of existing illnesses.
During 1985, there were about 125,000
new cases of these occupational illnesses
among workers in private industry. More
than two-thirds of these new cases involved
skin diseases or disorders associated with
repeated trauma (for example, noise-induced
hearing loss and conditions due to repeated
motion, pressure, or vibration). Chronic and
long-term latent illnesses, which are often
difficult to recognize or relate to the
workplace, are included in the estimate but
may be understated.
The distribution of illnesses among in
dustries remained consistent with patterns
of previous years. About 72,000 illness
cases, or about 58 percent of the total, oc
curred in manufacturing, more than double
the ratio of manufacturing employment to
private sector employment.
Background of the survey. The Annual
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses is a Federal/State program in
which reports are received and processed by
State agencies participating with the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. The 1985 survey, requir
ing mandatory response, involved a sample
of 280,000 establishments. The estimates
generated from the survey represent the
work injury and illness experience of over
81 million workers in the private sector of
the American economy.
Data are based on the records which
employers maintain under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970. Excluded
from coverage under the Act are workplaces
which are covered by other Federal safety
and health laws. Therefore, data conform
ing to definitions of recordable occupational
injuries and illnesses for coal, metal, and
nonmetal mining and railroad activities were
provided to the Bureau by the Mine Safety
and Health Administration of the U.S.
Department of Labor and the Federal
Railroad Administration of the U.S. Depart
ment of Transportation.
Also excluded from the survey are the
self-employed; farmers with fewer than 11
em ployees; private households; and
employees in Federal, State, and local
government agencies. In a separate report
ing system, agencies of the Federal Govern
ment file work injury and illness reports with
the Secretary of Labor.
The fatality data only represent units with
11 or more employees, while estimates for
the other types of cases (injuries and
illnesses) include establishments with fewer
than 11 employees.
A relative standard error is calculated for
each estimate generated from the Annual
Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses and will be published in a BLS
bulletin that is in preparation.
□
Problems encountered in measuring
single- and multifactor productivity
Development of new data sources,
better utilization o f existing sources,
and broader coverage are some o f the ways in which
bls has improved its productivity measures;
progress has been made, but inadequacies remain
Jerome A. M ark
The slowdown in productivity growth since the early 1970’s
in many countries has stimulated and renewed interest in the
causes of productivity change. The observation that there
has been a slowdown has generally centered on the tradi
tional indicator of productivity— output per unit of labor
input, or labor productivity.
Labor productivity— the relationship between output and
labor input— has been the most prevalent measure of pro
ductivity for a variety of reasons. First, labor is involved in
all aspects of production and generally has been the most
important factor in the production process. Second, labor
input is the most readily measurable of the various produc
tion factors.
Labor productivity measures are useful in that they pro
vide quantitative indicators of the amount of change in labor
expended to produce real goods and services of an enter
prise, industry, or economy. Changes in output per hour,
however, do not measure the specific contribution of labor
or any other factor of production. Instead, they reflect the
joint effects of many influences which affect the use of labor,
including changes in technology, capital investment, utiliza
tion of capacity, economies of scale, energy substitution,
organization of production, and managerial skills, as well as
changes in the characteristics and efforts of the work force.
To provide insights into some of the factors influencing
Jerome A. Mark, Associate Commissioner for Productivity and Technol
ogy, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, presented a paper on this subject at the
International Productivity Symposium 2 in Munich, Germany, Octo
ber 14-16, 1986. This article is based on that paper.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
labor productivity changes, other measures of productivity
have been developed which include additional inputs, such
as capital services and intermediate items (purchased mate
rials, fuels, and business services). The difference in the
movements of these multifactor productivity measures and
the output per hour measures provides a look at the effect of
the substitution of other factors on labor productivity move
ments. The multifactor measures themselves reflect changes
in the use of many factors of production per unit of output
over time.
The problems in developing multifactor productivity
measures are much more severe than those present in deriv
ing the traditional single-factor productivity measures. All
the difficulties of defining and measuring output and labor
input in the labor productivity measures are present in the
development of the multifactor measures. But the additional
problems of defining and quantifying the other inputs, such
as capital, energy, and other intermediate inputs, are vastly
more complex. This article discusses some of the problems
the Bureau of Labor Statistics has encountered in develop
ing productivity measures and explains the approaches taken
to solve them.
Derivation of output
The output indexes for the measures of labor and multi
factor productivity for the private business economy and its
major sectors are derived from data on real gross product
published in the National Income and Product Accounts
(hereafter, national accounts) by the Bureau of Economic
3
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Single-Factor and Multifactor Productivity
Analysis, U. S. Department of Commerce. Output measures
for the detailed industries at the sic (Standard Industrial
Classification) two-, three-, and four-digit levels are pre
pared from basic data developed by various public and pri
vate agencies, using the greatest level of detail available.
Several major issues must be examined in the derivation
of the output measures. These involve (1) selecting the
appropriate output concept to be measured, (2) adjusting
output so that it is consistent with available input measures,
(3) obtaining quantity data on production, (4) developing
appropriate weights for aggregating heterogeneous items
into a single output measure, and (5) separating value
change into price change and real output change.
The output concept used for the business and major sector
measures is a net output or a value-added type of measure.
The concept used for industries is a gross output measure
that includes the value of purchased goods and services.
In using the national accounts data to derive the output
measure for the business economy, several important exclu
sions from the gross national product (gnp) measures are
made. These exclusions are necessary because (1) no ade
quate corresponding labor or capital input measure can be
developed for some components of the national accounts,
and (2) the gross product measures for some components are
based on labor inputs implying constant output per unit of
labor input.
Private business, which accounts for about 80 percent of
gnp , includes the output of all activities measured in the
national accounts, except for general government, paid em
ployees of private households, nonprofit institutions, the
“rest of world” sector, owner-occupied dwellings, govern
ment enterprises, and the statistical discrepancy.
General government is excluded because of the manner in
which it is measured in the national accounts: The constantdollar output of general government is derived by adjusting
base-year hourly compensation for changes in the total
hours of government employees. This assumes that produc
tivity of this component remains constant. Private house
hold employees and nonprofit institutions are also excluded
for this reason.
The “rest of world” sector is excluded primarily for rea
sons of consistency between output and input data. The
current value of output of this sector is equal to the payments
to factors (labor and capital) abroad owned by U.S. resi
dents, less payments to factors in the United States owned
by foreigners. The payments to factors abroad owned by
U.S. residents cannot be related to corresponding labor and
capital inputs. The returns to income sent abroad to foreign
owners of U.S. enterprises should be included but are not,
to provide consistency between the output and input data.
Owner-occupied dwellings are also excluded for consis
tency purposes. In the national accounts, an estimate is
made for the rental value of owner-occupied housing for
inclusion in the gnp measures. The output of this service,
the net rental value of owner-occupied homes, is estimated
4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
as the amount for which owner-occupied homes could be
rented, less maintenance, insurance, and like expenses.
However, there is no measure available for the hours
worked by homeowners.
Statistical discrepancy is the difference between gnp esti
mates constructed from the product (the sum of all produc
tion for consumption, investment, government, and net for
eign trade) and the income (the sum of all income resulting
from compensation, profits, interest, and so forth) sides of
the national accounts. Given that the input data are more
closely related to the income side of the accounts, measures
net of statistical discrepancy are developed to provide
greater consistency between the output and input data.
Government enterprises— the U.S. Postal Service, the
Tennessee Valley Authority, State and local enterprises, and
the like— are excluded from the multifactor productivity
measures because only limited data are available on their
capital input. In the national accounts, structures and
durable equipment used by these enterprises are treated as
final sales to general government rather than as investments
of the enterprises. Government enterprises thus show no
capital cost associated with plant and equipment in the na
tional accounts. Data on labor input of these enterprises,
however, are available and the output of these enterprises is
included in the labor productivity measures.
The aggregate measure resulting from these adjustments
covers the product of the private business sector. Included
in the output measure for this sector, however, are national
accounts data for some miscellaneous items still based on
measures of their inputs. This results from use of hourly
compensation indexes or cost indexes as a deflator in the
national accounts. Use of these measures implies no produc
tivity change for the associated components. These remain
ing items, however, do not constitute a serious problem
because they amount to only 6 percent of the total. (See
table 1.)
Specific problems. Although gnp data are adjusted to
make them appropriate for the multifactor productivity
series, there are still problems with the measures. Perhaps
the most important is the adequacy of the price measures
used to derive the constant-dollar measures. The price meas
ures used in the national accounts to deflate the value of
output and intermediate inputs are predominantly from com
ponents of the consumer and producer price indexes pre
pared by bls .
In obtaining the data for these series, respondents are
asked to quote prices for clearly specified items. When
producers significantly alter a product, they are asked to
report the changes so bls can adjust the reported price to
reflect the change in quality based on the additional cost (or
saving) due to the change. However, a quality change in a
product can be achieved in ways which are not captured by
measuring the cost of the change, either because there is no
way to identify the direct cost associated with a specific
Table 1. Relationship between gross national product
and the
measure of private business sector gross
product, 1985
b l s
Am ount
Ite m
( b illio n s o f
P e rc e n t
1 9 8 2 d o lla r s )
Gross national product (gnp)...........................................
$3,585.2
100
Output items excluded from gnp to obtain bls private
business gross product:
General g o v e rn m e n t..............................................................
Owner-occupied h o u s in g .......................................................
Rest-of-the-world ...................................................................
Households and in stitutio ns..................................................
Government enterprises.........................................................
Statistical d iscre pa n cy...........................................................
355.5
209.4
37.0
140.0
43.9
-5 .0
10
6
1
4
private business gross p ro d u c t........................................
Value of output deflated by hourly compensation or
cost indexes..........................................................................
2,804.4
78
238.5
6
Nonresidential s tru c tu re s ..................................................
O th e r......................................................................................
152.2
86.3
4
2
Value of output deflated by output price indexes..............
2,565.9
72
bls
0)
(D
1 Less than 0.5 percent.
Source:
S u r v e y o f C u r r e n t B u s in e s s , July 1986, supplemented by unpublished adjustments by Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, and Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
change, or because there is no additional cost involved.
Two items have been particularly weak in the price area:
the treatment of computers and the derivation of construc
tion industry measures.
Because of the rapid changes that have been taking place
and the inability to obtain reliable data in price surveys, the
national accounts, for many years, assumed no change in the
price of computers. It was generally believed that rapid
changes in quality of the computers resulted in an upward
bias in the prices and a downward bias in the resulting
output and productivity measures.
To improve these measures, the Bureau of Economic
Analysis, in conjunction with ibm , conducted a study in
which new price measures for computers were developed.1
This study compared two approaches: (1) a matched model
index in which prices of models on the market in 2 adjacent
years were used to compute a chain index over a period of
years, and (2) hedonic indexes, computed using regressions
showing the effects of specific computer characteristics on
computer prices. A composite index was developed
combining results from the two approaches. This composite
index showed a substantial drop in the prices for computers
and a corresponding increase in real output from that previ
ously reported. While this measure is a considerable im
provement, further development of the measurement tech
nique for computer prices is being pursued.
In the construction area, developments have not been as
fruitful. With the exception of single-family housing and
highway construction, the price indexes available for con
struction activities are generally input price or cost indexes.
(This problem is reflected in the entry for nonresidential
structures in table 1.) The resultant productivity index for
this industry has a bias toward no change and, to a lesser
extent, this extends to the overall measure.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A hedonic price measure has been developed for single
family housing and a bid price index is used for highway
construction. These price measures do reflect changes in the
utilization of materials and labor per unit of output. They do
not, however, represent a large proportion of total construc
tion activities.
The output measures for the industry productivity indica
tors are derived independently of the national accounts. For
each industry, the quantities of the various products that are
produced by the industry are directly aggregated with the
appropriate weights for the various products which make up
the output of the industry. The appropriate weight for the
direct aggregation of the products is the base-year factor
input. Thus, for a labor productivity measure, the weight is
the base-year hours of employees in the industry engaged in
the production of each output. For a multifactor industry
productivity measure, the appropriate weights for the output
are the costs of the factor inputs. The resultant productivity
measure is an internal mean of the productivity movements
of the component elements of the industry. Thus, the labor
productivity measure reflects the change in the labor ex
pended in the production of a constant bundle of goods or
services, and the multifactor measure reflects the change in
all factors expended in the production of the bundle.
In some industries, however, unit employee hour infor
mation is not available for individual products. In such
cases, substitute weights are used when it is believed that
they are proportional to unit employee weights. These are
either labor costs per unit of product, unit value added, or
prices. The resultant productivity measure from any of these
derivations reflects the effects of shifts in the labor cost,
value added, or value per hour among the various products
within the industry, as well as the change in productivity
among the various products.
For some industries, data collected in the U.S. economic
censuses have enabled the bls to develop labor input
weights for product classes, if not at the product level. Thus,
a hybrid measure is developed which includes substitute
(usually price) weights for combining specified products
into product classes and labor weights beyond the product
class level.
For those industries lacking quantity data, constant-dollar
value of shipments data, adjusted for inventory change, are
used to develop the output measure. Deflation of the value
of the production of the industry by the price change of the
various products is a variant of weighting the physical quan
tity data with unit values. The adequacy of these measures
depends to a great extent on the adequacy of the price
measures used to deflate the current-dollar value of output.
The problem of inadequate price deflators is more pro
nounced with the industry output measures. In many cases,
its resolution largely determines whether a productivity
measure can or cannot be derived. This has been one of the
important factors determining the number of productivity
measures that are available in the service sector. In recent
5
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Single-Factor and Multifactor Productivity
years, the number of producer and consumer price indexes
has been increasing substantially in the service area, as has
the number of productivity measures developed.
In developing the deflated value of gross output indexes
for sic two-digit industries, it is useful to remove intraindus
try transactions from the output series. Data for the transac
tions between establishments in the same two-digit industry
are difficult to obtain. However, approximations can be
obtained from input-output data.2 For this purpose, the
amount of imported goods included in intraindustry con
sumption is estimated and removed. Domestic consumption
of materials produced by the same domestic industry is then
divided by the total domestic commodity output and multi
plied by gross output to estimate intraindustry sales. These
are then subtracted from the two-digit industry deflated
shipment data, adjusted for inventory change, to obtain the
output measure.
Determining labor input
The labor input measures for both the sector and industry
productivity series are based largely on a monthly survey of
establishment payroll records. This survey, the bls Current
Employment Statistics program (establishment survey),
provides data on total employment (for all employees) and
average weekly hours (for production and nonsupervisory
workers only) in nonagricultural establishments. Because
the output of the goods and services reflects the activities of
all persons engaged in economic activity, it is important
to develop labor input measures that include the selfemployed, unpaid family workers, and, for the total busi
ness sector, labor input on farms. These data are derived, for
the most part, from a household survey of the noninstitutional population, the Current Population Survey, which is
conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the bls .
Reliance on establishment survey data provides major
benefits, but also presents two problems. The major benefits
derive mainly from the size and coverage of the survey:
Payroll data are provided each month from a nationwide
sample of more than 200,000 establishments. The problems
are that the establishment hours are based on an hours paid,
rather than an hours worked, concept, and the data exclude
average weekly hours of nonproduction and supervisory
workers.
A desirable measure of productivity is one that reflects the
change in labor input actually involved in the productive
process. The hours paid data include paid vacations, holi
days, sick leave, and other paid time off, in addition to the
actual hours worked. To the extent that leave practices
change, the resultant productivity measures overstate or
understate the actual change in output per hour or output per
unit of labor and capital combined.
To develop a better series of hours at work, the bls has
been conducting an annual survey (now in its fifth year) of
some 4,000 establishments to collect data on hours at work
and hours paid for all production and nonsupervisory work
6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ers in the private nonagricultural business sector. From this
survey, ratios are developed to adjust the hours paid meas
ures from the establishment survey to an hours at work
basis. The definition of hours at work was established, after
careful study, as time on the job or at the place of work.
Besides actual time at work, it includes coffee breaks, short
rest periods, paid cleanup time, and other paid time at the
workplace. This definition was considered to be conceptu
ally the most acceptable one for which statistics could be
extracted from establishment records. A narrower definition
of hours actually worked was considered questionable and,
in any case, too difficult to collect.
Although the problem of developing the appropriate
hours concept for the productivity measures is being re
solved at the level of the business economy and the major
sectors, the current survey does not provide data in suffi
cient detail to enable the bls to develop corresponding
measures at the industry level.
In the absence of information from the establishment sur
vey on the average weekly hours for nonproduction and
supervisory workers, two solutions, neither entirely satis
factory, have been adopted. For average weekly hours of
nonproduction workers in manufacturing, ratios of the aver
age weekly hours of manufacturing office workers to those
of nonoffice workers have been developed from surveys in
the 1960’s and 1970’s. Estimates of average weekly hours
of nonproduction workers in manufacturing are obtained by
multiplying production worker hours by these ratios. In
industries other than manufacturing, supervisory em
ployees’ average weekly hours are assumed to be equal to
those of nonsupervisory workers.
The bls measures of productivity based on the hours of all
persons assume that workers are homogeneous with respect
to skill. However, a highly skilled worker can be viewed as
providing more labor services per hour than a lesser skilled
worker. When skill differences are ignored, increases in
skill levels are measured as increases in productivity. As a
result, shifts from less skilled to more skilled labor because
of increased education or on-the-job training are not re
flected as an increase in the measure of labor input. For
some purposes, it is useful to have a productivity measure
that includes any changes in the potential productivity or
quality of an input in the input measure. The problem is to
construct a measure of labor input which accurately reflects
changes in the skill level of the work force.
Worker characteristics weights
Previous studies have generally taken the position that
relative wage or income level differentials associated with
specific worker characteristics— years of schooling, age,
sex, and possible industry and occupation— reflect marginal
productivity of these attributes. Weighting the quality of
labor (hours or employment), classified by these character
istics of the work force, by the relative wage or income
differentials results in an aggregate measure of labor input
intended to reflect the composition of the work force.
While this procedure certainly is not without merit, it
presents some difficulties. In particular, it is not always
clear whether certain characteristics are indeed productive.
For example, workers with similar characteristics have
widely different earnings in different occupations. How
ever, this correlation between occupation and earnings may
be due to influences other than the productivity of the occu
pation per se. Furthermore, wages or earnings may also be
an imperfect indicator of marginal product because they
may vary for reasons unrelated to productivity, including
regional differences in the cost of living and various institu
tional factors.
To address these problems, the bls is developing new
measures of labor input based solely on changes in the
amount of work experience and schooling workers acquire.
This methodology, which follows directly from the eco
nomic theory of human capital as developed by Jacob Min
cer and Gary Becker,3 assumes that increased schooling and
on-the-job training increases one’s stock of skills, and thus
one’s productivity. Furthermore, the economic returns to
higher education and additional work experience reflect the
marginal productivity of these characteristics. The bls has
developed a multidimensional data base which crossclassifies the annual hours of workers grouped by schooling
and experience. Simultaneously, the implicit prices of these
characteristics have been calculated.
The determination of work experience requires substan
tial effort. There are no large-scale surveys which directly
collect data on work experience. Instead, an econometric
model has been developed that estimates an individual’s
quarters of work experience, based on available survey data
regarding other personal characteristics. This model re
quires that for each year, the work force be cross-classified
by age, sex, education, race, marital status, and number of
children. For the decennial census years, and for years after
1968 when observation data from the household survey
could be used, the cross-classification of the work force is
straightforward. For the remaining years (1948, 1949,
1951-59, 1961-67), a multiproportional interpolation pro
cedure is employed.
The experience model makes use of a matched sample
developed from both the household survey and Social Secu
rity records. The results have proven to be significantly
better than previous estimates: They show that there is a
positive correlation between education and experience
which some measures of experience do not take into account
and which can produce biased estimates. This positive cor
relation is shown by a comparison of the derived returns to
education and experience using the traditional estimates of
experience and the new estimates.
As mentioned earlier, it is recognized that hourly wages
differ not only because of skill differences, but also because
of factors unrelated to productivity. Accordingly, simple
averages of hourly wage rates for each education and expe
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
rience group are not necessarily appropriate measures of
marginal productivity. To remove these imperfections, an
other econometric model has been developed which pro
vides measures of wages dependent upon changes in educa
tion and experience, but which simultaneously controls for
other types of variation.
This model measures the returns to seven different
schooling levels and to quarters of work experience. It con
trols for differentials by full- or part-time status, regional
location, and urban or rural residence of a worker. The latter
two variables adjust for possible regional price variations.
Proprietors and unpaid family workers are excluded from
the estimating sample because their income may reflect not
only labor returns, but also returns to capital. The model is
designed to yield returns to education and experience ad
justed for the possible effects of race and sex discrimination
on wages. Initially, annual measures of these returns will be
constructed for the 1948-85 period.
The construction of aggregate measures of labor input
requires that all hours be cross-classified by the level of
education and the amount of experience for men and women
separately. The hours of each type of cross-classified labor
are weighted by the corresponding hourly rental price deter
mined from the model above to obtain a Tomqvist weighted
index of labor input. Skill-adjusted labor input measures are
presently being developed for the business and nonfarm
business sectors.
In sum, the measurement of labor input is limited in
several problem areas. One is achieving more accurate cov
erage of hours of all persons; another is developing hours at
work measures; and another is developing weights which
reflect differentials in marginal productivity. Some success
in each of these areas has been achieved at the macro level
with measures for the business economy and major sectors.
However, problems remain with the measures for individual
industries. It is difficult to see possibilities for substantial
improvement in industry measures without substantial ex
pansions in the surveys providing the basic data.
Capital input measures
Capital inputs should be measures of the flow of services
from capital stocks rather than of capital stocks themselves.
This is consistent with the measurement of labor and output
as flows of goods and services. It is also consistent with the
general observation that it is the services of a physical asset,
rather than the asset itself, that enter into the production
process. Further, it permits the capital input measure to
differentiate between the annual contributions of a short
lived asset and a long-lived asset that yields its services at
a slower annual rate relative to its value as a stock.
The bls measures adopt the service-flow concept. The
assets included are fixed business equipment and structures,
inventories, and land. Structures include nonresidential
structures and residential capital which is rented out
by profitmaking firms or persons. Financial assets are
7
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Single-Factor and Multifactor Productivity
excluded, largely on pragmatic grounds, as are owneroccupied residential structures.
The capital input measures are constructed in two stages.
First, stocks are estimated for various types of assets. The
stock estimates are developed after assuming that an asset’s
services diminish in a fixed pattern as it ages. Second, assets
are aggregated by weighting with capital income shares
based on rental prices. This step requires the development of
rental prices for each type of capital stock.
Exhibit 1 summarizes the methods and data sources used
to construct the measures of capital input. Steps 1 through
5 correspond to the first stage and steps 6 and 7, the second.
The framework used for deriving the capital input meas
ures is based on the concept that the stock of capital repre
sents the amount of new investment that would be required
to produce the same capital services actually produced by
existing assets of all vintages. Thus, the stock measure
requires historical data on real investment and assumes an
age-efficiency function that describes the pattern of services
that capital goods supply as they age.
The measures of investment form the initial point for
deriving the capital stock measures. These are constantdollar measures and are derived from price indexes which
have limitations similar to those of indexes used in deriving
the constant-dollar gnp output measures. For example,
equipment is deflated principally by using the Producer
Price Indexes. One part of investment equipment includes
computers and, for many years, this presented a problem in
measurement of this component of investment. The recently
developed price measure for computers (discussed earlier)
has improved the estimates for this component. Structures
are deflated by indexes of residential prices, highway con
struction prices, and the construction cost indexes. The
highway component and the tenant-occupied, single-family
housing construction components are deflated by adequate
price measures, but the other structures must be deflated by
inadequate cost measures.
In general, the relationship between the economic effi
ciency of an asset and its age is very complex and depends
on the particular type of asset as well as a host of other
factors, such as the level of economic activity, relative input
prices, interest rates, and technological developments.
Use of an efficiency function involves a strong assump
tion. The quantity of capital services from a particular asset
is assumed to be a function of its age alone. Thus, because
the pattern of diminishing services remains fixed over time,
the resulting capital measure cannot respond to variations in
factor demand. In view of this restrictive assumption, the
validity of weighting with a function representative of age
alone remains a major issue.
Several general forms have been employed, none of
which is completely satisfactory. Use of the gross stock
assumes that the asset exhibits no loss of services until it
suddenly is discarded. Other forms are net of some loss of
services during their lives. A straight-line form shows the
8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
same loss of services each year. A concave form shows
gradual losses early in the life of an asset, and more rapid
losses as it ages. A convex form shows rapid early losses fol
lowed by more gradual losses of the remaining efficiency.
Several attempts have been made to address the efficiency
function issue by observing used asset prices. A relationship
is postulated between the efficiency of a used asset and its
market price relative to that of a new asset. The most exten
sive empirical study of used asset prices in the United States
was done by Charles Hulten and Frank Wykoff in 1981.4
bls concluded that the concave deterioration pattern ap
peared to be consistent with the empirical data in the HultenWykoff study, as well as with the reports of businesses
concerning experiences with their own capital assets.5
Many private researchers have used alternative forms
such as a gross measure with no deterioration, a geometric
decay function with early rapid decline and a slackening of
the rate of decline as the asset ages, other concave forms,
and straight-line deterioration.6 To test the impact of the
choice of a particular function on the final measure of mul
tifactor productivity, bls conducted sensitivity tests of the
growth rates of multifactor productivity and of the contribu
tion of the capital-labor ratio to the growth in labor produc
tivity using the different age-efficiency relationships. What
emerged was that the choice of function had very little effect
on either the multifactor productivity growth rates or the
contribution of capital services per hour to the growth rates
of output per hour. The largest difference in long-term pro
ductivity growth produced by the alternative functions was
0.1 percent. (See table 2.)
Depreciable assets have finite lives; eventually they are
discarded from stock. Average lives of the different asset
groups are based on recently revised estimates from the
Department of Commerce. Asset lives are assumed to be
normally distributed with a fairly wide dispersion to take
account of the range of service lives observed within each
investment cohort.
The second stage in constructing measures of capital serv
ices is the aggregation of capital stocks by weighting the
stocks with income shares based on rental prices. The vari
ous types of capital assets are appropriately aggregated
using implicit rental prices (sometimes called user costs) for
each type of asset. The rental price represents the annual
costs which would be incurred by an organizaiton that pur
chases an asset with the intention of renting it out.7 Thus,
the rental prices are implicit because the owners and users
of capital assets are frequently the same.
Rental prices are calculated for each type of asset. Assets
with shorter lives tend to have higher depreciation rates, and
therefore, higher rental prices, and are given a larger weight
in capital input. This implies that assets with higher rental
prices contribute more to the annual flow of output than
assets with lower rental prices.
The Tomqvist method is used to combine the capital
series by asset type. The change in capital input is, in effect,
Table 2. Sensitivity of private business sector
multifactor productivity measure to various age-efficiency
assumptions, 1949-81
[Percent change]
H u lt e n - W y k o f f
P e r io d
BLS
(b e s t
( H y p e r b o lic )
g e o m e t r ic
a p p r o x im a t io n )
1 9 4 9 ..................................................
- 1 .1
G ro s s
(o n e h o s s
shay)
S t r a ig h t
lin e
-1 .0
-1 .0
-1 .2
7 .2
7.1
2 .2
1 9 5 0 ..................................................
7 .2
7 .4
1 9 5 1 ..................................................
2 .4
2 .5
2 .5
1 9 5 2 ..................................................
1 .8
2 .0
1 .8
1 9 5 3 ..................................................
2 .6
2 .8
2 .5
2 .6
1 .8
1 9 5 4 ..................................................
-.4
-.3
-.5
-.4
1 9 5 5 ..................................................
4 .4
4 .4
4 .3
4 .3
1 9 5 6 ..................................................
.3
.4
.4
.2
1 9 5 7 ..................................................
.9
1 .0
.9
1 9 5 8 ..................................................
.7
.8
.5
.7
1 9 5 9 ..................................................
4 .0
4.1
3 .9
4.1
.8
1 9 6 0 ..................................................
.6
.5
.6
.6
1 9 6 1 ..................................................
2 .0
1 .9
1 .9
1 .9
1 9 6 2 ..................................................
3 .6
3 .6
3 .6
3 .6
1 9 6 3 ..................................................
2 .9
2 .8
2 .9
2 .8
3 .5
1 9 6 4 ..................................................
3 .6
3 .6
3 .7
1 9 6 5 ..................................................
3.1
3.1
3 .3
3 .0
1 .8
1 9 6 6 ..................................................
1 .9
2 .0
2 .2
1 9 6 7 ..................................................
.3
.4
.5
1 9 6 8 ..................................................
2 .4
2 .5
2 .5
2 .3
1 9 6 9 ..................................................
-.5
-.4
-.4
-.5
1 9 7 0 ..................................................
-1 .2
-1 .0
1.1
-1 .2
1 9 7 1 ..................................................
2 .2
2 .3
2.1
2 .2
1 9 7 2 ..................................................
3 .3
3 .4
3 .2
3 .3
-
.2
1 9 7 3 ..................................................
2 .4
2 .4
2 .4
2 .3
1 9 7 4 ..................................................
-3 .8
-3 .7
-3 .8
-3 .8
1 9 7 5 ..................................................
-.2
-.1
-.3
-.2
1 9 7 6 ..................................................
3 .8
3 .8
3 .6
3 .9
1 9 7 7 ..................................................
3 .0
3 .0
2 .9
3.1
1 .0
1 .0
1 9 7 9 ..................................................
-1 .1
-1 .1
-1 .2
-1 .2
1 9 8 0 ..................................................
-2 .2
-2 .2
-2 .3
-2 .2
1 9 8 1 ..................................................
1.1
1.1
1 .0
1.1
1 9 7 8 ..................................................
1 .0
1 .0
1 9 4 8 - 6 5 .........................................
2 .2
2 .3
2 .3
2 .2
1 9 6 5 - 7 3 .........................................
1 .3
1 .4
1 .4
1 .3
1 9 4 8 - 7 3 .........................................
2 .0
2 .0
2 .0
1 .9
1 9 7 3 - 8 1 .........................................
.1
.2
.1
.2
1 .5
1 .5
1 9 4 8 - 8 1 .........................................
1 .5
1 .6
a weighted sum of the percentage changes in the capital
inputs by asset type. The weights are developed as averages,
for the current and preceding year, of the asset’s capital
compensation, which is the product of the asset’s rental
price and the quantity of its stock.
Stocks for inventories are based on average end-ofquarter real inventories as reported in the national accounts.
The land stock estimate for the farm portion of private
business, where land represents a large share of capital, is
developed by aggregating regional acreage figures using
weights reflecting regional rental values. In the nonfarm
sector, the measure for land is derived by multiplying struc
tures by a land-structures ratio.8
The capital input measures for the sic two-digit industries
are developed in the same manner as those for the major
sectors. However, one problem is encountered at the twodigit level in implementation of the usual capital input meas
urement procedures. The capital rental price formulation
includes the rate of return plus the rate of depreciation minus
the rate of capital gains— inflation in the value of an asset—
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
all in nominal terms. Rental prices are used to construct
weights for asset types as discussed above. Capital gains are
usually computed as the year-to-year change in the deflator
for new investment.
At the two-digit level, some industries have very low
rates of return in some years. After capital gains are sub
tracted, some rental prices are volatile over time and even
negative. The resulting asset weights thus lead to implausi
ble capital aggregates. Furthermore, this volatility clearly
comes from asset-specific year-to-year movements in the
deflators customarily used to determine capital gains. Be
cause the derivation of the rental price assumes perfect fore
sight, the usual procedure of estimating capital gains im
plies, incorrectly, that investors fully anticipate even erratic
price movements. After careful study, bls concluded that
the usual procedure of using an annual deflator is not re
quired by theory.9 A 3-year moving average of the deflator
was judged superior on empirical grounds.
Intermediate inputs
Intermediate purchases include materials, fuels, and busi
ness services. Material inputs represent all commodity in
puts exclusive of fuels (electricity, fuel oil, coal, natural
gas, and miscellaneous fuels). Data on the total cost of
materials are available from Department of Commerce an
nual surveys and are deflated by appropriate price indexes to
obtain measures of real material inputs. Because the data are
obtained on an establishment basis, products transferred
between establishments in the same industry are included in
the aggregate materials cost. A two-step procedure is used
to determine the rate of growth in real expenditures for
materials which are purchased from outside the particular
industry. First, from the annual current-dollar cost of mate
rials, an estimate of the cost of intraindustry sales and trans
fers is removed. Second, a materials deflator is constructed
with the detailed materials price data and information on
weights from input-output tables.
Data on the price and quantity of energy inputs are con
structed from annual surveys. These include only the quan
tity and cost of fuels purchased for heat and power. How
ever, quantity information is not available for all years, and
the measures are extrapolated and interpolated using annual
estimates of total cost deflated by appropriate Producer
Price Indexes.
Directly collected data on purchased business services are
relatively scant in the United States. Nevertheless, the inclu
sion of purchased services in the input measure is important
because there is ample evidence of increased use by indus
tries of such services. Also, there is evidence of increased
substitution of leased capital for owned capital, and of pur
chased services such as accounting, legal, and technical
services for services performed inhouse.
The bls estimates these services from published inputoutput tables. The general approach is to take service shares
in the value of production from the input-output tables at the
9
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Single-Factor and Multifactor Productivity
greatest level of detail; to obtain service costs by multiplying
the shares by the value of production; and to deflate these
current cost estimates by appropriate deflators. Prices for
service inputs are obtained from the consumer and producer
price indexes or imputed from various data sources. This is
a major problem which will be alleviated by developing
more extensive price measures for the service activities.
Exhibit 1.
Multifactor productivity
The calculation of multifactor productivity proceeds from
dividing the index of output by the derived index of com
bined inputs. In the net, or value-added, output framework
used in developing the measures for the private business
economy and the major sectors, the combined inputs are
labor (hours) and capital services. The aggregate input index
Summary of methods and data sources used to measure capital and multifactor productivity
Step
1. Obtain real investment data
for data for depreciable
assets
2. Allocate investment data to
major sectors
Data item obtained
or constructed
Investment in:
Equipment............................
S tructures............................
Rental residential
ca p ital..............................
Investment by asset type by
sector (farm manufacturing,
nonfarm manufacturing)
3. Determine age/efficiency
Weights reflecting the declin
functions for each type of
ing services of an asset
asset
type cohort as it ages
Method used and detail in
which step is performed
20 asset ty p e s.........................
14 asset ty p e s.........................
National accounts1
National accounts1
9 asset ty p e s.........................
National accounts1
Asset detail allocated using
methods in step 1 ...............
Sectoral investment total
proportional to national
accounts................................
Historical data cross-classified
by asset detail and sector..
A hyperbolic form using:
An average service life
estimate............................
Normal distribution of
discards............................
A shape determined using
empirical evidence.........
4. Perform vintage aggregation
Real stocks of depreciable
assets by type and sector
Perpetual inventory method:
Real historical investments
weighted by age/efficiency
functions
5. Measure nondepreciable
assets
Stock of inventories...............
By stage of processing in
manufacturing.....................
Regional services weighted
using rental prices...............
Proportional to structures
using benchmark land
estimate
Stock of farm la n d .................
Stock of land in manufactur
ing and nonfarm manufac
turing
Data source
See step 1
National accounts1
National accounts1
National accounts1
National accounts1
Hulten and Wykoff2
See steps 2 and 3
National accounts1
U.S. Department of
Agriculture
Allan3
6. Obtain constant rental
prices
Implicit rental value of the
services of a unit of each
type of asset in each sector
Rental price formula esti
mated using data on capital
stocks and data on pay
ments to capital
Christensen and Jorgenson;4
steps 4 and 5; and national
accounts1
7. Obtain aggregate assets
Measure of real capital input
in each sector
Tomqvist index to asset capi
tal stocks using rental
prices to determine weights
Steps 4, 5, and 6
1 National Income and Product Accounts, Bureau of Eco
nomic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.
2 Shares were reconciled to functions reported in C. R. Hulten
and F. C. Wykoff, “The Measurement of Economic Deprecia
tion,” in C. R. Hulten, ed., Depreciation, Inflation and Taxation
o f Income from Capital (Washington, The Urban Institute Press,
1981), pp. 81-125; and C. R. Hulten and F. C. Wykoff, “The
Estimation of Economic Depreciation Using Vintage Asset
P r i c e s Journal o f Econometrics, 1981, pp. 367-96.
10
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Benchmarks based on estimates from Manvel D. Allan,
“Trends in the Value of Real Estate and Land, 1956-1966,”
Three Land Research Studies (Washington, National Commis
sion on Urban Problems, 1966).
4 Formula used to measure rental prices derived by Laurits R.
Christensen and Dale W. Jorgenson, “The Measurement of U.S.
Real Capital Input, 1929-1967,” Review o f Income and Wealth,
December 1969, pp. 292-320.
is derived by weighting the annual growth rates of the indi
vidual components, where the weights are the income shares
of each component averaged over the current and preceding
year, a Tomqvist index. Within each sector, total income is
equal to the sum of labor compensation of all employees
(labor income), corporate property income (capital income),
and proprietors’ income.
The labor compensation data for employees are readily
available from the national accounts. However, proprietors’
income is the total return to the proprietors’ own labor and
capital. Because this income reflects returns to both factors
of production, it is necessary to develop a method to allocate
the income between the two factors.
Various assumptions can be made to do this. For exam
ple, production worker earnings can be imputed to the selfemployed, but this frequently results in negative nonlabor
proprietor income (which is obtained as a residual). Con
versely, the rate of return on capital in the corporate sector
can be applied to the proprietors’ capital, but this frequently
yields negative proprietors’ labor income.
In the b l s measures, proprietor hours are given the same
average wages received by paid employees, and capital in
come is measured by assigning noncorporate capital the
same rate of return as corporate capital. The sum of these
computed values is compared with reported noncorporate
income in the national accounts, and both the derived labor
and capital income are scaled to agree with the reported
levels.
The combined input index, then, is derived by weighting
the labor input index by the derived compensation share of
total income, and the capital input index by the income share
of capital.
In the derivation of the two-digit industry and the specific
industry multifactor measures, the output measure is a gross
output index including the value of purchased materials and
services. The corresponding factor input measure reflects
intermediate materials and purchased services as well as the
labor and capital inputs. These are combined with share
weights also; in this case, the sum of the labor, capital, and
intermediate shares will equal one.
Inadequacies remain, despite progress
Measurement of productivity change is not a simple task.
Despite recent progress, it is clear that inadequacies remain
in the data available for measurement of both labor and
multifactor productivity. In addition, multifactor productiv
ity measurement presents challenging problems of shaping
sometimes imperfect data into empirical measures that take
advantage of recent theoretical advances. While multifactor
productivity measures are useful for understanding factors
affecting the traditional productivity movements, and many
such measures have been developed, it is important to rec
ognize that they do not have the same degree of precision
that the labor productivity measures have. In estimating
them, many more assumptions have to be made, particularly
with regard to measuring capital input.
Despite problems, improvements in the measures have
been made and, undoubtedly, more will follow. For exam
ple, better price data for developing constant-dollar output
and capital and intermediate material input measures are
now available. Better estimates of rental prices for aggregat
ing the heterogeneous capital stocks have been developed.
Even the output per hour measures are being improved using
more appropriate hours information and developing adjust
ments for changes in the composition of the work force.
Improvements in the procedures for measuring productiv
ity must and will continue to be made. Productivity meas
ures of high quality can shed light on policy issues of great
importance, including questions on the best means of in
creasing the efficiency of economic resources, the ability of
the economy to expand without adding to inflationary pres
sures, and the determinants of a country’s competitive posi
tion in international markets.
□
-FOOTNOTES
1 See David W. Cartwright, “Improved Deflation of Purchases of Com
puters,” Survey of Current Business, March 1986, pp. 7 -1 0 .
2 Input-output data are available for 1947, 1958, 1963, 1972, and 1977,
and estimated data have been developed for the 1967-80 period.
3 See Jacob Mincer, Schooling Experience, and Earnings (New York
and London, Columbia University Press, 1974); and Gary Becker, Human
Capital (Chicago and London, University of Chicago, 1975).
4 C. R. Hulten and F. C. W ykoff, “The Estimation of Economic Depre
ciation Using Vintage Asset Prices,” Journal of Econometrics, 1981, pp.
3 6 7-96.
5 See Trends in Multifactor Productivity, 1948-81, Bulletin 2178 (Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1983).
6 See John W. Kendrick, “Productivity Trends in the United States,” in
Shlomo Maital and Noah M. Meltz, eds., Lagging Productivity Growth
(Cambridge, m a , Ballinger Publishing C o., 1980); Edward F. Denison,
Accounting for Slower Economic Growth (Washington, The Brookings
Institution, 1979); and Frank M. Gollop and Dale W. Jorgenson, “U .S.
Productivity Growth by Industry, 1947—1973,” in John W. Kendrick and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Beatrice N. Vaccara, eds., New Developments in Productivity Measure
ment and Analysis (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1980),
pp. 17-124.
7 The foundations for the use of rental prices in asset aggregation were
set forth in Laurits R. Christensen and Dale W. Jorgenson, “The Measure
ment of U .S. Real Capital Input, 1929-1967,” Review of Income and
Wealth, December 1969, pp. 292-320. Their analysis proceeds from the
assumption of equilibrium of supply and demand in the rental market and
develops a rental price equation. Rental prices derived from this equation
are assumed to reflect the stock’s marginal products. The equation reflects,
among the determinants of rental prices, depreciation costs, and the rate of
return in the form of interest and profits. These costs are reduced by
inflation in the value of the asset and adjusted for tax considerations.
8 Manvel D. Allan, “Trends in the Value of Real Estate and Land
1956-1966,” Three Land Research Studies (Washington, National Com
mission on Urban Problems, 1966).
9 Michael J. Harper, Ernst R. Bemdt, and David O. Wood, “Rates of
Return and Capital Aggregation Using Alternative Rental Prices” (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, unpublished working paper, 1986).
11
International trends in productivity
and unit labor costs in manufacturing
U.S. output per hour exceeded the rates of gain
in 8 of 11 other industrial countries in 1985,
but U.S. unit labor costs rose 2.7 percent relative
to the trade-weighted average of the other nations
after adjustment for the dollar’s appreciation
A rthur N
eef
Labor productivity, as measured by output per hour, rose
4.4 percent in manufacturing in the United States in 1985.
This exceeded the rates of gain recorded by Canada and 7 of
9 European countries studied— France, Italy, the United
Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and Swe
den. However, two major trade competitors, Japan and
West Germany, along with Belgium, had larger increases.
Manufacturing output rose in each country, but the in
creases recorded by the United States and most of the other
countries were substantially less than in the preceding year
and only Canada, Japan, Denmark, and Norway had in
creases in both employment and aggregate hours.
Unit labor costs, which reflect changes in productivity
and hourly compensation costs, rose less in the United
States, at 0.6 percent, than in Canada or in the seven Eu
ropean countries with smaller productivity gains. Germany
and Belgium, however, had about equally small increases,
and unit labor costs fell in Japan. The relative value of the
U.S. dollar began to fall during 1985, but on an annual
average basis the U.S. dollar was up by 0.4 percent over
1984 compared with the Japanese yen, by 5 percent com
pared with the Canadian dollar, and by 2 to 9 percent com
pared with the European currencies. Consequently, when
measured on a U.S. dollar basis, unit labor costs declined
in Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands,
as well as in Japan. Only the three Scandinavian countries
had larger increases than the United States. Measured on a
Arthur N eef is chief o f the Division of Foreign Labor Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics. He was assisted by Division economists Harry Boissevain,
Christopher Kask, and James Thomas.
12
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
national currency basis, U.S. unit labor costs fell 0.5 per
cent relative to a trade-weighted average of the other 11
countries; adjusted for the dollar’s appreciation, U.S. rela
tive unit labor costs rose 2.7 percent.
This article examines comparative annual average percent
changes in manufacturing labor productivity and labor costs
through 1985 in the United States and 11 other industrial
nations.1 The comparisons are limited to trend measures
only; reliable level comparisons of manufacturing produc
tivity and unit labor costs are not available.2 The measures
for 1985 are preliminary. Data for other years are also sub
ject to some revision as countries revise the underlying
statistics used to construct the measures.3 The Canadian
productivity and labor cost series are in the process of being
revised because of a benchmark revision of the Canadian
national accounts, including a shift in the base year from
1971 to 1981 for the series at constant prices, and a major
historical revision in the labor income series. The revised
measures were not available for inclusion in this article.4
The article also provides comparisons of changes in U.S.
manufacturing productivity and labor costs relative to a
trade-weighted average of the 11 other countries. The rela
tive measures were constructed by taking the ratio of the
U.S. indexes to weighted geometric averages of the corre
sponding indexes for the other 11 countries. The weights
used to combine the other 11 countries’ indexes into an
average “competitors” index reflect the relative importance
of each country as a manufacturing trade competitor as of
1980.5
Productivity trends
The U.S. productivity gain of about 4\ percent in 1985
was somewhat stronger than the average trade-weighted
gain of 4 percent recorded by the 11 foreign competitor
nations, although below the 5- to 5|-percent increases
recorded by Japan and Germany. (See table 1.) In the 3
years from 1982 to 1985, the U.S. average increase of 4.7
percent was about equal to the average 5-percent increase of
the 11 foreign nations, most of which had average annual
gains between about 4 and 5^ percent. On the upside, Japan
and the Netherlands registered nearly 6 and 7 percent and on
the downside, Denmark and Norway posted 1.5 and 3 per
cent.
As pointed out in previous articles,6 all 12 countries have
had productivity slowdowns since about 1973 as compared
with the period 1960 to 1973. The addition of 1985 data
does not change this pattern. However, the U.S. productiv
ity gains for each of the 3 years between 1982 and 1985
exceeded the U.S. average rate of gain between 1960 and
1973. The United Kingdom was the only other country to
exceed its pre-1973 rate over the 1982-85 period.
Output and labor input. U.S. manufacturing output
growth slowed from 11 percent in 1984 to about 4 percent
in 1985. (See table 2.) Most of the other countries also had
smaller output gains in 1985 than in the preceding year. A
notable exception was Germany, where output rose 5 per
cent— Germany’s largest annual increase since 1976.
The slowdown in U.S. manufacturing output growth did
not result in a lower rate of productivity growth because
total worker hours, which rose 6 | percent in 1984, were
reduced by 0.5 percent in 1985. (See table 3.) This has not
been typical of the United States, where manufacturing out
put increases of 2 percent or more are normally accompa
nied by increases in employment and hours. It corresponds
more closely to recent developments in many of the Eu
ropean countries, where employment and hours have fre
quently continued to decline even in years of relatively large
output increases. In 1985, however, total manufacturing
hours rose along with output in Denmark and Norway and
remained about unchanged in Sweden and the United King
dom. Employment rose strongly in Denmark and increased
Table 1.
in Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Em
ployment and hours also rose in Canada and Japan, but at
reduced rates from 1984.
The rise in Dutch manufacturing employment was the
first annual increase since 1970; the increase in Norwegian
employment was the first since 1977. British employment
remained nearly stable after falling in 9 of the previous
10 years. However, employment in Belgium and France
continued to fall for the 11th consecutive year. The tabula
tion below shows the peak year for manufacturing employ
ment in each of the 12 countries and the level of employ
ment in 1985 relative to the peak employment year and
relative to 1973. The latter was one of very large output
increases in each country, but not the peak employment year
for any country.
Peak
em ploym ent
year
Japan .....................
Canada ...................
United States ........
Denmark ...............
Italy .......................
Norway .................
S w eden...................
Germany ...............
France ...................
Netherlands ...........
Belgium .................
United Kingdom ..
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
1985 index
P eak = 100
1973=100
100
95
92
92
87
85
84
81
81
70
65
64
101
100
96
94
89
88
89
83
82
76
66
70
1985
1979
1979
1965
1974
1974
1965
1970
1974
1965
1974
1966
H o u r l y c o m p e n s a tio n a n d u n i t l a b o r c o s ts
Hourly compensation costs— which include wages and
salaries, supplements, and employer payments for social
security and other employee benefit plans— rose 2\ percent
between 1984 and 1985 in Japan; about 5 to 6 percent in the
United States, Canada, France, Germany, Belgium, Den
mark, and the Netherlands; and 7 to 10 percent in Italy, the
United Kingdom, Norway, and Sweden. As shown in table
4, all countries recorded slower increases in 1985 compared
with their 1973-85 trend rates.
Japan, which had the largest increases in hourly compen
sation in the 1960’s and among the largest increases in the
Annual percent changes in manufacturing productivity, 12 countries, 1960-85
F o r e ig n
U n it e d
Year
C anada
Japan
F ra n c e
G e rm a n y
It a ly
S ta te s
Output per hour:
1960-85 ..............
1960-73 ............
1 9 7 3 -8 5 ............
2.7
3.2
2.2
3.4
4.7
1.9
1973-79 ............
1979-85 ............
1.4
3.1
2.2
1.7
1984 ...................
1985 ...................
4.1
4.4
3.7
3.2
B e lg iu m
D e n m a rk
N e t h e r la n d s
N o rw a y
Sw eden
c o u n t r ie s
( w e ig h t e d ) 1
5.5
6.5
4.4
4.8
5.8
3.7
5.4
7.3
3.5
3.5
4.3
2.7
6.5
6.9
6.0
4.8
6.4
3.0
6.2
7.4
5.0
3.2
4.3
2.1
4.7
6.4
3.0
5.4
6.8
3.9
5.5 ‘
5.7
5.0
3.8
4.3
3.2
3.3
3.7
1.2
4.2
6.2
5.7
4.2
1.9
5.5
4.4
2.1
2.0
2.6
3.3
3.9
3.9
7.0
5.0
3.9
3.3
3.7
5.6
5.4
3.1
4.5
3.4
3.5
4.6
1.0
.7
10.7
3.1
2.6
.9
4.4
2.7
5.0
4.1
8.0
10.3
5.6
1 A trade-weighted average of the 11 foreign countries. See description of weights in text.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U n it e d
K in g d o m
No t e :
Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
13
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Table 2.
December 1986 •
International Trends in Productivity
Annual percent changes in manufacturing output, 12 countries, 1960-85
U n it e d
Year
S ta te s
Canada
Japan
F ra n c e
G e rm a n y
Ita ly
U n it e d
K in g d o m
B e lg iu m
D e n m a rk
N e t h e r la n d s
N o rw a y
Sw eden
Output:
1960-85 ............
1960-73 .........
1973-85 .........
3.4
4.8
1.9
4.2
6.5
1.7
9.3
12.8
5.6
4.6
7.3
1.7
3.3
5.2
1.3
4.6
7.0
2.0
1.2
3.0
-.8
4.2
6.6
1.6
3.8
5.3
2.2
3.8
6.0
1.5
2.5
4.6
.1
3.1
5.1
1.1
1973-79 ..........
1979-85 ..........
1.9
1.8
2.7
.6
3.6
7.5
3.1
.4
1.7
.8
3.1
1.0
-.7
-.9
1.5
1.6
1.6
2.8
1.7
1.4
.1
.1
.5
1.6
1984 ................
1985 ................
10.8
3.8
8.2
4.6
11.4
6.4
1.0
.2
2.7
5.0
3.7
1.8
3.9
3.2
1.7
.9
5.8
5.3
5.5
2.1
2.5
2.4
6.0
2.0
Note:
Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
first half of the 1970’s, has had the smallest average rate of
increase in the 1980’s— about 4 percent. The only other
countries with average gains of 6 percent or less since 1980
are the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands.
Unit labor costs, which reflect changes in both labor
productivity and hourly compensation, fell for the fourth
consecutive year in Japan as productivity continued to climb
more than hourly compensation. Manufacturing unit labor
costs were about unchanged in 1985 in Belgium. Unit labor
costs rose only about 0.5 percent in the United States and
Germany. In the previous 2 years, unit labor costs fell 3
percent in the United States and rose only 0.5 percent in
Germany. Canada and the other European countries had
1985 increases of 2 to 7 percent.
cantly influenced by 1985 changes in currency exchange
rates, as they were in the previous 4 years. The value of the
U.S. dollar began to fall during 1985 relative to the Japanese
yen and the European currencies, but measured on an annual
average basis, the U.S. dollar was largely unchanged rela
tive to the yen and rose about 2 to 5 percent relative to the
currencies of Canada and all of the European countries ex
cept Italy. The dollar rose 8 percent relative to the Italian
lira. Consequently, manufacturing unit labor costs on a U.S.
dollar basis declined in Canada, Germany, Italy, Belgium,
and the Netherlands as well as in Japan. On a national
currency basis, 8 of the 11 foreign countries had larger unit
labor cost increases than the United States; on a U.S. dollar
basis, only the three Scandinavian countries had larger in
creases.
The strong gain of the U.S. dollar relative to most other
currencies began about 1980. As of 1985 (annual average),
Unit labor costs in U.S. dollars
Unit labor costs measured in U.S. dollars were signifi
Table 3.
Annual percent changes in manufacturing employment and hours, 12 countries, 1960-85
Year
U n it e d
S ta te s
Canada
Japan
F ran ce
G e rm a n y
It a ly
U n it e d
K in g d o m
B e lg iu m
D e n m a rk
N e t h e r la n d s
N o rw a y
Sw eden
Aggregate hours:
1960-85 ..............
1960-73 ............
1973-85 ............
0.6
1.6
-.3
0.8
1.8
-.3
1.1
2.3
-.1
-0 .8
.8
-2 .6
-1 .5
-.6
-2 .4
- 0 .8
-.2
- 1 .4
- 2 .3
- 1 .2
- 3 .4
-2 .2
-.3
-4 .2
-0 .9
-1 .1
-.8
-2 .2
-1 .2
-3 .2
-0 .9
.3
-1 .9
- 1 .5
- 1 .2
-1 .8
1973-79 ............
1979-85 ............
.5
-1 .2
.5
- 1 .0
-1 .8
1.7
- 1 .9
- 3 .3
-2 .5
-2 .3
-.2
- 2 .6
-1 .8
-4 .9
-4 .5
-3 .8
-2 .5
.9
-3 .6
- 2 .9
-1 .9
-1 .8
-2 .0
-1 .6
1984 ...................
1985 ...................
6.4
-.5
4.4
1.4
4.1
1.3
- 2 .8
- 3 .0
-.9
-.5
-1 .6
-1 .2
-.5
-.2
-1 .8
-3 .5
4.7
4.6
- 4 .7
-1 .0
-.2
1.4
1.5
-.6
1960-85 ..............
1960-73 ............
1973-85 ............
.6
1.4
-.3
1.0
1.9
0
1.7
3.3
.1
-.1
1.3
-1 .7
-.5
.4
- 1 .6
.4
1.6
- 1 .0
- 1 .7
-.6
-2 .9
-1 .3
.8
-3 .4
0
.5
-.5
-1 .1
.1
- 2 .3
.1
1.3
-1 .1
-.5
.1
-1 .0
1973-79 ............
1979-85 ............
.8
-1 .4
.8
-.8
-1 .5
1.7
-.9
-2 .4
- 1 .6
-1 .6
.3
- 2 .2
-1 .4
-4 .4
-3 .4
- 3 .5
-2 .0
1.0
-2 .3
-2 .3
-.2
-1 .9
-.5
-1 .5
1984 ...................
1985 ...................
4.9
-.5
4.4
.7
2.9
1.9
-2 .9
-3 .0
-.9
1.1
-4 .0
-2 .3
-1 .2
-.2
-1 .2
-6 .3
5.0
6.9
-2 .0
1.6
-1 .3
1.2
.7
.3
1960-85 ..............
1960-73 ............
1973-85 ............
.1
.2
0
-.2
-.2
-.3
-.6
-1 .0
-.1
-.7
-.5
-1 .0
-.9
- 1 .0
-.8
-1 .1
-1 .8
-.5
-.6
-.7
-.5
-.9
-1 .1
-.7
- 1 .0
- 1 .6
-.3
-1 .2
-1 .3
-1 .0
-.9
- 1 .0
-.8
-1 .1
-1 .3
-.8
1973-79 ............
1979-85 ............
-.2
.2
-.4
-.2
-.3
.1
-.9
-1 .0
-.9
-.7
-.5
-.4
-.5
-.5
-1 .1
-.3
-.5
-.1
-1 .3
-.6
- 1 .7
.1
- 1 .6
-.1
1984 ...................
1985 ...................
1.4
-.1
-.1
.7
1.2
-.6
.1
0
0
-1 .6
2.5
1.1
.7
0
-.6
3.0
-.3
-2 .2
-2 .8
-2 .5
1.2
.3
.8
-.9
Employment:
Average hours:
Note: Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
14
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the Japanese yen was only 5 percent below its 1980 value.
However, the Canadian dollar was down to 86 percent of its
1980 value, relative to the U.S. dollar, and the European
currencies ranged between about 45 and 60 percent of their
1980 values. The following tabulation shows the effect of
these exchange rate changes by comparing the average an
nual percentage changes in each country’s unit labor costs
between 1980 and 1985, as measured on a national currency
basis and on a U.S. dollar basis:
N ational
currency
U.S.
dollars
United States .........................................................
2.1
2.1
(Trade-weighted average, 11 countries).............
3.1
—4.3
C a n a d a .................................................................... 5.4
Japan .................................................................... —1.2
Norway .................................................................. 7.0
Italy ...................................................................... 11.9
Denmark ................................................................ 6.2
2.1
—2.3
—4.2
—4.7
—6.5
United Kingdom ................................................... 3.9
Germany ................
1.8
France .................................................................... 7.4
S w eden.................................................................... 5.5
Netherlands ....................................................................1
Belgium .................................................................. 1.2
—7.6
- 7 .6
—7.7
—8.4
—9.7
—12.2
Expressed in national currencies, 7 of the 11 foreign coun
tries had greater increases in unit labor costs than the United
States. Taking into account the appreciation of the dollar
since 1980, only one country besides the United States—
Table 4.
Canada— had an increase in unit labor costs.
Unadjusted for exchange rate changes, Japan improved
its relative competitive position more than any of the other
11 countries, with an overall decline in unit labor costs
between 1980 and 1985. However, because of the sharp
relative depreciations of all of the European currencies, all
nine European countries had larger declines in unit labor
costs than Japan after adjustment for relative changes in
exchange rates. The countries that most improved their
competitive positions were those with small increases in unit
labor costs in national currency terms and large relative
currency depreciations, such as Belgium and the Nether
lands. Table 5 shows annual percent changes in U.S. unit
labor costs, average trade-weighted “competitors” unit labor
costs, and the U.S. relative measures.
Recent exchange rate changes
The comparative measures in this article are based on
annual average measures. Therefore, the 1985 trend meas
ures of unit labor costs on a national currency basis have
been adjusted to a U.S. dollar basis using annual average
exchange rates for 1985. As noted earlier, the U.S. dollar in
1985 was largely unchanged relative to the Japanese yen on
an annual average basis and rose between 2 and 9 percent
relative to the currencies of the other 10 countries. How
ever, by the end of 1985, the U.S. dollar had depreciated
strongly against the yen and most European currencies and
the dollar continued to depreciate during 1986. Table 6
provides a comparison of October 1986 exchange rates and
Annual percent changes in hourly compensation and unit labor costs in manufacturing, 12 countries, 1960-85
F o r e ig n
Year
U n it e d
S ta te s
C anada
Japan
F ran ce
G e rm a n y
It a ly
U n ite d
K in g d o m
B e lg iu m
D e n m a rk
N e t h e r la n d s
N o rw a y
Sw eden
c o u n t r ie s
( w e ig h t e d ) 1
Houriy
compensation:
1960-85 ............
1960-73 ..........
1 9 7 3 -8 5 ..........
6.5
5.0
8.2
8.1
6.2
10.3
11.9
15.1
8.6
12.1
10.0
14.4
9.1
10.3
7.7
15.9
13.6
18.4
12.1
9.3
15.1
10.9
11.0
10.7
11.6
12.2
10.9
10.7
12.9
8.4
10.7
10.0
11.6
11.2
10.5
11.9
10.9
10.9
10.8
1 9 7 3 -7 9 ..........
1 9 7 9 -8 5 ..........
9.5
6.9
12.2
8.3
12.8
4.6
16.3
12.5
9.5
6.0
20.6
16.1
19.2
11.2
14.0
7.5
14.0
7.9
11.6
5.2
13.4
9.8
14.2
9.7
13.8
8.0
1984 .................
1985 .................
3.6
5.0
1.5
5.1
2.9
2.5
8.8
5.9
4.8
6.0
8.4
10.2
7.1
7.3
8.3
4.8
5.6
5.6
4.8
5.3
8.5
7.7
9.5
10.1
4.7
5.3
Unit labor costs:
1960-85 ............
1960-73 .........
1973-85 ..........
3.7
1.8
5.8
4.6
1.4
8.2
3.6
4.3
2.8
6.2
3.3
9.5
4.1
4.3
3.9
9.9
5.9
14.3
8.3
4.8
12.1
4.1
3.8
4.5
6.5
5.5
7.6
4.3
5.2
3.3
7.3
5.4
9.3
6.2
3.9
8.7
5.2
3.8
6.7
1973-79 .........
1 9 7 9 -8 5 ..........
8.0
3.7
9.8
6.6
6.9
-1 .1
10.7
8.3
4.9
2.8
16.7
12.0
17.9
6.7
7.4
1.7
9.4
5.9
5.8
.8
11.1
7.6
11.2
6.2
9.5
4.0
1984 .................
1985 .................
-.5
.6
-2 .1
1.9
-3 .9
-2 .5
4.7
2.5
1.0
.5
2.8
7.0
2.5
3.7
4.6
.2
4.5
4.8
-5 .4
2.1
5.8
6.7
4.8
7.3
-.3
1.1
Unit labor costs in
U.S., dollars:
1960-85 ............
1960-73 .........
1 9 7 3 -8 5 .........
3.7
1.8
5.8
3.2
1.2
5.4
5.3
6.6
3.9
3.7
4.1
3.3
5.5
8.0
3.0
5.0
6.4
3.6
5.0
3.7
6.4
3.4
5.8
.9
4.7
6.6
2.7
4.8
7.7
1.7
6.5
7.2
5.7
4.0
5.3
2.7
4.6
5.1
4.1
1 9 7 3 -7 9 .........
1979-85 .........
8.0
3.7
7.0
3.9
10.8
-2 .5
11.5
-4 .4
11.6
-5 .0
10.0
-2 .5
15.1
-1 .7
12.5
-9 .6
11.9
-5 .8
11.7
-7 .3
13.4
-1 .4
11.5
-5 .5
10.8
-2 .2
1984 ................
1985 ................
-.5
.6
-6 .8
-3 .4
-3 .8
-2 .9
-8 .7
-.3
-9 .3
-2 .8
-1 1 .0
-1 .6
-9 .6
.7
-7 .4
-2 .5
-7 .7
2.4
-1 5 .8
-1 .3
-5 .3
1.3
-2 .8
3.1
-7 .4
-2 .0
1 A trade-weighted average of the 11 foreign countries. See description of weights in text.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Note:
Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
15
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
International Trends in Productivity
were up 10 to 46 percent. Whether U.S. relative unit labor
costs will fall in 1986 in line with the depreciation of the
U.S. dollar will, of course, depend on comparative 1986
developments in productivity and hourly compensation
costs. As of the first three quarters of 1986, U.S. manufac
turing unit labor costs were up only 0.3 percent over the first
three quarters of 1985.
While the relative values of the Japanese yen and the
European currencies rose strongly in 1986, only the
Japanese yen has increased in value over 1980. The relative
values of the European currencies, which in 1985 ranged
between 45 and 60 percent of their 1980 values, ranged
between 60 and 90 percent of their 1980 values as of Octo
ber 1986.
Table 5. Relative annual percent changes in U.S. unit
labor costs in manufacturing, 1960-85
Year
U n it e d S t a t e s
11 f o r e ig n c o u n t r ie s 1
R e la t iv e m e a s u r e s 2
Unit laborcosts in
national currency:
1 9 6 0 -8 5 ...................
1960-73 ..............
1973-85 ..............
3.7
1.8
5.8
5.2
3.8
6.7
- 1 .4
- 2 .0
-.9
1973-79 ..............
1979-85 ..............
8.0
3.7
9.5
4.0
- 1 .4
.3
1980-85 ..............
1 9 8 1 .................
1982 .................
1983 .................
1984 .................
1985 .................
2.1
7.3
6.2
-2 .5
-.5
.6
3.1
8.2
5.7
.9
-.3
1.1
-.9
-.8
.4
-3 .4
1 9 6 0 -8 5 ...................
1960-73 ..............
1973-85 ..............
3.7
1.8
5.8
4.6
5.1
4.1
-.9
-3 .2
1.6
1973-79 ..............
1979-85 ..............
8.0
3.7
10.8
-2 .2
-2 .5
6.0
1980-85 ..............
1 9 8 1 .................
1982 .................
1983 .................
1984 ................
1985 .................
2.1
7.3
6.2
-2 .5
-.5
.6
-4 .3
-3 .1
-5 .5
-3 .4
- 7 .4
-2 .0
6.7
10.7
12.3
1.0
7.4
2.7
-.2
-.5
Unit laborcosts in
U.S. dollars:
1 A trade-weighted average of the 11 foreign countries.
2 Ratio of U.S. measure to the trade-weighted measure for the 11 foreign countries.
Note:
Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
January-October 1986 exchange rates relative to annual av
erage 1985 and 1980 exchange rates.
As the table shows, while the Canadian dollar continued
to depreciate slightly, the Japanese yen as of October 1986
had risen 52 percent in value relative to the U.S. dollar over
the annual average of 1985 and the European currencies
Table 6.
Exchange rates and trade. Because of the 1985-86 depre
ciation of the U.S. dollar, many commentators have ex
pected significant improvement in the U.S. trade balance.
However, two important facts are often overlooked. The
U.S. dollar has not depreciated against the Canadian dollar,
and Canada accounted for 20 percent of U.S. manufactured
imports, for 25 percent of U.S. manufactured exports, and
for 12 percent of the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured
products in 1985. Of possibly greater significance, the U.S.
dollar has not depreciated against the currencies of most of
the Asian and Latin American countries or areas that are
frequently referred to as the newly industrializing coun
tries— such as Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Tai
wan, Brazil, and Mexico. Table 6 also shows exchange rate
indexes for these 6 countries and areas, along with 1985
U.S. trade weights (percent of U.S. imports and exports of
manufactured goods) and percent of the U.S. trade deficit in
manufactured goods for the 6 and for the 11 foreign coun-
Exchange rate indexes, 18 countries or areas, 1980-86
[Value of foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar]
In d e x : 1 9 8 5 = 1 0 0
In d e x : 1 9 8 0 = 1 0 0
T r a d e w e ig h t s 1
C o u n try
1985
J a n .-O c t.
O c to b e r
1986
1986
1980
1985
J a n .-O c t.
O c to b e r
1986
1986
(p e rc e n t)
U .S . t r a d e
d e f ic it 2
(p e rc e n t)
United S ta te s ....................................
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Canada .............................................
Ja pa n ..................................................
France ................................................
G e rm a n y ...........................................
I ta ly ....................................................
United K in g d o m ...............................
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.2
141.5
128.5
133.9
126.7
113.6
98.4
152.4
136.8
146.7
137.6
109.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
85.6
95.0
47.0
61.8
44.9
55.8
84.1
134.4
60.5
82.8
56.8
63.4
84.2
144.8
64.4
90.6
61.7
61.3
21.7
18.3
3.1
5.9
2.8
4.5
12.1
36.3
3.2
10.4
5.4
.6
B e lg iu m .............................................
D e n m a rk ...........................................
N ethe rla n ds......................................
N o rw a y .............................................
S w e d e n .............................................
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
131.5
129.5
134.0
116.6
120.1
142.5
140.2
146.4
116.7
124.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
49.3
53.2
59.9
57.5
49.2
64.8
68.9
80.2
67.0
59.1
70.2
74.5
87.7
67.1
61.4
1.6
.4
2.0
.2
1.2
-.8
.9
- 1 .7
0
2.0
B ra z il..................................................
Hong Kong ......................................
Mexico .............................................
Singapore ........................................
South Korea ....................................
Taiwan .............................................
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
46.1
99.8
48.0
101.2
97.1
104.5
44.4
99.9
33.0
101.1
98.0
108.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
(3)
63.9
(3)
63.8
(3)
63.8
(3)
97.3
70.5
90.3
(3)
98.5
68.5
94.3
(3)
98.3
69.1
98.3
1.9
2.3
4.7
1.6
3.1
4.2
3.6
5.3
-1 .8
.7
5.2
11.9
1 Percent of total U.S. imports and exports of manufactured goods in 1985, excluding special
category exports (military goods sent out under Department of Defense contracts). Weight for
Belgium is Belgium-Luxembourg combined.
16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
2 Percent of U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods in 1985. See footnote 1.
3 Not relevant unless adjusted for inflation.
-
tries covered by the comparative unit labor cost measures.
The six newly industrializing countries and areas ac
counted for 18 percent of U.S. trade in manufactured goods
in 1985 and for 25 percent of the trade deficit in manufac
tured products. For comparison, the nine European coun
tries covered by this article accounted for 22 percent of U.S.
trade and 20 percent of the deficit. As of October 1986, the
relative value of the Taiwan dollar was up moderately
against the U.S. dollar but the Hong Kong and Singapore
dollars and the South Korean won were little changed from
their 1985 values. The relative values of the currencies of
Brazil and Mexico were only about half of their average
1985 values as of October 1986, but, in large part, this
reflects sharply higher prices. A more meaningful compari
son among countries with markedly different price develop
ments is a real exchange rate index, that is, one adjusted for
relative differences in inflation. Inflation-adjusted exchange
rate indexes for Brazil and Mexico (1985 = 100) were, re
spectively, 108 and 82 in the first half of 1986.
The principal trade-weighted dollar exchange rate indexes
are those published by the Board of Governors of the Fed
eral Reserve System, the Department of the Treasury, the
International Monetary Fund, and the Morgan Guaranty
Trust Co. of New York. All of these indexes show a sharp
depreciation of the U.S. dollar since early 1985, but, while
all four indexes include Canada, they all exclude the six
newly industrializing countries and areas of Asia and Latin
America. An exchange rate index including these countries
was recently developed by senior economist W. Michael
Cox of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.7 His index,
which covers 131 U.S. trading partners, shows only a
6- percent depreciation of the U.S. dollar between March
1985 and May 1986, while the other four indexes show
depreciations ranging from about 18 percent up to 34 per
cent.8 The differentials between the Cox index and the other
four would probably be less on an inflation-adjusted basis.
An inflation-adjusted index computed by Cox shows a
7- percent depreciation of the U.S. dollar between the first
and fourth quarters of 1985, compared with a nominal
2-percent depreciation over the same period.9
1 The data relate to all employed persons, including the self-employed,
in the United States and Canada, and to all wage and salary employees in
the other countries. Hours refer to hours paid in the United States and to
hours worked in the other countries.
counts were rebased to 1982, the entire constant dollar series was revised.
2 The Bureau does not prepare level comparisons of manufacturing pro
ductivity and unit labor costs because of data limitations and technical
problems in comparing the levels of manufacturing output among coun
tries. Each country measures total manufacturing output in its own currency
units. To compare outputs among countries, a common unit of measure—
such as the U .S. dollar— is needed. However, satisfactory conversion
factors are not available for the manufacturing sector. Market exchange
rates are not suitable as a basis for comparing output levels. What are
needed are purchasing-power-parity ( ppp) exchange rates, that is, the num
ber o f foreign currency units required to buy goods and services equivalent
to what can be bought with one unit of U .S. currency. Reasonably reliable
ppp exchange rates are available for total gross domestic product ( g d p ) and
are used by the Bureau for comparing levels of total g d p . See Michael
Ward, P u r c h a s in g P o w e r P a r itie s a n d R e a l E x p e n d itu r e s in th e OECD
(Paris, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( o e c d ),
1985); and Peter Hill, I n te r n a tio n a l P r ic e L e v e ls a n d P u r c h a s in g P o w e r
P a r itie s , o e c d Economic Studies No. 6 (Paris, o e c d , Spring 1986).
However, these ppp exchange rates are derived from the expenditure side
o f the national accounts (consumer, business, and government final expen
ditures for goods and services) and not from the output side of the accounts
(gross product originating by industry). Therefore, they do not provide ppp
exchange rates by industry. Some researchers have published level com
parisons o f manufacturing productivity using either the ppp exchange rate
for total g d p or a constructed ppp exchange rate based on selected final
expenditures by consumers and businesses. However, there are large differ
ences in ppp exchange rates for different categories of final expenditure and
the author is not aware of any satisfactory justification for the use of either
procedure for comparing manufacturing output levels, although a con
structed ppp exchange rate that excludes government consumption expendi
tures and consumer expenditures on services should prov ide a better ap
proximation of a ppp exchange rate for the manufacturing sector than the ppp
for total g d p .
3 This article includes revised statistics which have not yet been incorpo
rated in “Current Labor Statistics,” table 47, this issue.
4 The output figures from 1981 forward will be based on 1981 price
weights. The figures for earlier years will continue to be based on 1961 and
1971 price weights, although they will be expressed in 1981 constant dollar
levels. This contrasts with the U .S. method; when the U.S. national ac
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5 The trade weights were adapted from weights developed by the Interna
tional Monetary Fund ( im f ). The original im f weights cover 17 countries;
the 11 foreign countries covered by this article account for 94 percent o f the
IMF 16 U .S. competitors’ total trade weight. For more information on the
relative indexes, see Patricia Capdevielle, Donato Alvarez, and Brian
Cooper, “International trends in productivity and labor costs,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v i e w , December 1982, pp. 3 -1 4 .
6 For example, see Edwin Dean, Harry Boissevain, and James Thomas,
“Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries,”
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , March 1986, pp. 3 -1 0 .
7 See W. Michael Cox, “A New Alternative Trade-Weighted Dollar
Exchange Rate Index,” E c o n o m ic R e v i e w , Federal Reserve Bank of Dal
las, September 1986, pp. 2 0 -2 8 . In addition to introducing the new index,
the article provides a comparison with the four principal indexes. Cox’s
index differs from the other four primarily by its much broader coverage—
131 countries versus 10 to 22 countries. It also differs in that he uses
annually moving rather than constant trade weights. Both the 1985 and
1986 indexes are based on 1985 weights, but the 1986 indexes will be
revised when full-year 1986 trade data become available. During the period
when the dollar was appreciating strongly, the five indexes show more
similar results— a U .S. dollar appreciation between January 1980 and
March 1985 ranging from 42 percent up to Cox’s 65.5 percent.
For another recently compiled trade-weighted dollar exchange rate index
that includes the major newly industrializing countries and areas, see Irwin
L. Kellner “Why Our Trade Gap Persists,” M a n u fa c tu re rs H a n o v e r E c o
n o m ic R e p o r t, September 1986. Kellner’s index covers the 17 largest U .S.
trading partners and uses 1985 weights. It shows only about a 4-percent
trade-weighted depreciation of the U .S. dollar between February 1985 and
August 1986.
8 March 1985 to April 1986 for the Treasury index. All of the other four
indexes include Canada, but with very different weights. As reported in
Cox, the weights given to Canada are 9 percent in the Board of Governors
index, 30 percent in the Morgan Guaranty Trust index, and 21 percent in
the International Monetary Fund and his own index (1985 weight).
9 Information provided directly to the author by W. Michael Cox. Cox’s
article did not include an inflation-adjusted index.
The Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. publishes both nominal and real effec
tive U .S. dollar exchange rates. They show virtually the same U .S. dollar
depreciation— 24.0 and 24.7 percent, respectively, between March 1985
and July 1986.
17
U.S. productivity growth since 1982:
the post-recession experience
Gains in productivity during recoveries
typically are greater than the long-term trend;
increases for the current upturn are more modest
than those recorded for similar postwar periods,
although the manufacturing sector is performing well
L aw rence
J.
F ulco
Productivity in the business sector has grown at an average
annual rate of 2.3 percent since 1947.1 Growth was more
rapid before 1973 (3.0 percent) than after (0.9 percent), but
throughout the postwar period, the business cycle has had
pronounced effects on the rate of change in productivity.
Table 1 shows these effects on productivity growth in the
business, nonfarm business, and manufacturing sectors.
There have been eight business cycle troughs since the
end of World War II, the most recent of which occurred in
the fourth quarter of 1982.2 (See exhibit 1.) The business
cycle exerts an accelerating influence on productivity
growth during recoveries and retards it during contractions.
Since the 1982 trough, the b l s has analyzed movements in
labor productivity— output per hour of all persons— for pur
poses of comparing this recovery with similar periods in the
past.
The cycle’s effect on productivity is often explained in
terms of the fixed nature of some inputs in the short run.
Because the stocks of capital plant and equipment and the
number of available skilled employees are not instanta
neously adjustable, they remain to some extent fixed over
the course of the cycle. Thus, when product demand in
creases after a trough, firms are able to increase output more
rapidly than capital and labor inputs, thereby inducing a
swift rise in productivity. During a contraction the opposite
occurs, giving rise to a procyclical pattern in productivity.
Lawrence J. Fulco is a supervisory economist in the Office of Productivity
and Technology, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
18
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Productivity in the business sector3 has risen more rapidly
during postwar recoveries (2.6 percent per year) than over
the entire 1947-85 period (2.3 percent). The same is true for
the more narrowly defined nonfarm business and manufac
turing sectors. However, since the beginning of the produc
tivity slowdown in 1973, the contrast between productivity
advances during recoveries and the long-term trend in pro
ductivity increase has become greater. Since 1973, the
growth rate during recoveries has been more than 0.6 per
cent higher than the long-term rate for business and nonfarm
business, and 1.1 percent higher for manufacturing. In man
ufacturing, the post-1973 slowdown has been smaller than
in the more comprehensive business and nonfarm business
sectors. (Manufacturing accounts for about one-fourth of the
business sector output.)
The current recovery
The eight postwar recoveries are dissimilar, ranging in
length from 4 to 35 quarters, trough to peak:
T ro u g h
October 1949 . .
May 1954 .........
April 1958
February 1961 .
November 1970
March 1975 . . .
July 1980 .........
Mean ...........
Q u a r te r s ,
tro u g h to p e a k
15
13
8
35
12
20
_4
15
By the second quarter of 1986, the current recovery had
lasted 14 quarters, longer than all but three of the others.
Chart 1. Productivity and related measures 14 quarters after the trough of the business cycle
in the business and manufacturing sectors, current recovery versus average postwar recovery
Index
(Trough quarter = 100)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Business
Quarters
index
(Trough quarter = 100)
Manufacturing
Quarters
19
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Productivity Growth Since 1982
Because recoveries have differed so widely, it is not possi
ble to draw any conclusions regarding the underlying
growth rate of productivity based on experience during this
part of the cycle. (For similar reasons, projections of the
future course of productivity change are quite unreliable.)
However, a comparison of the ongoing recovery with others
which have also lasted at least 14 quarters reveals the fol
lowing:
Exhibit 1. Troughs and peaks of the eight postwar
business cycles
Trough
October
May
April
February
November
March
July
November
• Productivity gains in the business sector have been the
lowest of any similar recovery period.
• In manufacturing, productivity gains have been much bet
ter than in the total business sector and higher than previous
experience.
• Increases in hourly compensation have lagged consider
ably behind past gains.
Peak
November
July
August
April
December
November
January
July
1949
1954
1958
1961
1970
1975
1980
1982
1948
1953
1957
1960
1969
1973
1980
1981
creases, while manufacturing productivity rose more
rapidly. The following tabulation presents annualized per
cent changes in productivity, output, and hours in the sec
ond quarter for major divisions of the economy. (Additional
information appears in tables 42--44 of the Current Labor
Statistics section of this issue.)
• As a result, unit labor costs (compensation per unit of
output) have grown quite slowly by historical standards.
For the other recoveries, the average annual rate of busi
ness productivity growth for the first 14 quarters was 3.1
percent; during the current recovery, productivity increased
at only a 1.8-percent annual rate over the same time span.
In manufacturing, the average 14-quarter recovery showed
a 3.6-percent annual rate of growth; during this recovery,
the rate of increase has been 4.4 percent. Chart 1 compares
productivity and related measures for the average recovery
and for the current upturn in business and manufacturing.
Hourly compensation gains have been modest during the
current upturn in all major sectors of the economy, and
among both union and nonunion employees. Givebacks,
smaller benefits packages, and two-tier pay plans, combined
with slower growth in consumer prices, have been reflected
in current-dollar hourly compensation growth of less than
4 percent during the last 14 quarters; the average annual
increase for previous recoveries was about 6.5 percent in
both business and manufacturing.
Taken together, these trends have resulted in slow gains
in compensation per unit of output during the current upturn.
In fact, unit labor costs in manufacturing were actually
somewhat lower in the second quarter of 1986 than in the
third quarter of 1980.
S ector
P roductivity
B u sin ess......................................
Nonfarm business .................
Manufacturing ...................
Durable goods ...............
Nondurable goods .........
Nonfinancial corporations . . .
0.5
.5
3.2
Output
0.3
1.0
7.0
- .3
H ours
- 0 .2
.6
.1
- .4
- 3 .8
5.3
- 3 .5
- 4 .8
-1.6
-1.1
- .8
Business sector. Business sector productivity rose at a
0.5-percent annual rate during the second quarter of 1986,
and hours declined for the first time since the recoveryexpansion phase of the business cycle began 14 quarters
earlier. The business sector is the broadest sector for which
productivity is measured, accounting for about four-fifths of
gross national product ( g n p ).
Hourly compensation rose moderately during the second
quarter, but after adjustment for changes in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers ( c p i -u ) , 4 a strong
increase occurred. With this increase, real hourly compen
sation stood at its highest level since 1979. Real hourly
compensation had advanced in every year but one from 1947
to 1978, but three consecutive years of declines occurred
beginning with 1979. Growth resumed in 1982, but even so,
real hourly compensation in the second quarter of 1986
remained somewhat lower than in 1978. Hourly compensa-
Second-quarter results
During the second quarter of 1986, productivity in the
business and nonfarm business sectors showed slight in
Table 1. Compound annual rates of change in productivity for selected sectors, trend versus recovery and contraction
phases, 1947-85
T re n d
N um ber
P e r io d
of
c y c le s
B u s in e s s
N o n fa rm
b u s in e s s
C o n t r a c t io n
M a n u f a c t u r in g
B u s in e s s
R e c o v e ry
N o n fa rm
b u s in e s s
M a n u f a c t u r in g
B u s in e s s
N o n fa rm
b u s in e s s
M a n u f a c t u r in g
...............................................................................
8
2 .3
1 .9
2 .7
.6
.4
-.1
2 .6
2.1
1 9 4 7 - 1 9 7 3 ............................................................................
5
3 .0
2 .5
2 .9
1 .3
1.1
-.2
3.1
2 .6
3 .3
1 9 7 3 - 1 9 8 5 ............................................................................
3
.9
.7
2 .2
-.7
-.7
1 .7
1 .3
3 .3
1 9 4 7 -1 9 8 5
20
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
.0
3 .3
tion includes wages and salaries, supplements, and em
ployer payments to employee benefit plans, and measures
employer costs rather than employee income. Adjustment
with the c p i -u translates these costs into real terms, by taking
into account changes in the prices of consumption goods.
The decline in the c p i -u was quite unusual in itself; over the
past 25 years, there has only been one other quarter during
which the c p i -u fell— the second quarter of 1961, for which
a 0.1-percent drop was recorded.
Unit labor costs are compensation expenses per unit of
output, and thus are influenced by changes in both hourly
compensation and productivity. In the second quarter of
1986, these important costs rose at an annual rate of only
2.3 percent. This small increase reflects the slow gains in
hourly compensation which have characterized the entire
recovery period and the small productivity gain in the sec
ond quarter, as shown in chart 2.
Business employment continued to grow during the sec
ond quarter of 1986, but the pace was slower than was
typical for earlier quarters of the recovery. In all, over 9.5
million jobs have been added to business payrolls since the
expansion phase of the business cycle began early in 1983.
At 88.4 million, the business sector accounts for about 77
percent of U.S. employment.
Chart 2. Productivity and related measures in four major sectors of the economy,
1973-second quarter 1986
Ratio scale
(1st quarter = 100)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Ratio scale
(1st quarter = 100)
21
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Productivity Growth Since 1982
Nonfarm business. Productivity movements in nonfarm
business are, of course, not affected by developments on
farms, which are included in the more comprehensive busi
ness measure. Nonfarm productivity showed the same in
crease as the business measure in the second quarter. Output
rose more than in the business sector, and hours posted a
small rise. These were the smallest increases in nonfarm
output and hours during the current expansion.
Hourly compensation increases in nonfarm business were
modest in the second quarter, but the declining c p i -u re
sulted in the largest quarterly gain in real hourly compensa
tion since 1983. Unit labor costs rose 1.8 percent, reflecting
the small rise in productivity and moderate increase in
hourly compensation.
Manufacturing. Although discussions of productivity
often conjure up images of assembly-line production, man
ufacturing has long accounted for a small part of all business
hours. Manufacturing hours— employment times average
weekly hours— have declined from about one-third of busi
ness hours in the late 1960’s to less than one-fourth
presently. Over the same period, manufacturing output has
fallen relatively little as a portion of business output— from
29 percent in 1969 to 27 percent in 1986— reflecting the
relatively faster rate of productivity growth in manufactur
ing industries.
During the second quarter of 1986, the productivity ad
vance that occurred in manufacturing resulted mainly from
a decrease in hours. Paid hours of all persons engaged in
both durable and nondurable goods manufacturing declined.
Output was cut back by a smaller amount overall, so produc
tivity rose. This was the first time that both manufacturing
output and hours have declined since the recovery began.
Hourly compensation in manufacturing increased at a
very modest 2.7-percent annual rate during second-quarter
1986. However, the decline in the c p i -u resulted in an in
crease in real hourly compensation that was larger than any
since 1982. Unit labor costs declined 0.5 percent in the
second quarter.
The decline in manufacturing hours was accomplished
through cutbacks in both employment and average weekly
hours. Employment, which stood at 19.5 million in the
second quarter, had grown by about 1.3 million jobs in the
first eight quarters of the recovery, but then declined by
about 300,000 over the next six quarters.
Nonfinancial corporations. Nonfinancial corporations ex
perienced the third consecutive quarterly decrease in output
per hour of all employees during the second quarter of 1986.
This was also the first period since the fourth quarter of 1982
during which both output and hours declined. Hourly com
pensation increased only 1.6 percent, and this is reflected in
the moderate 1.9-percent rise in unit labor costs during the
period. Unit nonlabor costs— capital consumption al
lowances, interest, rental income of persons, and indirect
business taxes— fell 2.7 percent, and unit profits rose at a
2.0-percent annual rate. The implicit price deflator, which
reflects price movements in these costs and profits, rose
0.7 percent in the second quarter, the smallest increase since
1972.
The nonfinancial corporate sector includes all corpora
tions doing business in the United States with the exception
of banks, insurance companies, stock and commodities bro
kers, and finance and credit agencies. About 62 million jobs
were provided by these corporations during the second quar
ter of 1986, 7.7 million more than at the start of the recov
ery.
Labor input trends. Payroll hours in the business sector
have increased at a surprisingly rapid pace during the
present recovery. But in manufacturing, growth in paid
hours during the last 14 quarters has been slower than during
previous long recoveries. This implies that nonmanufactur
ing firms have experienced very large hours increases dur
ing the period.
□
------ FOOTNOTES----1 The bls labor productivity measures use labor input statistics derived
primarily from two monthly bls surveys, the Current Employment Statis
tics survey and the Current Population Survey. Output and compensation
measures are based on quarterly data prepared by the Bureau o f Economic
Analysis, U .S. Department of Commerce, as part of the National Income
and Product Accounts. For the most recent quarters, the manufacturing
output measure reflects movements in the monthly index of industrial
production for durable and nondurable manufactures prepared by the Board
o f Governors o f the Federal Reserve System. Further information on the
computation o f bls productivity and cost measures can be found in Chapter
13 o f the b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1982).
2 Business cycles are designated by the National Bureau of Economic
22
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Research, a private economic research organization based in Cambridge,
MA.
3 The business sector excludes only those components of gross national
product ( g n p ) for which independent measures of output and labor input are
unavailable and components o f g n p for which no corresponding labor input
measure is available. These are: general government, nonprofit institu
tions, paid employees of private households, the rental value of owneroccupied housing, the rest-of-the-world sector, and the statistical dis
crepancy in preparing the National Income and Product Accounts.
The nonfarm business sector is the business sector less farms. The farm
sector currently accounts for about 3 percent of business hours.
4 Hourly compensation measures are divided by the seasonally-adjusted
quarterly average of the monthly Consumer Pricer Index for All Urban
Consumers.
Sensitivity of bls economic projections
to exogenous variables
The 1995 macroeconomic model has been most responsive
to changes in fiscal spending and to changes
in foreign economic activity; assumptions regarding
energy have had little effect on the estimates
N orman
C.
S aunders
The Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts a comprehensive
program of aggregate and industry-level employment pro
jections on a biennial basis.1 Users of the projections should
keep in mind that b l s (or others preparing similar projec
tions) must make many assumptions regarding the behavior
of factors which affect the future course of the U.S. econ
omy. In addition, judgments are made about the response of
the projections to these primary assumptions. In short, al
though projections preparation and the use of models in
preparing the projections may appear precise and scientific,
developing economic projections is very much an art filled
with uncertainty.
The assumptions made by b l s cover a broad range, from
those about which we may be reasonably certain to those
which are not at all predictable. The role of the analyst in
preparing projections is to exercise judgment with regard to
reasonable expectations for the assumptions, particularly
where alternate values may have significant impacts. That
is, if a particular assumption is highly uncertain, yet has
little impact on the outcome of the projections, it is impor
tant that the analysts make that known to the users. Con
versely, if the projections are particularly sensitive to
specific assumptions, more care must be taken in their
preparation.
This article examines the assumptions which affect the
aggregate economic projections and illustrates the degree of
Norman C. Saunders is an economist in the Office of Economic Growth
and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
sensitivity of the projections to possible errors in those as
sumptions.
Two types of assumptions are required to develop a set of
aggregate economic projections. First, values must be as
signed to all variables which are exogenous to the aggregate
projections model, that is, variables that are not determined
by the model but are required to generate a solution. They
include such items as real defense expenditures, Social Se
curity benefit payments, and the U.S. currency exchange
rate. The second type of assumptions concern the validity of
the model structure itself, as these are reflected in changes
to that structure in the form of excluded variables, constant
adjustments, and modifications to behavioral coefficients.
By their very nature, the first type of assumptions— ex
ogenous variable specification— are the most visible inputs
to the model and, also, the most amenable to sensitivity
testing. The second type of assumptions are generally less
visible, given that they (and their ultimate impact on the
projections) are more a function of the projections prepara
tion process. They include explicit assumptions such as
expected structural shifts in the economy, the timing of the
business cycle, and expectations for productivity growth.
This type of assumption is far more difficult to assess for
sensitivity purposes.
This article focuses primarily on the sensitivity of the
macroeconomic projections (and, to a certain extent, industrylevel employment measures) to changes in the aggregate
model’s exogenous inputs. First, the flow of information
into and out of the macroeconomic model is outlined, fol23
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Sensitivity o f bls Economic Projections
lowed by a discussion of the results of the error analysis and
an examination of the effects of large, sustained errors in the
growth rates of selected exogenous assumptions on the ag
gregate and industry projections. Finally, the constant ad
justments imposed on the model’s behavioral relationships
are discussed.
The flow of information
The projections process begins with the constrained ex
trapolation of age-, sex-, and race-specific labor force par
ticipation rates.2 Applying the extrapolated participation
rates to the Bureau of the Census projected population lev
els3 yields an estimate of the civilian labor force which is
used in the aggregate model.
Next, exogenous assumptions are applied to the aggregate
model. These assumptions include true policy variables (for
example, benefit payments under various Federal transfer
programs, the response of the monetary authority to growth
in the economy, and the level of the Armed Forces), and
variables for which other reliable and generally accepted
projections are available, such as the population projections
developed by the Bureau of the Census. Exogenous vari
ables also include items which are outside the scope of the
model, such as economic growth and inflation rates in the
economies of the major trading partners of the United
States, the long-term behavior of the U.S. dollar’s exchange
value, and energy prices.
The aggregate model is then used as a framework for the
preparation of the projection of total U.S. economic activ
ity.4 b l s analysts review the aggregate results for reason
ableness, checking for internal consistency and continuity
with past trends and comparing the results with projections
made by others. Their review focuses on such aggregate
measures of economic activity as g n p , unemployment, and
productivity, but the model’s framework ensures that other
important measures of economic performance are not over
looked.
As for industry and occupational projections, the level
and distribution of real g n p and employment, as well as
several other aggregate variables, are the controlling factors
from the aggregate projections model. Following is a sum
mary of major inputs to and outputs from the aggregate
projections model:
• Variables incorporated from earlier projection stages
Level of the Armed Forces
Labor force, age 16 and over, by sex
Resident population, all age groups, by sex
• Variables incorporated as part of the macroeconomic
stage of the projections
Fiscal policy assumptions
Monetary policy assumptions
Foreign economic activity assumptions
Energy price and availability assumptions
24
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
• Variables passed from the macroeconomic model to later
stages of the projections
Gross National Product
Personal Consumption Expenditures
Gross Private Domestic Investment
Exports
Imports
Government
Employment
Miscellaneous
The flow of information in the early stages of projection
development is from the more aggregate to the more de
tailed. In the later stages, a less formal, but no less impor
tant, feedback occurs from the industry and occupational
projections to the more aggregate level. Because of the
review and feedback process, b l s projections converge to an
internally consistent set of solutions at all levels of the
estimation process.
Error analysis
The macroeconomic model used by b l s requires the val
ues for 849 exogenous variables to generate a solution.
Following is a breakdown by type of all variables and of the
subset of those variables included in the subsequent
analysis:
Total
Included
in analysis
T o ta l............................................... ...........
849
373
Fiscal .............................................
In c o m e ..........................................
Financial ......................................
T ax-related....................................
Foreign activity ............................
Demand-related ............................
Energy ..........................................
Technical input/output.................
Demographic ................................
Miscellaneous ..............................
Model switches ............................
29
40
18
161
11
37
136
170
46
13
188
26
40
18
146
11
37
36
0
46
13
0
...........
...........
...........
..........
...........
...........
..........
...........
...........
...........
..........
Variables were excluded from consideration if they con
trolled program flow (model switches), accounted for ex
traordinary variability in historical data series (dummy vari
ables), or were of a highly detailed industry-specific nature.
A separate run of the model was performed for each of the
373 exogenous variables used.
The assumption was made that the underlying trend of
each variable was correct for the 1985-95 period, but that
the initial period estimate was in error by 10 percent. Thus,
the exogenous value was increased by 10 percent in each
year of the period, a model solution was generated, and the
results were compared with the results of the base projec
tion. Comparisons were made of those variables which are
used at later stages of the projections— g n p and major de
mand components, employment, the unemployment rate,
T a b le
1.
g e n e ra te d
D iffe r e n c e
b e tw e e n
s e le c t e d e x o g e n e o u s v a r ia b le s u s e d t o
g e n e r a te 1 9 9 5 p r o je c t io n s v a lu e s a s p u b lis h e d
and as
b y a 10 -p e rc e n t e rro r
[In percent]
GNP,
1972
d ollars
Exogenous variable
Fiscal:
Defense purchases of goods and services, 1972 dollars .....................................................................................
Nondefense purchases, 1972 d o lla rs .........................................................................................................................
Federal nondefense employment ..............................................................................................................................
Federal compensation/employee, 1972 dollars ......................................................................................................
Transfers, food stamps, 1972 d o lla rs .........................................................................................................................
Transfers, military retirement, 1972 dollars .............................................................................................................
Transfers, medicare, 1972 d o lla r s ..............................................................................................................................
Transfers, Social Security, 1972 d o lla rs ....................................................................................................................
Transfers, all other, 1972 d o lla r s ................................................................................................................................
1.4
.4
-
GNP,
cu rre nt
d o llars
E m ploym ent
Unem ploym ent
rate
-.2
-
1.5
.5
.1
-.2
-
1.6
.5
.1
-.6
-
-1 .4
-.5
-.1
.5
-.1
-.2
-.4
-.9
-.2
.1
.3
.8
.2
.2
.5
.9
.3
.2
.5
.9
.3
.8
.4
.2
.7
.9
.4
.2
.8
.2
- 1 .0
-.5
-.2
-.8
-.2
-
Large tim e
dep osit
rate
_
_
.1
-
State and local:
Education purchases, 1972 dollars ............................................................................................................................
Health, labor and welfare, 1972 dollars ....................................................................................................................
Civilian safety, 1972 d o lla rs ..........................................................................................................................................
Other purchases, 1972 dollars ...................................................................................................................................
Education employment .................................................................................................................................................
Civilian safety employment ..........................................................................................................................................
Other employment ........................................................................................................................................................
Compensation/employee, 1972 dollars ....................................................................................................................
Transfers to persons, 1972 dollars ............................................................................................................................
-
-
-.2
.2
-.1
.3
1.1
.6
.3
.9
.3
.1
.2
-1 .0
.3
Foreign economic activity:
World gross domestic product less U.S. and centrally-planned, 1972 dollars ..................................................
Major trading partner gross domestic product deflator ..........................................................................................
Major trading partner export deflator .........................................................................................................................
Major trading partner exchange rate in d e x ................................................................................................................
1.4
.1
1.5
1.5
1.1
.6
2.0
2.9
1.4'
-.1
1.6
1.6
-1 .2
.1
- 1 .4
-1 .4
-.7
.5
-.6
-.1
-.1
-
.1
-
-
-
-.3
-.1
.1
.9
-1 .0
- .1
-.1
-
.3
.3
.2
1.2
1.5
-.1
Energy-related:
Domestic well-head price, lower 48 crude ................................................................................................................
Domestic well-head price, natural g a s .......................................................................................................................
Barrel price, imported crude petroleum ....................................................................................................................
Miscellaneous income:
Depreciation rate, commercial and o th e r ..................................................................................................................
Depreciation rate, food and kindred p ro d u c ts ...........................................................................................................
Depreciation rate, mining ............................................................................................................................................
Depreciation rate, communications ............................................................................................................................
Ratio, non-OASDHi contributions to personal income less tra n s fe rs .....................................................................
Percent of private earnings covered by Social Security ........................................................................................
Ratio, employee social insurance contributions to total contributions ................................................................
Business transfer payments, current d o lla rs .............................................................................................................
-
-.1
-.1
.4
.3
.1
-
-.2
-
.2
-
-.4
-.2
-1 .0
-.1
.1
-1 .5
-.2
- 1 .2
-.2
-
-
-
-
-
.3
-.3
-.2
.1
-.1
.2
.6
-.5
Demographic:
Male labor force, age 16 and o v e r ..............................................................................................................................
Female labor force, age 16 and o v e r .........................................................................................................................
.9
.7
Tax-related:
Ratio, personal income of States with an income tax to total income ................................................................
Value of a standard deduction, average ..................................................................................................................
Value of an individual e xe m p tio n ................................................................................................................................
Maximum taxable salary, oasdhi................................................................................................................................
Indirect business tax rate ............................................................................................................................................
Effective corporate tax r a t e ..........................................................................................................................................
Effective State personal income tax rate ..................................................................................................................
Combined oasdhi tax ra te ............................................................................................................................................
-.5
.2
.2
-.1
-.3
-.3
-.5
-1 .0
Personal tax alternatives:
No indexation of rates (versus full in de xin g ).............................................................................................................
10-percent tax cut (across the board) .......................................................................................................................
10-percent tax increase (across the board) .............................................................................................................
- 8 .8
1.9
- 1 .7
Miscellaneous demand-related:
Capacity value, new housing u n its ..............................................................................................................................
Discard rate, residential one-unit s tru c tu re s .............................................................................................................
Ratio, purchases of new cars to total pce ...............................................................................................................
Gasoline pump price, 1972 dollars/gallon ................................................................................................................
Exports, factor income, 1972 dollars .........................................................................................................................
Imports, factor income, 1972 dollars .........................................................................................................................
per labor hour, the inflation rate (as measured by the
rate o f change in the implicit price deflator for gnp), and the
interest rate on large time deposits (the key interest rate in
the macroeconomic model).
gnp
Table 1 shows the percent difference between the pub
lished moderate-growth projection values and those gener
ated by the alternative solution. Also included is the abso
lute difference in the unemployment rate between the two
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-.1
-
-.2
-
-
-.2
.9
-.3
-
.1
_
.1
-
-.6
-.1
-.2
-.1
-
.2
.1
-.1
-.2
.1
-.1
-
-.1
.1
-
.2
-.1
-.1
.1
1.1
.9
1.2
.9
3.8
3.2
-
-.7
-.7
.3
.2
.6
-.3
-.2
.1
.2
.2
.6
1.2
-.1
-
.1
.3
.2
-.1
-.3
-.3
-.7
-1 .2
-.1
-.2
-.1
-.2
-4 .0
2.4
- 2 .2
-3 .5
2.3
-2 .2
3.3
-2 .1
2.0
-2 .4
.4
-.1
1.2
-.3
-.7
-
-
model solutions and the impact on the interest rate on large
time deposits. Exogenous variables having insignificant im
pacts on these specific variables were not included in the
table.
The macroeconomic model appears to be most sensitive
to changes in fiscal policy assumptions, both revenues and
expenditures, and to assumptions concerning foreign eco
nomic activity. Changes in assumptions regarding the en25
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Sensitivity o f b l s Economic Projections
ergy sector, especially the barrel price of imported crude
petroleum, have very little impact on the macroeconomic
estimates passed along to later stages of the projections
process.
To better analyze the effects of fiscal expenditure shifts
on projections, the immediate and long-term multipliers for
selected Federal and State and local government expenditure
categories are shown in the following tabulation:
Immediate
effect
11-year
effect
Federal:
Defense spending ........................................ 1.83
Nondefense spending .................................. 1.94
Military retirement .............................................71
Medicare benefits ........................................ 1.56
Social Security benefits.......................................73
Other Federal transfers ...................................... 72
2.36
2.51
1.83
1.97
1.81
1.77
State and local:
Education purchases .................................... 1.82
Health and welfare purchases..................... 1.72
Civilian safety purchases ............................ 1.78
Other State and local purchases ................. 1.76
Transfer p aym ents............................................... 72
1.95
1.91
1.90
1.89
1.53
Table 2 presents the absolute differences in the percent
shares of gnp accounted for by the major demand compo
nents of gnp . As with the level of gnp and employment, the
Table 2. Difference between the distribution of
alternate assumptions for exogenous variables
g n p
significant impacts appear to be related primarily to fiscal
policy and foreign economic activity assumption changes.
The macroeconomic model includes two types of mone
tary policy assumptions. The first includes many of the
small components of the various definitions of the money
supply. These assumptions affect only the determination of
mi (the narrow definition of the money supply) and M3 (the
broadest definition of the money supply) and have no impact
whatsoever on other sectors of the model.
The second type of monetary policy assumption is the
“decision rule” used by the Federal Reserve Board to deter
mine the optimal rate of growth of M2. In the macroeco
nomic model used by bls , the decision rule is formulated as
the willingness of the monetary authority to accommodate
current levels of inflation and real growth in the current
period. Choices range from fully accommodative (easy
money) to the least accommodative (tight money).
Accommodation policies affect real and nominal gnp
growth, employment and inflation growth, the interest rate
on large time deposits, and the unemployment rate. The
impacts are quite small, which is not particularly surprising
in a model of this type. Monetary control, by its very nature,
is a short-term phenomenon which depends on the dynamics
of a detailed financial sector specification normally found
only in the many short-term forecasting models available for
the U.S. economy. Long-run determinants of potential
in the 1995 projections values as published and as generated by
[In percent]
P e r s o n a l C o n s u m p t io n
G o v e rn m e n t
F o r e ig n t r a d e
In v e s t m e n t
E x p e n d it u r e s ( p c e )
Exogenous
v a r ia b le
In v e n t o r y
NonD u r a b le s
N o n d u r a b le s
S e r v ic e s
r e s id e n t ia l
Fiscal:
Defense purchases, 1972 dollars ..............
Nondefense purchases, 1972 d o lla rs ..........
Medicare transfers, 1972 d o lla r s .................
Social Security, 1972 d o lla rs ........................
.16
.05
.02
.15
-.0 9
-.0 2
- .0 1
.09
-.2 2
-.0 6
.10
.02
.03
State and local:
Education, 1972 dollars ...............................
Health, 1972 dollars ......................................
Other, 1972 d o lla r s ........................................
Compensation per employee, 1972 d o llars.
.10
.04
.08
-.0 5
- .07
-.0 4
-.0 6
.01
- .14
-.0 8
-.1 2
.03
-.0 2
Foreign economic activity:
World gross domestic p ro d u c t.....................
Foreign export deflator .................................
Exchange rate ................................................
.05
.06
.04
-.2 6
-.2 7
-.2 8
Miscellaneous Income:
Social Security co verag e ...............................
Employee contribution r a t e ..........................
-.1 6
-.0 6
-.0 3
.29
- .0 3
Miscellaneous demand:
Financial services, 1972 d o lla rs ...................
Auto share of pce ................................
Gasoline pump p ric e ......................................
Factor income, e x p o rts .................................
Factor income, im p o rts .................................
Tax-related:
State coverage r a t io ......................................
Indirect business tax rate ............................
Corporate tax r a te ...........................................
State tax rate ..................................................
Combined oasdhi rate .................................
-
-.1 0
-.0 3
-.0 4
-.1 0
-.1 6
R e s id e n t ia l
change
E x p o rts
im p o r t s
.47
.14
-.0 3
-.0 6
-.1 4
- .04
-.0 3
-.0 8
- .0 1
.04
-.0 6
-.0 3
-.0 5
.01
.31
.16
.28
.02
.74
.37
.40
.02
.41
.44
-.1 0
-.1 1
- .11
-.1 4
-.1 5
- .16
.04
.10
-.0 2
.10
.08
.01
.11
.01
-.0 2
-.0 1
-.0 1
-.0 1
-.0 1
.01
-.0 9
-.0 4
-.0 8
.01
-.0 1
-.0 2
-.1 0
-.0 2
-.0 1
-.0 2
.03
-.4 0
-.3 9
-.3 7
.14
.12
.07
-.0 5
-.0 2
-.0 2
- .0 1
-.0 1
- .0 1
.07
-.0 8
.05
-.0 8
-.0 6
.02
.04
-.0 3
.01
-.0 4
-.1 1
.07
-.0 6
.04
.07
-.0 9
-.0 3
-.0 8
.07
-.0 7
.01
-.0 1
.08
.03
- .0 1
.05
-
-.0 7
-.0 7
26
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I
.03
-
-
-.0 3
-
-.0 3
.02
-.0 2
-.0 4
-.1 0
-.0 2
-.0 6
-.0 3
- .0 1
-.0 1
-.0 1
- .0 1
-.0 1
-
-.0 1
-
-.0 1
-
-
“
- .0 1
-.0 1
-.0 1
-
-
-
.03
.01
.01
-
-
-
.04
.01
and
lo c a l
-.1 5
-.0 4
-.0 4
-.0 9
“
-
F e d e ra l
-
-
-.0 5
-
-
.01
-.0 1
.22
.03
-.0 6
-.0 2
.06
-.0 3
.03
.06
.04
.04
-.0 7
.02
.04
-.0 2
-
- .2 1
-
.01
-
-.0 2
.02
.04
.02
.02
.04
.08
-
.01
-0 .1
- .03
.03
.06
.03
.03
.06
.11
growth are generally understood to be more related to those
factors which affect the trend path of demand growth, such
as demographic factors and patterns in income growth.
Thus, the monetary policy instruments, while useful in in
fluencing the short-run behavior of the macroeconomic
model, generally do not affect projections which focus on
long-term growth.
Growth-rate shift analysis
The error analysis tests for the relative sensitivity of the
macroeconomic model to sustained level shifts or errors in
a specific exogenous variable. Some of the key asumptions,
however, are subject to wide, relatively unpredictable fluc
tuations. To test the sensitivity of the model and projection
results to unexpected fluctuations in the growth rates of
selected exogenous variables, six exogenous variables were
selected and two solutions were prepared for each, as fol
lows:
• Defense purchases of goods and services (1972 dollars):
Variable unchanged, 1985-95 (no real growth).
Annual real growth of 5 percent.
• Federal nondefense purchases of goods and services
(1972 dollars):
Variable unchanged, 1985-95 (no real growth).
Annual real growth of 5 percent.
• Federal transfer payments, Social Security benefits (1972
dollars):
Real average annual decline of 5 percent.
Real average annual increase of 5 percent.
• Gross domestic product, our major trading partners (1972
dollars):
Annual real growth of 1 percent.
Annual real growth of 5 percent.
• Average exchange rate index, our major trading partners:
No change, 1985-95 (value of the dollar remains con
stant over the period).
Annual growth of 8 percent (value of the dollar falls
smoothly over the entire period).
• Price of imported crude petroleum:
Price declines to $18 per barrel by 1988 and remains at
that level thereafter.
Price declines to $26 per barrel in 1986 then begins to
increase again, reaching $60 per barrel by 1995.
Table 3 shows the percent difference for each of the six
exogenous variables and the associated impact on the major
results of the aggregate model solutions.
The major demand components, for each of the 12 aggre
gate solutions, were allocated by producing sectors using
the distributions implicit in the published bls base projec
tions. The resulting final demand bills of goods were applied
to the 1995 input-output table from the same published
projections to arrive at detailed estimates of industry total
output necessary to produce the aggregate gnp . Finally, the
industry output estimates were translated to employment
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
requirements using the employment/output ratios from the
published base projections. The resulting percent changes in
employment between the two alternative solutions for each
of the selected exogenous variables are presented, at the
sector level, in table 3.
The implications are that, at least for the selected vari
ables, large errors in specification could lead to significantly
altered results, at both the aggregate and industry levels of
detail. In subsequent projections preparation, it would be
worthwhile to develop such “single-variable” alternatives.
Add-factor analysis
For each behavioral relationship in the macroeconomic
model, the analyst may specify adjustments to the constant
term of the equation. These are called add-factors because
they displace the result of the equation up or down by an
additive amount. Constant adjustments may be applied in
one or more years of the solution interval, may be constant,
declining, or increasing over time, and, in short, allow for
tremendous control by the analyst over the solution path and
results of the model.
Normally, constant adjustments are initially specified for
virtually every behavioral equation in a complex model to
smooth the vagaries of individual equations and to force the
model to reproduce the last few years of available historical
data. These add-factors would then be tapered smoothly to
a zero value at some point in the solution interval. Indeed,
without this initial step, large economic models will gener
ally be unable to converge on a solution at all.
Finally, to derive an acceptable solution, the analyst in
troduces modifications to exogenous values and further
changes to the constant adjustment factors. In some cases,
where the dynamics of the model make the effects of
changes to constant adjustments unpredictable, the analyst
may elect to exclude certain behavioral relationships. That
is, the equation is “turned o ff’ and exogenously specified
values are supplied in place of the equation results. Once an
acceptable solution has been derived, all of the add-factors
are recomputed so that previously excluded variables may
be included again in the solution set.
From the foregoing discussion, it is clear that an econo
metric model provides a convenient framework for a set of
economic projections. However, the way that framework is
fleshed out is, to a great extent, a reflection of the experien
tial judgments of the analysts preparing the projection. In
fact, it has been estimated that as much as 70 percent of the
content of a particular projection set is attributable to the
judgments of the analyst and the remaining 30 percent to the
formal structure of the econometric model.
The bls 1995 projections process was begun with the
Wharton control forecast of June 1984 as the starting point.
Thus, the preliminary step of calibrating the constant adjust
ments had already been performed. However, to derive a
reasonable trend projection of growth, bls had to replace the
Wharton exogenous variables with its own estimates, and,
more importantly, to disentangle the Wharton constant ad27
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Sensitivity o f b l s Economic Projections
justments which had been overlaid on the calibrating adjust
ments. One of the primary features of the Wharton forecast
was that it contained a strong cyclical component, and many
of the initial changes to the Wharton add-factors were neces
sitated by bls ’ goal of a cycle-free trend projection.
A comparison of the Wharton constant adjustments was
made with those of bls for 106 behavioral relations in the
model: 71 demand categories (all behaviorally determined
components of real gnp), 33 employment levels (all behav
iorally determined sectoral employment), and the male and
female civilian labor force. Following is the number of
behavioral relations where the constant adjustment as a pro
portion of the determined variable increased or decreased
over time:
Equation
In creased
D ecreased
Demand:
BLS ........................................ ........
W h a rto n ................................ ........
37
35
34
36
Employment:
BLS ........................................ ........
Wharton ................................ .........
18
10
15
23
Labor force:
BLS ........................................ .........
W h a rto n ................................ ........
2
2
0
0
Equation
Larger
Sm aller
Identical
39
24
0
21
4
2
11
5
0
Demand ................................
Em ploym ent.........................
Labor force .........................
Exactly how one should interpret these comparisons is
moot. Generally, the bls add-factors are larger than those of
Wharton. This may reflect a greater propensity on the part
of bls analysts to experiment with the structure of the
model, or it may reflect the smoothing that bls imposed on
the macroeconomic results.
Recall that the bls macroeconomic projections do not
stand completely on their own merits. Where detailed re
sults at lower levels of the projection process contradict the
aggregate results, the aggregate projections are often modi
fied to take into account these contradictions. This factor
alone accounts for bls ’ apparent tendency to more heavily
add-factor the employment equations than does Wharton.
Conclusions and recommendations
The key results of the macroeconomic model are more
heavily influenced by some exogenous assumptions than by
others. These include Federal spending and tax policy and
the assumptions relating to foreign economic activity. Per
haps far more important, but much less straightforward to
quantify, are the impacts of model structure modifications,
in the form of constant adjustments, on projection results.
The relation of the bls constant adjustment to that in the
Wharton control is shown below:
Table 3. Effects of large changes in selected exogenous variables on major projected variables and sectoral employment as
compared to those published for 1995
[In percent]
Ite m
D e fe n s e
N o n d e fe n s e
p u rc h a s e s
p u rc h a s e s
S o c ia l
S e c u r it y
b e n e f it s
F o r e ig n
g ro s s
Exchange
d o m e s t ic
ra te
p ro d u c t
Im p o r t
o il
p r ic e
M a jo r p r o je c t e d v a r ia b le
Exogenous variable difference ......................................................................................................
62.9
62.9
172.1
37.8
115.9
233.3
Real gnp .........................................................................................................
1985-95 growth rate d iffe re n ce ..................................................................................................
6.5
.6
2.3
.2
5.3
.5
5.4
.5
12.6
1.1
-.7
.0
gnp d e fla to r........................................................................................................................................
1985-95 growth rate d iffe re n ce .................................................................................................
.7
.1
.4
.0
.9
.1
-.7
.0
9.1
.8
1.3
.1
E m ploym ent........................................................................................................................................
1985-95 growth rate d iffe re n ce ..................................................................................................
6.5
.6
2.5
.2
5.3
.5
4.2
.4
10.0
.9
-.6
.0
Unemployment rate difference ......................................................................................................
Large time deposit rate d iffe re n c e .............................................................................................
gnp per worker, 1985-95 rate d iffe re n ce .................................................................................
-5 .6
.36
.0
-2 .2
.16
.0
-4 .7
.36
.0
-3 .6
.06
.0
-8 .5
1.99
.2
6.3
2.6
5.8
5.6
9.7
7.7
5.7
6.8
6.4
3.8
5.1
5.7
3.9
2.0
1.2
1.5
1.4
2.1
1.9
1.8
2.2
2.2
1.5
2.1
1.7
1.8
6.7
4.2
4.2
3.5
6.2
6.4
6.5
8.6
8.7
6.0
6.0
6.7
5.2
5.2
8.3
9.9
3.1
9.5
7.0
5.1
4.8
4.6
2.8
3.2
4.1
2.5
12.0
18.5
42.4
8.2
25.7
15.7
11.0
13.6
7.7
7.1
7.8
9.7
5.9
.5
.16
.0
S e c t o r a l e m p lo y m e n t
Total establishment e m p loym en t...............................................................................................
Agriculture, forestry, and fish e rie s..................................................................................................
Mining .................................................................................................................................................
Maintenance and repair construction ..........................................................................................
Manufacturing ...................................................................................................................................
Transportation ...................................................................................................................................
Communications ..............................................................................................................................
Public u tilitie s .....................................................................................................................................
Wholesale and retail trade .............................................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate .............................................................................................
Other s e rv ic e s ...................................................................................................................................
Government e n te rp rise s..................................................................................................................
Special in d u strie s..............................................................................................................................
Digitized for 28
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-.6
-.3
-1 .8
-.4
-.8
-.8
-.5
- .1
- .7
-.3
-.3
-.8
-.8
b l s ’ current methodology is to prepare a base projection
and several alternative projections. The purpose of the
alternative projections has been primarily to put confi
dence intervals around the base projection. This approach
should continue, with special focus on those variables most
heavily add-factored in the preparation of the base projec
tion.
What b l s methodology has been lacking, however, is the
identification and exploration of alternatives around those
exogenous assumptions which most heavily impact the key
macroeconomic results. Therefore, in addition to the alter
native projections mentioned above, the foregoing results
should be used to identify those specific exogenous assump
tions for which alternative scenarios should be developed.
Such “single-variable” alternatives would be relatively inex
pensive to generate (relative to “whole-model” alternatives)
and would add greatly to the usefulness of the b l s projec
tions, in that they would assist users in identifying results
which are most likely to be affected by unexpected develop
ments in key assumptions.
-F O O T N O T E S
1 The bls projections are initially published in the M o n th ly L a b o r R e
v ie w . The latest series of projections articles, appearing in the November
1985 R e v ie w , include: Betty W. Su, “The economic outlook to 1995: new
assumptions and projections,” pp. 3-16; Howard N Fullerton, Jr., “The
1995 labor force: bls ’ latest projections,” pp. 17-25; Valerie A. Personick,
“A second look at industry output and employment trends through 1995,”
pp. 26-41; and George T. Silvestri and John M. Lukasiewicz, “Occupa
tional employment projections: the 1984-95 outlook,” pp. 4 2 -5 7 .
2 A comprehensive methodological description, along with reprints of
the latest projection articles and more detailed projection results, appears
in E m p lo y m e n t P r o je c tio n s f o r 1 9 9 5 : D a ta a n d M e th o d s , Bulletin 2253
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1986).
3 P r o je c tio n s o f th e P o p u la tio n o f th e U n ite d S ta te s : 1 9 8 3 to 2 0 8 0 ,
C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n R e p o r ts , Series P-25, No. 952 (Bureau of the Census,
1984).
4 The aggregate economic model currently in use by the bls was ac
quired as the result of a competitive procurement process. It is the LongTerm Model of the U .S. Economy developed by the Wharton Econometric
Associates, Inc., version LTM0684S. The general structure of the model
is fully outlined in L o n g -T e r m M o d e l S tr u c tu r e a n d S p e c ific a tio n (Wharton
Econometrics, 1982).
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. Depart
ment of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212.
29
Research
Summaries
Women veterans total
1 million in first half of 1986
M
a r ia
L. R oca
A large portion of our male population has served in the
Armed Forces of the United States, and there has long been
a demand for information on their post-service adjustment to
the civilian labor market. Data on male veterans of World
War II, for example, were published regularly by b l s in the
1940’s and 1950’s,1 and population and labor force data on
those who served during the Vietnam era have been pub
lished monthly since 1971. By contrast, women did not
begin to serve in the Armed Forces to a significant degree
until the mid-1970’s. With this rise in service participation,
there has been an increase in the number of women joining
the veteran ranks. Beginning in January 1986, data on fe
male veterans first became available from the Current Pop
ulation Survey ( c p s ). This report discusses the current role
of women in the military services and provides a summary
of the new c p s data.
Women in the military. Women began active participation
in the military during the early part of this century, with the
establishment of the Army Nurse Corps in 1901 and the
Navy Nurse Corps 7 years later. But, while they were recog
nized as military personnel, these women were denied equal
rank, comparable pay, and veteran status.2 It was not until
the second half of the century that they began to be recruited
in large numbers for a wider range of jobs providing equal
pay and full veterans’ benefits.
Women in the military today find a broad range of job
opportunities available to them. Though many continue to
serve in such traditional specialties as health and administra
tion, others work in such diverse fields as sonar and aircraft
equipment repair, radio and air traffic control, law enforce
ment, and meteorology. While each service has its own
regulations, the only occupational restrictions women gen
erally encounter in the military are those associated with
direct combat, and so very few serve in the infantry, on gun
crews, and on combat ships.3
In March 1986, the Department of Defense reported that
Maria L. Roca is an economist in the Division of Employment and Unem
ployment Analysis, Office of Employment and Unemployment Statistics,
Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
30
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
a
there were 215,000 women in the military, comprising ap
proximately 10 percent of the total Armed Forces. In the
post-Vietnam era (since 1975), the number of enlisted
women has increased by 100,150 and the number of female
officers by 17,200— or by 120 and 126 percent, respec
tively.4 Over this same period, the size of the total Armed
Forces has changed little.
The new data. Given the small sample of female veterans
in the c p s , the new data allow for little analysis of such
issues as post-service employment and unemployment expe
rience. Nevertheless, the accompanying tables provide lim
ited labor force and population data for the average of the
first 6 months of 1986; 6-month averages were used because
they are somewhat more reliable than data for an individual
month.
During the first half of 1986, the female veteran popula
tion averaged 1,030,000. (See table 1.) About 55 percent of
these women participated in the labor force, the same pro
portion as for female nonveterans. The majority of female
veterans served during a designated wartime period: almost
250.000 were Vietnam-era veterans, 70 percent of whom
were between the ages of 30 and 39. (See table 2.) The labor
force participation rate for these veterans, almost 80 per
cent, was higher than that of any age group of female non
veterans. The unemployed among this group averaged only
9.000 persons, yielding a jobless rate of about 5 percent.
However, the sample on which such estimates are based is
so small that any interpretation of these data is problematic.
About 450,000 women were veterans of other wars.
These women were primarily involved in World War II and
the Korean conflict and thus were mainly between the ages
of 60 and 69. Because of this concentration in the older age
Table 1. Labor force status of women 18 years and over by
veteran status, January-June 1986 averages
[Numbers in thousands]
C iv ilia n
V e te r a n s ta tu s
n o n in s t it u t io n a i
C iv ilia n
la b o r f o r c e
p o p u la t io n
Total veterans ............
Vietnam-era
v e te ra n s ..............
Other war
veterans ..............
Peacetime
veterans ..............
Nonveterans
..............
L a b o r fo rc e
p a r t ic ip a t io n
ra te
1 ,0 2 7
562
5 4 .7
245
193
7 8 .8
452
135
2 9 .9
330
234
7 1 .0
9 3 ,5 0 4
5 1 ,2 4 4
5 4 .8
Table 2. Age distribution of the female population 18 years
and over by veteran status, January-June 1986 averages
V e te ra n s
Age
V ie t n a m - e r a
v e te ra n s
O th e r
Peace
w ar
t im e
v e te ra n s
v e te ra n s
Total (in thousands) . . . .
245
452
330
Total (in percent) ............
18 to 29 years ............
30 to 39 years ............
40 to 49 years ............
50 to 59 years ............
60 to 69 years ............
70 years and over . . .
100.0
4.5
69.7
20.0
3.3
1.2
1.2
100.0
100.0
52.7
22.1
16.4
5.2
1.2
2.4
—
—
0.9
20.4
63.1
15.9
Non
v e te ra n s
93,504
100.0
26.2
20.7
14.1
12.2
11.5
11.5
groups, the labor force participation rate for “other” war
veterans is relatively low, about 30 percent.
The last group identified through the survey was peace
time veterans, generally those who served between World
War II and the Korean conflict, between the Korean conflict
and Vietnam, and during the post-Vietnam era. In early
1986, there were 330,000 peacetime veterans, 71 percent of
whom were labor force participants.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics will make the data on
female veterans available upon request.
comparing the labor force patterns of military and civilian
wives.1 The recent situation is described first and is fol
lowed by a review of trends since 1970.
Status in March 1986
About 846,000 women in the United States were living on
or off military posts with husbands who were members of
the Armed Forces in March 1986. An additional 50,000
women were separated from their spouses because the men
had been assigned to ships, overseas duty, or other posts
where the family could not accompany them.2
Of the women living with their husbands 52 percent were
working or looking for work, compared with 55 percent of
civilian wives. However, this similarity is misleading.
When the age difference between military and civilian wives
is taken into account, military wives are substantially less
likely to be in the labor force.
The age distribution of military wives can be estimated
from that of their husbands. We know that, in general,
women tend to marry men who are about 2 to 3 years older
than themselves. In 1986, for example, the median age for
married women, husband present, was 42.1 years, com
pared with a median of 44.8 years for husbands. As shown
in the percent distribution below, husbands in military serv
ices are a great deal younger than their civilian counterparts.
------ F O O T N O T E S ------
Age
1 See, for example, L a b o r F o r c e a n d E m p lo y m e n t in 1 9 5 9 , Special
Labor Force Report No. 4 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1960), p. A -l 1.
2 S u r v e y o f F e m a le V e te r a n s (Veterans’ Administration, September
1985), p. 1.
3 M ilita r y W o m en in th e D e p a r tm e n t o f D e fe n s e (U.S. Department of
Defense, April 1985), p. 47.
4 Data are from the U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Manpower
Data Center.
Military and civilian wives:
update on the labor force gap
H ow ard V. H ayghe
In an era when wives’ earnings are a major component of
family income, many military wives experience labor mar
ket difficulties which can have a serious impact on the
economic well-being of their families. This, in turn, can
affect the ability of today’s all-volunteer Armed Forces to
retain the highly skilled, experienced personnel that are vital
to its mission.
This report updates a 1981 Monthly Labor Review article
Howard V. Hayghe is an economist in the Division of Employment and
Unemployment Analysis, O ffice of Employment and Unemployment
Statistics, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T o ta l...............
16
20
25
35
45
to 19 .............
to 24 .............
to 34 .............
to 44 .............
and over . . . .
M ilitary
husbands
Civilian
husbands
A ll
w ives
100
100
100
2
17
49
26
6
4
23
23
50
_
_
7
26
23
44
Thus, it can be expected that as a group, military wives
are also considerably younger than all civilian wives. In
deed, virtually all are probably under 45 years of age. For
the sake of consistency, labor force comparisons for military
wives will be made with all wives 16 to 44 years old. (The
proportion of military wives is only about 2.9 percent of all
married women these ages, so their effect on labor force
data pertaining to all 16- to 44-year-old wives is clearly
negligible. Thus, all wives in the age group can be consid
ered as the civilian counterparts of military wives.)
Overall, the labor force participation rate of military
wives (52 percent) was nearly 15 percentage points lower
than that of their civilian counterparts. Moreover, whatever
their race or motherhood status, military wives were less
likely than the 16- to 44-year-olds to be labor force partici
pants. (See table 1.) For instance, white military wives had
a participation rate in 1986 that was 18 percentage points
lower than the rate for their civilian counterparts. Among
blacks, the difference was about 11 percentage points. The
presence of preschool children appeared to limit military
wives’ labor force activity more sharply than that of the
31
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Research Summaries
Table 1. Population and labor force participation rates of
military and civilian wives by race and presence and age of
children, March 1986
[Numbers in thousands]
C h a r a c t e r is t ic
M ilit a r y w iv e s ,
C iv ilia n w iv e s ,
16 y e a rs an d
16 y e a rs and
o ld e r
o ld e r
A ll w iv e s ,
1 6 t o 4 4 y e a r s o ld
P o p u la t io n
Total ..................................................
W h it e .............................................
Black .............................................
846
669
138
50,132
45,285
3,570
29,228
25,967
2,213
With no children under age 1 8 . .
With children under age 18 . . . .
Children ages 6 to 17 only . . .
Children under age 6 ..............
221
625
216
409
26,100
24,032
12,499
11,533
7,079
22,150
10,027
12,123
Trends
L a b o r f o r c e p a r t ic ip a t io n r a t e 1
Total ..................................................
White .............................................
Black .............................................
52.1
48.1
65.9
54.6
53.6
64.3
66.9
66.1
77.1
With no children under age 1 8 . .
With children under age 18 . . . .
Children ages 6 to 17 only . . .
Children under age 6 ..............
68.3
46.4
66.2
35.7
48.0
61.8
68.5
54.5
82.6
61.8
71.4
53.9
1 Labor force as a percent of population.
Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual cells may not equal totals.
other group of wives with children that age, but the differ
ence narrowed for those with school-age children. How
ever, even when there were no children in the family, the
military wives’ participation rate was lower.
Unemployment rates were higher across the board for
military wives than for the other wives— 10.7 versus 6.0
percent. This is partly a function of the black-white mix as
well as greater family mobility; black wives constituted 16
percent of the total, versus 8 percent of all civilian wives.
Table 2.
When employed, military wives are more concentrated in
sales and service occupations than civilian wives. About 35
percent of military wives held such jobs in March 1986,
compared with 27 percent of civilian wives. At the same
time, military wives were less likely to be in professional
specialty jobs— 12 versus 16 percent. Service and sales jobs
frequently offer the flexibility of part-time employment, do
not necessarily require specialized training, and are often
typified by high employee turnover. Hence, even though
they are characterized by low earnings,3 they are probably
easier for military wives to obtain than other jobs, for which
longer-term commitments are often expected.
The relatively low labor force participation rates of mili
tary wives are not a new development. In 1970, shortly after
the Bureau of Labor Statistics first tabulated data for this
group, 31 percent of military wives were working or looking
for work. In contrast, 44 percent of their civilian counter
parts were in the labor force. Since then, the rates for both
groups have increased by a little more than 20 percentage
points. Thus, by 1986, the rates were 52 percent for military
wives and 67 percent for the other wives— practically the
same difference as in 1970.
While the participation rates for civilian wives advanced
steadily over the period, the trend for military wives was
erratic. In addition to the demographic, economic, and so
cial factors that influence the labor force activity of both
civilian and military wives,4 the rates for military wives are
also likely to be affected by changes in the flows of enlist
ments, transfers, and discharges of their husbands. This
may also partly account for the erratic movements in mili
tary wives’ unemployment rates.
Labor force and unemployment rates of military and civilian wives, March 1970 to March 1986
U n e m p lo y m e n t r a t e 2
L a b o r f o r c e p a r t ic ip a t io n r a t e 1
Year
M ilit a r y
C iv ilia n
A ll
M ilit a r y
C iv ilia n
A ll
w iv e s ,
w iv e s ,
w iv e s ,
w iv e s ,
w iv e s ,
w iv e s ,
16 y e a rs and
16 y e a rs and
1 6 to 4 4
16 y e a rs an d
16 y e a rs and
16 to 4 4
o ld e r
o ld e r
y e a r s o ld
o ld e r
o ld e r
y e a r s o ld
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
30.5
27.2
26.8
33.3
36.3
41.2
41.1
41.9
42.5
43.3
43.7
44.0
45.3
47.5
48.9
13.0
10.4
10.0
13.1
12.4
4.5
5.7
5.2
4.4
4.5
5.7
7.3
6.4
5.3
5.8
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
..........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................
39.3
38.0
38.2
46.6
50.2
44.6
45.3
46.8
47.7
49.4
51.1
52.1
54.7
56.3
58.7
16.3
12.7
18.0
16.5
11.8
8.3
7.0
6.6
4.9
4.9
10.0
8.4
7.8
6.2
5.9
1980 .........................................................................................................................
1981 .........................................................................................................................
1982 .........................................................................................................................
50.6
50.7
51.9
47.6
50.6
52.1
52.1
50.2
51.1
51.3
51.9
53.0
54.4
54.6
60.3
61.6
62.4
63.4
64.5
66.3
66.9
10.9
8.0
13.5
17.2
16.9
17.8
10.7
5.1
5.6
6.9
6.9
5.4
5.5
5.2
6.2
6.8
8.1
8.2
6.7
6.3
6.0
1984 .........................................................................................................................
1985 .........................................................................................................................
1986 .........................................................................................................................
1 Labor force as percent of population.
2 Unemployed as percent of labor force.
note: Data are not seasonally adjusted.
32
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Clearly, military wives have made considerable progress
in the labor market. But a number of articles and studies
indicate that frequent transfers of their husbands place many
military wives at a labor market disadvantage. It has long
been known that high mobility means frequent breaks in the
wife’s employment or education and training.5 One result
is that her opportunities to develop a marketable career are
disrupted; another is that she must search for jobs in unfa
miliar geographic areas. Moreover, the concomitant lack of
experience, training, and seniority may result in lower earn
ings for military wives.6 They may also experience some
job discrimination because of the likelihood that they will
not remain with an employer for very long.7 But, whatever
the cause, or causes, of military wives’ labor market prob
lems, these problems continue to be a source of concern not
only to the families themselves, but also to the Armed Serv
ices as a whole.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S --------1 See Allyson Sherman Grossman, “The employment situation for mili
tary w ives,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v i e w , February 1981, pp. 6 0-64.
2 The information in this research summary is based on data collected in
the Current Population Survey in March 1986 and in March of prior years.
The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey with a sample that
presently includes about 59,500 households in the 50 States and the District
o f Columbia. The survey is conducted for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by
the Bureau o f the Census and provides comprehensive data on the labor
force by a wide variety of demographic characteristics, including family
status. For further information, see b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , V o lu m e I ,
Bulletin 2 1 3 4 -1 , pp. 3 -1 2 .
3 See, for example, “Weekly Earnings o f Wage and Salary Workers:
Third Quarter,” bls News Release, Oct. 1985, table 3.
4 See Hilda Kahne and Andrew Kohen, “Economic Perspectives on the
Roles o f Women in the American Economy,” J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m ic L ite r
a tu r e , December 1975, pp. 1249-92.
5 See Ruth Chaskel, “Effect o f Mobility on Family Life,” S o c ia l W o r k ,
vol. 9, October 1964, pp. 83-91; Elizabeth Finlayson, “A Study of the
Wife o f the Army Officer: Her Academic and Career Preparation, Her
Current Employment and Volunteer Services,” in McCubbin and others,
eds ., F a m ilie s in th e M ilita r y (Beverly Hills, c a , Sage Publications, 1976),
ch. 1.; Judy Pearson, T e s tim o n y on T r a n s fe r a b ility o f G I B ill (Arlington,
v a , Military Wives Association, October 1981).
6 See “Relative Spouse Earnings,” P a y A d e q u a c y S tu d y (Department of
Defense, 1979), appendix C.
7 See Helga M. Parks, “Survey o f Job Discrimination Against Military
W ives,” unpublished manuscript (Springfield, v a , Military Family Re
source Center, February 1983).
Occupational pay in textile dyeing
and finishing plants
Production and related workers in the textile dyeing and
finishing industry averaged $6.67 an hour in June 1985,
according to a study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.1
Regionally, average hourly earnings were highest in New
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
England ($7.67) and lowest in the Southeast ($6.42), where
three-fourths of the 36,300 production workers were em
ployed. The Middle Atlantic States, employing one-tenth of
the workers, recorded $7.27 an hour. (See table 1.)
Wages in mills processing textiles for their own account
averaged virtually the same as mills processing materials for
customers on a commission basis (textiles owned by others),
$6.67 and $6.68, respectively. Employment was equally
divided between these two types of finishers.
Pay in mills primarily processing manmade textiles—
seven-tenths of the work force— averaged $6.83 an hour,
6 percent more than the $6.42 recorded among cotton textile
processors. Within both of these groups, pay nearly always
averaged more per hour in fabric mills than in yam or thread
mills.
Pay levels also were compared by type of area, size of
establishment, and labor-management contract coverage.
Average hourly earnings were 11 percent higher in
metropolitan areas2 than in nonmetropolitan areas ($7.10
versus $6.39). Pay in plants with at least 500 employees
averaged $6.84 an hour, the same as in plants with 250 to
499 employees, but was higher than in plants with 50-249
employees ($6.45 an hour). In establishments where a ma
jority of the workers were covered by labor-management
agreements, pay averaged $7.57 an hour, 19 percent more
than the $6.35 in nonunion establishments. Regionally, the
pay advantage for production workers in union establish
ments was 5 percent in the Southeast, 15 percent in New
England, and 48 percent in the Middle Atlantic region.
Forty occupations, accounting for nearly three-fifths of
the production workers, were selected to represent the in
dustry’s wage structure, workers’ skills and manufacturing
operations. Pay levels among these jobs ranged from $5.63
and hour for janitors, porters, and cleaners, to $9.71 for
machine printers. Tenders of cloth-dyeing machines, nu
merically the largest job studied separately, averaged $6.92
an hour. Occupational pay levels varied by pay determining
characteristics such as region, type of textile processed, size
of establishment, and union contract status; the interrela
tionships among these factors, however, were not taken into
account when tabulating the data.
Virtually all production workers were in establishments
providing paid holidays, paid vacations, and at least part of
the cost of various health and insurance plans. Seven to 10
holidays annually were typical, as were 1 to 4 weeks of
vacation pay, depending on years of service.
Retirement pension plans (in addition to Social Security)
covered approximately three-fourths of the work force,
while retirement severance plans applied to nearly one-tenth.
Employers typically paid the entire cost of these retirement
plans.
One-fourth of the workers were employed in establish
ments having collective bargaining agreements covering a
majority of the production workers. Regionally, the propor
tions were one-tenth in the Southeast, seven-tenths in the
33
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Research Summaries
Table 1. Average hourly earnings1 in textile dyeing and finishing plants, United States and selected regions,2 June 1985
C h a r a c t e r is t ic
U n it e d S t a t e s 3
N e w E n g la n d
M id d le A t la n t ic
S o u th e a s t
All production workers ................................................................................................................................
$ 6 .6 7
$ 7 .6 7
$ 7 .2 7
$ 6 .4 2
Type of finisher:
Commission m i ll........................................................................................................................................
For own a cco u n t........................................................................................................................................
6 .6 8
7 .5 8
7 .5 4
6 .0 0
6 .6 7
8 .0 3
5 .3 1
6 .6 5
Type of textile:
Cotton3 ......................................................................................................................................................
Broadwoven ..........................................................................................................................................
Yarn or th re a d ........................................................................................................................................
Manmade3 .................................................................................................................................................
Broadwoven ..........................................................................................................................................
Yarn or th re a d ........................................................................................................................................
6 .4 2
7 .7 1
6 .3 5
6 .1 8
6 .4 4
7 .3 7
6 .8 6
6 .1 9
6 .1 1
-
-
6 .1 1
6 .8 3
7 .6 6
7 .8 5
6 .5 6
6 .9 2
7 .6 6
8 .1 0
6 .6 2
5 .5 1
-
-
5 .4 7
Type of area:
Metropolitan areas4 ................................................................................................................................
Nonmetropolitan a r e a s ............................................................................................................................
7 .1 0
7 .6 7
7 .4 0
6 .5 5
6 .3 9
-
-
6 .3 9
Size of establishment:
5 0 - 2 4 9 w o rk e rs ........................................................................................................................................
2 5 0 - 4 9 9 w o rk e rs .....................................................................................................................................
5 0 0 workers or more ..............................................................................................................................
6 .4 5
7 .5 5
7 .2 6
6 .8 4
7 .9 5
-
6 .6 5
6 .8 4
-
6 .8 4
Labor-management contracts:
E sta b lish m e n ts w ith —
Majority of workers co v e re d ................................................................................................................
None or minority of workers covered ...............................................................................................
Selected production occupations:
Color m ix e rs ...............................................................................................................................................
Dyeing-machine tenders, cloth ..............................................................................................................
Finishing-range o p e ra to rs .......................................................................................................................
Inspectors, cloth, machine .....................................................................................................................
Janitors, porters, and cleaners ..............................................................................................................
Mechanics (machinery), m a in te n a n ce ..................................................................................................
Power-truck operators ............................................................................................................................
Printers, m a c h in e .....................................................................................................................................
Tenter-frame tenders ..............................................................................................................................
Winders, y a r n ............................................................................................................................................
1 Excludes premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts.
Incentive payments, such as those resulting from piecework or production bonus systems, and
cost-of-living pay increases (but not bonuses) were included as part of the workers’ regular pay.
Excluded are performance bonuses and lump-sum payments of the type negotiated in the auto
and aerospace industries, as well as profit-sharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or
yearend bonuses, and other nonproduction bonuses.
2 The regions used in this study include: N e w E n g la n d — Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; M id d le A tla n tic — N ew Jersey, New York, and Penn
Middle Atlantic, and four-fifths in New England. The major
union in the industry was the Amalgamated Clothing and
Textile Workers Union ( a f l -c io ).
A comprehensive bulletin on the study, Industry Wage
Survey: Textile Dyeing and Finishing, June 1985, b l s Bul
letin 2260, may be purchased from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics Publication Sales Center, P.O. Box 2145,
Chicago, il 60690, or the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.
The bulletin provides additional information on occupa
tional pay and on the incidence of employee benefits. The
study covered 223 establishments primarily engaged in dye-
34
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
5 .6 9
7 .5 7
7 .8 7
8 .0 6
6 .7 4
6 .3 5
6 .8 7
5 .4 3
6 .3 9
7 .1 2
7 .7 9
8 .4 4
6 .7 4
6 .9 2
7 .4 0
7 .8 5
6 .3 2
6 .6 1
7 .7 0
6 .3 2
6 .3 1
6 .4 4
6.71
7 .8 9
,
6 .2 9
5 .6 3
6 .7 1
7 .7 5
5 .2 6
8 .3 2
8 .3 9
9 .7 3
8 .2 5
6 .0 7
7 .0 9
-
9 .7 1
-
7 .3 7
6 .8 8
6 .9 0
7 .7 6
6 .2 7
5 .6 6
-
5 .1 2
5 .7 3
5 .9 7
1 0 .5 0
sylvania; and S o u th e a s t— Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Caro
lina, Tennessee, and Virginia.
3 Includes data for subclassifications in addition to those shown separately.
4 Metropolitan Statistical Areas as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
th ro u g h Ju n e 1983.
Note:
Dashes indicate no data were reported or that data did not meet publication criteria.
ing and finishing non wool yam, thread, cloth, or other tex
tile products and employing 50 workers or more.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1 Wage data are straight-time earnings which exclude premium pay for
overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts. Incentive
payments, such as those resulting from piecework or production bonus
systems, and cost-of-living pay increases (but not bonuses) were included
as part of the workers’ regular pay. Excluded are performance bonuses and
lump-sum payments of the type negotiated in the auto and aerospace indus
tries, as well as profit-sharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas
or yearend bonuses, and other nonproduction bonuses.
2 Metropolitan Statistical Areas as defined by the U .S. Office o f Man
agement and Budget through June 1983.
M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
This list of selected collective bargaining agreements expiring in January is based on information collected
by the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering
1,000 workers or more. Private industry is arranged in order of Standard Industrial Classification.
I n d u str y o r a c tiv ity
E m p lo y e r a n d lo c a tio n
L a b o r o r g a n iz a tio n 1
N u m b er o f
w ork ers
P r iv a te
Construction.......................................
Food products ................. .................
National Electrical Contractors Association, Northwest Line
Constructors (Interstate)
Associated General Contractors, Cincinnati Division Ohio Building
Chapter and one other (Ohio)
Wholesale, retail bread and cake bakeries (New York, N Y ) .............
.................
1,200
Carpenters ...........................................
2,800
3,000
Erwin Mills (Erwin, N C ) ........................................................
Coming Glass Works (Coming, N Y ) ........................................................
Blaw Knox Foundry & Mill Machinery, Inc. (Interstate) .................
Litton Industries, Inc. (Sioux Falls, SD) ......................
United Technologies Corp. (West Palm Beach, F L )...............
Dana Corp., Spicer Axle Division (Ft. Wayne, I N ) ......................
Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco
Workers
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Retail, Wholesale and Department
Store
Clothing and Textile Workers .........
Flint Glass Workers ........................
Steelworkers .......................................
Electrical Workers (U E-Ind.).............
Machinists .....................................
Industrial W o rk ers..............................
1,150
3,500
1,500
2,100
1,300
1,650
Western Airlines, flight attendants (Interstate) ......................
Western Airlines, clerks and agents (Interstate) ............................
Western Airlines, ground service (Interstate) ........................
General Telephone Co. of Wisconsin (Wisconsin) ........................
Boston Gas Co. (Boston, m a ) ..............................
Utah Power & Light Co. (Interstate) .........................................
Flight A ttendants................................
Air Transport Employees .................
Teamsters (Ind.) .................................
Communications W orkers.................
Steelworkers .......................................
Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) .................
2,300
4,500
1,600
1,250
1,000
3,800
Associated Produce Dealers & Brokers of Los Angeles (California) ..
Acme Markets, Inc. (Philadelphia, P A ) ...........................................................
Acme Markets, Inc. (New Jersey) ............................
Acme Markets, Inc. (D riaw are)..............................
Midtown Realty Owners Association, Inc............................
Teamsters (Ind.) .................................
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Service Employees ............................
1,900
5,000
2,700
1,250
2,500
Michigan: Detroit Board of Education, o ffic e ..........................
Detroit Board of Education, maintenance, custodial,
transportation
Detroit Board of Education, paraprofessional ......................
Educational Office Employees .........
State, County and Municipal
Employees
Detroit Association of Educational
Employees
1,800
2,400
Chef Boy-Ar-Dee, division of American Home Foods (Milton, p a ) . . .
Bryan Foods Inc. (West Point, MS) .............................................
Del Monte Corp., Midwest Division (Illinois) ..............................
Textiles ..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass products . . .
Primary m e ta ls...................................
Electrical p ro d u cts............................
Transportation equipment ...............
Air transportation
............................
Communication .................................
Utilities .............................................
Wholesale tr a d e ................................
Retail trade .......................................
Real estate .........................................
Electrical Workers
(ib
e w
)
1,350
1,200
1,200
P u b lic
E d u catio n ...........................................
1 Affiliated with
afl -cio
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,400
except where noted as Independent (Ind.).
35
Developments in
Industrial Relations
Health insurance extended to the unemployed
Employees and their dependents gained additional health
insurance protection in 1986 under provisions of the Consol
idated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (Public
Law 99-272). Under the Act, employers with more than 20
employees who offer group health insurance must continue
coverage for up to 18 months for workers who are laid off
or quit, and for up to 36 months for widows and divorced
spouses and their dependents. Employers generally criti
cized the provisions, even though the cost of the mandated
coverage, and a 2-percent administration fee, must be borne
by the beneficiaries.
The employers contend that it will be difficult and expen
sive to keep track of former employees, particularly in high
turnover industries. They also maintain that premiums will
be driven up because persons with chronic medical prob
lems will tend to retain coverage. Another problem, accord
ing to critics, is that some people will not continue cover
age, but will initiate coverage if they suffer a health
problem. The law provides for retroactive coverage if the
employer receives the first premium within 105 days after an
applicant indicates he or she intends to join the plan.
Proponents of the coverage extension say it is vital to help
reduce the number of people not protected by health in
surance, estimated to be between 30 and 37 million.
nlrb
upholds safety complaint ruling
In a 3 -0 decision, the National Labor Relations Board
affirmed its 1984 ruling that an employer was justified in
firing an employee who acted alone *in refusing to drive a
company truck he deemed unsafe. In its 1986 opinion, the
Board said the employee’s action would have been war
ranted if it was “concerted” or “engaged in with or on the
authority of other employees, and not solely by and on
behalf of the employee himself.”
In the 1984 decision, the Board had reversed the prece
dent it had established in a 1975 case in which it had ex
panded the definition of “concerted activity” by ordering the
reinstatement of a maintenance worker who was fired after
he acted alone in filing a safety complaint with a State
“Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben of the
Division o f Developments in Labor-Management Relations, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, and is largely based on information from secondary
sources.
36
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
agency. On appeal, a Federal district court had reversed the
1984 decision and returned it to the Board for reconsider
ation. In its finding, the district court said that the Board had
“misconstrued the bounds of the law,” which is intended to
protect workers who act to protect themselves on the job.
The attorney for Kenneth Prill, the fired truck driver, said
the Board’s 1986 decision would be appealed. The em
ployer involved is Meyers Industries, a boat manufacturer
located in Tecumseh, m i .
Boston University faculty cannot bargain
The National Labor Relations Board upheld a hearing
examiner’s finding that department heads and full-time fac
ulty at Boston University are managerial employees and
therefore not entitled to bargain collectively. In its 4 -0
ruling, the Board said “the faculty has absolute authority
over such matters as grading, teaching methods, graduation
requirements and student discipline.” The Board also said
that the teachers also play “an effective and determinative
role” in recommending faculty hiring, tenure, promotions,
and reappointments. The ruling was based on a 1980
Supreme Court decision that full-time faculty members at
Yeshiva University were not covered by the National Labor
Relations Act because they had managerial duties.
Ann Franke, associate counsel of the American Associa
tion of University Professors, called the decision “another
precedent that administrations will find extremely useful in
justifying a refusal to bargain.” She said the Association was
considering an appeal of the decision and that future rulings
in such cases will hinge on the extent of faculty involvement
in school management. The decision does not prohibit fac
ulty members from joining unions or associations such as
the American Association of University Professors, which
has had a chapter at Boston University since 1975.
Catfish processors vote for union representation
The Food and Commercial Workers claimed a major vic
tory in its 7-year organizing campaign in Mississippi after
winning a representation election at Delta Catfish Proces
sors’ plant in Indianola. About 925 of the company’s 1,050
employees were eligible to vote in the National Labor Rela
tions Board election. The tally was 489-349 in favor of the
union. More than 2,000 workers in the State are employed
in the catfish processing industry, of which Delta is the
largest employer.
At the time of the election, the union was negotiating with
Farm Fresh Catfish in Hollandale on an initial contract for
200 workers it organized in 1985.
The organizing drive, which has also included other types
of industries in the State, has also encountered some set
backs. The latest came in August, when workers at Con
Agra’s catfish plant in Isola rejected union representation by
a 162-to-l 19 vote.
During the representation drive at Delta Catfish, the Food
and Commercial Workers contended that the employees
were underpaid, averaging $3.90 an hour, did not have paid
sick leave or adequate health insurance, and were subject to
excessive discipline. The company maintained that the em
ployees did not “need a third party to speak for them because
our company and our employees will work out any problems
we might have.”
Winery workers accept previously rejected pact
A 7-week strike against 11 of California’s Largest winer
ies ended when the employers threatened to hire permanent
replacements for the 2,200 striking workers. The strike oc
curred during the critical grape-crushing season, but the
wineries maintained normal production using supervisory
employees, temporary replacements, and some returning
strikers, according to an official of the California Winery
Employers Association.
George J. Orlando, President of the Distillery, Wine and
Allied Workers union, said that employee acceptance of the
“final offer” they had turned down 5 days earlier resulted
from “the understandable fear that remaining on the picket
line would result in the loss of their jobs.”
The settlement provided for an immediate cut of 50 cents
an hour in pay, which ranged from $6.34 to $15.54 accord
ing to the Association, and averaged $10.75 according to the
union. There also was a 25-cent-an-hour cut in the employ
ers’ financing of pensions, and an increase in the annual
individual deductible under the health insurance plan.
In another important change, the agreement will run to
March 31, 1991, diminishing the impact of a possible strike
because it will occur prior to the grape-crushing period. The
previous contract expired on July 31, 1986.
The Association said the compensation cuts accepted by
the employees were needed to help the wineries compete
with increased imports and with a growing number of
nonunion lower cost producers.
Timken steelworkers take pay cut
A recent United Steelworkers settlement providing for
cuts in compensation involved 6,000 employees of Timken
Co. plants in Canton, Columbus, and Wooster, oh . Timken,
which makes roller bearings as well as steel, had tradition
ally followed the settlement pattern set by the other compa
nies bargaining as the Coordinating Committee Steel Com
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
panies. This was not possible in 1986 because the breakup
of the bargaining association resulted in wide variations in
settlement terms at the various companies. The companies
contended that such variations in terms were necessary be
cause of differences in their financial condition.
The Timken accord, which was preceded by a 1-month
strike, provides for a 45-cent-an-hour pay cut, which will be
restored in 15-cent increments at the end of each contract
year. Immediately after the cut, average pay was $10.95
according to the union, and $11.84 according to the com
pany.
The automatic cost-of-living pay allowance formula was
modified to provide quarterly adjustments of 1 cent an hour
for each 0.3-point rise in the bls Consumer Price Index for
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (1967=100).
The provision becomes operative in the second year and
reflects only possible cpi movement between 4 and 6 percent
in that year and between 1.5 and 6 percent in the third year
(previously, there was no 6-percent annual cap).
Pension rates were raised by $1.50 a month for each year
of credited service, bringing the range of rates to $19—$22.
Also, employees age 60 with 30 years of service were given
two opportunities (during the last months of both 1986 and
1987) to retire with a $400 special pension supplement con
tinuing to age 62.
In contrast with other 1986 settlements in the steel indus
try, Empire-Detroit Steel Co. and United Steelworkers Lo
cal 169 negotiated a 3-year contract that does not call for a
cut in employee compensation. Company President John
Frecka said, “We’re profitable. I saw no reason to insist
upon concessions.” The contract does provide for possible
annual performance awards of $150, $300, or $450, based
on the company’s financial results during the preceding 12
months. The accord, covering 1,100 workers in Mansfield,
oh , also provides for a reopening of negotiations if the
company encounters unexpected difficulties.
Paperworkers approve ‘flexible’ work assignments
In Rumford, me , a 2|-month strike against Boise Cascade
Corp.’s largest paper mill ended when members of the
United Paperworkers union approved a 3-year contract that
included a “flexible work assignment” plan the company
had been seeking since 1980. In 1984, Boise Cascade unilat
erally introduced part of the plan by consolidating 12 job
classifications into seven. In response to a complaint filed
by the union, an arbitrator later overturned the company
move. Nevertheless, the company claimed that the job con
solidation improved productivity and morale during the 18
months it was in effect.
Under the bargained approach, Boise Cascade can shift
production workers into other jobs, and have nonbargaining
unit employees perform duties that had previously been
generally restricted to bargaining unit workers. Another as
pect of the plan permits management to train machine oper37
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Developments in Industrial Relations
ators to perform routine maintenance and minor repairs,
cutting the down time that had resulted when the operators
waited for regular maintenance workers to do the work.
There also was a change in duties of maintenance workers,
as 12 job classifications were reduced to two: machinists and
instrument machinists.
Wage provisions included a 50-cent-an-hour immediate
increase, followed by 3-percent increases in the second and
third years. According to a company official, the initial
increase brought the average pay rate to $13.58 and the
maximum for some machine tenders to more than $18. All
employees on the payroll at the time of the contract signing
also received a $1,000 lump-sum payment.
Boise-Cascade also achieved a cost saving under a new
stretched pay progression schedule. New employees will be
paid 80 percent ($7.77) of top base pay during their first
6 months, and full base pay thereafter.
The contract also provided for other cost reduction provi
sions, including time-and-one-half pay for all overtime
work (previously, double time and, on occasion, quadruple
time pay applied to some overtime work); elimination of
some restrictions on operating the mill on Independence
Day and Christmas; and adoption of a cost-containment plan
for health insurance, including an 80-percent/20-percent
coinsurance instead of the previous “first-dollar” coverage.
John Hancock provides ‘cafeteria’ benefits
The flexible or “cafeteria” approach to employee benefits
is illustrated in a settlement between John Hancock Mutual
Life Insurance Co. and the Teamsters union for nearly 300
claims processors in Dearborn, mi. All of the employees
have “core” coverage consisting of a major medical plan
with a $350 annual deductible and life insurance equal to
each employee’s annual compensation. Each employee also
receives a number of weekly credits which can be used for
alternate or additional benefits, such as a major medical plan
with a $175 annual deductible, additional life insurance,
dependent life insurance, a survivor’s income plan, dental
coverage, and vision coverage. Employees are permitted to
select coverage in excess of their available credits if they
assume the additional cost.
In addition to pension improvements, the 3-year contract
provided for 5-percent annual pay increases and a lump-sum
payment at the end of the first contract year equal to
7 percent of earnings during that year, followed by a 5percent payment at the end of the second year and a 4percent payment at the end of the final year.
Machinery workers take $1 hourly pay cut
Employees of Hamischfeger Corp., a machinery manu
facturer, have agreed to a $1 an hour pay cut and other cost
reduction changes in return for a possible share of profits
and a company commitment to modernize the plants, lo
cated in the Milwaukee, wi, area. If the company meets the
38
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
specified profit objective during the fiscal year beginning
November 1, 1986, the 1,250 employees will receive $1.20
for each hour worked during the period. If the profit exceeds
the objective, the distribution will be larger. If the com
pany’s profit level is “on target” after the first 6 months, the
employees will then receive 25 percent of the expected
full-year total payout.
Other terms of the 3-year contract negotiated by United
Steelworkers Local 1114 included a suspension of automatic
cost-of-living adjustments during the first 2 years and a
15-cent limit on adjustments during the final year; adoption
of a two-tier compensation system providing for lower pay
and benefit levels for new employees; lower vacation pay;
and employee payment of a larger share of health insurance
costs.
Hamischfeger’s obligation for plant modernization was
set at a minimum of $4.5 million over the contract term. Of
that amount, the union will have a voice in spending
$250,000 a year. The company also agreed to establish a job
training fund of $30,000 a year to be administered by a joint
committee.
Hospitals, nursing homes in New York settle
In New York City, 40,000 employees were covered by a
settlement between the League of Voluntary Hospitals and
Nursing Homes and Local 1199, Drug, Hospital and Health
Care Employees Union. The League comprises 40 nonprofit
hospitals and 9 nonprofit nursing homes. Earlier, five other
nonprofit hospitals had settled on terms that were reportedly
slightly more favorable to their 6,500 employees repre
sented by Local 1199, which is part of the Retail, Wholesale
and Department Store Union.
The League contract provides for an initial wage increase
of 5 percent, retroactive to the August 28, 1984, ending date
of the 47-day strike that preceded the 1984 settlement. This
amount, to be paid in two lump-sums, represents a 5-percent
increase scheduled under the 1984 accord but never imple
mented because of a dispute over the legality of the contract.
(The 1984 settlement called for an additional 5-percent in
crease which went into effect as scheduled.)
The 3-year 1986 contract also calls for wage increases of
4 percent on November 1, 1986, and July 1, 1987, and 5
percent on July 1, 1988, all calculated on pay rates at the
time of settlement, rather than being compounded. Accord
ing to the union, average pay at the time of settlement was
$370 a week for nurses, nurses’ aides, housekeeping and
laboratory personnel, social workers, and clerical workers.
The union agreed to several changes intended to moderate
the cost of the settlement. One was that entry pay rates were
only increased 9 percent over the term, instead of 13 per
cent. Also, new employees will be paid 4 percent less than
normal pay rates during their first year. In the benefits area,
employers’ financing of pensions was changed to an amount
equal to 7 percent of each employee’s base pay, from
8 percent of gross pay. (Despite this reduction, an existing
surplus enabled the parties to request that the plan trustees
raise benefits by 10 percent for current retirees, retroactive
to January 1, 1985, and by the same amount for future
retirees.) Health insurance benefits were not changed, but
the parties did adopt a cost-containment plan calling for such
measures as a second opinion requirement before nonemer
gency surgery.
Food stores settlements
In Washington, DC, and nearby Maryland and Virginia,
18,500 employees of Safeway Stores Inc. and Giant Food
Inc. were covered by a 3-year contract negotiated by Local
400 of the United Food and Commercial Workers. Similar
terms also were negotiated by Local 27 for 7,000 employees
in the Baltimore, m d , area.
Under the Local 400 settlement, employees hired prior to
the October 1983 effective date of the prior contract did not
receive wage increases. However, they will receive six
semiannual lump-sum payments, each ranging from $175 to
$500, depending on their assignment and number of hours
worked. Workers hired after October 1983 will receive
wage increases of $1.30 an hour, narrowing the differential
with the longer service employees that resulted from adop
tion of a two-tier pay system in 1983.
The negotiators eliminated two-tier insurance benefits by
adopting a uniform program for full-time employees and
another less generous program for part-time employees.
Pension rates for employees hired prior to October 1983
were increased to $32 a month (from $20) for each year of
credited future service for full-time employees, and to $20
(from $16) for part-timers. For employees hired later, the
rates were increased to $13.20 for full-time workers and to
$6.60 for part-timers. All of the 2,300 employees who re
tired prior to January 1, 1986, will receive 3-percent in
creases in their benefits on January 1 of 1987, 1988, and
1989.
Elsewhere in the industry, 650 members of United Food
and Commercial Workers Local 23 agreed to pay cuts rang
ing from 24 cents to $1.15 an hour in a settlement with 12
Kroger Co. stores in eastern Ohio and nearby West Virginia.
According to a company official, the pay cuts and other
negotiated labor-cost savings could lead to expansion of
operations in the Ohio Valley area, despite intense competi
tion from nonunion stores.
The impact of the pay cut will be reduced by a provision
for one-time lump-sum payments in late 1986 equal to the
individual’s cut in hourly pay multiplied by the number of
hours worked between October 1985 and October 1986.
There will not be any other such payments under the 5-year
contract, but a new profit-sharing plan provides for possible
annual distributions beginning in March 1988. Each
worker’s share of any distribution will be proportional to
earnings lost as a result of the pay cut. In each of the last 2
years of the contracts, full-time employees will be guaran
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
teed minimum payments of $300 and part-timers will be
guaranteed $150.
Other changes that will reduce labor costs include a “buy
out” offer under which top-scale full-time employees will
receive $8,000 for resigning and top-scale part-timers will
receive $4,000; 5 weeks maximum paid vacation, instead of
6 weeks; two paid personal leave days per year, instead of
five; a $19.88 reduction in Kroger’s $247.88 a month fi
nancing of insurance benefits; and expanded duties for meat
clerks. Kroger estimated that all of the contract changes
would result in a cost savings of about $2 an hour.
Hotel employees settle
More than 20,000 members of the Hotel Employees and
Restaurant Employees were covered by settlements in three
cities.
In Atlantic City, n j , workers settled with seven casino
hotels, ending a 1-day strike. The settlement covered
13,000 people, including employees of three operations that
were not struck in return for assurances that they would
accept the same terms as the other casino hotels. The settle
ment, reached under a contract reopening provision, ex
tended the contract by 1 year, and provides for 10- to 20cent-an-hour pay increases in 1986 and 1987.
In Washington, d c , Local 25 negotiated a 3-year contract
that covered more than 6,000 employees of 17 hotels in the
employers’ bargaining association and 11 other hotels that
accepted the same terms. The accord provides for 5-percent
pay increases in each year, bringing the average pay of
housekeepers, dishwashers, and food service workers to $8
an hour.
In San Francisco, Local 2 settled for 2,150 employees of
six large hotels and was pressing 32 hotels to accept the
same terms. During the 3-year contract term, employees
will receive annual pay increases of 15 cents an hour for
those who receive tips and 35 cents for those who do not, as
well as improvements in overtime pay, sick leave, and med
ical and pension benefits.
Home work proposed in producing ladies apparel
In a move that drew criticism and vows of legal action
from organized labor, the Department of Labor proposed
regulations to allow employees in six industries to work in
their homes, as long as their employers get a Government
certificate. Secretary of Labor William Brock said that
“because of the nationwide interest in home work employ
ment,” the period for public comment on the proposal would
be 60 days.
The industries that would be affected are the production
of women’s apparel, jewelry, gloves and mittens, buttons
and buckles, handkerchiefs, and embroidery. The proposal
came after an 18-month study of the effectiveness of the
certification plan that was instituted in the knitted outerwear
39
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Developments in Industrial Relations
industry in December 1984. In that industry, homework is
permitted after employers register with the Department of
Labor so that their adherence to minimum wage, child labor,
and other laws can be monitored.
Jay Mazur, President of the Ladies Garment Workers,
said the proposed rules give “the green light to thousands of
sweatshop operators throughout this country who exploit
our most vulnerable workers.” He predicted that thousands
of factory workers in the six industries would lose their jobs
or suffer a decline in their “already modest standard of living
due to competition with sweatshop wages.”
Stephen Goodrick, executive director of the Center on
National Labor Policy, a lobbying and legal advocacy
group, said the rule change will “liberate this section of the
economy for entrepreneurial growth and productivity.” He
also said that 70,000 people are already engaged in illegal
commercial work in the home and that legalizing the prac
tice would raise government tax revenue by $50 million a
year.
Glass container workers restore forgone pay
In the glass container industry, 17,000 workers negoti
ated restoration of a 31-cent-an-hour scheduled wage in
crease they had given up in 1985 when the employers were
experiencing financial problems. The 1985 settlements had
also extended the existing agreement by 1 year, to March
31, 1987. Under the 1986 settlement, which came during a
period of improved employer profits, the contract was ex
tended to March 31, 1990, with provision for a 21-cent
wage increase in April 1987, 26 cents in April 1988, and 31
cents in April 1989. Prior to the settlement, the average
wage was $9.40.
Pensions were increased effective in April 1988 for all
employees who retire after April 1986. The employees’ cost
for health insurance was increased, but the companies did
agree to pay more into a trust fund for retirees’ health cov
erage. They also agreed to assume the workers’ 50-percent
share of a 10-cent-an-hour payment into an industry promo
tion fund.
The companies that settled with the Glass, Pottery, Plas
tic and Allied Workers were Brockway Inc., for 6,500
workers; Anchor-Hocking Corp. (4,300); Foster Forbes
Glass Co. (3,000); Incon Packaging Inc. (2,100); and Ball
Corp. (1,100). Negotiations were continuing with Owens
Illinois Inc. for 12,000 workers and with Diamond-Bathurst
for 5,000.
Teachers’ agreements
Members of the Portland (or) Association of Teachers
negotiated a 3-year contract that calls for wage increases of
5 percent in the first year and 4.5 percent in the second year.
40
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In the third year, the 3,200 teachers will receive an increase
of at least 3.5 percent but not more than 6.5 percent, de
pending on the movement of the Portland area Consumer
Price Index. After the first-year increase, salaries ranged
from $17,732 for starting teachers to $33,240 for teachers
with a master’s degree plus 45 credit hours of academic
training and 18 years of experience.
Other terms included a doubling of college tuition reim
bursement, to six credit hours per year.
In Little Rock, ar , 1,100 teachers received two payments
totaling $520 to $971 by agreeing to add 6 | days to the
1985-86 school year. The payment resulted when the school
district received a Federal grant for magnet schools, permit
ting the district to distribute to teachers $1.6 million it had
budgeted from its own funds for the project.
Early in 1986, the district gave each teacher $475 and was
planning to distribute the balance of the $1.6 million in the
same way, but the State Board of Education ruled that this
could be done only if the school year was extended, leading
to the 6^-day extension and an additional $45 to $496 pay
ment, varying according to each teacher’s salary scale.
The payments did not become part of the teachers’ con
tractual salary scale for the school year, which was raised
1.61 percent on September 9, 1985, under the contract ne
gotiated then. This brought the salary range to $14,098 to
$26,308 a year, depending on education and length of serv
ice.
Ohio State workers get initial contract
About 35,000 State employees were covered by an initial
contract negotiated by the Ohio Civil Service Employees
Association, which affiliated with the State, County and
Municipal Employees union in 1984. Ohio State employees
gained the right to bargain on wages and benefits under 1984
legislation.
Wage provisions included an immediate increase of
58 cents an hour or 7 percent (whichever is greater) and a
$450 bonus for those on the payroll before April 1; 1986; an
increase of 44 cents or 5 percent, in the second year; and
65 cents or 7 percent in the third year, plus a $300 bonus on
November 1, 1988, for those on the payroll on October 15,
1988.
Prior to the initial pay increase, average hourly rates for
the eight units of workers involved ranged from $6.63 for
food service, custodial, and laundry workers to $11.64 for
engineers, biologists, and geologists.
Benefit changes included an eleventh paid holiday; 10
annual sick leave days payable at 100 percent, instead of 7
days payable at 90 percent; three personal leave days and
prorated paid vacation for part-time employees; and adop
tion of a program to aid corrections officers suffering after
effects of being taken hostage.
□
Book Reviews
Managerial discretion in the workplace
M anagem ent R ights: A L egal and A rbitral A nalysis. By
Marvin Hill, Jr. and Anthony V. Sinicropi. Washing
ton, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1986. 560
pp. $40.
Source books that deal with questions of legal rights for
practitioners usually face the kind of dilemma that confronts
do-it-yourself guides to medicine: offer summary descrip
tions and readers may not be able to tell when they have a
problem, but present a detailed discussion and they may
start to think that they can cut the doctor out of the process.
Marvin Hill, Jr. and Anthony V. Sinicropi have avoided that
dilemma by writing a book that is not for practitioners in the
usual sense but for the labor relations “doctors”— arbitrators
and those who present arbitration cases.
The book focuses on the issue of management rights
under collective bargaining agreements— situations where
the agreements do not clearly specify the rights of the
parties. In fact, the book’s theme is much broader than what
many arbitrators will think of as management rights issues,
in that it goes beyond such common problems as technolog
ical change and job assignment to consider virtually every
set of circumstances where contracts may be silent. This
broad coverage has the great advantage of presenting a sin
gle source for all such issues. However, some issues, such
as employee discipline and discharge and seniority deci
sions, have already been discussed in depth elsewhere, and
readers may want to consult the existing literature.
The book traces the evolution of management rights pri
marily through a detailed analysis of arbitration decisions,
although rulings of the National Labor Relations Board,
case law, and legislation are also considered. It begins by
discussing some general issues, such as the important role of
past practice in determining management rights, and then
addresses various areas of those rights in turn. Perhaps the
most interesting section of the book is the discussion of
areas where management’s interests may conflict with em
ployees’ interests in privacy, for example, the use of
polygraph tests and surveillance and searches in the work
place. Separate discussions of management’s rights with
respect to medical and psychiatric screening, including drug
testing and the handling of employees with aids , make the
book very topical.
M anagem ent R ights is obviously not a book for everyone.
Nonarbitrators involved in day-to-day labor relations should
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of course be aware that the analyses of the issues here will
not necessarily help determine how a given arbitrator might
rule on a particular issue because the precedential value of
arbitration decisions is limited at best. In terms of reading,
the book is filled with quotations and citations that com
bined with the often convoluted path of arbitration decisions
make it considerably slower going than, say, your average
gothic novel.
But this detail is precisely what results in a very useful
book, especially for arbitrators and lawyers who have lim
ited experience with some of the issues raised here because
they can quickly see the line of reasoning in previous deci
sions. By identifying the trends in arbitration decisions in
the difficult area of management’s rights, the authors have
traveled through relatively uncharted waters and have con
tributed a real service to the field of labor relations.
— Peter C appelli
Associate Professor
The Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
Labor in a changing America
O ut o f W ork: The F irst C entury o f U nem ploym ent in M a s
sachusetts. By Alexander Keyssar. New York, Cam
bridge University Press, 1986. 469 pp. $49.50, cloth;
$14.95, paper.
Alexander Keyssar’s book is a scholarly contribution and
a valuable resource to economists, labor historians, trade
unionists, and policymakers. Keyssar investigates labor
markets from the 1870’s to the 1920’s, a period often passed
over by present-day economists and economic historians
who tend to direct more attention to the Great Depression
and Industrial Revolution in the United States. (John A.
Garraty’s U nem ploym ent in H istory: E conom ic Thought and
P ublic P olicy and Gordon, Edwards, and Reich’s S eg
m ented W ork, D ivided W orkers are notable exceptions.) He
blends an abundance— sometimes an overabundance— of
empirical data with impressionistic evidence depicting the
extent and character of the period’s unemployment.
Idle labor is a centuries-old phenomenon. But as the
structure of production shifted toward manufacturing
throughout the 19th century, the consequences for a typical
jobless worker became harsher by the 1870’s with the disap
pearance of alternative activities such as household produc
tion.
41
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Book Reviews
With the stage set, Keyssar then offers four original view
points in Out o f Work. First is his chronicling of the unbe
lievably slow pace at which unemployment came to be re
garded as a conspicuous social problem. Public perception
only gradually evolved from considering unemployment as
an individual, labor supply problem to understanding it as a
labor demand problem endemic to the industrial economy.
The tendency for chronic unemployment to uproot many
working men was initially regarded as “the tramp problem.”
Reforms to prevent unemployment or its hardship were
routinely rebuffed until 1915, when government and busi
ness began to recognize the threat of unemployment to the
existing social structure. Economists viewed unemployment
as transitory and thus proved little help in remedying it.
Keyssar also describes how chronic unemployment grad
ually transformed trade unions from organizations promot
ing universal policies to benefit all labor such as a shorter
workweek to policies pursuing exclusionist measures, for
example, restricting apprenticeships in order to protect
members’ jobs.
The author creatively uses the available data to construct
unemployment frequencies— the percentage of workers un
employed at some point during the year. The data reveal
startlingly high frequencies upwards of 30 percent in the
depths of a downturn and surprisingly high proportions in
prosperous times as well.
Keyssar’s final and most important point derives from
these frequencies. The 1870-1920’s era was apparently
characterized by a substantial volatility in employment. In
come insecurity rather than low incomes per se was thus the
key problem workers faced. Their vulnerability to sudden
layoff and income loss cut across occupations, industries,
ethnic groups, and gender. One immediate and two subse
quent developments from this era could be traced to the
widespread income insecurity. Keyssar colorfully illustrates
how workers established ad hoc methods of coping with the
persistent threat of unemployment. Children were periodi
cally sent to work and debt was commonly incurred with
local shopkeepers. After 1915, businesses began to discover
the costs associated with high labor turnover. Some imple
mented progressive personnel practic6s including the offer
of continuous employment over seasonal (but not cyclical)
fluctuations, work sharing, and a rationalized allocation of
layoffs based on seniority. The modem implicit contract and
its increased predictability of incomes were thus bom. Fi
nally, the widespread income insecurity ultimately led to the
adoption of unemployment insurance programs.
Despite its merits, Out o f Work has some shortcomings.
The author often fails to clearly distinguish structural, fric
tional, and cyclical sources of unemployment, essential in
assessing the consequent hardship. Also, there is no direct
mention of productivity growth in industry and its potential
role in suppressing employment levels, shortening the work
week, or varying wages and living standards. In addition,
Keyssar often subtly implicates but never really outright
42
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
indicts the widely accepted employment-at-will doctrine as
the ultimate source of the era’s employment volatility. This
is perhaps the principle message and it is left to the reader
to infer. Finally, it is also left to the reader to gauge the
relative condition of labor because we are given no refer
ence point. Perhaps some of the redundancy that appears
throughout the book could be sacrificed for some compari
sons to unemployment frequencies, the composition of the
“reserve army” of unemployed, and the use of short-time
versus layoffs in more recent years.
A final comparison Keyssar misses is the parallel to the
current fad of identifying laissez faire as the policy solution
rather than the problem. Even with these shortcomings, Out
of Work reminds us that labor market instability and unem
ployment were the cause of union and government interven
tion rather than the result of it.
— L onnie G olden
Assistant Professor of Economics
University of Wisconsin, Whitewater
Publications received
Economic and social statistics
Bernstein, Jeffrey I. and M. Ishaq Nadiri, Research and Develop-•
ment and Intraindustry Spillovers: An Empirical Application o f
Dynamic Duality. Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Eco
nomic Research, Inc., 1986, 35 pp. (nber Working Paper
Series, 2002.) $2, paper.
Bluestone, Barry and John Havens, “The Microeconomic Impacts
of Macroeconomic Fiscal Policy, 1981-1985,” Journal o f Post
Keynesian Economics, Summer 1986, pp. 499-514.
Danziger, James N. and Kenneth L. Kraemer, People and Com
puters: The Impacts o f Computing on End Users in Organiza
tions . New York, Columbia University Press, 1986, 268 pp.
$32.50.
Diewert, W. Erwin and Catherine J. Morrison, Export Supply and
Import Demand Functions: A Production Theory Approach.
Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1986, 29 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 2011.) $2, paper.
Hamermesh, Daniel S ., Incentives fo r the Homogenization o f Time
Use. Reprinted from Economic Incentives. Edited by Bela
Belassa and Herbert Giersch, pp. 124-39. Cambridge, ma, Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986. (nber Reprint
Series, 730.) $2, paper.
Helliwell, John, Supply-Side Macroeconomics . Cambridge, ma,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 45 pp.
(nber Working Paper Series, 1995.) $2, paper.
Lichtenberg, Frank R. and Zvi Griliches, Errors o f Measurement
in Output Deflators . Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Eco
nomic Research, Inc., 1986, 27 pp. (nber Working Paper
Series, 2000.) $2, paper.
Stiglitz, Joseph E., The Wage-Productivity Hypothesis: It’s Eco
nomic Consequences and Policy Implications fo r L.D.C.s.
Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1986, 46 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1976.) $2, paper.
Economic growth and development
Industry and government organization
Oberai, A. S., “Land Settlement Policies and Population Redistri
bution in Developing Countries: Performance, Problems and
Prospects,” International Labour Review, March-April 1986,
pp. 141-61.
Card, David, “The Impact of Deregulation on the Employment and
Wages of Airline Mechanics,” Industrial and Labor Relations
Review, July 1986, pp. 527-38.
Sah, Raaj Kumar and Joseph E. Stiglitz, “The Architecture of
Economic Systems: Hierarchies and Polyarchies,” The Ameri
can Economic Review, September 1986, pp. 716-27.
Schultze, Charles L., Other Times, Other Places: Macroeconomic
Lessons from U.S. and European History. Washington, The
Brookings Institution, 1986, 88 pp. $15.95, cloth; $7.95, paper.
Education
Chubb, John E. and Terry M. Moe, “No School Is an Island:
Politics, Markets, and Education,” The Brookings Review, Fall
1986, pp. 21-28.
Duke, Benjamin, The Japanese School: Lessons for Industrial
America. New York, Praeger Publishers, 1986, 242 pp. $32.95,
cloth; $12.95, paper.
Istance, David and Jillian Chapman, “Priority for Educational
Equality,” The O E C D Observer, July 1986, pp. 17-19.
International Labour Organization, The Promotion o f Small and
Medium-Sized Enterprises: Report VI (International Labour
Conference, 72d Sess.) Geneva, International Labour Organiza
tion, 1986, 104 pp. Available from the Washington branch of
ILO.
International economics
Holtham, Gerald, “A Case for International Coordination of Mon
etary Policy,” The Brookings Review, Fall 1986, pp. 37-43.
Servais, J. M., “Flexibility and Rigidity in International Labour
Standards,” International Labour Review, March-April 1986,
pp. 193-208.
Zetter, John, “Japan: The Urban Challenge,” The
July 1986, pp. 4-8.
O E C D
Observer,
Labor and economic history
Neuschatz, Michael, The Golden Sword: The Coming o f Capital
ism to the Colorado Mining Frontier. Westport, CT, Greenwood
Press, 1986, 301 pp. $37.95.
McPherson, Michael S. and Mary S. Skinner, “Paying for College:
A Lifetime Proposition,” The Brookings Review, Fall 1986,
pp. 29-36.
Suggs, George G., Jr., Union Busting in the Tri-State: The Okla
homa, Kansas, and Missouri Metal Workers’ Strike o f 1935.
Norman, The University of Oklahoma Press, 1986, 282 pp.
$22.50.
Industrial relations
Labor force
Allen, Steven G. and Robert L. Clark, “Unions, Pension Wealth,
and Age-Compensation Profiles,” Industrial and Labor Rela
tions Review, July 1986, pp. 502-17.
Darby, Michael R., John C. Haltiwanger, Mark W. Plant, The Ins
and Outs o f Unemployment: The Ins Win. Cambridge, MA, Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 48 pp. (nber
Working Paper Series, 1997.) $2, paper.
Becker, Don, “Retirement ‘Pick-Up’ Systems: Reviewing the Pros
and Cons,” California Public Employee Relations, September
1986, pp. 2-11.
Berry, Robert C. and Glenn M. Wong, Law and Business o f the
Sports Industries: Vol. I, Professional Sports Industries; Vol. II,
Common Issues in Amateur and Professional Sports. Dover,
ma , Auburn House Publishing Co., 1986, 570 and 581 pp. $45
each.
Färber, Henry S. and Max H. Bazerman, “The General Basis of
Arbitrator Behavior: An Empirical Analysis of Conventional
and Final-offer Arbitration,” Econometrica, July 1986,
pp. 819-44.
Hill, Marvin, Jr., and Anthony V. Sinicropi, Management Rights:
A Legal and Arbitral Analysis. Washington, The Bureau of
National Affairs, Inc., 1986, 560 pp.
Kochan, Thomas A., Robert B. McKersie, and John Chalykoff,
“The Effects of Corporate Strategy and Workplace Innovations
on Union Representation,” Industrial and Labor Relations Re
view, July 1986, pp. 487-501.
Lipset, Seymour Martin, ed., Unions in Transition: Entering the
Second Century. San Francisco, CA, Institute for Contemporary
Studies, 1986, 506 pp. $29.95, ics Press, 785 Market Street,
San Francisco, CA 94103.
“Labour Market Flexibility: A Controversial Issue,” The
Observer, July 1986, pp. 13-16.
o e c d
Leonard, Jonathan S ., In the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time: The
Extent o f Frictional and Structural Unemployment. Cambridge,
MA, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 37 pp.
(nber Working Paper Series, 1979.) $2, paper.
The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., The Changing Workplace:
New Directions in Staffing and Scheduling. Washington, 1986,
140 pp. $50, bna’s Customer Service Center, 9435 Key West
Avenue, Rockville, MD 20850.
Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Labor in Tokyo. Tokyo, Japan,
Tokyo Metropolitan Government, 1986, 148 pp. (tmg Munici
pal Library, 20)
Zachmann, Roberto, “Reduction of Working Time as a Means to
Reduce Unemployment: A Micro-Economic Perspective,” In
ternational Labour Review, March-April 1986, pp. 163-75.
Management and organization theory
Argyris, Chris, “Skilled Incompetence,” Harvard Business Re
view, September-October 1986, pp. 74-79.
Hayes, Robert H. and Kim B. Clark, “Why Some Factories are
More Productive Than Others,” Harvard Business Review,
September-October 1986, pp. 66-73.
Luria, Daniel D., “New Labor-Management Models from De
troit?” Harvard Business Review, September-October 1986, be
ginning on p. 22.
Monetary and fiscal policy
McConnell, Campbell R. and Stanley L. Brue, Contemporary
Labor Economics. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.,
1986, 607 pp. $30.95.
Becketti, Sean, “Corporate Mergers and the Business Cycle,” Eco
nomic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, May
1986, pp. 13-26.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
43
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Book Reviews
Henry, Mark, Mark Drabenstott, Lynn Gibson, “A Changing
Rural America,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, July-August 1986, pp. 23-41.
Litan, Robert E ., “Taking the Dangers Out of Bank Deregulation,”
The Brookings Review, Fall 1986, pp. 3-12.
Roley, V. Vance, “Market Perceptions of U.S. Monetary Policy
Since 1982,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, May 1986, pp. 27-40.
Volcker, Paul A., “The Rapid Growth of Debt in the United
States,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas
City, May 1986, pp. 3-12.
Skinner, Wickham, “The Productivity Paradox,” Harvard Busi
ness Review, July-August 1986, pp. 55-59.
Wages and compensation
Aaron, Henry J. and Cameran M. Lougy, The Comparable Worth
Controversy. Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1986,
57 pp. $7.95, paper.
Corson, Walter, Alan Hershey, Stuart Kerachsky, Nonmonetary
Eligibility in State Unemployment Insurance Programs: Law
and Practice. Kalamazoo, Ml, The W. E. Upjohn Institute for
Employment Research, Inc., 1986, 138 pp. $14.95, cloth;
$9.95, paper.
Young, Harrison, “Bank Regulation Ain’t Broke,” Harvard Busi
ness Review, September-October 1986, pp. 106-12.
Schwartz, Saul, “The Relative Earnings of Vietnam and KoreanEra Veterans,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review,
July 1986, pp. 564-72.
Prices and living conditions
Welfare programs and social insurance
Altonji, Joseph G. and Aloysius Siow, Testing the Response o f
Consumption to Income Changes with (Noisy) Panel Data.
Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1986, 43 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 2012.) $2, paper.
Anderson, Kathryn H., Richard V. Burkhauser, Joseph F. Quinn,
“Do Retirement Dreams Come True? The Effect of Unantici
pated Events on Retirement Plans,” Industrial and Labor Rela
tions Review, July 1986, pp. 518-26.
Carlton, Dennis W ., “The Rigidity of Prices,” The American Eco
nomic Review, September 1986, pp. 637-58.
Gisser, Micha, “Price Leadership and Welfare Losses in U.S.
Manufacturing,” The American Economic Review, Septem
ber 1986, pp. 756-67.
Productivity and technological change
Griliches, Zvi, Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the
Firm Level in the 1970’s. Reprinted from The American Eco
nomic Review, March 1986, pp. 141-54. Cambridge, ma, Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986. (nber
Reprint, 721.) $2, paper.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Ballantyne, Harry C., “Actuarial Status of the OASi and Di Trust
Funds,” Social Security Bulletin, July 1986, pp. 5-9.
Klees, Barbara and Carter Warfield, “Actuarial Status of the hi and
SMI Trust Funds,” Social Security Bulletin, July 1986, pp. 1018.
Robins, Philip K., “Child Support, Welfare Dependency, and
Poverty,” The American Economic Review, September 1986,
pp. 768-88.
Tamburi, Giovanni and Pierre Mouton, “The Uncertain Frontier
Between Private and Public Pension Schemes,” International
Labour Review, March-April 1986, pp. 127-40.
Current
Labor Statistics
Schedule of release dates for major
Notes on Current Labor Statistics
bls
statistical series
......................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................
46
47
Comparative indicators
1. Labor market indicators..................................................................................................................................................................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, andproductivity ..........................................................................................
3. Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes ....................................................................................................................................
56
57
57
Labor force data
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Employment status o f the total population, data seasonally ad ju sted ..................................................................................................................
Employment status of the civilian population, data seasonally adjusted .............................................................................................................
Selected employment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ...................................................................................................................................
Selected unemployment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates by sex and age, data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................................................................................
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, data seasonally a d ju sted ..................................................................................................
Duration o f unemployment, data seasonally adjusted ............................................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates o f civilian workers, by State .................................................................................................................................................
Employment of workers by State .................................................................................................................................................................................
Employment of workers by industry, data seasonally adjusted.............................................................................................................................
Average weekly hours by industry, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Average hourly earnings by industry .........................................................................................................................................................................
Average weekly earnings by in d ustry.........................................................................................................................................................................
Hourly Earnings Index by industry..............................................................................................................................................................................
Indexes o f diffusion: proportion o f industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted ......................................................
Annual data: Employment status o f the noninstitutional population ................................................................................................................
Annual data: Employment levels by industry ........................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Average hours and earnings levels by industry.............................................................................................................................
58
59
60
61
62
62
62
63
63
64
65
66
67
67
68
68
68
69
Labor compensation and collective bargaining data
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Employment Cost Index, compensation, by occupation and industry group ..................................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry g r o u p .........................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area s i z e ..............................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments,
situations covering 1,000 workers or more ..............................................................................................................................................................
Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or m o r e ..................................
Average effective wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more ..................................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments, State and local government bargaining
situations covering 1,000 workers or more ..............................................................................................................................................................
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more .................................................................................................................................................
70
71
72
73
73
74
74
74
Price data
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Consumer Price Index: U .S. City average, by expenditurecategory and commodity and service groups ................................................
Consumer Price Index: U .S. City average and localdata, all items ....................................................................................................................
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items and major groups .....................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing .......................................................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes by durability o f p rod u ct......................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes by stage of p ro cessin g ..............................................................................................................................
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade C lassification .........................................................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification.........................................................................................................
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category .........................................................................................................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by
end-use c a teg o ry .....................................................................................................................................
U .S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial C lassification...........................................................................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification .........................................................................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
75
78
80
81
82
82
83
84
85
85
85
86
45
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics
Contents— Continued
Productivity data
42. Indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted .............................................................................
43. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity ..............................................................................................................................................................
44. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and p r ic e s .................................................................................................
86
87
87
International comparisons
45. Unemployment rates in nine countries, data seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................................................
46. Annual data: Employment status of civilian working-age population, ten countries ................................................................................. ..
47. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures, twelve countries ..........................................................................................................
88
89
90
Injury and illness data
48. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness incidence r a te s...............................................................................................................................
Schedule of release dates for
S e r ie s
Employment situation ...............................
b l s
91
statistical series
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
MLR t a b le
d a te
c o v e re d
d a te
c o v e re d
d a te
c o v e re d
num ber
December 5
November
December
February 6
January
January
9
1; 4-21
Producer Price In d e x .................................
December 12
November
January
9
December
February 13
January
2; 3 3-35
Consumer Price In d e x ...............................
December 19
November
January 21
December
February 27
January
2; 3 0-32
Real earnings .............................................
December 19
November
January 21
December
February 27
January
14-17
Productivity and costs:
3rd quarter
2; 4 2-44
Nonfarm business and
February
Major collective bargaining se ttle m e n ts...
U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes
46
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
..
2
4th quarter
2; 4 2-44
January 27
1986
January 27
4th quarter
1 -3 :2 2 -2 4
January 27
4th quarter
36-41
3; 2 5-28
NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS
This section o f the Review presents the principal statistical series collected
and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics: series on labor force,
employment, unemployment, collective bargaining settlements, consumer,
producer, and international prices, productivity, international comparisons,
and injury and illness statistics. In the notes that follow, the data in each
group o f tables are briefly described, key definitions are given, notes on the
data are set forth, and sources o f additional information are cited.
Adjustments for price changes. Some data— such as the Hourly
Earnings Index in table 17— are adjusted to eliminate the effect o f 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 o f $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 $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars.
General notes
Additional information
The following notes apply to several tables in this section:
Seasonal adjustment.
Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect on the data o f such factors as climatic conditions,
industry production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday
buying periods, and vacation practices, which might prevent short-term
evaluation of the statistical series. Tables containing data that have been
adjusted are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” (All other data are not
seasonally 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. (Season
ally adjusted data appear in tables 1 - 3 ,4 - 1 0 , 13, 14, 17, and 18.) Begin
ning in January 1980, the bls introduced two major modifications in the
seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are
seasonally adjusted with a procedure called x —11 arima, which was devel
oped at Statistics Canada as an extension o f the standard x - ii method
previously used by bls. A detailed description of the procedure appears in
The x - l l arima Seasonal Adjustment Method by Estela Bee Dagum (Statis
tics Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E , February 1980). The second change
is that seasonal factors are calculated for use during the first 6 months of
the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at midyear
for the July-December period. However, revisions of historical data con
tinue to be made only at the end of each calendar year.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 1 and 4—10 were revised
in the February 1986 issue o f the Review, to reflect experience through
1985.
Annual revisions o f the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in tables
13, 14, and 18 were made in the July 1986 Review using the X-ll arima
seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for productivity
data in table 42 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 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.
Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the
Bureau in a variety of sources. News releases provide the latest statistical
information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule preceding these general notes. More
information about labor force, employment, and unemployment data and
the household and establishment surveys underlying the data are available
in Employment and Earnings, a monthly publication of the Bureau. More
data from the household survey are published in the two-volume data
book— Labor Force Statistics Derived From the Current Population Sur
vey, Bulletin 2096. More data from the establishment survey appear in two
data books— Employment, Hours, and Earnings, United States, and Em
ployment, Hours, and Earnings, States and Areas, and the annual supple
ments to these data books. More detailed information on employee com
pensation and collective bargaining settlements is published in the monthly
periodical, Current Wage Developments. More detailed data on consumer
and producer prices are published in the monthly periodicals, The cpi
Detailed Report, and Producer Prices and Price Indexes. Detailed data on
all of the series in this section are provided in the Handbook of Labor
Statistics, which is published biennally by the Bureau, bls bulletins are
issued covering productivity, injury and illness, and other data in this
section. Finally, the Monthly Labor Review carries analytical articles on
annual and longer term developments in labor force, employment, and
unemployment; employee compensation and collective bargaining; prices;
productivity; international comparisons; and injury and illness data.
Symbols
p = preliminary. To increase the timeliness of some series, prelim
inary figures are issued based on representative but incom
plete returns.
r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability o f later
data but may also reflect other adjustments,
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified,
n.e.s. = not elsewhere specified.
COMPARATIVE INDICATORS
(Tables 1-3)
Comparative indicators tables provide an overview and comparison of
major bls statistical series. Consequently, although many of the included
series are available monthly, all measures in these comparative tables are
presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include employment measures from two ma
jor surveys and information on rates of change in compensation provided
by the Employment Cost Index (eci) program. The labor force participation
rate, the employment-to-population ratio, and unemployment rates for
major demographic groups based on the Current Population (“household ”)
Survey are presented, while measures o f employment and average weekly
hours by major industry sector are given using nonagricultural payroll data.
The Employment Cost Index (compensation), by major sector and by
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
bargaining status, is chosen from a variety of bls compensation and wage
measures because it provides a comprehensive measure of employer costs
for hiring labor, not just outlays for wages, and it is not affected by
employment shifts among occupations and industries.
Data on changes in compensation, prices, and productivity are pre
sented in table 2. Measures of rates of change of compensation and wages
from the Employment Cost Index program are provided for all civilian
nonfarm workers (excluding Federal and household workers) and for all
private nonfarm workers. Measures of changes in: consumer prices for all
urban consumers; producer prices by stage of processing; and the overall
export and import price indexes are given. Measures of productivity (output
per hour of all persons) are provided for major sectors.
47
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics
Alternative measures of wage and compensation rates of change,
which reflect the overall trend in labor costs, are summarized in table 3.
Differences in concepts and scope, related to the specific purposes of the
series, contribute to the variation in changes among the individual mea
sures.
Notes on the data
Definitions o f each series and notes on the data are contained in later
sections of these notes describing each set of data. For detailed descriptions
of each data series, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Volumes I and II,
Bulletins 2134-1 and 2 1 34-2 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982 and 1984,
respectively), as well as the additional bulletins, articles, and other publi
cations noted in the separate sections of the Review's “Current Labor
Statistics Notes.” Historical data for many series are provided in the Hand
book o f Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
Users may also wish to consult Major Programs, Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, Report 718 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
EMPLOYMENT DATA
(Tables 1; 4-21)
Household survey data
the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of Employment and
Earnings.
Description of the series
Data in tables 4 -1 0 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1985.
employment data in this section are obtained from the Current Population
Survey, a program of personal interviews conducted monthly by the Bureau
o f the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of
about 59,500 households selected to represent the U .S. population 16 years
o f age and older. Households are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that
three-fourths o f the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months.
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 employed
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 unem
ployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the labor
force, including the resident Armed Forces. The civilian unemployment
rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor
force.
The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus
members o f 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 a.ngaged in their own house
work, those not working while attending school, those unable to work
because o f long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because
o f personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The
noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years of age and
older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions, sanitariums, or
homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members of the Armed Forces
stationed in the United States. The labor force participation rate is the
proportion o f 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.
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 comparabil
ity o f historical data. A description of these adjustments and their effect on
Digitized for 48
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Additional sources of information
For detailed explanations of the data, see b l s Handbook of Methods,
Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 1, and for
additional data, Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1985). A detailed description of the Current Population
Survey as well as additional data are available in the monthly Bureau of
Labor Statistics periodical, Employment and Earnings. Historical data
from 1948 to 1981 are available in Labor Force Statistics Derived from the
Current Population Survey: A Databook, Vols. I and II, Bulletin 2096
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” Monthly
Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
Establishment survey data
Description of the series
E mployment, hours, and earnings data in this section are compiled from
payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by more than 250,000
establishments representing all industries except agriculture. In most indus
tries, 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 ware
house.) Self-employed persons and others not on a regular civilian payroll
are outside the scope of the survey because they are excluded from estab
lishment records. This largely accounts for the difference in employment
figures between the household and establishment surveys.
Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which produces goods or services
(such as a factory or store) at a single location and is engaged in one type
o f economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holiday
and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th o f 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 working supervisors and
all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with production operations.
Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 include production workers in
manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construction; and non
supervisory workers in the following industries: transportation and public
utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and
services. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employ
ment on private nonagricutural 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
in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available)
and the effects o f 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 nonsupervi
sory 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 the May 1983 Review , represents
the percent o f 185 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 1-, 3-, and 6-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while those for the
12-month span are unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measur
ing the dispersion o f economic gains or losses and is also an economic
indicator.
Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are peri
od ically adjusted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release
o f May 1986 data, published in the July 1986 issue of the Review. Conse
quently, data published in the Review prior to that issue are not necessarily
comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to
April 1984; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January
1981. These revisions were published in the Supplement to Employment
and Earnings (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1986). Unadjusted data from
April 1985 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1982 for
ward are subject to revision in future benchmarks.
In the establishment survey, estimates for the 2 most recent months are
based on incomplete returns and are published as preliminary in the tables
(13 to 16 in the Review). When all returns have been received, the esti
mates are revised and published as final in the third month of their appear
ance. Thus, August data are published as preliminary in October and
November and as final in December. For the same reason, quarterly estab
lishment data (table 1) are preliminary for the first 2 months of publication
and final in the third month. Thus, second-quarter data are published as
preliminary in August and September and as final in October.
Additional sources of information
Detailed data from the establishment survey are published monthly in the
BLS periodical, Employment and Earnings. Earlier comparable unadjusted
and seasonally adjusted data are published in Employment, Hours, and
Earnings, United States, 1909-84, Bulletin 1312-12 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1985) and its annual supplement. For a detailed discussion o f the
methodology of the survey, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 2. For additional data, see
Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” Monthly
Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
Unemployment data by State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained from two major sources— the
Current Population Survey (cps) and the Local Area Unemployment Statis
tics (laus) program, which is conducted in cooperation with State employ
ment security agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force, employment, and unemployment
for States and sub-State areas are a key indicator of local economic condi
tions and form the basis for determining the eligibility of an area for
benefits under Federal economic assistance programs such as the Job Train
ing Partnership Act and the Public Works and Economic Development Act.
Insofar as possible, the concepts and definitions underlying these data are
those used in the national estimates obtained from the cps .
Notes on the data
Data refer to State of residence. Monthly data for 11 States— California,
Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas— are obtained directly from the
cps , because the size of the sample is large enough to meet bls standards
of reliability. Data for the remaining 39 States and the District of Columbia
are derived using standardized procedures established by bls. Once a year,
estimates for the 11 States are revised to new population controls. For the
remaining States and the District of Columbia, data are benchmarked to
annual average cps levels.
Additional sources of information
Information on the concepts, definitions, and technical procedures used
to develop labor force data for States and sub-State areas as well as addi
tional data on sub-States are provided in the monthly Bureau o f Labor
Statistics periodical, Employment and Earnings, and the annual report,
Geographic Profile o f Employment and Unemployment (Bureau of Labor
Statistics). See a l s o b l s Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 4.
COMPENSATION AND WAGE DATA
(Tables 1 ■3; 22-29)
C ompensation and wage data are gathered by the Bureau from business
establishments, State and local governments, labor unions, collective bar
gaining agreements on file with the Bureau, and secondary sources.
Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index (eci) is a quarterly measure of the rate of
change in compensation per hour worked and includes wages, salaries, and
employer costs of employee benefits. It uses a fixed market basket of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
labor— similar in concept to the Consumer Price Index’s fixed market
basket of goods and services— to measure change over time in employer
costs of employing labor. The index is not seasonally adjusted.
Statistical series on total compensation costs and on wages and salaries
are available for private nonfarm workers excluding proprietors, the selfemployed, and household workers. Both series are also available for State
and local government workers and for the civilian nonfarm economy,
which consists of private industry and State and local government workers
combined. Federal workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability sample consists of about 2,200
private nonfarm establishments providing about 12,000 occupational ob
servations and 700 State and local government establishments providing
49
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics
3,500 occupational observations selected to represent total employment in
each sector. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensa
tion information on five well-specified occupations. Data are collected each
quarter for the pay period including the 12th day of March, June, Septem
ber, and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed employment weights from the
1980 Census o f Population are used each quarter to calculate the indexes
for civilian, private, and State and local governments. (Prior to June 1986,
the employment weights are from the 1970 Census of Population.) These
fixed weights, also used to derive all of the industry and occupation series
indexes, ensure that changes in these indexes reflect only changes in com
pensation, not employment shifts among industries or occupations with
different levels o f wages and compensation. For the bargaining status,
region, and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan area series, however, employ
ment data by industry and occupation are not available from the census.
Instead, the 1980 employment weights are reallocated within these series
each quarter based on the current sample. Therefore, these indexes are not
strictly comparable to those for the aggregate, industry, and occupation
series.
Definitions
Total compensation costs include wages, salaries, and the employer’s
costs for employee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions, in
cluding production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-ofliving adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers for paid leave, supplemental pay
(including nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retirement and savings
plans, and legally required benefits (such as Social Security, workers’
compensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and employee benefits are such items
as payment-in-kind, free room and board, and tips.
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, when combined with the wages and salaries
series, a measure o f the percent change in employer costs for employee
total compensation. State and local government units were added to the e c i
coverage in 1981, providing a measure of total compensation change in the
civilian nonfarm economy (excluding Federal employees). Historical in
dexes (June 1981 = 100) o f the quarterly rates o f change are presented in the
May issue o f the bls monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments.
Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion of the Employment Cost Index, see the
Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982),
chapter 11, and the fo llo w in g M onthly L abor R eview articles:
“Employment Cost Index: a measure of change in the ‘price of labor’,” July
1975; “How benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost In
dex,” January 1978; “Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost
Index,” May 1982; and “Introducing new weights for the Employment Cost
Index,” June 1985.
Data on the e c i are also available in bls quarterly press releases issued
in the month following the reference months of March, June, September,
and December; and from the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217
(Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1985).
Collective bargaining settlements
(wage and benefit costs) and wages alone, quarterly for private industry and
semiannually for State and local government. Compensation measures
cover all collective bargaining situations involving 5,000 workers or more
and wage measures cover all situations involving 1,000 workers or more.
These data, covering private nonagricultural industries and State and local
governments, are calculated using information obtained from bargaining
agreements on file with the Bureau, parties to the agreements, and second
ary sources, such as newspaper accounts. The data are not seasonally
adjusted.
Settlement data are measured in terms of future specified adjustments:
those that will occur within 12 months after contract ratification— firstyear— and all adjustments that will occur over the life of the contract
expressed as an average annual rate. Adjustments are worker weighted.
Both first-year and over-the-life measures exclude wage changes that may
occur under cost-of-living clauses that are triggered by future movements
in the Consumer Price Index..
Effective wage adjustments measure all adjustments occurring in the
reference period, regardless of the settlement date. Included are changes
from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from con
tracts negotiated in earlier periods, and changes under cost-of-living adjust
ment clauses. Each wage change is worker weighted. The changes are
prorated over all workers under agreements during the reference period
yielding the average adjustment.
Definitions
Wage rate changes are calculated by dividing newly negotiated wages
by the average hourly earnings, excluding overtime, at the time the agree
ment is reached. Compensation changes are calculated by dividing the
change in the value of the newly negotiated wage and benefit package by
existing average hourly compensation, which includes the cost o f previ
ously negotiated benefits, legally required social insurance programs, and
average hourly earnings.
Compensation changes are calculated by placing a value on the benefit
portion of the settlements at the time they are reached. The cost estimates
are based on the assumption that conditions existing at the time o f settle
ment (for example, methods o f financing pensions or composition o f labor
force) will remain constant. The data, therefore, are measures of negotiated
changes and not of total changes in employer cost.
Contract duration runs from the effective date of the agreement to the
expiration date or first wage reopening date, if applicable. Average annual
percent changes over the contract term take account of the compounding of
successive changes.
Notes on the data
Care should be exercised in comparing the size and nature of the settle
ments in State and local government with those in the private sector because
of differences in bargaining practices and settlement characteristics. A
principal difference is the incidence of cost-of-living adjustment (cola)
clauses which cover only about 2 percent of workers under a few local
government settlements, but cover 50 percent of workers under private
sector settlements. Agreements without cola’s tend to provide larger speci
fied wage increases than those with cola’s . Another difference is that State
and local government bargaining frequently excludes pension benefits
which are often prescribed by law. In the private sector, in contrast,
pensions are typically a bargaining issue.
Additional sources of information
Description of the series
For a more detailed discussion on the series, see the b l s Handbook of
Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 10.
Collective bargaining settlements data provide statistical measures of
negotiated adjustments (increases, decreases, and freezes) in compensation
Comprehensive data are published in press releases issued quarterly (in
January, April, July, and October) for private industry, and semi-
Digitized for 50
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
annually (in February and August) for State and local government. Histor
ical data and additional detailed tabulations for the prior calendar year
appear in the April issue o f the bls monthly periodical, Current Wage
monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments . Historical data appear in
the b l s Handbook of Labor Statistics.
Developments.
Other compensation data
Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the number and duration of major
strikes or lockouts (involving 1,000 workers or more) occurring during the
month (or year), the number of workers involved, and the amount of time
lost because o f stoppage.
Data are largely from newspaper accounts and cover only establishments
directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or second
ary effect o f stoppages on other establishments whose employees are idle
owing to material shortages or lack of service.
Definitions
Number of stoppages: The number of strikes and lockouts involving
1,000 workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
Workers involved: The number of workers directly involved in the
stoppage.
Number of days idle: The aggregate number of workdays lost by
workers involved in the stoppages.
Days of idleness as a percent of estimated working time: Aggregate
workdays lost as a percent of the aggregate number of standard workdays
in the period multiplied by total employment in the period.
Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one terminated in 1981 that
covered strikes involving six workers or more.
Additional sources of information
Data for each calendar year are reported in a BLS press release issued in
the first quarter o f the following year. Monthly data appear in the bls
Other bls data on pay and benefits, not included in the Current Labor
Statistics section of the Monthly Labor Review, appear in and consist of the
following:
Industry Wage Surveys provide data for specific occupations selected to
represent an industry’s wage structure and the types of activities performed
by its workers. The Bureau collects information on weekly work schedules,
shift operations and pay differentials, paid holiday and vacation practices,
and information on incidence of health, insurance, and retirement plans.
Reports are issued throughout the year as the surveys are completed.
Summaries of the data and special analyses also appear in the Monthly
Labor Review.
Area Wage Surveys annually provide data for selected office, clerical,
professional, technical, maintenance, toolroom, powerplant, material
movement, and custodial occupations common to a wide variety o f indus
tries in the areas (labor markets) surveyed. Reports are issued throughout
the year as the surveys are completed. Summaries of the data and special
analyses also appear in the Review.
The National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay provides detailed information annually on salary levels and
distributions for the type^of jobs mentioned in the survey’s title in private
employment. Although the definitions of the jobs surveyed reflect the
duties and responsibilities in private industry, they are designed to match
specific pay grades of Federal white-collar employees under the General
Schedule pay system. Accordingly, this survey provides the legally re
quired information for comparing the pay of salaried employees in the
Federal civil service with pay in private industry. (See Federal Pay Com
parability Act of 1970, 5 u .s .c . 5305.) Data are published in a BLS news
release issued in the summer and in a bulletin each fall; summaries and
analytical articles also appear in the Review.
Employee Benefits Survey provides nationwide information on the inci
dence and characteristics of employee benefit plans in medium and large
establishments in the United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Data are
published in an annual bls news release and bulletin, as well as in special
articles appearing in the Review.
PRICE DATA
(Tables 2; 30-41)
Price data 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).
Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index (cpi) is a measure of the average change in
the prices paid by urban consumers for a fixed market basket of goods and
services. The cpi is calculated monthly for two population groups, one
consisting only of urban households whose primary source of income is
derived from the employment o f wage earners and clerical workers, and the
other consisting o f all urban households. The wage earner index (cpi- w) is
a continuation o f the historic index that was introduced well over a halfcentury ago for use in wage negotiations. As new uses were developed for
the cpi in recent years, the need for a broader and more representative index
became apparent. The all urban consumer index (cpi- u) introduced in 1978
is representative o f the 1972-73 buying habits of about 80 percent of the
noninstitutional population of the United States at that time, compared with
40 percent represented in the cpi- w . In addition to wage earners and clerical
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
workers, the cpi-U covers professional, managerial, and technical workers,
the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, retirees, and oth
ers not in the labor force.
The cpi is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, trans
portation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and services
that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality o f these
items are kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only
price changes will be measured. All taxes directly associated with the
purchase and use of items are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000
tenants in 85 urban areas across the country are used to develop the “U .S.
city average.” Separate estimates for 28 major urban centers are presented
in table 31. The areas listed are as indicated in footnote 1 to the table. The
area indexes measure only the average change in prices for each area since
the base period, and do not indicate differences in the level of prices among
cities.
Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the way in which homeownership
costs are measured for the cpi-U. A rental equivalence method replaced the
51
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics
asset-price approach to homeownership costs for that series. In January
1985, the same change was made in the cpi- w . The central purpose of the
change was to separate shelter costs from the investment component of
homeownership so that the index would reflect only the cost of shelter
services provided by owner-occupied homes.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion o f the general method for computing the cpi, see b l s
Handbook of Methods, Volume II, The Consumer Price Index , Bulletin
2 1 3 4 -2 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1984). The recent change in the mea
surement o f homeownership costs is discussed in Robert Gillingham and
Walter Lane, “Changing the treatment o f shelter costs for homeowners in
the CPI,” Monthly Labor Review, June 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 .
Additional detailed cpi data and regular analyses of consumer price
changes are provided in the c p i Detailed Report, a monthly publication of
the Bureau. Historical data for the overall cpi and for selected groupings
may be found in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1985).
the exclusion of imports from, and the inclusion of exports in, the survey
universe; and the respecification of commodities priced to conform to
Bureau of the Census definitions. These and other changes have been
phased in gradually since 1978. The result is a system of indexes that is
easier to use in conjunction with data on wages, productivity, and employ
ment and other series that are organized in terms of the Standard Industrial
Classification and the Census product class designations.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the methodology for computing Producer Price In
dexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 7.
Additional detailed data and analyses of price changes are provided
monthly in Producer Price Indexes. Selected historical data may be found
in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1985).
International price indexes
Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes (ppi) measure average changes in prices re
ceived in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodi
ties in all stages o f processing. The sample used for calculating these
indexes currently contains about 3,200 commodities and about 60,000
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 stage of proc
essing structure o f Producer Price Indexes organizes products by class of
buyer and degree o f fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate
goods, and crude materials). The traditional commodity structure of ppi
organizes products by similarity of end use or material composition.
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 o f the month.
Since January 1976, price changes for the various commodities have
been averaged together with implicit quantity weights representing their
importance in the total net selling value o f 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 o f special composite groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
Notes on the data
Beginning with the January 1986 issue, the Review is no longer present
ing tables o f Producer Price Indexes for commodity groupings, special
composite groups, or sic industries. However, these data will continue to
be presented in the Bureau’s monthly publication Producer Price Indexes.
The Bureau has completed the first major stage of its comprehensive
overhaul o f the theory, methods, and procedures used to construct the
Producer Price Indexes. Changes include the replacement of judgment
sampling with probability sampling techniques; expansion to systematic
coverage o f the net output of virtually all industries in the mining and
manufacturing sectors; a shift from a commodity to an industry orientation;
52
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Description of the series
The bls International Price Program produces quarterly export and
import price indexes for nonmilitary goods traded between the United
States and the rest of the world. The export price index provides a measure
of price change for all products sold by U .S. residents to foreign buyers.
(“Residents” is defined as in the national income accounts: it includes
corporations, businesses, and individuals but does not require the organiza
tions to be U .S. owned nor the individuals to have U .S. citizenship.) The
import price index provides a measure of price change for goods purchased
from other countries by U .S. residents. With publication of an all-import
index in February 1983 and an all-export index in February 1984, all U.S.
merchandise imports and exports now are represented in these indexes. The
reference period for the indexes is 1977 = 100, unless otherwise indicated.
The product universe for both the import and export indexes includes raw
materials, agricultural products, semifinished manufactures, and finished
manufactures, including both capital and consumer goods. Price data for
these items are collected quarterly by mail questionnaire. In nearly all
cases, the data are collected directly from the exporter or importer, al
though in a few cases, prices are obtained from other sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered refer to prices at the U .S. border
for exports and at either the foreign border or the U .S. border for imports.
For nearly all products, the prices refer to transactions completed during the
first 2 weeks of the third month of each calendar quarter— March, June,
September, and December. Survey respondents are asked to indicate all
discounts, allowances, and rebates applicable to the reported prices, so that
the price used in the calculation of the indexes is the actual price for which
the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices for U .S. exports and imports,
indexes are also published for detailed product categories o f exports and
imports. These categories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit level of detail
of the Standard Industrial Trade Classification System (su e). The calcula
tion of indexes by sitc category facilitates the comparison of U .S. price
trends and sector production with similar data for other countries. Detailed
indexes are also computed and published on a Standard Industrial Classifi
cation (sic-based) basis, as well as by end-use class.
Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are weighted indexes o f the
Laspeyres type. Price relatives are assigned equal importance within each
weight category and are then aggregated to the sitc level. The values
assigned to each weight category are based on trade value figures compiled
by the Bureau o f the Census. The trade weights currently used to compute
both indexes relate to 1980.
Because a price index depends on the same items being priced from
period to period, it is necessary to recognize when a product’s specifica
tions or terms o f transaction have been modified. For this reason, the
Bureau’s quarterly questionnaire requests detailed descriptions of the phys
ical and functional characteristics o f the products being priced, as well as
information on the number o f units bought or sold, discounts, credit terms,
packaging, class o f buyer or seller, and so forth. When there are changes
in either the specifications or terms of transaction of a product, the dollar
value o f each change is deleted from the total price change to obtain the
“pure” change. Once this value is determined, a linking procedure is
employed which allows for the continued repricing of the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free
alongside ship) U .S. port of exportation. When firms report export prices
f.o.b. (free on board), production point information is collected which
enables the Bureau to calculate a shipment cost to the port of exportation.
An attempt is made to collect two prices for imports. The first is the import
price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation, which is consistent with the
basis for valuation of imports in the national accounts. The second is the
import price c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and freight) at the U .S. port o f impor
tation, which also includes the other costs associated with bringing the
product to the U.S. border. It does not, however, include duty charges.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method of computing International Price
Indexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 8.
Additional detailed data and analyses of international price develop
ments are presented in the Bureau’s quarterly publication U.S. Import and
Export Price Indexes and in occasional Monthly Labor Review articles
prepared by bls analysts. Selected historical data may be found in the
Handbook of Labor Statistics , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
PRODUCTIVITY DATA
(Tables 2; 42-47)
U. S. productivity and related data
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real physical output to real input. As
such, they encompass a family of measures which include single factor
input measures, such as output per unit of labor input (output per hour) or
output per unit o f capital input, as well as measures of multifactor produc
tivity (output per unit of labor and capital inputs combined). The Bureau
indexes show the change in output relative to changes in the various inputs.
The measures cover the business, nonfarm business, manufacturing, and
nonfinancial corporate sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly compensation, unit labor costs, unit
nonlabor payments, and prices are also provided.
Unit profits include corporate profits and the value of inventory adjust
ments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours paid of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Capital services is the flow of services from the capital stock used in
production. It is developed from measures of the net stock o f physical
assets— equipment, structures, land, and inventories— weighted by rental
prices for each type of asset.
Labor and capital inputs combined are derived by combining changes
in labor and capital inputs with weights which represent each component’s
share of total output. The indexes for capital services and combined units
of labor and capital are based on changing weights which are averages of
the shares in the current and preceding year (the Tomquist index-number
formula).
Notes on the data
Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant prices produced per hour o f labor input.
Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant dollars produced per unit of capital services
input.
Multifactor productivity is the ratio output per unit of labor and capital
inputs combined. Changes in this measure reflect changes in a number of
factors which affect the production process such as changes in technology,
shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in capacity utilization,
research and development, skill and efforts of the work force, manage
ment, and so forth. Changes in the output per hour measures reflect the
impact o f these factors as well as the substitution of capital for labor.
Compensation per hour is the wages and salaries of employees plus
employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans, and
the wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the self-employed
(except for nonfinancial corporations in which there are no selfemployed)— the sum divided by hours paid for. Real compensation per
hour is compensation per hour deflated by the change in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compensation costs expended in the
production o f a unit o f output and are derived by dividing compensation by
output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, interest,
and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by subtracting
compensation o f all persons from current dollar value of output and divid
ing by output. Unit nonlabor costs contain all the components o f unit
nonlabor payments except unit profits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Output measures for the business sector and the nonfarm businesss sector
exclude the constant dollar value of owner-occupied housing, rest o f world,
households and institutions, and general government output from the con
stant dollar value of gross national product. The measures are derived from
data supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U .S. Department o f
Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing out
put indexes are adjusted by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics to annual esti
mates of output (gross product originating) from the Bureau of Economic
Analysis. Compensation and hours data are developed from data o f the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
The productivity and associated cost measures in tables 4 2 -4 4 describe
the relationship between output in real terms and the labor time and capital
services involved in its production. They show the changes from period to
period in the amount of goods and services produced per unit o f input.
Although these measures relate output to hours and capital services, they
do not measure the contributions of labor, capital, or any other specific
factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of many influ
ences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level o f output;
utilization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization o f produc
tion; managerial skill; and the characteristics and efforts of the work force.
Additional sources of information
Descriptions of methodology underlying the measurement of output per
hour and multifactor productivity are found in the b l s Handbook of Meth
ods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 13. His
torical data for selected industries are provided in the Bureau’s Handbook
of Labor Statistics , 1985, Bulletin 2217.
53
MONTHLY LABOR
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
(Tables 4 5 -4 7 )
Labor force and unemployment
Description of the series
Tables 45 and 46 present comparative measures of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment— approximating U .S. concepts— for the
United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and six European countries. The
unemployment statistics (and, to a lesser extent, employment statistics)
published by other industrial countries are not, in most cases, comparable
to U .S. unemployment statistics. Therefore, the Bureau adjusts the figures
for selected countries, where necessary, for all known major definitional
differences. Although precise comparability may not be achieved, these
adjusted figures provide a better basis for international comparisons than
the figures regularly published by each country.
Definitions
For the principal U.S. definitions of the labor force, employment, and
unemployment, see the Notes section on EMPLOYMENT DATA: House
hold Survey Data.
Notes on the data
The adjusted statistics have been adapted to the age at which compulsory
schooling ends in each country, rather than to the U .S. standard of 16 years
o f age and over. Therefore, the adjusted statistics relate to the population
age 16 and over in France, Sweden, and from 1973 onward, Great Britain;
15 and over in Canada, Australia, Japan, Germany, the Netherlands, and
prior to 1973, Great Britain; and 14 and over in Italy. The institutional
population is included in the denominator o f the labor force participation
rates and employment-population ratios for Japan and Germany; it is ex
cluded for the United States and the other countries.
In the U .S. labor force survey, persons on layoff who are awaiting recall
to their job are classified as unemployed. European and Japanese layoff
practices are quite different in nature from those in the United States;
therefore, strict application of the U .S. definition has not been made on this
point. For further information, see Monthly Labor Review, December
1981, pp. 8 -1 1 .
The figures for one or more recent years for France, Germany, Great
Britain, Italy, and the Netherlands are calculated using adjustment factors
based on labor force surveys for earlier years and are considered prelimi
nary. The recent-year measures for these countries are, therefore, subject
to revision whenever data from more current labor force surveys become
available.
Additional sources of information
For further information, see International Comparisons of Unemploy
ment, Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978), Appendix B and
unpublished Supplements to Appendix B, available on request. The statis
tics are also analyzed periodically in the Monthly Labor Review . Additional
historical data, generally beginning with 1959, are published in the Hand
book of Labor Statistics and are available in unpublished statistical supple
ments to Bulletin 1979.
Manufacturing productivity and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 47 presents comparative measures of manufacturing labor produc
tivity, hourly compensation costs, and unit labor costs for the United
Digitized for54
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
States, Canada, Japan, and nine European countries. These measures are
limited to trend comparisons— that is, intercountry series of changes over
time— rather than level comparisons because reliable international com
parisons of the levels of manufacturing output are unavailable.
Definitions
Output is constant value output (value added), generally taken from the
national accounts o f each country. While the national accounting methods
for measuring real output differ considerably among the 12 countries, the
use of different procedures does not, in itself, connote lack of comparabil
ity— rather, it reflects differences among countries in the availability and
reliability o f underlying data series.
Hours refer to all employed persons including the self-employed in the
United States and Canada; to all wage and salary employees in the other
countries. The U .S. hours measure is hours paid; the hours measures for the
other countries are hours worked.
Compensation (labor cost) includes all payments in cash or kind made
directly to employees plus employer expenditures for legally required in
surance programs and contractual and private benefit plans. In addition, for
some countries, compensation is adjusted for other significant taxes on
payrolls or employment (or reduced to reflect subsidies), even if they are
not for the direct benefit of workers, because such taxes are regarded as
labor costs. However, compensation does not include all items of labor
cost. The costs of recruitment, employee training, and plant facilities and
services— such as cafeterias and medical clinics— are not covered because
data are not available for most countries. Self-employed workers are in
cluded in the U .S. and Canadian compensation figures by assuming that
their hourly compensation is equal to the average for wage and salary
employees.
Notes on the data
For most of the countries, the measures refer to total manufacturing as
defined by the International Standard Industrial Classification. However,
the measures for France (beginning 1959), Italy (beginning 1970), and the
United Kingdom (beginning 1976), refer to manufacturing and mining less
energy-related products and the figures for the Netherlands exclude
petroleum refining from 1969 to 1976. For all countries, manufacturing
includes the activities o f government enterprises.
The figures for one or more recent years are generally based on current
indicators o f manufacturing output, employment, hours, and hourly com
pensation and are considered preliminary until the national accounts and
other statistics used for the long-term measures become available.
Additional sources of information
For additional information, see the bls Handbook of Methods , Bulletin
2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 16, and periodic Monthly
Labor Review articles. Historical data are provided in the Bureau’s Hand
book of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217, 1985. The statistics are issued
twice per year— in a news release (generally in May) and in a Monthly
Labor Review article (generally in December).
OCCUPATIONAL INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA
(Table 48)
Description of the series
The Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses is designed to
collect data on injuries and illnesses based on records which employers in
the following industries maintain under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act o f 1970: agriculture, forestry, and fishing; oil and gas extraction;
construction; manufacturing; transportation and public utilities; wholesale
and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and services. Excluded
from the survey are self-employed individuals, farmers with fewer than 11
employees, employers regulated by other Federal safety and health laws,
and Federal, State, and local government agencies.
Because the survey is a Federal-State cooperative program and the data
must meet the needs of participating State agencies, an independent sam
ple is selected for each State. The sample is selected to represent all pri
vate industries in the States and territories. The sample size for the
survey is dependent upon (1) the characteristics for which estimates are
needed; (2) the industries for which estimates are desired; (3) the charac
teristics o f the population being sampled; (4) the target reliability o f the
estimates; and (5) the survey design employed.
While there are many characteristics upon which the sample design could
be based, the total recorded case incidence rate is used because it is one of
the most important characteristics and the least variable; therefore, it re
quires the smallest sample size.
The survey is based on stratified random sampling with a Neyman
allocation and a ratio estimator. The characteristics used to stratify the
establishments are the Standard Industrial Classification (sic) code and size
o f employment.
Definitions
Recordable occupational injuries and illnesses are: (1) occupational
deaths, regardless o f the time between injury and death, or the length o f the
illness; or (2) nonfatal occupational illnesses; or (3) nonfatal occupational
injuries which involve one or more o f the following: loss of consciousness,
restriction o f work or motion, transfer to another job, or medical treatment
(other than first aid).
Occupational injury is any injury such as a cut, fracture, sprain, ampu
tation, and so forth, which results from a work accident or from exposure
involving a single incident in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal condition or disorder, other than
one resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to environ
mental factors associated with employment. It includes acute and chronic
illnesses or disease which may be caused by inhalation, absorption, inges
tion, or direct contact.
Lost workday cases are cases which involve days away from work, or
days o f restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workday cases involving restricted work activity are those cases
which result in restricted work activity only.
Lost workdays away from work are the number of workdays (consec
utive or not) on which the employee would have worked but could not
because o f occupational injury or illness.
Lost workdays— restricted work activity are the number of workdays
(consecutive or not) on which, because of injury or illness: (1) the em
ployee was assigned to another job on a temporary basis ; or (2) the em-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ployee worked at a permanent job less than full time; or (3) the employee
worked at a permanently assigned job but could not perform all duties
normally connected with it.
The number of days away from work or days of restricted work
activity does not include the day of injury or onset of illness or any days
on which the employee would not have worked even though able to work.
Incidence rates represent the number o f injuries and/or illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers.
Notes on the data
Estimates are made for industries and employment-size classes and for
severity classification: fatalities, lost workday cases, and nonfatal cases
without lost workdays. Lost workday cases are separated into those where
the employee would have worked but could not and those in which work
activity was restricted. Estimates of the number of cases and the number of
days lost are made for both categories.
Most of the estimates are in the form of incidence rates, defined as the
number of injuries and illnesses, or lost workdays, per 100 full-time em
ployees. For this purpose, 200,000 employee hours represent 100 em
ployee years (2,000 hours per employee). Only a few of the available
measures are included in the Handbook of Labor Statistics. Full detail is
presented in the annual bulletin, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the
United States, by Industry.
Comparable data for individual States are available from the bls Office
of Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to bls by the Mine Safety and
Health Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration, respec
tively. Data from these organizations are included in bls and State publica
tions. Federal employee experience is compiled and published by the Occu
pational Safety and Health Administration. Data on State and local
government employees are collected by about half of the States and territo
ries; these data are not compiled nationally.
Additional sources of information
The Supplementary Data System provides detailed information describ
ing various factors associated with work-related injuries and illnesses.
These data are obtained from information reported by employers to State
workers’ compensation agencies. The Work Injury Report program exam
ines selected types of accidents through an employee survey which focuses
on the circumstances surrounding the injury. These data are not included
in the Handbook of Labor Statistics but are available from the bls Office
of Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
The definitions o f occupational injuries and illnesses and lost workdays
are from Recordkeeping Requirements under the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970. For additional data, see Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses in the United States, by Industry, annual Bureau o f Labor
Statistics bulletin; bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 17; Handbook of Labor Statistics , Bulletin
2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985), pp. 411-14; annual reports in the
Monthly Labor Review, and annual U .S. Department o f Labor press
releases.
55
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
1.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Comparative Indicators
Labor market indicators
1984
Selected indicators
1984
1986
1985
1985
IV
I
III
II
I
IV
III
II
E m p lo y m e n t d a ta
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey)1
Labor Force participation rate.......................................................
Employment-population ratio.........................................................
Unemployment rate .......................................................................
M en..............................................................................................
16 to 24 years ..........................................................................
25 years and over....................................................................
Women ........................................................................................
16 to 24 years ..........................................................................
25 years and over....................................................................
Unemployment rate, 15 weeks and over....................................
64.4
59.5
7.5
7.4
14.4
5.7
7.6
13.3
6.0
2.4
64.8
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.1
5.3
7.4
13.0
5.9
2.0
64.5
59.8
7.2
7.1
13.8
5.4
7.5
12.9
5.9
2.1
64.8
60.1
7.3
7.1
14.1
5.4
7.6
13.1
6.0
2.0
64.7
60.0
7.3
7.1
14.2
5.4
7.5
13.0
6.0
2.0
64.7
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.0
5.3
7.4
12.7
5.9
2.0
64.9
60.4
7.0
6.9
14.0
5.2
7.2
13.1
5.5
1.9
65.1
60.5
7.1
6.8
13.3
5.3
7.3
13.2
5.7
1.9
65.3
60.6
7.2
7.1
14.5
5.4
7.3
13.2
5.7
1.9
65.3
60.8
6.9
6.9
13.8
5.4
6.9
12.5
5.4
2.0
Total .................................................................................................
Private sector ................................................................................
Goods-producing............................................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................................
Service-producing ..........................................................................
94,496
78,472
24,727
19,378
69,769
97,614
81,199
24,930
19,314
72,684
94,064
78,096
24,690
19,381
69,374
96,581
80,341
24,970
19,439
71,611
97,295
80,958
24,947
19,323
72,347,
97,897
81,414
24,866
19,241
73,031
97,295
80,958
24,947
19,323
72,347
99,403
82,731
25,028
19,284
74,375
99,848
83,144
24,952
19,194
74,896
100,279
83,623
24,869
19,114
75,410
Average hours
Private sector ................................................................................
Manufacturing ...........................................................................
Overtime..................................................................................
35.2
40.7
3.4
34.9
40.5
3.3
35.2
40.8
3.5
35.0
40.4
3.3
34.9
40.4
3.2
34.9
40.6
3.3
34.9
40.4
3.2
34.9
40.7
3.4
34.8
40.7
3.4
34.7
40.7
3.5
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal workers) ......
Private industry workers ...............................................................
Goods-producing2 .....................................................................
Servicing-producing2 .................................................................
State and local government workers...........................................
5.2
4.9
4.6
5.1
6.6
4.3
3.9
3.4
4.4
5.7
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.2
1.5
1.0
1.2
.7
.8
.7
1.0
.2
1.6
1.3
.6
1.8
3.4
.6
.6
.6
.5
.7
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
.7
.8
.9
.6
.6
1.1
.7
.6
.8
2.8
Workers by bargaining status (private industry)
Union.............................................................................................
Nonunion ......................................................................................
4.3
5.2
2.6
4.6
1.1
1.3
.7
1.6
.6
1.0
.8
1.4
.5
.6
1.0
1.2
.2
.9
.5
.8
Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data), in thousands:1
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x
1 Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-
Digitized for56
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
producing Industries include all other private sector industries.
2.
Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
1984
Selected measures
1984
1985
1986
1985
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
C o m p e n s a t i o n d a t a 1, 2
Employment Cost Index-compensation (wages, salaries,
benefits)
Civilian nonfarm ...................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries
Civilian nonfarm ...................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................
5.2
4.9
4.3
3.9
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.2
0.7
.8
1.6
1.3
0.6
.6
1.1
1.1
0.7
.8
1.1
.7
45
4.1
44
4.1
12
1.2
1.2
1.2
.9
1.1
17
1.3
.6
10
1.0
.9
.7
Consumer Price Index (All urban consumers): All items......
4.0
3.8
.3
1.0
1.1
.7
.9
-.4
.6
.7
Producer Price Index
Finished goods.....................................................................
Finished consumer goods...................................................
Capital equipment ...............................................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ....................
Crude materials....................................................................
1.7
1.6
1.8
1.3
-1.6
1.8
1.5
2.7
-.3
-5.6
.9
.8
1.1
-.1
-1.2
.0
-.3
1.3
-.4
-3.1
.7
.7
.4
.2
-2.1
-1.4
-1.4
-1.4
-.5
-4.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
.4
4.3
-3.1
-4.1
.2
-2.9
-7.6
.5
.4
.6
-.9
-1.5
-.6
-.6
-.6
-.2
-.5
P r ic e d a t a 1
P r o d u c tiv ity d a ta 3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business sector..................................................................
Nonfarm business sector....................................................
Nonfinancial corporations 4 .................................................
2.3
1.8
2.0
1.0
.5
'1.2
-.1
-.4
1.1
1 Annual changes are December-to-December change. Quarterly changes]
are calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price
data are not seasonally adjusted and the price data are not compounded.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.
3.
.9
.3
.8
2.7
1.8
2.2
3.4
2.2
4.9
-3.2
-3.5
-2.8
3.3
4.3
-.5
.5
.5
-.3
.2
.2
.3
Quarterly percent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly
indexes. The data are seasonally adjusted.
4 Output per hour of all employees.
Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Quarterly average
Components
1985
II
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector..........................................
All employees, nonfarm business sector...................................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 2 .......................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................................
Union ..............................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
State and local governments...................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2 ...................................................
Private nonfarm .................................................
Union..........................................................
Nonunion................................................................
State and local governments...............................................................
Total effective wage adjustments3 ...............................................................
From current settlements..................................................................
From prior settlements ...........................................................
From cost-of-living provision................................................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements3
First-year adjustments ...............................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:5
First-year adjustment...........................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................
III
IV
I
II
1985
III
II
III
1986
IV
I
II
III
5.1
4.6
4.4
3.2
3.8
3.7
2.5
3.1
2.8
2.3
2.9
2.3
4.5
4.2
4.4
4.0
4.4
3.9
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
3.0
2.9
.7
.8
.6
1.0
.2
1.6
1.3
.8
1.4
3.4
.6
.6
.5
.6
.7
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.0
.7
.8
.2
.9
.6
1.1
.7
.5
.8
2.8
4.6
4.2
3.1
4.9
6.1
4.9
4.7
3.2
5.4
6.0
4.3
3.9
2.6
4.6
5.7
4.1
3.8
2.9
4.2
5.5
4.0
3.8
2.5
4.2
5.8
3.6
3.2
2.3
3.5
5.2
.9
1.1
1.1
1.1
.2
.8
.2
.5
.1
1.7
1.3
.9
1.5
3.5
1.2
.2
.5
.4
.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.5
.1
.2
.1
1.0
1.0
.7
1.1
1.0
.6
(4)
.4
.2
.8
.9
.4
.9
.4
.7
.2
.6
1.1
.7
.6
.7
3.2
.6
.1
.5
(4)
4.5
4.3
3.4
4.8
5.5
3.5
.9
1.9
.7
5.0
4.8
3.6
5.4
5.6
3.5
.9
1.8
.8
4.4
4.1
3.1
4.6
5.6
3.3
.7
1.8
.7
4.2
3.9
3.2
4.3
5.5
3.1
.6
1.7
.8
4.1
3.7
2.5
4.1
5.7
2.9
.5
1.8
.7
3.5
3.1
2.3
3.4
5.4
2.3
.5
1.6
.2
2.5
2.8
2.0
3.1
2.1
1.9
.9
1.5
1.3
2.0
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.7
2.0
2.5
1.6
2.2
1.5
1.9
3.5
3.4
2.0
3.0
2.0
1.4
.4
1.2
.7
1.6
1.9
1.9
3.4
2.7
3.1
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.3
2.6
1.4
2.0
1.4
1.6
Seasonally adjusted.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.
3 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 1,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Four quarters ended1986
(4)
4 Data round to zero.
5 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
4.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Employment status of the total population, by sex, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1986
1985
Annual average
Employment status
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
1984
1985
178,080
115,241
64.7
106,702
179,912
117,167
65.1
108,856
180,470
117,814
65.3
109,513
180,642
117,832
65.2
109,671
180,810
117,927
65.2
109,904
181,361
118,477
65.3
110,646
181,512
118,779
65.4
110,252
181,678
118,900
65.4
110,481
181,843
118,929
65.4
110,587
181,998
119,351
65.6
110,797
182,183
119,796
65.8
111,353
182,354
119,744
65.7
111,554
182,525
119,879
65.7
111,852
182,713
119,936
65.6
111,607
182,935
120,231
65.7
111,989
59.9
1,697
105,005
3,321
101,685
8,539
7.4
62,839
60.5
1,706
107,150
3,179
103,971
8,312
7.1
62,744
60.7
1,700
107,813
3,058
104,755
8,301
7.0
62,656
60.7
1,702
107,969
3,070
104,899
8,161
6.9
62,810
60.8
1,698
108,206
3,151
105,055
8,023
6.8
62,883
61.0
1,691
108,955
3,299
105,655
7,831
6.6
62,885
60.7
1,691
108,561
3,096
105,465
8,527
7.2
62,733
60.8
1,693
108,788
3,285
105,503
8,419
7.1
62,778
60.8
1,695
108,892
3,222
105,670
8,342
7.0
62,914
60.9
1,687
109,110
3,160
105,950
8,554
7.2
62,647
61.1
1,680
109,673
3,165
106,508
8,443
7.0
62,387
61.2
1,672
109,882
3,112
106,769
8,190
6.8
62,610
61.3
1,697
110,155
3,048
107,107
8,027
6.7
62,646
61.1
1,716
109,891
3,121
106,770
8,329
6.9
62,777
61.2
1,749
110,240
3,149
107,091
8,242
6.9
62,704
85,156
65,386
76.8
60,642
86,025
65,967
■ 76.7
61,447
86,293
66,227
76.7
61,656
86,374
66,176
76.6
61,731
86,459
66,139
76.5
61,793
86,882
66,679
76.7
62,458
86,954
66,838
76.9
62,243
87,035
66,864
76.8
62,288
87,120
66,757
76.6
62,254
87,195
66,943
76.8
62,190
87,288
66,964
76.7
62,322
87,373
66,936
76.6
62,365
87,460
66,944
76.5
62,515
87,556
67,094
76.6
62,483
87,682
67,132
76.6
62,553
71.2
1,551
59,091
4,744
7.3
71.4
1,556
59,891
4,521
6.9
71.4
1,551
60,105
4,571
6.9
71.5
1,552
60,179
4,445
6.7
71.5
1,549
60,244
4,346
6.6
71.9
1,539
60,919
4,221
6.3
71.6
1,539
60,704
4,595
6.9
71.6
1,540
60,748
4,577
6.8
71.5
1,541
60,713
4,503
6.7
71.3
1,533
60,657
4,754
7.1
71.4
1,525
60,797
4,642
6.9
71.4
1,518
60,847
4,571
6.8
71.5
1,541
60,974
4,429
6.6
71.4
1,560
60,923
4,611
6.9
71.3
1,590
60,963
4,578
6.8
92,924
49,855
53.7
46,061
93,886
51,200
54.5
47,409
94,177
51,587
54.8
47,857
94,266
51,655
54.8
47,939
94,351
51,788
54.9
48,111
94,479
51,797
54.8
48,187
94,558
51,941
54.9
48,009
94,643
52,036
55.0
48,194
94,723
52,172
55.1
48,333
94,803
52,408
55.3
48,608
94,895
52,832
55.7
49,031
94,981
52,808
55.6
49,189
95,065
52,935
55.7
49,337
95,156
52,842
55.5
49,125
95,253
53,099
55.7
49,436
49.6
146
45,915
3,794
7.6
50.5
150
47,259
3,791
7.4
50.8
149
47,708
3,730
7.2
50.9
149
47,790
3,716
7.2
51.0
149
47,962
3,677
7.1
51.0
152
48,035
3,610
7.0
50.8
152
47,857
3,932
7.6
50.9
153
48,041
3,842
7.4
51.0
154
48,179
3,839
7.4
51.3
154
48,454
3,800
7.3
51.7
155
48,876
3,801
7.2
51.8
154
49,035
3,619
6.9
51.9
156
49,181
3,598
6.8
51.6
156
48,969
3,717
7.0
51.9
159
49,277
3,663
6.9
TOTAL
Noninstitutional population ', 2 .......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed 2 .......................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ....................
Agriculture ............................
Nonagricultural industries.....
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........
Not in labor force ........................
M e n , 16 y e a rs a n d o v e r
Noninstitutional population 1, 2 .......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed 2 .......................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ...................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........
W o m e n , 16 y e a rs a n d o v e r
Noninstitutional population 1, 2 ......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed2 ........................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ....................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........
’ The 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 noninstitutlonal population.
Digitized for 58
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4 Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces).
5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1985
1986
Employment status
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
176,383
113,544
64.4
105,005
178,206
115,461
64.8
107,150
178,770
116,114
65.0
107,813
178,940
116,130
64.9
107,969
179,112
116,229
64.9
108,206
179,670
116,786
65.0
108,955
179,821
117,088
65.1
108,561
179,985
117,207
65.1
108,788
180,148
117,234
65.1
108,892
180,311
117,664
65.3
109,110
180,503
118,116
65.4
109,673
180,682
118,072
65.3
109,882
180,828
118,182
65.4
110,155
180,997
118,220
65.3
109,891
181,186
118,482
65.4
110,240
59.5
8,539
7.5
62,839
60.1
8,312
7.2
62,744
60.3
8,301
7.1
62,656
60.3
8,161
7.0
62,810
60.4
8,023
6.9
62,883
60.6
7,831
6.7
62,885
60.4
8,527
7.3
62,733
60.4
8,419
7.2
62,778
60.4
8,342
7.1
62,914
60.5
8,554
7.3
62,647
60.8
8,443
7.1
62,387
60.8
8,190
6.9
62,610
60.9
8,027
6.8
62,646
60.7
8,329
7.0
62,777
60.8
8,242
7.0
62,704
76,219
59,701
78.3
55,769
77,195
60,277
78.1
56,562
77,498
60,526
78.1
56,849
77,566
60,553
78.1
56,897
77,651
60,548
78.0
56,982
78,101
61,212
78.4
57,706
78,171
61,183
78.3
57,384
78,236
61,268
78.3
57,459
78,309
61,053
78.0
57,391
78,387
61,208
78.1
57,312
78,484
61,387
78.2
57,560
78,586
61,323
78.0
57,499
78,634
61,235
77.9
57,607
78,722
61,345
77.9
57,547
78,802
61,391
77.9
57,559
73.2
2,418
53,351
3,932
6.6
73.3
2,278
54,284
3,715
6.2
73.4
2,188
54,661
3,677
6.1
73.4
2,210
54,687
3,656
6.0
73.4
2,278
54,704
3,566
5.9
73.9
2,349
55,356
3,507
5.7
73.4
2,258
55,127
3,799
6.2
73.4
2,411
55,048
3,809
6.2
73.3
2,347
55,043
3,663
6.0
73.1
2,278
55,034
3,897
6.4
73.3
2,320
55,241
3,827
6.2
73.2
2,266
55,233
3,824
6.2
73.3
2,173
55,435
3,628
5.9
73.1
2,272
55,275
3,798
6.2
73.0
2,288
55,271
3,831
6.2
85,429
45,900
53.7
42,793
86,506
47,283
54.7
44,154
86,810
47,663
54.9
44,609
86,901
47,713
54.9
44.656
86,988
47,870
55.0
44,882
87,112
47,895
55.0
44,980
87,185
47,921
55.0
44,710
87,263
47,952
55.0
44,797
87,355
48,107
55.1
45,009
87,444
48,409
55.4
45,284
87,547
48,805
55.7
45,701
87,629
48,916
55.8
45,918
87,689
48,989
55.9
45,999
87,779
48,922
55.7
45,879
87,856
49,061
55.8
46,062
50.1
595
42,198
3,107
6.8
51.0
596
43,558
3,129
6.6
51.4
609
44,000
3,054
6.4
51.4
591
44,065
3,057
6.4
51.6
597
44,285
2,988
6.2
51.6
696
44,284
2,915
6.1
51.3
593
44,117
3,211
6.7
51.3
598
44,199
3,155
6.6
51.5
576
44,433
3,097
6.4
51.8
609
44,675
3,125
6.5
52.2
565
45,136
3,104
6.4
52.4
608
45,309
2,998
6.1
52.5
627
45,372
2,990
6.1
52.3
610
45,269
3,042
6.2
52.4
605
45,457
2,999
6.1
14,735
7,943
53.9
6,444
14,506
7,901
54.5
6,434
14,463
7,925
54.8
6,355
14,472
7,864
54.3
6,416
14,474
7,811
54.0
6,342
14,458
7,678
53.1
6,269
14,465
7,984
55.2
6,467
14,485
7,987
55.1
6,532
14,484
8,074
55.7
6,492
14,480
8,047
55.6
6,515
14,472
7,923
54.7
6,411
14,467
7,833
54.1
6,465
14,505
7,958
54.9
6,549
14,496
7,953
54.9
6,465
14,527
8,030
55.3
6,619
43.7
309
6,135
1,499
18.9
44.4
305
6,129
1,468
18.6
43.9
261
6,094
1,570
19.8
44.3
269
6,147
1,448
18.4
43.8
276
6,066
1,469
18.8
43.4
254
6,015
1,409
18.4
44.7
246
6,221
1,517
19.0
45.1
276
6,256
1,455
18.2
44.8
298
6,194
1,582
19.6
45.0
274
6,241
1,532
19.0
44.3
280
6,131
1,512
19.1
44.7
238
6,227
1,368
17.5
45.2
249
6,300
1,409
17.7
44.6
239
6,226
1,488
18.7
45.6
256
6,363
1,411
17.6
152,347
98,492
64.6
92,120
153,679
99,926
65.0
93,736
154,082
100,533
65.2
94,369
154,203
100,478
65.2
94,507
154,327
100,533
65.1
94,585
154,784
100,961
65.2
95,165
154,889
101,232
65.4
94,803
155,005
101,248
65.3
94,958
155,122
101,249
65.3
95,081
155,236
101,515
65.4
95,180
155,376
101,975
65.6
95,731
155,502
101,922
65.5
95,760
155,604
102,189
65.7
96,271
155,723
102,127
65.6
95,953
155,856
102,326
65.7
96,158
60.5
6,372
6.5
61.0
6,191
6.2
61.2
6,164
6.1
61.3
5,971
5.9
61.3
5,948
5.9
61.5
5,796
5.7
61.2
6,429
6.4
61.3
6,290
6.2
61.3
6,168
6.1
61.3
6,335
6.2
61.6
6,244
6.1
61.6
6,162
6.0
61.9
5,918
5.8
61.6
6,174
6.0
61.7
6,169
6.0
19,348
12,033
62.2
10,119
19,664
12,364
62.9
10,501
19,761
12,412
62.8
10,566
19,790
12,457
62.9
10,518
19,819
12,522
63.2
10,657
19,837
12,548
63.3
10,737
19,863
12,545
63.2
10,690
19,889
12,656
63.6
10,791
19,916
12,740
64.0
10,856
19,943
12,781
64.1
10,889
19,974
12,754
63.9
10,825
20,002
12,601
63.0
10,836
20,028
12,473
62.3
10,654
20,056
12,630
63.0
10,757
20,089
12,732
63.4
10,893
52.3
1,914
15.9
53.4
1,864
15.1
53.5
1,846
14.9
53.1
1,939
15.6
53.8
1,865
14.9
54.1
1,810
14.4
53.8
1,855
14.8
54.3
1,865
14.7
54.5
1,884
14.8
54.6
1,892
14.8
54.2
1,929
15.1
54.2
1,766
14.0
53.2
1,819
14.6
53.6
1,873
14.8
54.2
1,838
14.4
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ...................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
Not in labor force ........................
M e n , 2 0 y e a rs a n d o v e r
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Agriculture...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
W o m e n , 20 y e a rs o n d o v e r
Civilian noninstitutional
population1....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ..................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ...................................
Agriculture...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
B o th s e x e s , 16 to
19 y e a rs
Civilian noninstitutional
population1....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Agriculture ...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
W h ite
Civilian noninstitutional
population1....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
B la c k
Civilian noninstitutional
population1....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
59
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
5. Continued— Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1986
1985
Annual average
Employment status
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
11,478
7,451
64.9
6,651
11,915
7,698
64.6
6,888
12,040
7,854
65.2
6,982
12,075
7,782
64.4
6,953
12,111
7,772
64.2
6,962
12,148
7,787
64.1
6,998
12,184
7,943
65.2
6,969
12,219
7,920
64.8
7,105
12,255
7,975
65.1
7,144
12,290
8,002
65.1
7,123
12,326
8,110
65.8
7,251
12,362
8,123
65.7
7,274
12,397
8,102
65.4
7,213
12,432
8,170
65.7
7,264
12,469
8,210
65.8
7,351
57.9
800
10.7
57.8
811
10.5
58.0
872
11.1
57.6
829
10.7
57.5
810
10.4
57.6
789
10.1
57.2
974
12.3
58.2
815
10.3
58.3
832
10.4
58.0
878
11.0
58.8
858
10.6
58.8
849
10.5
58.2
889
11.0
58.4
906
11.1
59.0
858
10.5
H is p a n ic o r ig in
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
1 The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
6.
because data for the ‘‘other races” groups are not presented and Hispanics are included
in both the white and black population groups.
Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
1986
1985
Annual average
Selected categories
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Jan.
Dec.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
C H A R A C T E R IS T IC
Civilian employed, 16 years and
M en..........................................
Women ....................................
Married men, spouse present ..
Married women, spouse
present....................................
Women who maintain families .
105,005
59,091
45,915
39,056
107,150
59,891
47,259
39,248
107,813
60,105
47,708
39,272
107,969
60,179
47,790
39,314
108,206
60,244
47,962
39,278
108,955
60,919
48,035
39,615
108,561
60,704
47,857
39,382
108,788
60,748
48,041
39,365
108,892
60,713
48,179
39,555
109,110
60,657
48,454
39,614
109,673
60,797
48,876
39,626
109,882
60,847
49,035
39,611
110,155
60,974
49,181
39,716
109,891
60,923
48,969
39,623
110,240
60,963
49,277
39,668
25,636
5,465
26,336
5,597
26,702
5,514
26,721
5,605
26,804
5,693
26,958
5,702
26,593
5,733
26,656
5,771
26,802
5,812
26,920
5,718
27,427
5,668
27,523
5,829
27,438
5,826
27,203
5,927
27,330
6,056
1,555
1,553
213
1,535
1,458
185
1,465
1,436
172
1,537
1,361
158
1,572
1,409
164
1,673
1,492
163
1,519
1,444
156
1,689
1,453
172
1,587
1,475
180
1,480
1,486
186
1,498
1,504
154
1,486
1,427
171
1,469
1,379
178
1,501
1,472
157
1,562
1,458
159
93,565
15,770
77,794
1,238
76,556
7,785
335
95,871
16,031
79,841
1,249
78,592
7,811
289
96,530
16,213
80,317
1,271
79,046
7,991
248
96,676
16,157
80,519
1,197
79,322
8,013
249
96,921
16,194
80,727
1,131
79,596
7,903
250
97,911
16,418
81,494
1,256
80,238
7,655
273
97,516
16,104
81,412
1,197
80,216
7,669
270
97,698
16,095
81,604
1,213
80,390
7,644
240
97,831
16,187
81,643
1,321
80,322
7,571
253
97,994
16,325
81,669
1,275
80,394
7,757
229
98,372
16,387
81,984
1,279
80,705
7,807
235
98,206
16,647
81,559
1,243
80,317
8,081
254
98,667
16,479
82,188
1,261
80,927
7,982
282
98,738
16,307
82,432
1,234
81,198
7,927
277
98,864
16,243
82,621
1,216
81,405
7,996
262
5,744
2,430
2,948
13,169
5,590
2,430
2,819
13,489
5,475
2,251
2,897
13,713
5,498
2,306
2,883
13,645
5,494
2,303
2,864
13,556
5,543
2,364
2,883
13,958
5,377
2,369
2,703
13,817
5,538
2,330
2,953
13,754
5,923
2,603
2,974
13,933
5,980
2,659
2,893
13,638
5,537
2,434
2,810
14,268
5,399
2,484
2,624
13,991
5,443
2,411
2,711
14,023
5,544
2,496
2,764
13,860
5,772
2,524
2,847
14,257
5,512
2,291
2,866
12,704
5,334
2,273
2,730
13,038
5,241
2,115
2,801
13,277
5,295
2,196
2,784
13,194
5,294
2,195
2,760
13,122
5,275
2,208
2,776
13,441
5,158
2,224
2,636
13,369
5,301
2,159
2,861
13,285
5,621
2,430
2,849
13,599
5,673
2,523
2,790
13,191
5,320
2,308
2,724
13,779
5,191
2,323
2,579
13,656
5,259
2,286
2,660
13,683
5,298
2,327
2,712
13,468
5,501
2,334
2,759
13,811
M A J O R IN D U S T R Y A N D C L A S S
OF W ORKER
Agriculture:
Wage and salary workers.......
Self-employed workers............
Unpaid family workers.............
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary workers .......
Government ..........................
Private industries...................
Private households.............
Self-employed workers............
Unpaid family workers.............
PERSONS AT W ORK
P A R T T IM E 1
All industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack work ...............................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time .....................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time ....................
1 Excludes persons “with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such
Digitized for60
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.
7.
Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(U ne m p loym en t rates)
Annual average
1985
1986
Selected categories
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Total, all civilian workers...........................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years..............................
Men, 20 years and over.....................................
Women, 20 years and over................................
7.5
18.9
6.6
6.8
7.2
18.6
6.2
6.6
7.1
19.8
6.1
6.4
7.0
18.4
6.0
6.4
6.9
18.8
5.9
6.2
6.7
18.4
5.7
6.1
7.3
19.0
6.2
6.7
7.2
18.2
6.2
6.6
7.1
19.6
6.0
6.4
7.3
19.0
6.4
6.5
7.1
19.1
6.2
6.4
6.9
17.5
6.2
6.1
6.8
17.7
5.9
6.1
7.0
18.7
6.2
6.2
7.0
17.6
6.2
6.1
White, total ........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............................
Men, 16 to 19 years ...................................
Women, 16 to 19 years..............................
Men, 20 years and over ..................................
Women, 20 years and over.............................
6.5
16.0
16.8
15.2
5.7
5.8
6.2
15.7
16.5
14.8
5.4
5.7
6.1
17.0
18.5
15.3
5.2
5.5
5.9
15.5
15.8
15.1
5.2
5.4
5.9
15.9
16.2
15.5
5.1
5.4
5.7
14.9
14.7
15.1
5.0
5.3
6.4
16.2
16.5
15.8
5.4
5.9
6.2
14.5
15.3
13.7
5.5
5.8
6.1
16.4
17.2
15.6
5.2
5.5
6.2
16.0
17.3
14.7
5.5
5.5
6.1
16.2
17.8
14.4
5.4
5.4
6.0
15.0
15.3
14.7
5.5
5.3
5.8
15.2
16.7
13.5
5.0
5.2
6.0
16.1
17.0
15.2
5.4
5.3
6.0
15.4
15.4
15.4
5.4
5.2
Black, total .........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............................
Men, 16 to 19 years ...................................
Women, 16 to 19 years..............................
Men, 20 years and over ..................................
Women, 20 years and over.............................
15.9
42.7
42.7
42.6
14.3
13.5
15.1
40.2
41.0
39.2
13.2
13.1
14.9
39.7
41.0
38.2
13.7
12.1
15.6
40.8
45.2
36.0
13.7
13.6
14.9
41.6
41.0
42.3
13.1
12.6
14.4
41.9
41.3
42.4
12.7
12.0
14.8
39.1
38.7
39.5
13.3
12.5
14.7
43.7
44.1
43.4
12.6
12.2
14.8
42.6
41.4
43.7
12.6
12.5
14.8
40.8
40.8
40.8
12.7
12.8
15.1
40.2
38.5
41.9
13.3
12.8
14.0
38.6
41.6
35.1
12.7
11.9
14.6
39.5
37.4
41.8
13.2
12.5
14.8
38.3
38.9
37.8
13.7
12.5
14.4
34.8
38.1
31.6
13.5
12.4
Hispanic origin, total...........................................
10.7
10.5
11.1
10.7
10.4
10.1
12.3
10.3
10.4
11.0
10.6
10.5
11.0
11.1
10.5
Married men, spouse present............................
Married women, spouse present.......................
Women who maintain families...........................
Full-time workers ................................................
Part-time workers ...............................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and over.......................
Labor force time lost1 ........................................
4.6
5.7
10.3
7.2
9.3
2.4
8.6
4.3
5.6
10.4
6.8
9.3
2.0
8.1
4.2
5.3
10.4
6.8
9.6
2.0
7.9
4.3
5.5
10.0
6.7
8.8
1.9
7.9
4.3
5.3
9.4
6.6
9.0
1.9
7.8
4.3
5.1
9.9
6.4
8.4
1.8
7.6
4.5
5.5
9.9
6.9
9.4
2.0
8.1
4.5
5.6
10.1
6.9
9.1
1.9
8.1
4.2
5.3
9.4
6.7
9.6
1.8
8.1
4.5
5.4
10.2
7.0
9.2
1.9
8.3
4.5
5.2
10.1
6.7
9.1
2.0
8.1
4.4
5.3
9.2
6.6
9.0
1.9
7.7
4.1
5.1
10.3
6.4
9.3
1.9
7.7
4.2
5.0
10.1
6.7
9.3
2.0
8.0
4.6
5.0
8.8
6.6
9.2
1.8
7.9
7.4
10.0
14.3
7.5
7.2
7.8
5.5
8.0
5.9
4.5
13.5
7.2
9.5
13.1
7.7
7.6
7.8
5.1
7.6
5.6
3.9
13.2
7.1
7.7
13.5
7.5
7.3
7.8
5.1
7.7
5.4
3.9
12.9
7.0
7.3
13.4
7.7
7.6
7.8
5.1
7.5
5.4
3.6
12.5
6.9
10.3
12.6
7.3
7.3
7.3
5.0
7.6
5.3
3.8
10.6
6.7
10.9
12.9
7.0
7.0
7.1
4.3
7.2
5.2
3.4
10.9
7.2
9.2
13.2
7.2
7.4
7.0
5.3
7.8
5.9
3.8
14.3
7.2
10.4
13.0
7.2
6.8
7.7
6.1
7.6
5.7
4.0
11.9
7.2
12.8
12.0
6.8
6.8
6.8
5.6
8.1
5.9
3.5
13.4
7.3
13.7
13.3
7.5
7.3
7.7
5.3
8.1
5.5
3.7
15.8
7.1
17.6
12.1
7.3
7.1
7.5
5.5
7.7
5.4
3.6
13.2
7.2
17.0
13.2
6.9
6.7
7.2
6.1
7.8
5.7
3.2
11.6
6.9
16.7
12.2
6.8
6.9
6.7
4.6
7.4
5.7
3.2
13.8
7.0
13.3
12.7
7.0
6.5
7.8
4.7
7.6
5.6
3.5
13.5
7.0
14.4
14.1
7.3
7.3
7.3
5.2
7.4
5.3
3.8
11.7
C H A R A C T E R IS T IC
IN D U S T R Y
Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ....
Mining.....................................................
Construction ...................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................
Durable goods.................................................
Nondurable goods ...........................................
Transportation and public utilities ......................
Wholesale and retail trade.................................
Finance and service industries..........................
Government workers ................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers .....................
1 Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.
61
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
8.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Civilian workers)
Annual
average
Sex and age
1984
1986
1985
1985
Nov.
Oct.
Dec.
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
June
May
July
Sept.
Aug.
Oct.
Total, 16 years and over ..................................................................
16 to 24 years...............................................................................
16 to 19 years .............................................................................
16 to 17 years ..........................................................................
18 to 19 years ..........................................................................
20 to 24 years .............................................................................
25 years and over..........................................................................
25 to 54 years ..........................................................................
55 years and over....................................................................
7.5
13.9
18.9
21.2
17.4
11.5
5.8
6.1
4.5
7.2
13.6
18.6
21.0
17.0
11.1
5.6
5.8
4.1
7.1
13.9
19.8
22.7
17.8
10.9
5.4
5.7
3.9
7.0
13.5
18.4
21.4
16.9
11.0
5.4
5.6
3.8
6.9
13.3
18.8
21.1
17.5
10.6
5.3
5.5
3.9
6.7
13.0
18.4
20.9
16.4
10.4
5.1
5.4
3.9
7.3
13.6
19.0
21.8
17.2
10.8
5.7
5.9
4.4
7.2
13.2
18.2
19.4
17.1
10.6
5.7
5.9
4.3
7.1
13.9
19.6
20.9
18.9
10.9
5.4
5.8
3.9
7.3
14.2
19.0
21.1
17.5
11.7
5.5
5.9
3.6
7.1
13.5
19.1
20.6
17.9
10.7
5.6
5.9
3.7
6.9
13.0
17.5
19.4
15.7
10.8
5.4
5.8
3.8
6.8
12.8
17.7
19.6
16.6
10.2
5.3
5.6
3.7
7.0
13.8
18.7
20.3
17.4
11.2
5.4
5.6
4.1
7.0
12.9
17.6
19.1
16.3
10.4
5.5
5.8
4.2
Men, 16 years and over..............................................................
16 to 24 years ..........................................................................
16 to 19 years........................................................................
16 to 17 years.....................................................................
18 to 19 years.....................................................................
20 to 24 years........................................................................
25 years and over ....................................................................
25 to 54 years.....................................................................
55 years and over................................................................
7.4
14.4
19.6
21.9
18.3
11.9
5.7
5.9
4.6
7.0
14.1
19.5
21.9
17.9
11.4
5.3
5.6
4.1
7.1
14.6
21.5
24.0
19.9
11.1
5.3
5.5
4.1
6.9
13.9
19.4
20.9
18.7
11.2
5.2
5.4
4.0
6.7
13.5
19.3
21.6
18.0
10.6
5.1
5.4
3.9
6.5
12.8
18.2
20.9
16.2
10.3
5.0
5.3
3.9
7.0
13.6
19.3
23.2
16.6
10.7
5.5
5.7
4.4
7.0
13.6
18.9
20.0
17.8
11.0
5.5
5.7
4.3
6.9
14.5
20.2
21.2
19.7
11.6
5.2
5.5
3.9
7.3
15.0
20.4
21.6
19.6
12.2
5.4
5.8
3.8
7.1
14.0
20.1
19.4
20.4
11.0
5.5
5.8
4.1
7.0
13.5
18.2
20.0
16.1
11.2
5.5
5.8
3.9
6.8
13.3
19.2
21.0
18.1
10.3
5.3
5.5
4.1
7.0
14.5
19.4
21.9
17.4
12.0
5.3
5.5
4.3
7.0
13.0
18.0
19.7
16.7
10.4
5.6
5.8
4.6
Women, 16 years and over.......................................................
16 to 24 years.........................................................................
16 to 19 years ......................................................................
16 to 17 years ...................................................................
18 to 19 years ...................................................................
20 to 24 years ......................................................................
25 years and over...................................................................
25 to 54 years ...................................................................
55 years and over..............................................................
7.6
13.3
18.0
20.4
16.6
10.9
6.0
6.3
4.2
7.4
13.0
17.6
20.0
16.0
10.7
5.9
6.2
4.1
7.3
13.1
17.9
21.2
15.5
10.7
5.6
5.9
3.7
7.2
13.1
17.4
22.0
15.1
10.8
5.6
5.9
3.6
7.1
13.2
18.3
20.6
16.9
10.6
5.4
5.7
3.9
7.0
13.2
18.5
20.8
16.5
10.5
5.3
5.6
3.8
7.6
13.6
18.6
20.2
17.7
11.0
5.9
6.2
4.4
7.4
12.7
17.5
18.7
16.3
10.1
5.9
6.3
4.4
7.4
13.2
19.0
20.5
18.1
10.0
5.8
6.2
3.8
7.3
13.3
17.6
20.5
15.3
11.1
5.7
6.1
3.4
7.2
13.0
18.0
21.9
15.1
10.4
5.7
6.1
3.1
6.9
12.5
16.6
18.7
15.3
10.4
5.4
5.7
3.6
6.8
12.1
16.0
18.1
15.0
10.1
5.4
5.8
3.1
7.1
12.9
17.9
18.5
17.3
10.3
5.5
5.8
3.8
6.9
12.8
17.1
18.4
15.9
10.5
5.4
5.7
3.7
9.
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1986
1985
Annual average
Reason for unemployment
1984
Job losers ................................................................
On layoff................................................................
Other job losers....................................................
Job leavers ..............................................................
Reentrants ...............................................................
New entrants ...........................................................
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
4,421
1,171
3,250
823
2,184
1,110
4,139
1,157
2,982
877
2,256
1,039
4,040
1,161
2,879
911
2,237
1,045
4,081
1,175
2,906
808
2,226
1,055
3,933
1,132
2,801
876
2,225
1,033
3,776
1,163
2,613
996
2,066
1,025
4,162
1,152
3,010
1,001
2,292
1,097
4,246
1,164
3,082
1,002
2,197
1,000
4,034
1,028
3,006
1,110
2,191
1,059
4,311
1,133
3,178
975
2,217
1,062
4,335
1,066
3,269
1,013
2,064
1,059
3,937
1,079
2,858
1,034
2,223
965
3,831
990
2,841
978
2,232
1,000
4,044
1,014
3,030
1,043
2,118
1,044
3,979
1,082
2,897
997
2,223
955
51.8
13.7
38.1
9.6
25.6
13.0
49.8
13.9
35.9
10.6
27.1
12.5
49.1
14.1
35.0
11.1
27.2
12.7
50.0
14.4
35.6
9.9
27.2
12.9
48.8
14.0
34.7
10.9
27.6
12.8
48.0
14.8
33.2
12.7
26.3
13.0
48.7
13.5
35.2
11.7
26.8
12.8
50.3
13.8
36.5
11.9
26.0
11.8
48.1
12.2
35.8
13.2
26.1
12.6
50.3
13.2
37.1
11.4
25.9
12.4
51.2
12.6
38.6
12.0
24.4
12.5
48.3
13.2
35.0
12.7
27.2
11.8
47.6
12.3
35.3
12.2
27.8
12.4
49.0
12.3
36.7
12.6
25.7
12.7
48.8
13.3
35.5
12.2
27.3
11.7
3.9
.7
1.9
1.0
3.6
.8
2.0
.9
3.5
.8
1.9
.9
3.5
.7
1.9
.9
3.4
.8
1.9
.9
3.2
.9
1.8
.9
3.6
.9
2.0
.9
3.6
.9
1.9
.9
3.4
.9
1.9
.9
3.7
.8
1.9
.9
3.7
.9
1.7
.9
3.3
.9
1.9
.8
3.2
.8
1.9
.8
3.4
.9
1.8
.9
3.4
.8
1.9
.8
PERCENT OF UNEM PLOYED
Job losers..............................................................
On layoff.............................................................
Other job losers.................................................
Job leavers............................................................
Reentrants.............................................................
New entrants ........................................................
PERCENT OF
C IV IL IA N
LABOR FORCE
Job losers ...............................................................
Job leavers ..............................................................
Reentrants ...............................................................
New entrants ...........................................................
10.
Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1986
1985
Annual average
Weeks of unemployment
62
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Less than 5 weeks ...........................................
5 to 14 weeks ..................................................
15 weeks and over...........................................
15 to 26 weeks ..............................................
27 weeks and over ........................................
3,350
2,451
2,737
1,104
1,634
3,498
2,509
2,305
1,025
1,280
3,430
2,536
2,277
1,057
1,220
3,465
2,448
2,205
894
1,311
3,374
2,460
2,188
973
1,215
3,311
2,441
2,056
969
1,087
3,562
2,622
2,340
1,149
1,191
3,589
2,640
2,258
1,099
1,159
3,628
2,685
2,135
1,001
1,134
3,705
2,737
2,209
1,072
1,137
3,384
2,708
2,320
1,036
1,284
3,394
2,486
2,256
1,066
1,190
3,427
2,379
2,295
1,086
1,209
3,407
2,533
2,405
1,114
1,291
3,418
2,584
2,167
929
1,238
Mean duration in weeks....................................
Median duration in weeks.................................
18.2
7.9
15.6
6.8
15.4
7.0
15.7
6.9
15.4
6.9
14.9
6.8
15.3
6.9
14.4
6.8
14.3
6.5
14.4
6.6
15.2
7.3
15.0
7.1
15.8
7.2
15.6
7.2
15.2
7.0
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11.
Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
Sept.
1985
Sept.
1986
Alabama.......................................................
Alaska ..........................................................
Arizona.........................................................
Arkansas......................................................
California......................................................
8.1
7.3
6.5
7.4
7.0
9.7
9.7
6.9
8.0
6.2
Colorado ......................................................
Florida ..........................................................
5.3
4.3
4.2
8.2
6.5
6.7
3.6
3.9
8.5
6.3
Hawaii...........................................................
Idaho ............................................................
Illinois ...........................................................
Indiana .........................................................
6.4
5.6
6.4
8.9
6.9
5.8
4.5
7.1
7.8
6.3
Maine............................................................
7.0
4.4
8.2
11.4
4.3
5.8
5.2
7.0
12.5
4.2
Minnesota....................................................
Mississippi....................................................
Missouri........................................................
4.1
39
98
4.9
95
54
4.2
4.3
8.3
4.2
11.2
5.9
State
Iowa..............................................................
Sept.
1985
Sept.
1986
Montana .....................................................
6.1
4.7
7.3
3.2
6.6
3.9
5.0
26
New Jersey.................................................
New Mexico ................................................
4.8
8.4
64
4.2
44
4.3
9.0
58
5.0
5.0
Ohio ............................................................
9.0
6.6
7.5
7.1
4.2
8.4
82
7.7
6.4
3.3
South Carolina............................................
South Dakota..............................................
6.2
4.0
72
7.2
5.0
5.4
3.6
70
91
5.2
Vermont......................................................
Wisconsin...................................................
3.7
5.2
68
10 7
5.8
3.4
45
71
11 6
6.1
Wyoming.....................................................
5.9
8.0
State
Oregon........................................................
Pennsylvania...............................................
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data
published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the
database,
12. Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
Sept. 1985
Aug. 1986
A la b a m a ...................
A la ska .......................
A r iz o n a ......................
A rk a n s a s ..................
C a lifo rn ia ..................
1,422.9
244.9
1,286.3
819.0
11,084.9
1,436.6
242.7
1,335.5
823.3
11,173.1
C o lo ra do ..................
C o n n e cticu t .............
D e la w a re ..................
D istrict o f C olum bia
F lo r id a .......................
1,426.8
1,583.6
297.8
627.0
4,414.8
1,445.8
1,607.6
301.9
667.2
4,508.5
G eo rg ia .....................
H a w a ii........................
Idaho .........................
Illinois ........................
Indiana ......................
2,591.1
418.9
348.7
4,794.6
2,218.6
2,650.4
431.5
333.0
4,826.3
2,266.3
I o w a ............................
Kansas ......................
K e n tu c k y ..................
L o u is ia n a ..................
M a in e .........................
1,084.1
985.4
1,260.1
1,603.9
471.7
1,062.0
989.7
1,274.6
1,504.3
485.6
M aryland ..................
M a s s a c h u s e tts .......
M ic h ig a n ...................
M in n e s o ta ................
M is s is s ip p i................
M is s o u ri.....................
M o n ta n a ...................
1,902.1
2,938.6
3,553.0
1,894.8
848.5
2,133.1
282.8
1,941.5
2,967.5
3,575.2
1,905.0
835.0
2,163.2
273.6
Sept.
1986p
1,442.1
237.4
1,354.6
839.2
11,305.4
Sept. 1985
Aug. 1986
Sept.
1986p
Nebraska....................................................
Nevada .......................................................
New Hampshire..........................................
656.3
455.4
479.2
657.1
469.6
494.8
663.7
473.0
495.4
New Jersey ................................................
New Mexico ................................................
1,441.6 New York....................................................
1,623.2 North Carolina ............................................
301.6 North Dakota ..............................................
648.9
4,575.8 Ohio ............................................................
Oklahoma...................................................
2,672.9 Oregon........................................................
425.8 Pennsylvania...............................................
344.2 Rhode Island...............................................
4,857.3
2,296.3 South Carolina............................................
South Dakota..............................................
1,072.3 Tennessee ..................................................
999.3 Texas ..........................................................
1,289.4 Utah ............................................................
1,517.8
484.9 Vermont......................................................
Virginia........................................................
1,941.5 Washington .................................................
2,991.1 West Virginia...............................................
3,611.9 Wisconsin....................................................
1,923.8
856.5 Wyoming.....................................................
2,186.0 Puerto Rico .................................................
273.9 Virgin Islands ..............................................
3,451.6
524.9
7,797.6
2,672.5
254.8
3,564.3
523.7
7,914.0
2,696.9
248.9
3,550.0
524.6
7,948.5
2,752.7
252.4
4,437.7
1,186.0
1,047.2
4,777.9
430.2
4,526.0
1,137.1
1,058.6
4,835.3
430.6
4,570.1
1,146.1
1,068.8
4,852.2
433.4
1,318.7
249.7
1,889.7
6,711.0
634.9
1,347.8
252.0
1,943.3
6,644.1
632.9
1,362.7
253.3
1,964.9
6,676.0
642.6
227.1
2,479.3
1,741.5
601.7
2,016.1
224.3
2,536.5
1,772.4
597.5
2,031.4
227.8
2,562.1
1,794.1
600.9
2,047.5
211.8
679.0
35.5
201.1
696.9
37.2
201.0
704.2
35.8
p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
State
•
because of the continual updating of the database.
63
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
13.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
1986
1985
A nn u al average
1984
1985
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
S ept.p
O ct.p
94,496
78,472
97,614
81,199
98,428
81,853
9 8,666
82,073
98,910
82,281
99,296
8 2,659
99,429
82,748
99,484
82,785
99,783
83,072
99,918
83,198
99,843
83,161
100,105
83,508
100,283
83,655
100,448
83,705
100,746
83,943
24,727
966
607
24,930
930
585
24,903
913
571
24,931
907
565
24,977
901
560
25,101
897
556
2 5,038
880
541
24,945
852
518
25,038
821
488
24,965
790
461
24,854
772
446
24,869
768
442
24,888
753
431
24,850
743
423
24,882
746
424
4,383
1,161
4,687
1,251
4,754
1,276
4,765
1,283
4,787
1,287
4,901
1,330
4,864
1,320
4,838
1,298
4,972
1,315
4,974
1,314
4,947
1,299
4 ,980
1,299
5,012
1,306
5,008
1,299
5,010
1,306
19,378
13,285
19,314
13,130
19,236
13,059
19,259
13,074
19,289
13,100
19,303
13,111
19,294
13,097
19,255
13,061
19,245
13,060
19,201
13,025
19,135
12,979
19,121
12,961
19,123
12,971
19,099
12,955
19,126
12,998
11,505
7,739
11,516
7,660
11,447
7,594
11,453
7,594
11,461
7,595
11,466
7,595
11,455
7,579
11,418
7,545
11,415
7,547
11,378
7,519
11,307
7,462
11,294
7,441
11,302
7,458
11,275
7,439
11,290
7,471
704
487
593
857
700
493
591
813
705
493
591
797
708
493
591
801
710
494
593
803
716
494
596
798
716
494
597
795
715
493
594
787
719
494
600
785
719
496
599
780
721
496
597
761
724
498
593
758
729
499
592
751
734
500
594
749
738
501
593
750
334
1,463
305
1,468
304
1,460
302
1,459
303
1,456
300
1,455
299
1,452
293
1,450
291
1,451
288
1,447
286
1,440
285
1,428
272
1,429
270
1,433
274
1,431
M achinery, e xce p t e le c tr ic a l..........
E le ctrical a nd e le ctro n ic
e q u ip m e n t............................................
T ra n sp o rta tio n e q u ip m e n t...............
M o to r ve h icle s and e qu ip m e nt ....
Instru m e n ts and related pro du cts
M iscellan eo u s m a nufacturing
in d u s trie s .............................................
2,198
2,182
2,146
2 ,139
2,133
2,137
2,127
2,118
2,111
2,100
2,089
2,079
2,072
2,044
2,039
2,208
1,901
862
714
2,207
1,971
876
723
2,181
1,987
873
722
2,179
1,993
870
723
2,182
1,998
872
725
2,182
1,996
867
724
2,181
1,998
864
725
•2,177
1,989
858
726
2,177
1,986
854
723
2,175
1,972
839
721
2,143
1,974
839
717
2,169
1,969
824
713
2,168
1,985
839
713
2,162
1,982
836
714
2,171
1,990
836
713
382
369
365
367
367
368
370
369
369
369
369
363
364
363
364
N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s ..................................
7,873
5,546
7,798
5,470
7,789
5,465
7,806
5,480
7,828
5,505
7,837
5,516
7,839
5,518
7,837
5,516
7,830
5,513
7,823
5,506
7,828
5,517
7,827
5,520
7,821
5,513
7,824
5,516
7,836
5,527
Food and kindred p r o d u c ts ...........
T o b a c c o m an ufa ctu re s ..............
T e xtile mill p ro du cts .........................
A pp a rel and o th e r textile
p ro d u c ts ...............................................
P aper and allied p ro du cts ..............
1,612
64
746
1,608
65
704
1,610
64
699
1,612
65
701
1,623
64
702
1,623
64
702
1,631
63
705
1,632
63
707
1,633
63
703
1,640
62
705
1,648
62
707
1,645
62
710
1,642
59
711
1,638
60
710
1,635
59
710
1,185
681
1,125
683
1,121
683
1,122
687
1,130
686
1,133
687
1,122
687
1,117
688
1,119
689
1,113
689
1,106
690
1,108
687
1,108
685
1,109
690
1,108
693
P rinting and p u b lis h in g .....................
C h em ica ls and allie d p ro d u c ts ......
P etroleum and co al p ro d u c ts ........
R ubb e r a nd mise, plastics
p ro d u c ts ...............................................
L e a th e r and le ath er p ro du cts .......
1,376
1,049
189
1,435
1,046
178
1,447
1,040
171
1,454
1,037
170
1,457
1,035
169
1,461
1,034
168
1,467
1,032
167
1,469
1,031
166
1,472
1,028
166
1,474
1,024
166
1,477
1,026
164
1,483
1,025
163
1,481
1,026
163
1,485
1,023
162
1,489
1,023
163
780
189
790
166
790
164
794
164
798
164
802
163
803
162
804
160
800
157
796
154
797
151
792
152
794
152
797
150
805
151
69,769
72,684
73,525
73,735
73,933
74,195
74,391
74,539
74,745
74,953
74,989
75,236
75,395
75,598
75,864
5,159
2,917
5,242
3,006
5,260
3,026
5,272
3,040
5,277
3,046
5,286
3,056
5,277
3,048
5,280
3,053
5,266
3,040
5,265
3,037
5,167
3,035
5,288
3,057
5,255
3,063
5,309
3,080
5,314
3,092
2,242
2,236
2,234
2,232
2,231
2,230
2,229
2,227
2,226
2,228
2,132
2,231
2,192
2,229
2,222
5,555
3,276
2,279
5,740
3,409
2,331
5,796
3,442
2,354
5,796
3,451
2,345
5,809
3,460
2,349
5,830
3 ,470
2,360
5,843
3,482
2,361
5,841
3,480
2,361
5,864
3,485
2,379
5,872
3,488
2,384
5,829
3,454
2,375
5,849
3,483
2,366
5,863
3,485
2 ,378
5,858
3,485
2,373
5,871
3,493
2,378
16,545
2,267
2,637
17,360
2,320
2,779
17,543
2,329
2,828
17,589
2,326
2,845
17,622
2,317
2,870
17,734
2,328
2,880
17,795
2,333
2,891
17,828
2,333
2,901
17,851
2,342
2,910
17,911
2,344
2,917
17,944
2,350
2,932
17,992
2,354
2,938
18,030
2,359
2,951
18,030
2 ,364
2,951
18,109
2,383
2,958
1,799
5,388
1,892
5,715
1,916
5,772
1,918
5,783
1,922
5,801
1,929
5,831
1,938
5,854
1,939
5,868
1,940
5,859
1,944
5,889
1,945
5,918
1,950
5,931
1,962
5,923
1,967
5,918
1,975
5,952
5,689
2,854
1,757
1,078
5,953
2,979
1,830
1,144
6,038
3,024
1,852
1,162
6,070
3,039
1,862
1,169
6,095
3,053
1,868
1,174
6,123
3,066
1,878
1,179
6,157
3,082
1,889
1,186
6,184
3,095
1,900
1,189
6,228
3,120
1,910
1,198
6,261
3,137
1,918
1,206
6,295
3,159
1,927
1,209
6,334
3,176
1,945
1,213
6,364
3,192
1,952
1,220
6,383
3,201
1,962
1,220
6,399
3,213
1,968
1,218
20,797
4,057
6,122
21,974
4,452
6,310
22,313
4 ,567
6,375
22,415
4,604
6,401
22,501
4,631
6,424
22,585
4,660
6,447
22,638
4,687
6,471
22,707
4,698
6,497
22,825
4,750
6,511
22,924
4,755
6,543
23,072
4,792
6,571
2 3,176
4 ,835
6,601
2 3,255
4 ,848
6,634
23,275
4,887
6,650
23,368
4,911
6,687
16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482
16,415
2,875
3,848
9,692
16,575
2,895
3,895
9,785
16,593
2,904
3,901
9,788
16,629
2,913
3,904
9,812
16,637
2,918
3,916
9,803
16,681
2,918
3,924
9,839
16,699
2,923
3,927
9,849
16,711
2,914
3,938
9,859
16,720
2,899
3,936
9,885
16,682
2,875
3,927
9,880
16,597
2,866
3,921
9,810
16,628
2,875
3 ,919
9,834
16,743
2,899
3,940
9,904
16,803
2,895
3,951
9,957
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 .................................................................
O il and gas e xtractio n ....................
C o n s tr u c tio n
................................................
G en e ra l building c o n tra c to r s ........
M a n u f a c t u r i n g .............................................
P ro du ction w o rke rs .........................
D u r a b l e g o o d s ..........................................
P rodu ction w o rke rs .........................
L um ber a nd w o od p ro du cts ..........
Furniture a nd f ix t u r e s .......................
S tone, clay, and glass p ro du cts ...
P rim ary m etal in du strie s .................
B last furna ce s and basic steel
p ro d u c ts ...............................................
F a bricate d m etal p ro d u c ts ..............
P ro du ction w o rk e rs ............................
S E R V IC E -P R O D U C IN G
.........................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic
u t i l i t i e s ..............................................................
T ra n s p o rta tio n .....................................
C o m m u n icatio n and public
u tilitie s ..................................................
W h o le s a le tr a d e
.......................................
D urable g o o d s .....................................
N o nd u ra ble g o o d s .............................
R e t a i l t r a d e ....................................................
'
G en e ra l m erch an d ise s t o r e s .........
F ood s t o r e s .........................................
A u to m o tive dea le rs a nd service
s t a t io n s ................................................
Eating and d rinking p la c e s .............
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 .................................................................
Fin a nce .................................................
In s u ra n c e .............................................
Real e s t a t e .........................................
S e r v i c e s ...........................................................
B usine ss s e r v ic e s .............................
H ealth se rvice s .................................
G o v e rn m e n t
................................................
F e d e r a l.................................................
S ta te ......................................................
L o c a l......................................................
p = prelim inary
NOTE:
64
See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted
A nnual
average
1985
1986
Industry
1984
P R IV A T E S E C TO R ....................................................
35.2
1985
34.9
Oct.
34.9
Nov.
34.8
Dec.
Jan.
34.9
35.0
Feb.
34.9
Mar.
34.9
Apr.
34.8
May
34.8
June
34.7
July
34.7
Aug.
34.8
S ep t.p
34.7
O ct.p
34.6
C O N S T R U C T IO N ..............................................................
37.8
37.7
-
-
-
-
-
-
M A N U F A C T U R IN G ..........................................................
O vertim e h o u r s .........................................................
40.7
3.4
40.5
3.3
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.9
3.6
40.8
3.5
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.6
3.3
40.6
3.4
40.8
3.5
40.8
3.5
40.6
3.4
D u ra b le g o o d s ................................................................
O vertim e h o u r s .........................................................
Lum be r a nd w o od p r o d u c t s .......................................
Furniture and f ix t u r e s ....................................................
S to n e, clay, and glass p r o d u c t s ...............................
P rim ary m etal in du strie s ..............................................
B last furn a ce s and basic steel p r o d u c ts ...........
Fa bricate d m etal p ro d u cts .........................................
41.4
3.6
39.9
39.7
42.0
41.7
40.7
41.4
41.2
3.5
39.9
39.4
41.9
41.5
41.1
41.3
41.3
3.5
40.2
39.5
42.1
41.8
41.6
41.5
41.3
3.6
39.9
39.4
41.8
41.9
41.9
41.5
41.6
3.7
40.2
39.9
41.8
42.1
41.9
41.6
41.5
3.6
40.4
40.0
42.7
41.9
41.7
41.5
41.4
3.5
40.0
39.7
41.9
42.1
41.8
41.5
41.4
3.6
40.2
39.4
41.9
41.9
41.7
41.4
41.3
3.6
40.3
39.1
42.4
41.3
40.5
41.2
41.2
3.4
40.3
39.4
42.3
41.7
41.5
41.1
41.2
3.5
39.9
39.4
42.2
41.6
41.1
41.1
41.1
3.5
40.1
39.4
42.2
41.3
41.2
41.1
41.4
3.5
40.2
39.9
42.5
41.9
41.5
41.2
41.5
3.6
40.1
40.1
42.5
42.1
41.9
41.5
41.2
3.5
40.2
39.8
42.2
42.3
42.8
41.0
M ach ine ry e xcep t e le ctrica l .......................................
E lectrical and e le ctro n ic e q u ip m e n t........................
T ra n spo rta tion e q u ip m e n t............................................
M o to r ve hicles and e q u ip m e n t...............................
Instru m e n ts and re la ted p ro du cts ............................
M iscellan eo u s m a n u fa c tu rin g .....................................
41.9
41.0
42.7
43.8
41.3
39.4
41.5
40.6
42.6
43.5
41.0
39,4
41.5
40.6
42.8
43.7
40.9
41.6
40.9
42.7
43.6
41.0
41.7
41.1
43.0
44.0
41.6
41.6
41.0
42.8
43.6
41.1
41.6
40.9
42.7
43.4
41.2
41.6
41.0
42.7
43.3
41.3
41.8
41.1
42.1
41.9
41.3
41.8
41.0
41.9
41.8
40.9
41.7
41.0
42.2
42.4
41.0
41.4
41.1
42.1
42.4
40.8
41.7
41.2
42.6
42.8
41.0
41.7
41.3
42.6
42.7
40.7
41.5
41.0
42.0
41.9
40.8
-
-
-
N o n d u ra b le g o o d s ........................................................
O vertim e h o u r s .........................................................
F ood and kindred p r o d u c ts ........................................
T o b a cco m a n u fa c tu re s ................................................
T e xtile mill p ro d u c ts ......................................................
A pp a rel and o th e r te xtile p ro d u c ts ..........................
P aper and allie d p ro du c ts ..........................................
39.7
3.1
39.8
38.9
39.9
36.4
43.1
39.6
3.1
40.0
37.2
39.7
36.4
43.1
39.8
3.2
40.2
39.8
3.2
40.0
40.0
3.4
40.1
P rinting and p u b lis h in g .................................................
C h em ica ls and allied p ro d u c ts ..................................
P etro le um and co al p ro d u c ts .....................................
L ea the r and le ath er p ro du cts ...................................
37.9
41.9
43.7
36.8
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
-
-
39.8
3.2
39.9
39.9
3.3
40.2
39.9
3.4
40.2
_
39.8
3.2
40.0
_
39.8
3.4
40.0
_
40.0
3.4
40.3
_
-
39.9
3.3
39.7
_
-
39.8
3.4
39.7
-
-
40.8
36.7
43.6
40.6
36.3
43.5
40.7
36.5
43.5
41.3
36.9
43.0
41.1
36.5
43.2
40.8
36.5
43.1
40.9
36.6
43.2
41.4
36.5
43.5
41.5
36.7
43.1
41.2
36.6
42.9
37.8
41.9
43.0
37.2
37.9
41.8
44.2
37.9
41.9
43.2
38.1
42.0
43.6
38.0
41.9
43.5
38.0
41.8
43.7
38.0
41.9
43.8
38.0
41.9
43.6
38.0
42.0
43.4
37.8
41.9
44.0
37.9
41.9
43.5
38.0
42.1
44.3
38.0
42.0
43.2
37.8
42.1
43.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
39.4
39.5
39.5
39.4
39.5
39.4
39.5
39.6
39.2
39.2
39.1
39.2
39.1
38.9
38.8
W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .................................................................
38.5
38.4
38.4
38.4
38.4
38.5
38.4
38.5
38.5
38.4
38.3
38.3
38.4
38.2
38.3
R E T A IL T R A D E
...............................................................................
29.8
29.4
29.3
29.3
29.2
29.3
29.3
29.3
29.2
29.2
29.1
29.2
29.2
29.2
29.1
...........................................................................................
32.6
32.5
32.5
32.4
32.5
32.6
32.6
32.5
32.5
32.5
32.4
32.4
32.4
32.4
32.3
-
-
-
-
41.0
36.8
43.5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
39.7
3.2
39.8
-
40.8
36.8
43.3
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
-
39.9
3.3
40.1
-
40.7
36.6
43.2
S E R V IC E S
-
-
_
NOTE: See “Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent
benchmark adjustment.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry
A nnual
average
1986
1985
Industry
P R I V A T E S E C T O R ........................................................................
S ea so na lly a dju sted ..................................................
1984
1985
O ct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.»
Oct.»
$8.32
$8.57
$8.64
8.63
$8.66
8.65
$8.71
8.70
$8.72
8.68
$8.74
8.71
$8.73
8.73
$8.72
8.72
$8.72
8.73
$8.71
8.74
$8.69
8.73
$8.70
8.77
$8.81
8.77
$8.83
8.82
-
-
M I N I N G ....................................................................................................
11.63
11.98
12.00
12.07
12.27
12.24
12.32
12.35
12.43
12.44
12.50
12.46
12.51
12.51
12.54
C O N S T R U C T I O N ............................................................................
12.13
12.31
12.42
12.28
12.47
12.34
12.35
12.22
12.29
12.33
12.31
12.31
12.39
12.54
12.63
9.70
9.74
9.68
9.73
9.73
9.19
9.53
9.56
9.63
9.74
9.70
9.70
9.72
9.70
9.71
L um be r a nd w o o d p ro d u c ts .......................................
Fu rn iture a nd f ix t u r e s ....................................................
S to n e, clay, and glass p ro du cts ...............................
P rim ary m etal in du strie s ..............................................
B la st furn a ce s a nd basic stee l p ro d u c ts ............
F a bricate d m etal p ro du cts .........................................
9.74
8.03
6.84
9.57
11.47
12.98
9.40
10.10
8.22
7.17
9.84
11.68
13.34
9.70
10.15
8.30
7.29
9.87
11.61
13.32
9.71
10.22
8.29
7.32
9.91
11.77
13.43
9.76
10.34
8.35
7.38
9.95
11.84
13.44
9.91
10.27
8.30
7.36
9.96
11.81
13.48
9.85
10.29
8.36
7.31
9.94
11.96
13.81
9.85
10.30
8.33
7.35
9.93
11.99
13.80
9.88
10.28
8.32
7.36
10.00
12.00
13.82
9.84
10.28
8.37
7.39
10.04
12.02
13.86
9.85
10.26
8.43
7.46
10.04
11.94
13.88
9.88
10.27
8.36
7.44
10.06
12.06
14.08
9.84
10.22
8.40
7.46
10.07
11.85
13.83
9.82
10.30
8.42
7.50
10.10
11.95
14.01
9.87
10.28
8.37
7.49
10.08
11.93
13.95
9.87
M a ch ine ry, e xc e p t e le ctrica l ......................................
E le ctrical a nd e le ctro n ic e q u ip m e n t........................
T ra n sp o rta tio n e q u ip m e n t...........................................
M o to r ve hicles a nd e q u ip m e n t...............................
In stru m e n ts and re la ted p r o d u c t s ............................
M iscellan eo u s m a n u fa c tu rin g .....................................
9.96
9.04
12.20
12.73
8.84
7.05
10.29
9.47
12.72
13.42
9.16
7.30
10.41
9.55
12.78
13.44
9.24
7.32
10.48
9.61
12.85
13.52
9.27
7.37
10.55
9.68
13.06
13.81
9.39
7.48
10.50
9.60
12.91
13.66
9.32
7.48
10.53
9.60
12.87
13.59
9.39
7.50
10.58
9.62
12.90
13.66
9.41
7.51
10.55
9.62
12.83
13.54
9.41
7.50
10.55
9.64
12.79
13.47
9.40
7.54
10.55
9.61
12.78
13.41
9.41
7.54
10.57
9.68
12.78
13.40
9.47
7.59
10.57
9.67
12.75
13.36
9.45
7.52
10.58
9.72
12.89
13.53
9.50
7.60
10.58
9.67
12.89
13.51
9.46
7.65
N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s ......................................................................
F ood and kin dred p ro d u c ts ........................................
T o b a cco m a n u fa c tu re s ................................................
T e xtile mill p ro d u c ts ......................................................
A pp a rel and o th e r te xtile p ro d u c ts ..........................
P ap e r and allie d p r o d u c t s ..........................................
8.38
8.39
11.22
6 .46
5.55
10.41
8.71
8.57
11.94
6.71
5.73
10.82
8 .72
8.51
11.31
6 .76
5.74
10.91
8.79
8.61
11.97
6 .79
5.75
10.97
8.87
8.71
11.78
6.83
5.80
11.07
8.86
8.72
11.89
6.85
5.82
11.02
8.86
8.71
12.38
6.83
5.79
10.99
8.88
8.74
12.76
6.86
5.80
11.03
8.88
8.75
12.84
6.87
5.81
11.05
8.90
8.78
13.38
6.88
5.78
11.12
8.91
8.74
13.68
6.87
5.79
11.15
8.99
8.75
13.48
6.90
5.76
11.31
8.93
8.65
13.44
6.99
5.79
11.17
8.95
8.63
12.16
7.05
5.87
11.19
8.96
8.67
12.10
7.03
5.85
11.27
P rinting a nd p u b lis h in g .................................................
C h em ica ls a nd allie d p ro d u c ts ..................................
P etro le um a nd co al p ro d u c ts .....................................
R ubb e r a nd m iscellan eo u s p lastics p r o d u c ts ......
L ea the r a nd le a th e r p ro du cts ....................................
9.41
11.07
13.44
8.29
5.71
9.71
11.56
14.06
8 .54
5.82
9.78
11.70
13.99
8.54
5.77
9.83
11.80
14.07
8.63
5.83
9.92
11.85
14.24
8.73
5.83
9.85
11.86
14.26
8.69
5.86
9.86
11.81
14.21
8.69
5.83
9.90
11.78
14.22
8.72
5.86
9.87
11.82
14.16
8.68
5.89
9.91
11.89
14.02
8.75
5.88
9.88
11.94
14.14
8.75
5.88
9.96
12.04
14.16
8.82
5.89
10.00
11.99
14.07
8.81
5.90
10.10
12.00
14.22
8.75
5.93
10.09
12.09
14.13
8 .76
5.91
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 ......
11.12
11.40
11.48
11.59
11.61
11.59
11.64
11.62
11.55
11.54
11.57
11.61
11.61
11.72
11.72
W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .................................................................
8.89
9.16
9.16
9.23
9.33
9.28
9.36
9.33
9.29
9.29
9.32
9.30
9.31
9.37
9.38
R E T A IL T R A D E
...............................................................................
5.85
5.94
5.95
5.97
5.99
6.03
6.04
6.03
6.01
6.00
5.99
5.97
5.97
6 .06
6.06
F I N A N C E , I N S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E ......
7.63
7.94
8.01
8 .06
8.15
8.14
8.28
8.30
8.29
8.31
8.37
8.30
8.33
8.40
8.40
8.10
8.04
8.05
8.19
8.25
M A N U F A C T U R I N G ........................................................................
D u r a b le g o o d s
S E R V IC E S
-
................................................................................
...........................................................................................
D ata n o t available.
p = pre lim in a ry
Digitized for66
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7.59
7.89
7.99
8.05
8.12
8.12
NO TE:
8.17
8.18
8.12
8.10
S ee “ N o te s on th e d a ta " fo r a d escriptio n
b en ch m a rk revision.
o f th e m o st re ce nt
16.
Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
1986
1985
A nn u al average
Industry
1984
1985
O ct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
June
May
July
Aug.
S ep t.p
O ct.p
P R IV A T E S E C T O R
S e a so na lly a d ju s te d ................................................
C o n sta n t (1977) d o llars ............................................
$292.86 $299.09 $301.54 $301.37 $306.59 $302.58 $300.66 $302.93 $301.71 $302.58 $ 303.98 $304.15 $305.37 $307.47 $306.40
304.32 305.17
303.28 302.93
305.20
3 01.19 301.02 303.63
303.80 303.98 304.68
303.46 303.80
171.77
170.94
170.78
170.97
171.36
172.78
170.36
169.59
172.05
169.32
168.82
171.05
170.85
170.42
-
M I N I N G ....................................................................................................
503.58
519.93
5 18.40
521.42
537.43
543.46
522.37
522.41
522.06
519.99
525.00
518.34
529.17
530.42
526.68
C O N S T R U C T I O N ............................................................................
458.51
464.09
475.69
450.68
460.14
459.05
4 34.72
444.81
4 62.10
467.31
4 65.32
471.47
4 75.78
482.79
4 78.68
374.03
220.67
385.97
219.93
390.05
220.37
393.87
221.65
406.16
227.92
394.79
220.92
390.91
2 19.49
395.60
223.38
3 92.85
2 22.58
394.23
222.60
3 95.76
2 22.34
391.55
220.10
393.98
2 21.09
398.93
222.87
396.01
L um ber and w o o d p r o d u c t s .......................................
Furniture and f ix t u r e s ....................................................
S tone, clay, a nd glass p r o d u c ts ...............................
P rim ary m etal indu strie s ..............................................
B la st furna ce s and basic steel p ro d u c ts ............
F a bricate d m etal p ro d u cts .........................................
403.24
320.40
271.55
401.94
478.30
528.29
389.16
416.12
327.98
282.50
412.30
484.72
548.27
400.61
419.20
335.32
291.60
419.48
480.65
544.79
403.94
424.13
327.46
291.34
414.24
491.99
557.35
406.02
439.45
335.67
303.32
414.92
504.38
564.48
422.17
425.18
329.51
289.98
414.34
493.66
556.72
407.79
4 21.89
3 28.55
2 84.36
4 03.56
503.52
578.64
4 03.85
426.42
333.20
288.12
412.10
504.78
576.84
4 09.03
423.54
3 34.46
2 86.30
4 25.00
4 99.20
569.38
4 03.44
4 23.54
338.99
288.21
428.71
501.23
576.58
404.84
4 24.76
3 42.26
294.67
429.71
4 99.09
577.41
408.04
417.99
334.40
287.93
4 27.55
4 95.67
582.91
398.52
420.04
341.04
2 98.40
4 32.00
491.78
569.80
402.62
4 28.48
342.69
3 03.75
435.31
504.29
587.02
4 10.59
4 24.56
3 38.15
3 02.60
429.41
499.87
5 85.90
4 05.66
M achinery, e xce p t e lectrical ......................................
E lectrical and e le ctro n ic e q u ip m e n t........................
T ra n sp o rta tio n e q u ip m e n t............................................
M o tor ve h icle s and e q u ip m e n t...............................
Instru m e n ts and related p ro du cts ...........................
M iscellan eo u s m a n u fa c tu rin g .....................................
417.32
370.64
520.94
557.57
365.09
2 77.77
427.04
384.48
541.87
583.77
375.56
287.62
430.97
387.73
545.71
585.98
376.07
2 95.00
438.06
396.89
551.27
588.12
382.85
296.27
4 52.60
4 08.50
577.25
625.59
400.01
304.44
437.85
394.56
555.13
595.58
383.05
297.70
4 37.00
3 89.76
545.69
583.01
3 84.99
294.75
442.24
395.38
552.12
592.84
389.57
299.65
4 37.83
3 92.50
542.71
574.10
385.81
297.75
437.83
393.31
537.18
567.09
382.58
297.08
4 39.94
394.01
540.59
572.61
385.81
298.58
431.26
391.07
530.37
560.12
382.59
294.49
436.54
3 95.50
531.68
555.78
384.62
294.78
4 41.19
402.41
545.25
575.03
388.55
300.20
438.01
3 96.47
540.09
566.07
384.08
3 05.24
332.69
333.92
436.46
257.75
202.02
448.67
344.92
3 42.80
4 44.17
2 66.39
2 08.57
466.34
3 47.93
3 43.80
4 44.48
276.48
211.23
472.40
351.60
346.12
435.71
279.75
2 12.75
4 77.20
359.24
354.50
4 48.82
2 83.45
2 15.18
4 90.40
352.63
347.93
448.25
278.80
213.01
479.37
347.31
339.69
453.11
274.57
207.28
472.57
352.54
344.36
478.50
278.52
211.70
477.60
351.65
346.50
469.94
278.92
211.48
474.05
354.22
352.08
504.43
282.08
210.97
479.27
355.51
350.47
523.94
283.04
213.65
480.57
356.00
350.00
483.93
278.07
209.09
486.33
358.09
352.06
486.53
290.78
211.91
4 83.66
359.79
348.65
470.59
294.69
215.43
485.65
3 57.50
345.93
4 69.48
2 91.04
2 15.28
484.61
356.64
463.83
587.33
367.04
484.36
604.58
371.64
486.72
619 .76
375.51
4 95.60
6 10.64
3 84.90
503.63
6 22.29
371.35
495.75
616.03
370.74
492.48
612 45
377.19
494.76
621.41
374.07
495.26
615.96
374.60
499.38
605.66
370.50
502.67
622.16
374.50
502.07
618.79
381.00
501.18
623.30
386.83
504.00
624.26
382.41
505.36
614.66
345.69
210.13
350.99
216.50
350.99
216.95
356.42
219.21
366.66
220.96
359.77
217.41
356.29
209.88
360.14
212.72
356.75
213.81
360.50
215.80
361.38
221.68
357.21
217.93
362.97
216.53
363.13
218.22
362.66
216.31
M A N U F A C T U R IN G
C urrent d o lla r s ...............................................................
C o nsta nt (1977) d o lla r s ..............................................
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
.....................................................................
Fo od and kindred p ro d u c ts ........................................
T o ba cco m a n u fa c tu re s ................................................
T e xtile mill p ro du cts ......................................................
A pp a rel and o th e r textile p ro d u c ts ..........................
P aper and allie d p ro du cts ..........................................
P rinting and p u b lis h in g .................................................
C h em ica ls and allie d p ro d u c ts ..................................
P etro le um and coal p ro d u c ts .....................................
R ubber and m iscellan eo u s
p lastics p ro d u c ts .........................................................
Lea the r and le a th e r p ro du cts ....................................
-
T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC
U T I L I T I E S ...........................................................................................
438.13
4 50.30
453 .46
457.81
4 60.92
452.01
456.29
457.83
450.45
450.06
455.86
457.43
457.43
458.25
454.74
W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .................................................................
342.27
351.74
3 51.74
355.36
360.14
355.42
355.68
357.34
355.81
356.74
358.82
358.05
358.44
358.87
359.25
R E T A IL T R A D E
174.33
174.64
173.74
173.73
178.50
173.06
172.74
174.27
173.69
174.60
176.71
178.50
178.50
176.95
175.74
2 78.50
289.02
2 90.76
291.77
299.11
296.30
304.70
304.61
301.76
301.65
306.34
302.95
304.88
305.76
306.60
2 47.43
256.43
259.68
260.02
263.90
263.09
264.71
265.03
263.09
262.44
264.06
263.71
264.04
265.36
266.48
...............................................................................
F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L
ESTATE
................................................................................................
S E R V IC E S
...........................................................................................
- Data not available.
p = pre lim in a ry
NO TE: S ee “ N o tes on th e d a ta ” fo r a d escriptio n o f the m o st re ce n t ben chm ark
revision.
17. The Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry
S ea so na lly adjusted
N ot se aso na lly adjusted
Industry
Sept.
1986p
O ct.
1985-
Aug.
1986
P R IV A T E S EC TO R (in c u r r e n t d o ll a r s ) ...............................
166.2
168.5
170.0
170.3
M in in g '...........................................................................................
C o n s tr u c tio n ................................................................................
M a n ufa ctu rin g .............................................................................
T ra n spo rta tion and public u t ilit ie s .......................................
W h o lesa le tra d e 1 .......................................................................
R etail tra de .................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s t a t e '.................................
S e r v ic e s ........................................................................................
178.8
151.9
169.3
167.7
169.1
156.0
173.2
170.1
181.5
151.3
172.2
169.6
171.7
157.4
179.8
•172.6
181.4
153.0
172.6
171.6
172.8
159.3
181.0
175.1
181.9
154.1
172.8
171.7
173.1
159.1
181.3
175.9
93.9
94.6
94.9
-
P R I V A T E S E C T O R ( in c o n s t a n t d o l l a r s )
..................................
1 T h is serie s is n o t se a so na lly adju sted beca use th e seaso na l co m p o n e n t Is sm all
re la tive to th e tre nd -cycle , irregular co m p on en ts, or both, a nd co n se q u e n tly ca n n o t
be se pa ra ted w ith s u fficie n t precision.
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Oct.
1986p
Oct.
1985
166.2
_
150.4
169.7
167.4
June
1986
169.2
.
151.4
172.5
170.7
July
1986
Aug.
1986
168.9
169.3
_
150.8
172.7
170.3
Sept.
1986
169.6
_
_
151.3
172.9
170.1
151.2
172.8
170.9
O ct.
1986p
170.3
_
152.8
173.3
171.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
156.4
157.8
157.7
158.5
159.1
159.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
169.9
174.3
173.4
174.3
174.4
175.7
94.0
95.2
95.1
95.1
95.0
-
p = prelim inary,
NO TE: S ee “ N o tes on the d a ta ” fo r a d escriptio n o f th e m o st re ce nt b en chm ark
revision.
67
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
18.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, data seasonally adjusted
(In p ercent)
Tim e span and ye ar
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Sept.
Aug.
O ct.
Nov.
1-m on th span:
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
67.8
52.4
59.7
72.7
47.8
53.5
67.6
53.8
45.1
67.6
49.2
54.1
62.4
51.6
49.2
65.4
47.0
46.2
62.2
56.2
54.6
55.9
56.8
54.3
50.5
50.8
52.2
63.0
61.9
55.1
53.5
57.6
O ve r
1984
1985
1986
3-m o nth span:
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
76.5
51.1
58.1
75.1
49.7
54.3
75.9
46.2
51.1
71.4
46.2
49.7
71.6
45.1
48.4
68.1
51.4
44.9
63.2
49.7
47.3
58.1
51.1
52.7
56.8
55.1
55.1
53.5
55.9
58.1
61.4
O ver
1984
1985
1986
6 -m o nth span:
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
78.1
49.2
53.8
76.5
47.8
53.8
77.0
43.0
47.6
75.1
45.9
45.9
69.2
44.3
45.9
65.1
44.3
48.4
63.2
48.9
48.9
59.2
50.8
58.6
54.1
53.2
57.0
-
O ve r
1984
1985
1986
12-m onth span:
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
.......................................................................................
81.1
46.2
50.3
78.1
45.7
51.1
72.2
46.8
51.6
72.2
43.8
51.1
68.9
44.9
67.8
47.3
65.7
47.6
62.7
48.9
59.7
47.3
54.6
49.5
51.4
48.9
48.6
48.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Data n ot available.
NO TE: Figures a re the p e rce n t o f in du strie s w ith e m p lo ym e n t rising. (H alf o f
the unch an g ed co m p o n e n ts are co u n te d as rising.) D ata are ce n te re d w ith in th e
19.
49.7
57.0
-
spans. Data fo r th e 2 m o st re ce n t m o n th s sh ow n in e ach span a re prelim inary.
S ee th e “ D e fin itio n s” in th is s ection. S ee “ N o tes on the d a ta ” fo r a d escriptio n of
th e m o st re ce n t b e n chm ark revision.
E m p loym en t status
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
160,689
163,541
166,460
169,349
171,775
173,939
175,891
178,080
179,912
L ab or force:
T o ta l (n u m b e r)..............................................................
P ercen t o f p o p u la tio n ................................................
100,665
62.6
103,882
63.5
106,559
64.0
108,544
64.1
110,315
64.2
111,872
64.3
113,226
64.4
115,241
64.7
117,167
65.1
93,673
58.3
1,656
97,679
59.7
1,631
100,421
60.3
1,597
100,907
59.6
1,604
102,042
59.4
1,645
101,194
58.2
1,668
102,510
58.3
1,676
106,702
59.9
1,697
108,856
60.5
1,706
92,017
3,283
88,734
96,048
3,387
92,661
98,824
3,347
95,477
99,303
3,364
95,938
100,397
3,368
97,030
99,526
3,401
96,125
100,834
3,383
97,450
105,005
3,321
101,685
107,150
3,179
103,971
U nem ployed:
T o ta l (n u m b e r)......................................................
P ercen t o f labor f o r c e .......................................
6,991
6.9
6,202
6.0
6,137
5.8
7,637
7.0
8,273
7.5
10,678
9.5
10,717
9.5
8,539
7.4
8 ,312
7.1
N o t in la bo r fo rce (num ber) .......................................
60,025
59,659
59,900
60,806
6 1,460
62,067
62,665
62,839
62,744
Annual data: Employment levels by industry
(N um bers in thou san ds)
Industry
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
Total e m p lo y m e n t....................................................................................
Private s e c to r .........................................................................................
G oo d s-p rod u cin g ...............................................................................
M in in g ..............................................................................................
C o n structio n .................................................................................
M a n u fa c tu rin g ...............................................................................
82,471
67,344
2 4,346
813
3,851
19,682
86,697
71,026
25,585
851
4,229
20,505
89,823
7 3,876
26,461
958
4,463
21,040
90,406
74,166
25,658
1,027
4,346
20,285
91,156
75,126
2 5,497
1,139
4,188
20,170
89,566
73,729
23,813
1,128
3,905
18,781
90,200
74,330
23,334
952
3,948
18,434
94,496
78,472
24,727
966
4,383
19,378
97,614
81,199
24,930
930
4,687
19,314
S e rv ic e -p ro d u c in g ..............................................................................
T ra n spo rta tion and public u tilitie s ..........................................
W h o lesa le tra de ...........................................................................
R etail tra de .....................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real esta te ......................................
S e r v ic e s ...........................................................................................
58,125
4,713
4,708
13,808
4,467
15,303
61,113
4,923
4,969
14,573
4,724
16,252
63,363
5,136
5,204
14,989
4,975
17,112
64,748
5,146
5,275
15,035
5,160
17,890
65,659
5,165
5,358
15,189
5,298
18,619
65,753
5,082
5,278
15,179
5,341
19,036
66,866
4,954
5,268
15,613
5,468
19,694
69,769
5,159
5,555
16,545
5,689
2 0,797
72,684
5,242
5,740
17,360
5,953
21,974
G o v e rn m e n t..................................................................................
F e d e ra l......................................................................................
S ta t e ..........................................................................................
Local .........................................................................................
15,127
2,727
3,377
9,023
15,672
2,753
3,474
9,446
15,947
2,773
3,541
9,633
16,241
2,866
3,610
9,765
16,031
2,772
3,640
9,619
15,837
2,739
3,640
9,458
15,869
2,774
3,662
9,434
16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482
16,415
2,875
3,848
9,692
NOTE:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
54.9
55.9
"
N o n institu tion a l p o p u la tio n .............................................
20.
- 53.0
60.5
-
Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population
E m ployed:
Total (num ber) .......................................................
P ercent o f pop ulatio n .........................................
R e sid en t A rm ed F o rc e s ..................................
C ivilian
T o ta l ...................................................................
A g r ic u ltu re ......................................................
N o na g ricu ltural in d u s trie s .........................
57.0
59.5
“
(N um b e rs in thousands)
68
Dec.
O ve r
1984
1985
1986
See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural
payrolls, by industry
Industry
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
36.0
5.25
189.00
35.8
5.69
203.70
35.7
6.16
219.91
35.3
6.66
235.10
35.2
7.25
2 55.20
34.8
7.68
2 67.26
35.0
8.02
280.70
35.2
8.32
2 92.86
34.9
8.57
299.09
43.4
6.94
301.20
43.4
7.67
332.88
43.0
8.49
365.07
43.3
9.17
397.06
43.7
10.04
438.75
42.7
10.77
459.88
42.5
11.28
479.40
43.3
11.63
503.58
43.4
11.98
519.93
36.5
8.10
295.65
36.8
8.66
3 18.69
37.0
9.27
342.99
37.0
9.94
367.78
36.9
10.82
3 99.26
36.7
11.63
4 26.82
37.1
11.94
4 42.97
37.8
12.13
458.51
37.7
12.31
4 64.09
40.3
5.68
228.90
40.4
6.17
249.27
40.2
6.70
269.34
39.7
7.27
288.62
39.8
7.99
318.00
38.9
8.49
330.26
40.1
8.83
354.08
40.7
9.19
374.03
40.5
9.53
385.97
39.9
6.99
2 78.90
40.0
7.57
302.80
39.9
8.16
3 25.58
39.6
8.87
3 51.25
39.4
9.70
382.18
39.0
10.32
4 02.48
39.0
10.79
420.81
39.4
11.12
4 38.13
39.5
11.40
450.30
38.8
5.39
209.13
38.8
5.88
228.14
38.8
6.39
247.93
38.5
6.96
267.96
38.5
7.56
2 91.06
38.3
8.09
309.85
38.5
8.55
329.18
38.5
8.89
342.27
38.4
9.16
3 51.74
31.6
3.85
121.66
31.0
4.20
130.20
30.6
4.53
138.62
30.2
4.88
147.38
30.1
5.25
158.03
29.9
5.48
163.85
29.8
5.74
171.05
29.8
5.85
174.33
29.4
5.94
174.64
36.4
4.54
165.26
36.4
4.89
178.00
36.2
5.27
190.77
36.2
5.79
209.60
36.3
6.31
2 29.05
36.2
6.78
2 45.44
36.2
7.29
2 63.90
36.5
7.63
278.50
36.4
7.94
2 89.02
33.0
4.65
153.45
32.8
4.99
163.67
32.7
5.36
175.27
32.6
5.85
190.71
32.6
6.41
208.97
32.6
6.92
2 25.59
32.7
7.31
239.04
32.6
7.59
247.43
32.5
7.89
256.43
P r iv a te s e c to r
A verag e w e ekly h o u r s ..............................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in d o lla r s )..............................................
A verag e w e ekly earnings (in dollars) ............................................
M in in g
A verage w e ekly hours .................................................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s )......................................
C o n s tr u c tio n
A verag e w e ekly hours .........................................................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in d o lla r s ) ......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s ) ......................................
M a n u fa c tu r in g
A verage w e ekly h ours ..................................................
A verag e hourly earnin g s (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s ).................................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s
A verage w e ekly h ours ................................................................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s ) ......................................
W h o le s a le t r a d e
A verag e w e ekly hours .................................................................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly e arnin g s (in d o lla r s )......................................
R e ta il t r a d e
A verage w e ekly hours .................................................................
A verage hourly earnin g s (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s )......................................
F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d r e a l e s ta te
A verage w e ekly h ours .........................................................
A verag e h ourly earnings (in dollars) .......................................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s )......................................
S e r v ic e s
A verage w e ekly h ours ......................................................
A verag e h ourly earnin g s (in dollars) .............................
A verag e w e ekly earnin g s (in d o lla r s )...............................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
22.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
(June 1 9 8 1 = 1 0 0 )
S eries
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
P ercent chan ge
1986
1985
1984
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
3
m onths
ended
Sept.
123.9
125.5
126.4
128.4
129.2
130.6
131.5
133.0
124.0
119.6
124.6
125.5
120.9
126.8
127.3
122.2
127.8
128.3
123.1
128.0
130.7
124.4
130.9
131.6
124.9
131.8
133.1
126.2
133.1
134.2
126.8
133.7
136.0
127.8
135.4
1.3
.8
1.3
4.1
2.7
3.4
120.4
123.3
128.8
126.9
122.0
124.8
130.9
128.6
123.9
126.2
131.9
130.1
124.6
127.2
132.6
130.3
125.5
129.7
136.4
134.2
126.0
130.6
137.1
134.8
127.7
131.9
138.8
136.8
128.7
132.8
139.4
138.0
129.3
134.6
142.4
140.6
.5
1.4
2.2
1.9
3.0
3.8
4.4
4.8
121.1
122.7
124.2
125.2
126.8
127.5
128.9
129.9
130.8
.7
3.2
122.4
119.3
123.2
123.9
120.6
125.7
125.8
121.9
126.3
127.1
122.8
126.5
128.8
124.0
128.8
129.8
124.4
129.5
131.3
125.7
130.9
132.5
126.3
131.1
133.5
127.2
132.3
.8
.7
.9
3.6
2.6
2.7
120.4
121.6
122.0
123.1
123.9
124.4
124.6
125.6
125.5
127.6
126.0
128.4
127.7
129.7
128.7
130.6
129.3
131.7
.5
.8
3.0
3.2
128.8
130.1
131.7
132.0
136.5
137.5
138.9
139.7
143.6
2.8
5.2
145.0
138.5
3.2
1.6
5.4
5.0
145.5
147.6
149.4
139.4
140.6
3.3
4.2
4.3
1.1
1.9
5.5
6.1
6.0
4.0
4.8
W orkers, by o ccu p a tio n a l group:
W o rke rs, by indu stry division:
W o rke rs, by o ccu p atio n al group:
129.7
125.0
131.1
125.9
132.5
128.1
132.9
128.5
137.6
131.9
138.6
132.7
140.0
134.7
140.5
136.3
129.9
130.6
132.1
127.9
126.9
131.3
132.0
133.5
129.2
128.6
132.8
133.4
134.4
131.1
130.1
133.2
133.7
134.6
131.5
130.3
137.9
139.1
140.9
134.1
134.2
139.1
140.3
142.0
135.2
134.8
140.4
141.5
143.0
136.8
136.8
140.8
141.7
143.2
137.9
138.0
W orke rs, by indu stry division:
1 C o st (ce n ts per hour w orke d) m easured in th e E m p loym en t C o st Index
c o n sists o f w ages, salaries, a nd e m p lo ye r co st o f em p loye e benefits.
2 C onsist o f private indu stry w o rke rs (excluding farm and h ou se h o ld w orke rs)
Digitized for70
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3.6
122.4
W o rke rs, by indu stry division:
E le m e r 'ir y and s e c o n d a ry ..................................................
1986
1.1
W orke rs, by o ccu p a tio n a l group:
N o n m an u fa cturin g .............................................................................
12
m onths
e nded
C o n sists o f legislative, judicial, adm inistrative , and re g ula tory
Includes, fo r exam ple, library, social, and health services.
activities.
23.
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
(June 1 9 8 1 = 1 0 0 )
1984
1985
1986
P ercent chan ge
S eries
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
3
m onths
e nded
Sept.
12
m o n th s
e nded
1986
C i v i l i a n w o r k e r s 1 .....................................................................................................
120.3
121.7
123.1
124.2
126.3
127.0
128.3
129.3
130.7
1.1
3.5
W orke rs, by o ccu p a tio n a l group:
W h ite -co lla r w o rke rs ........................................................................
B lu e-co lla r w o rk e rs ............................................................................
S ervice o c c u p a tio n s .........................................................................
132.2
117.0
122.3
123.5
118.2
124.3
125.2
119.3
124.8
126.4
120.5
125.3
128.8
122.0
128.0
129.8
122.3
128.6
131.2
123.4
129.8
132.4
124.1
130.0
134.1
125.0
131.7
1.3
.7
1.3
4.1
2.5
2.9
W o rke rs, by indu stry division
M an ufa ctu rin g .....................................................................................
N o nm an u fa cturin g .............................................................................
S ervices .............................................................................................
P ublic a d m inistratio n 2 .................................................................
118.0
121.3
127.2
124.4
119.5
122.6
128.9
125.7
121.0
123.9
129.7
127.0
122.3
125.0
130.5
127.2
123.2
127.6
134.2
131.4
123.8
128.4
134.8
132.0
125.3
129.6
136.4
133.8
126.5
130.4
137.0
134.6
127.2
132.2
139.9
137.5
.6
1.4
2.1
2.2
3.2
3.6
4.2
4.6
P r i v a t e i n d u s t r y w o r k e r s ...........................................................................
119.2
120.6
122.0
123.3
124.9
125.6
126.8
127.9
128.8
.7
3.1
120.9
125.2
122.3
127.3
124.0
127.7
125.5
128.7
127.3
131.2
128.3
131.5
129.6
132.7
131.1
134.0
132.0
135.4
.7
1.0
3.7
3.2
121.0
110.5
122.2
111.6
123.8
116.3
126.5
117.4
127.7
119.3
128.4
122.5
130.5
122.4
132.1
124.3
132.4
125.2
.2
.7
3.7
4.9
W orkers, by o ccu p a tio n a l group:
W h ite -co lla r w o r k e r s ..................................................................
P rofe ssio na l sp ecia lty and te ch n ica l o c c u p a tio n s .......
E xecutive, adm inistrative , and m anagerial
o ccu p a tio n s ..........................................................................
S ales o c c u p a tio n s ....................................................................
A d m in istra tive su pp ort occup atio n s, including
cle rica l .....................................................................................
122.0
122.9
124.7
125.6
127.1
127.9
129.6
130.8
131.7
.7
3.6
116.7
118.0
119.1
120.3
121.7
122.0
123.1
123.7
124.5
.6
2.3
118.0
116.6
113.4
119.4
117.9
114.0
120.8
118.9
114.5
122.0
120.1
115.7
123.7
121.1
117.7
123.8
121.6
117.8
125.3
122.6
118.0
125.7
123.6
118.9
126.7
124.1
119.8
.8
.4
.8
2.4
2.5
1.8
114.7
121.2
115.9
123.7
116.7
123.8
118.5
124.4
118.6
126.3
119.8
126.6
120.0
128.0
120.3
128.0
120.9
128.9
.5
.7
1.9
2.1
W orke rs, by indu stry division:
M a n u fa c tu rin g ...............................................................................
D u ra b le s ......................................................................................
N o n d u ra b le s ...............................................................................
118.0
117.7
118.6
119.5
119.1
120.2
121.0
120.6
121.6
122.3
122.0
122.6
123.2
122.7
124.0
123.8
123.4
124.6
125.3
124.8
126.1
126.5
125.8
127.9
127.2
126.4
128.5
.6
.5
.5
3.2
3.0
3.6
N o n m a n u fa c tu rin g .......................................................................
C o n s tru c tio n ...............................................................................
T ra n spo rta tion and pub lic u tilit ie s ......................................
W h o lesa le a nd retail t r a d e ...................................................
W h o lesa le tra de ....................................................................
R etail tr a d e ..............................................................................
Finance, insurance, a nd real e s ta t e .................................
S e r v ic e s .......................................................................................
119.9
114.3
119.9
116.5
120.7
114.9
115.3
127.1
121.2
114.4
120.7
118.1
122.9
116.2
115.8
129.5
122.6
115.5
121.7
118.8
123.7
116.9
122.0
129.9
123.9
116.6
122.8
121.1
126.8
118.9
121.7
131.0
125.9
117.3
124.8
122.7
127.7
120.8
124.1
133.9
126.6
117.9
125.2
123.7
128.3
121.9
126.5
134.1
127.7
118.3
126.3
124.5
129.7
122.5
126.6
136.2
128.7
119.8
126.6
125.8
131.2
123.7
128.0
136.9
129.7
120.5
127.3
126.5
131.8
124.4
129.0
138.2
.8
.6
.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.9
3.0
2.7
2.0
3.1
3.2
3.0
3.9
3.2
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 ............................................
126.1
127.1
128.4
128.7
133.2
134.2
135.5
136.0
140.4
3.2
5.4
127.1
121.9
128.0
122.5
129.3
124.2
129.6
124.5
134.3
127.9
135.3
128.4
136.6
130.4
137.0
131.9
141.8
134.5
3.5
2.0
5.6
5.2
127.2
127.8
129.3
125.1
124.4
128.1
128.7
130.2
125.9
125.7
129.4
129.9
130.8
127.7
127.0
129.7
130.2
131.1
128.0
127.2
134.5
135.8
137.5
130.2
131.4
135.6
137.0
138.5
130.9
132.0
136.8
138.0
139.4
132.4
133.8
137.1
138.2
139.4
133.3
134.6
142.1
144.1
145.7
135.8
137.5
3.6
4.3
4.5
1.9
2.2
5.7
6.1
6.0
4.3
4.6
B lu e-co lla r w o r k e r s .....................................................................
P recision pro du ction , craft, a nd repair
o ccu p a tio n s ...........................................................................
M a ch ine ope ra tors, a ssem blers, and in s p e c to r s .........
T ra n sp o rta tio n a nd m aterial m oving o c c u p a tio n s ........
H andlers, equ ip m e nt cleaners, helpers, and
la bo re rs ...................................................................................
S e rvice o c c u p a tio n s ..................................................................
W orke rs, by o ccu p a tio n a l group
W h ite -co lla r w o r k e r s ..................................................................
B lu e-co lla r w o r k e r s .....................................................................
W orke rs, by industry division
S ervices .........................................................................................
S c h o o ls ........................................................................................
E le m en tary and s e c o n d a ry ...............................................
H o spita ls and o th e r se rvice s 3 ............................................
P ublic a d m inistratio n 2 ...............................................................
1 C o nsists o f priva te indu stry w o rke rs (e xcluding farm and hou seh o ld w orke rs)
a nd S ta te and lo cal g o ve rn m e n t (e xcluding Federal G o ve rn m e nt) w orke rs.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2 C o nsists o f legislative, judicial, adm inistrative , and re g ula tory
3 Includes, fo r exam ple, library, so cial a nd hea lth services.
activities,
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
24. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size
(June 1 9 8 1 = 1 0 0 )
P ercent chan ge
1986
1985
1984
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
12
m o n th s
e nded
3
m onths
e nded
S eries
Sept.
Sept. 1986
C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s t a t u s 1
122.6
121.6
123.6
123.9
123.2
124.5
124.8
124.2
125.3
125.5
124.2
126.6
126.5
125.0
127.8
127.1
125.5
128.6
128.4
127.0
129.7
128.7
126.9
130.4
129.4
127.5
131.2
0.5
.5
.6
2.3
2.0
2.7
120.3
119.3
120.7
121.9
120.8
122.4
123.8
123.6
123.9
125.0
124.8
125.1
126.8
125.7
127.3
127.5
126.3
128.1
129.0
128.1
129.5
130.2
129.7
130.4
131.2
130.4
131.6
.8
.5
.9
3.5
3.7
3.4
122.4
120.7
119.7
122.5
123.8
122.2
120.8
124.9
125.1
124.2
122.0
126.8
126.4
125.2
122.7
127.9
128.8
126.5
124.2
129.1
129.9
127.2
124.6
129.8
131.6
128.7
125.9
130.8
133.3
129.6
126.2
131.6
134.2
130.7
127.3
132.1
.7
.8
.9
.4
4.2
3.3
2.5
2.3
121.5
119.0
123.2
119.8
124.7
121.4
125.7
122.5
127.3
123.9
128.1
123.9
129.5
125.5
130.5
126.4
131.4
127.2
.7
.6
3.2
2.7
119.8
118.1
121.3
120.9
119.5
122.1
121.7
120.4
122.8
123.0
121.7
124.1
124.1
122.8
125.3
124.7
123.3
125.9
125.6
124.2
126.9
126.1
124.6
127.4
126.9
125.0
128.5
.6
.3
.9
2.3
1.8
2.6
118.8
117.9
119.2
120.4
119.5
120.7
122.1
121.5
122.3
123.4
122.8
123.6
125.2
123.7
125.9
125.9
124.4
126.6
127.3
126.1
127.8
128.5
127.7
128.9
129.4
128.5
129.8
.7
.6
.7
3.4
3.9
3.1
120.5
119.0
117.8
120.0
121.9
120.2
118.7
122.5
123.0
122.3
119.6
124.0
124.6
123.4
121.1
125.1
126.8
124.8
122.5
126.6
128.1
125.4
122.9
127.1
129.2
126.8
124.2
128.1
131.3
127.8
124.4
128.9
132.3
128.8
125.3
129.3
.8
.8
.7
.3
4.3
3.2
2.3
2.1
119.5
117.5
121.0
118.3
122.4
119.6
123.8
120.6
125.5
121.9
126.3
122.0
127.4
123.6
128.5
124.5
129.4
125.0
.7
.4
3.1
2.5
W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1
W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta tu s 1
M anufa ctu rin g .....................................................................................
W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1
W o rk e rs , b y a re a s iz e 1
1 T h e in dexes are ca lcu la te d d iffe re n tly fro m th o se fo r th e o ccu p a tio n a nd
in du stry groups. Fo r a d eta ile d d escriptio n o f the in de x ca lculatio n , see th e
Digitized for72
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
L a b o r R e v ie w T e chn ica l
E m p loym en t C o st Ind e x,” M ay 1982.
M o n th ly
N ote,
“ E stim a tion
p ro ced ures
fo r
the
25. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, private
industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
A nnual average
Q ua rte rly averag e
M easure
1984
1984
1985
1986
1985
IV
I
II
III
IV
F
IF
IIIP
S p e c ifie d a d ju s tm e n ts :
T o ta l co m p en satio n 1 a d ju s tm e n ts ,2 se ttle m e n ts
co vering 5 ,000 w o rke rs o r more:
First ye ar o f c o n t r a c t .....................................................
A nn u al rate o ver life o f c o n t r a c t ...............................
3.6
2.8
2.6
2.7
3.7
2.0
3.6
2.7
3.5
3.4
2.0
3.0
2.0
1.4
0.4
1.2
0.7
1.6
1.9
1.9
W age adju stm e nts, s e ttle m e n ts co vering 1,000
w o rke rs o r more:
First ye ar o f c o n t r a c t .....................................................
A nn u al rate o ver life o f c o n t r a c t ...............................
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.7
2.3
1.5
3.3
3.2
2.5
2.8
2.0
3.1
2.1
1.9
.9
1.5
1.3
2.0
16
2.0
3.7
.8
3.3
.7
.7
.3
.7
.1
.8
.2
1.2
.2
.5
.1
.6
.0
.7
.2
6
1
2.0
.9
1.8
.7
.2
.2
.6
.1
.5
.1
.5
.4
.2
.1
.4
.2
.6
.0
5
.0
E f f e c t iv e a d ju s tm e n ts :
T o ta l e ffe ctive w age a d ju s tm e n t3 ...............................
From s e ttle m e n ts rea che d in period .......................
D eferred fro m s e ttle m e n ts rea che d in earlier
p e r io d s ...............................................................................
From co st-o f-livin g-ad ju stm en ts c la u s e s ................
1 C o m p en sa tion includes w ages, salaries, and e m p lo ye rs’ c o s t o f em p loye e
b e n e fits w h en c o n tra ct is neg otia ted .
2 A dju stm e n ts are th e n e t re su lt o f increases, decrea ses, and no ch an ge s in
co m p en satio n o r w ages.
3 B eca u se o f rounding to ta l m ay n o t e qual sum o f parts.
p
= prelim inary.
26. Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, major collective bargaining settlements in private
industry situations covering 1,000 workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
A verag e fo r fo u r q ua rte rs e n d in g M easure
1984
1985
IV
I
II
1986
III
IV
IP
IIP
IMP
S pe cifie d to ta l co m p en satio n a djustm ents, s e ttle m e n ts co vering 5,000
w o rke rs o r more, all industries:
First ye ar o f c o n t r a c t .............................................................................................
A nn u al rate o ve r life o f c o n t r a c t .......................................................................
3.6
2.8
3.4
2.6
3.4
2.7
3.1
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.3
2.6
1.4
2.0
1.4
1.6
2.4
2.9
2.1
2.4
1.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
1.3
2.8
2.4
2.3
2.4
2.4
1.5
2.8
2.4
1.9
2.7
2.5
1.8
3.0
2.3
1.6
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.8
2.0
1.6
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.6
1.8
1.5
2.2
2.6
2.1
1.5
2.2
1.2
1.9
2.1
1.8
2.3
2.1
2.9
1.5
1.0
3.3
2.1
2.0
2.5
1.4
.9
3.2
2.0
1.9
2.2
1.5
1.0
3.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.4
2.4
.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.6
.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.5
.1
.7
-.4
1.4
2.0
.9
-.1
1.1
-.8
.8
1.2
.6
2.5
5.5
2.0
2.9
4.8
2.6
2.6
5.1
2.4
2.8
4.0
2.7
2.7
4.3
2.5
2.9
3.8
2.8
3.2
4.0
3.0
3.3
3.9
3.2
3.3
3.6
3.3
3.3
3.6
3.3
2.8
3.5
2.7
3.0
3.6
2.9
2.6
3.5
2.4
2.8
3.4
2.7
2.1
2.7
1.9
2.3
2.5
2.2
.5
4.0
.4
1.0
1.4
1.0
.9
4.6
.8
1.4
1.7
1.4
1.1
9.2
1.0
1.7
4.6
1.7
1.7
2.4
.9
2.4
2.6
1.4
2.6
2.4
1.4
2.5
2.6
1.8
2.7
S pe cifie d w a ge adju stm e nts, s e ttle m e n ts co vering 1,000 w o rke rs or
more:
A ll industries
First ye ar o f co n tra ct .........................................................................................
C o n tracts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith o u t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
A nn u al rate o ve r life o f c o n t r a c t ....................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith o u t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
M anufacturing
First ye ar o f c o n t r a c t .........................................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o n tracts w ith o u t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
A nnual rate o ver life o f c o n t r a c t ....................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o ntracts w ith ou t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
N onm an u fa cturin g
First year o f co n tra c t .........................................................................................
C o n tracts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o n tracts w ith ou t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
A nnual rate o ver life o f c o n t r a c t ....................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ......................................................................
C o ntracts w ith ou t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
C o nstructio n
First ye ar o f c o n t r a c t .........................................................................................
C o n tra cts w ith C O LA c la u s e s ....................................................................
C o n tra c ts w ith o u t C O LA clauses ...............................................................
A nnual rate o ve r life o f c o n t r a c t ....................................................................
C o n tracts w ith C O LA c la u s e s .....................................................
C o n tra cts w ith o u t C O LA cla use s ...............................................................
1 D ata d o n o t m eet p ub lica tio n standards.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p
1.0
1.5
(')
(’ )
O
(')
(1)
(1)
1.7
(’ )
0
2.1
O
(1)
2.2
(’ )
O
= prelim inary.
73
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
27. Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
A verag e fo r fo u r q ua rte rs ending-E ffe ctive w age a d ju stm e nt
1985
1986
I
II
III
IV
lp
llp
lllp
3.6
.7
2.2
.7
3.5
.9
1.9
.7
3.5
.9
1.8
.8
3.3
.7
1.8
.7
3.1
.6
1.7
.8
2.9
.5
1.8
.7
2.3
.5
1.6
.2
4.5
2.9
4.2
2.3
4.2
2.9
3.9
2.3
4.3
2.8
3.7
2.8
4.1
3.4
3.7
2.2
4.0
2.9
3.5
2.5
3.8
2.5
3.4
2.0
3.1
1.7
3.8
1.0
F o r a ll w o r k e r s : ’
T o t a l.............................................................................................................................
From s e ttle m e n ts re a che d in period ............................................................
D eferred fro m s e ttle m e n ts rea che d in e arlie r period .............................
From c o st-of-livin g-ad ju stm en ts c la u s e s .....................................................
F o r w o r k e r s re c e iv in g c h a n g e s :
T o t a l.............................................................................................................................
From s e ttle m e n ts rea che d in period ............................................................
D eferred fro m s e ttle m e n ts rea che d in earlie r period .............................
From c o st-of-livin g-ad ju stm en ts c la u s e s .....................................................
1 B ecause o f rounding to ta l m ay not e qual sum o f parts.
p
= prelim inary.
28. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, State and
local government collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
A nn u al average
First 6 m o n th s
1986p
M easure
1984
1985
5.2
5.4
4.2
5.1
6.7
6.4
4.8
5.1
4.6
5.4
6.1
6.0
5.0
1.9
3.1
5.7
4.1
1.6
1.8
.6
1.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
S pe cifie d a djustm ents:
Total co m p en satio n ’ adju stm e nts, 2 s e ttle m e n ts co vering 5,000 w o rke rs o r more:
W age adju stm e nts, s e ttle m e n ts co vering 1,000 w o rke rs o r more:
E ffe ctive a djustm ents:
3 B eca u se o f rounding, to ta l m ay n o t equal sum o f parts.
4 Less tha n 0 .05 percent.
p = prelim inary.
1 C o m p en sa tion in clu de s w ages, salaries, and e m p lo ye rs’ co st o f em p loye e
b e n e fits w h en co n tra c t is negotiated.
2 A dju stm e n ts are the net re su lt o f increases, decrea ses, a nd no ch an ge s in
co m p en satio n o r wages.
29. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
1986
1985
A nn u al to ta ls
M easure
1984
1985
Nov.
O ct.
Jan.
Dec.
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Ju ne p
Mayp
July*1
A ug .p
S ep t.p
O ct.p
N u m b er o f stoppages:
10
22
198.0
46.7
113.3
37.9
44.3
144.8
85.2
107.7
54
61
6
20
3
13
2
9
4
7
3
7
2
8
4
8
6
10
11
15
376.0
323.9
76.6
26.2
8.2
7.6
24.0
11.2
6.1
28.6
W o rke rs in volved:
B eginning in period (in
In e ffe ct during period (in
7
17
391.0
584.1
119.3
47.0
38.0
12.0
28.4
38.6
17.6
41.2
205.9
66.3
8,499.0
7,079.0
1,428.8
688.2
661.9
170.0
309.5
367.5
297.3
303.6
3,684.3
894.5
1,612.1
1,208.5
1,420.6
.04
.03
.06
.04
.03
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.07
.04
.07
.06
.06
Days idle:
P ercent of estim a te d w orking
1 A gricultural and g o ve rn m e nt e m p loye e s are in cluded in the to ta l em p loye d and tota l
w o rkin g tim e: private household, forestry, a nd fish ery e m p loye e s a re exclud e d. A n
expla n atio n o f the m ea sure m e n t o f id leness as a p e rcen tag e o f the to ta l tim e w o rke d is
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5
17
13
22
62
68
fou n d in ‘“ T o ta l e co n o m y’ m easure o f strike id le n e ss," M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , O cto b e r
1968, pp. 54-56.
p = prelim inary
30. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless o th e rw ise indicated)
A nnual
1985
1986
S eries
O ct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
M ay
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
O ct.
322.2
374.7
325.5
378.5
326.6
379.9
327.4
380.8
328.4
3 81 .S
327.5
380.8
326.0
379.1
325.3
378.3
326.3
379.5
327.9
381.4
328.0
381.4
328.6
382.1
330.2
384.1
330.5
384.4
295.1
302.9
292.6
305.3
266.6
263.2
317.4
362.2
389.1
288.0
443.0
284.9
333.4
222.1
302.0
309.8
296.8
317.0
263.4
258.0
325.7
361.1
398.8
294.4
451.7
294.2
346.6
229.5
302.5
309.8
295.3
318.9
261.1
257.1
317.1
363.0
402.6
291.2
454.1
296.8
350.3
236.4
303.6
311.0
296.6
319.9
266.1
257.1
314.3
362.2
401.4
292.1
451.7
296.8
351.3
236.2
305.6
313.2
299.3
321.9
269.9
256.9
323.9
361.3
402.2
290.3
448.8
297.3
352.1
236.2
307.9
315.6
302.5
322.0
271.5
257.2
334.4
365.7
405.1
292.1
459.7
298.0
353.1
237.5
307.7
315.3
301.5
322.5
268.4
257.3
320.7
375.1
408.6
291.4
485.3
299.5
354.2
238.3
307.8
315.4
301.2
322.7
267.7
256.8
319.2
375.7
408.4
290.2
488.0
299.3
355.5
238.8
308.5
316.1
301.5
322.5
264.2
256.8
329.5
376.1
411.4
288.5
487.4
300.2
357.0
239.5
309.4
317.0
302.1
323.8
263.4
257.1
336.5
374.6
411.2
287.2
481.9
301.4
358.8
239.4
309.5
317.1
301.6
326.1
265.1
257.2
327.8
374.1
411.5
287.0
480.0
301.7
360.2
240.1
312.2
320.1
305.5
326.3
274.9
258.4
330.3
373.7
412.4
287.3
478.3
301.8
360.8
240.4
314.6
322.7
308.9
328.2
283.0
258.3
332.1
374.0
413.1
287.8
476.9
303.2
361.8
240.1
315.1
323.2
309.0
328.5
284.7
258.5
329.1
373.7
413.7
285.6
475.7
303.8
363.3
240.4
315.6
323.7
309.5
328.4
284.9
260.0
328.6
374.4
413.4
284.6
477.5
304.7
364.0
240.6
336.5
361.7
108.6
249.3
373.4
107.3
107.3
107.5
359.2
409.7
262.7
387.3
485.5
641.8
445.2
230.2
242.5
199.1
303.2
327.5
349.9
382.0
115.4
264.6
398.4
113.1
113.2
112.4
368.9
421.1
269.6
393.6
488.1
619.5
452.7
240.7
247.2
200.1
313.6
338.9
354.4
389.1
117.9
269.9
412.5
115.1
115.1
114.6
368.5
422.2
268.0
395.6
488.4
615.3
453.9
244.7
248.4
200.3
315.7
342.2
355.0
391.3
118.4
271.7
408.7
115.8
115.9
114.5
372.7
426.4
271.5
392.1
481.5
641.6
440.5
245.9
248.9
200.8
316.4
342.7
355.8
392.3
118.3
272.4
398.1
116.3
116.3
115.0
373.7
426.2
273.3
393.3
483.6
657.3
439.9
245.8
248.8
200.1
317.7
343.2
356.8
393.8
118.8
273.4
401.1
116.7
116.7
115.7
379.1
432.6
277.1
394.6
484.7
650.3
442.6
247.3
248.8
199.8
318.3
343.9
356.5
394.8
119.0
273.7
404.1
117.0
117.0
117.4
379.6
432.8
277.8
390.0
476.3
591.2
444.5
247.9
249.0
199.7
318.6
344.5
357.0
397.0
119.6
275.0
405.5
117.9
117.9
118.0
367.5
422.4
266.1
385.5
467.6
549.9
442.3
249.0
249.8
201.0
317.9
345.1
358.0
400.1
120.9
277.9
410.8
118.7
118.7
118.3
367.6
424.6
264.5
381.8
459.6
518.3
439.2
251.3
249.6
200.4
318.5
345.4
358.5
400.9
121.1
278.4
411.3
118.9
118.9
118.8
367.1
425.5
262.9
382.5
460.6
496.8
444.6
251.5
249.9
200.8
318.3
345.8
361.2
401.6
121.6
279.4
415.2
119.0
119.0
118.9
366.6
427.4
260.7
393.8
477.0
486.6
466.0
255.2
250.2
200.8
319.6
346.1
361.5
403.5
122.5
281.2
420.1
119.4
119.4
119.9
369.2
430.1
262.7
389.4
469.2
459.4
462.3
255.6
250.5
201.2
319.5
346.6
362.4
405.2
122.9
281.7
425.7
119.9
119.9
119.9
376.4
434.2
271.3
389.5
469.0
447.3
464.5
255.9
250.5
200.9
319.8
347.4
363.7
407.6
123.6
283.2
429.1
120.7
120.7
120.2
376.2
437.0
268.7
388.3
467.2
453.5
461.1
255.6
251.5
202.2
320.1
347.8
363.0
409.5
124.0
284.6
427.3
121.3
121.3
120.6
379.0
437.5
273.0
379.1
450.3
451.9
441.4
257.1
251.6
202.2
319.8
348.5
A pp a rel and u p k e e p ............................................
A pp a rel co m m o dities ............................................
Men s and b o ys’ a p p a r e l........................................
W om en s and g irls’ apparel ..............................................
In fa n ts’ and to d d le rs' a p p a r e l...........................................
F o o tw e a r..............................................................
O the r a pparel c o m m o d itie s ...........................................
A pp a rel s e rv ic e s ...............................................
200.2
187.0
192.4
163.6
287.0
209.5
216.4
305.0
206.0
191.6
197.9
169.5
299.7
212.1
215.5
320.9
211.1
196.7
203.2
177.9
302.1
212.3
214.9
325.7
211.2
196.8
203.6
176.5
307.0
215.5
214.9
326.3
209.0
194.2
202.0
172.6
304.1
213.1
214.6
326.9
205.0
189.5
198.6
164.4
313.9
209.1
215.5
329.8
204.1
188.5
196.8
163.4
311.6
207.9
216.1
330.7
206.3
190.8
198.3
167.6
313.1
210.1
214.6
331.5
207.3
191.7
199.7
168.0
316.6
211.4
215.3
332.9
206.4
190.7
200.2
164.9
318.5
211.5
215.4
333.6
204.5
188.4
198.1
161.3
319.7
210.0
215.8
334.3
203.2
187.0
195.8
159.8
307.5
209.1
218.1
334.6
207.0
191.2
197.8
167.2
310.6
209.6
221.6
334.7
212.1
196.6
203.2
175.7
309.7
212.0
221.1
336.7
213 .2
197.6
204.3
176.4
312.0
215.1
219.8
338.3
T ra n spo rta tion .........................................................
P rivate tra n s p o rta tio n .................................................................................
N e w v e h ic le s ..............................................................................................
N e w c a r s ..................................................................................................
Used c a r s ...................................................................................................
M o to r f u e l ...................................................................................................
G a s o lin e ............................................
M a in ten an ce and r e p a ir ..................................
O th e r priva te tra n s p o rta tio n .......................................
O the r private tra nsp o rtatio n c o m m o d itie s ...................................
O th e r private tra nsp o rtatio n s e rv ic e s .............................................
Public tra n s p o rta tio n ..............................................
311.7
306.6
208.0
208.5
375.7
370.7
370.2
341.5
273.3
201.5
295.0
385.2
319.9
314.2
214.9
215.2
379.7
373.8
373.3
351.4
287.6
202.6
312.8
402.8
320.9
314.7
215.9
216.2
375.3
374.6
374.2
355.7
289.6
202.8
315.4
411.5
323.2
317.0
218.2
218.4
376.4
376.7
376.1
355.8
293.9
201.6
321.2
412.8
324.0
317.8
219.2
219.4
375.6
377.5
376.8
357.5
295.2
202.1
322.7
4.12.9
323.9
317.3
219.7
219.9
374.1
373.3
372.5
357.9
297.7
203.4
325.5
419.6
319.2
312.2
220.2
220.4
370.7
351.5
350.8
358.9
299.2
202.9
327.6
422.2
309.6
302.1
220.1
220.3
367.2
308.5
307.7
359.3
301.5
203.6
330.3
421.2
303.3
295.3
221.0
221.2
364.8
279.5
278.6
360.6
301.6
202.2
330.9
422.2
305.7
297.8
222.8
223.0
363.6
289.3
288.7
361.3
301.3
202.4
330.4
423.7
308.6
300.8
224.0
224.2
362.5
299.4
299.1
362.1
303.0
201.5
332.8
425.4
304.7
296.5
224.5
224.7
360.3
280.2
279.8
363.4
304.5
201.6
334.6
428.0
301.3
292.8
224.5
224.7
358.0
265.9
265.3
364.3
304.5
201.8
334.6
428.0
302.2
293.7
224.2
224.5
359.5
271.1
270.6
365.0
302.3
200.3
332.3
428.5
302.6
294.1
226.7
227.1
360.6
263.2
262.6
365.7
307.6
198.9
339.3
428.7
M edical c a r e ..............................................
M edical care co m m o dities ....................................
M edical care s e rv ic e s .........................................
P rofessional se rvices .......................................
O the r m edical ca re s e rv ic e s .......................................
379.5
239.7
410.3
346.1
488.0
403.1
256.7
435.1
367.3
517.0
410.5
261.3
443.0
373.2
527.4
413.0
262.7
445.8
375.5
530.8
414.7
262.9
448.0
377.1
533.6
418.2
264.5
451.9
378.9
540.3
422.3
267.4
456.2
381.6
546.4
425.8
269.4
460.1
385.0
550.8
428.0
271.3
462.3
386.9
553.5
429.7
272.3
464.2
388.3
555.9
432.0
273.3
466.8
390.3
559.2
434.8
275.4
469.8
391.7
564.2
437.5
276.0
473.0
393.3
569.4
439.7
276.7
475.7
396.1
571.9
442.3
277.5
478.8
398.0
576.4
E nte rtainm en t ......................................................
E nte rtainm en t co m m o dities .....................................................................
E n te rtainm en t s e rv ic e s ..........................
255.1
253.3
258.3
265.0
260.6
271.8
268.4
264.0
275.2
269.0
264.0
276.6
268.3
262.5
277.1
270.8
264.7
279.9
272.0
265.2
282.1
271.9
265.0
282.2
272.3
264.8
283.5
272.9
265.3
284.2
273.9
266.1
285.5
274.4
265.8
287.0
274.7
266.1
287.3
275.3
265.9
289.2
276.5
266.7
290.8
O th e r goo ds and se rvice s ......................................
T o b a cco p ro du cts ..............................................
P ersonal c a r e ............................................
T o ile t goo ds and personal care a p p lia n c e s ...................................
P ersonal care se rvice s ...................................
P ersonal and edu catio n al e x p e n s e s .....................................
S cho o l b o o ks and s u p p lie s ..........................................
P ersonal and edu catio n al s e r v ic e s .......................
307.7
310.0
271.4
269.6
274 1
365 7
322 8
375 6
326.6
328.5
281.9
278.5
286.0
397.1
350.8
407.7
334.9
334.4
285.0
281.4
289.2
414.7
364.5
426.2
335.3
334.7
285.4
281.1
290.2
415.4
364.7
426.9
336.5
337.4
286.3
282.5
290.6 .
339.1
342.7
288.1
285.3
291.8
416.8
371.0
427.6
340.3
344.7
289.1
286.0
293.0
417.7
373.8
428.1
341.1
345.6
290.3
287.3
294.0
341.8
346.5
290.5
287.7
294.1
418.9
374.4
429.5
342.1
346.5
290.9
287.9
294.7
342.6
347.1
291.0
287.0
295.7
420.4
375.7
431.0
344.9
354.3
291.1
287.1
295.8
346.4
356.2
292.3
289.1
296.2
422.9
376.9
433.7
353.3
356.8
292.0
288.2
296.5
445.2
389.4
457.8
354.6
357.2
293.1
289.9
297.1
1984
1985
A ll it e m s ...............................................................................................................
All ite m s (1 9 5 7 - 5 9 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................................................
311.1
361.9
Food a nd b e v e ra g e s ...................................................................................
F o o d ................................................................................................................
Fo od at h o m e ..........................................................................................
C ereals and b akery p ro d u c ts ..........................................................
M eats, poultry, fish, and e g g s ..........................................................
Dairy p r o d u c ts .......................................................................................
Fruits and v e g e ta b le s ..........................................................................
O th e r fo o d s at h o m e ...........................................................................
S ugar and s w e e t s ..............................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................................
N o n a lco h o lic b e v e ra g e s ..................................................................
O the r p repared f o o d s .......................................................................
Food aw ay fro m hom e ..........................................................................
A lco h o lic b e v e ra g e s ...................................................................................
H ousing ..........................................................................................
S he lte r ...............................................................................................
R e nte rs' co sts (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )..............................................................
Rent, re s id e n tia l...................................................................................
O th e r re n te rs’ co sts ........................................................................
H o m e ow ne rs' c o sts ( 1 2 / 8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
O w n e rs’ equ iva le nt re n t (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .........................................
H ouse h old insuran ce ( 1 2 / 8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
M a in ten an ce and r e p a ir s .......................................................................
M a in ten an ce and re p air se rvice s ...................................................
M ain ten an ce a nd repair c o m m o d itie s ...........................................
Fuel and o th e r u tilitie s ................................................
Fuels ................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and b ottle d g a s ......................................................
G as (piped) and e le ctricity ................................................................
O th e r utilities a nd public s e r v ic e s ......................................................
H ouse h old furnishin g s and o p e ra tio n s ................................................
H ousefurm shings ..........................................
H ousekeeping s u p p lie s .........................................
H ouse ke ep in g s e rv ic e s ...............................................
C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R A L L U R B A N C O N S U M E R S :
415.5
364.7
427.0
417.9
374.3
428.3
419.5
374.5
430.2
421.2
375.9
431.9
447.6
392.3
460.2
See fo o tn o te s at e nd o f table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
75
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
30. Continued— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
S eries
1986
1985
A nnual
average
1984
1985
Sept.
Oct.
O ct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
326.6
289.2
303.6
286.8
196.8
337.8
271.5
327.4
289.9
305.6
286.8
194.2
339.1
271.4
328.4
290.1
307.9
284.9
189.5
338.7
271.4
327.5
287.4
307.7
278.6
188.5
329.5
270.5
326.0
283.7
307.8
268.9
190.8
313.6
269.7
325.3
281.2
308.5
262.0
191.7
302.6
269.2
326.3
282.1
309.4
263.3
190.7
305.2
269.6
327.9
282.8
309.5
264.7
188.4
308.4
269.9
328.0
281.9
312.2
259.8
187.0
301.7
269.6
328.6
281.9
314.6
258.1
191.2
296.9
269.0
330.2
283.5
315.1
261.5
196.6
299.5
269.3
330.5
283.6
315.6
260.4
197.6
297.2
270.5
A ll it e m s ................................................................................................................
C o m m o d itie s .....................................................................................................
Food and b e v e ra g e s ..................................................................................
C o m m o d ities less foo d and b e v e ra g e s ...............................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d and beve ra ge s ...........................................
A pp a rel c o m m o d itie s ............................................................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d , beverages, and a pparel ......................
D u ra b le s .......................................................................................................
311.1
280.7
295.1
-
322.2
286.7
302.0
275.7
187.0
325.8
266.5
282.1
191.6
333.3
270.7
325.5
287.9
302.5
285.3
196.7
335.6
270.2
S e rv ic e s ..............................................................................................................
R ent o f s h e lte r ..............................................................................................
H ousehold se rvice s less rent o f sh elte r .............................................
T ra n spo rta tion s e r v ic e s .............................................................................
M e d ical ca re s e rv ic e s ................................................................................
O th e r s e r v ic e s ..............................................................................................
363.0
107.7
108.1
321.1
410.3
296.0
381.5
113.9
111.2
337.0
435.1
314.1
387.7
116.1
112.1
341.1
443.0
321.4
388.7
116.7
110.8
344.7
445.8
322.5
389.5
117.0
110.8
346.1
448.0
322.9
391.7
117.4
111.4
349.0
451.9
324.8
393.3
117.7
111.8
351.0
456.2
326.1
394.9
118.5
111.6
352.4
460.1
326.6
396.8
119.4
111.6
353.2
462.3
327.6
397.9
119.7
112.3
353.4
464.2
328.2
401.0
119.9
115.2
355.3
466.8
329.2
402.3
120.5
114.9
357.1
469.8
330.1
403.7
120.9
115.3
357.3
473.0
330.8
405.5
121.7
114.9
356.2
475.7
337.9
406.1
122.2
112.9
360.5
478.8
339.5
S pecial in dexes:
All item s less f o o d ......................................................................................
A ll item s less s h e lt e r .................................................................................
All item s less h o m eo w n ers’ c o s t s ........................................................
All item s less m edical c a r e ......................................................................
C o m m o d ities less f o o d ..............................................................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d ..............................................................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d and a pparel ....................................................
N o n d u ra b le s ..................................................................................................
S ervices less rent o f s h e lte r ....................................................................
S ervices less m edical c a r e ......................................................................
E n e rg y ..............................................................................................................
All ite m s le ss ene rg y .................................................................................
All ite m s le ss fo o d and e nergy ..............................................................
C o m m o d ities less fo o d a nd e n e r g y ......................................................
E nergy co m m o d itie s ..................................................................................
S e rvices less e n e rg y ..................................................................................
311.3
295.1
106.3
307.3
267.0
270.8
311.9
286.6
108.5
355.6
423.6
302.9
301.2
253.1
409.8
356.4
323.3
303.9
109.7
317.7
272.5
277.2
319.2
293.2
113.5
373.3
426.5
314.8
314.4
259.7
409.9
375.9
327.4
306.3
110.7
320.8
274.4
280.7
322.0
295.1
115.1
379.3
427.1
318.4
318.9
262.0
410.1
382.5
328.5
307.2
111.1
321.9
275.7
282.0
324.0
296.4
115.2
380.1
425.1
319.8
320.4
262.7
415.2
384.8
328.9
307.9
111.3
322.6
275.7
282.0
325.1
297.4
115.4
380.8
426.5
320.5
320.7
262.2
417.9
385.8
329.5
308.8
111.6
323.4
274.7
280.4
324.9
297.7
116.2
382.7
424.7
321.8
321.6
261.8
413.2
387.9
328.5
307.4
111.2
322.2
270.9
274.5
316.8
294.3
116.8
384.0
408.9
322.3
322.3
261.6
386.5
389.4
326.6
305.2
110.5
320.5
265.2
265.6
302.7
289.5
117.1
385.4
381.3
323.3
323.6
262.0
343.0
391.5
325.7
303.6
110.1
319.7
261.2
259.2
292.9
286.3
117.4
387.2
361.8
324.4
324.8
262.1
313.3
393.8
326.7
304.7
110.4
320.6
262.1
260.5
295.2
287.4
117.8
388.3
367.6
325.0
325.3
262.2
319.3
394.5
328.6
306.5
111.1
322.2
263.0
261.8
298.1
288.2
119.2
391.3
380.6
325.5
325.9
262.0
327.1
395.9
328.0
306.1
111.0
322.1
260.2
257.3
292.2
287.1
119.5
392.5
366.5
326.9
326.9
262.0
306.6
397.7
328.1
306.4
111.2
322.6
259.0
255.6
287.9
287.4
119.8
393.6
358.6
328.3
327.9
262.9
292.4
399.0
330.0
307.9
111.7
324.2
261.1
258.9
290.2
289.4
120.2
395.4
360.6
330.0
329.9
264.5
297.7
401.4
330.2
307.8
111.7
324.4
260.9
257.8
288.1
289.0
120.1
395.7
348.6
331.4
331.6
265.5
290.6
403.7
P urchasing p ow e r o f th e co nsu m e r dollar:
1 9 6 7 —$ 1 .0 0 ..................................................................................................
1 9 5 7 - 5 9 - $ 1 .0 0 ............................................................................................
32.1
27.6
31.0
26.7
30.7
26.4
30.6
26.3
30.5
26.3
30.5
26.2
30.5
26.3
30.7
26.4
30.7
26.4
30.6
26.4
30.5
26.2
30.5
26.2
30.4
26.2
30.3
26.0
30.3
26.0
C O N S U M E R P RICE IN D E X FO R U R B A N W A G E E A R N E R S
A N D C L E R IC A L W O R K E R S :
All ite m s .............................................................................................................
A ll item s ( 1 9 5 7 - 5 9 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................
307.6
357.7
318.5
370.4
321.3
373.7
322.6
375.1
323.4
376.1
324.3
377.1
323.2
375.8
321.4
373.7
320.4
372.6
321.4
373.7
323.0
375,6
322.9
375.5
323.4
376.1
324.9
377.8
325.0
378.0
Food and b eve ra ge s .....................................................................................
F o o d .................................................................................................................
Fo od at hom e ...........................................................................................
C ereals and b akery p ro d u c ts ............................................................
M eats, poultry, fish, and e g g s ..........................................................
Dairy p r o d u c ts ........................................................................................
Fruits and v e g e ta b le s ..........................................................................
O th e r fo o d s at h o m e ...........................................................................
S ugar a nd s w e e t s ..............................................................................
Fa ts and o i l s ........................................................................................
N o n a lco h o lic b e v e ra g e s ..................................................................
O th e r prepared f o o d s .......................................................................
Food aw ay fro m hom e ..........................................................................
A lco h o lic b e v e ra g e s ...................................................................................
295.2
302.7
291.2
303.7
266.0
252.2
312.5
352.7
388.6
287.5
444.4
286.4
336.7
225.3
301.8
309.3
295.3
315.4
262.7
256.9
320.3
361.5
398.3
293.9
453.2
295.7
349.7
232.6
302.2
309.3
293.7
317.3
260.4
255.9
311.2
363.4
402.2
290.6
455.6
298.3
353.4
239.1
303.4
310.6
295.2
318.2
265.4
255.9
309.4
362.5
400.9
291.8
453.1
298.3
354.4
238.8
305.4
312.8
297.9
320.4
269.2
255.7
319.3
361.6
401.8
289.6
450.4
298.7
355.2
239.1
307.7
315.1
300.9
320.4
270.7
256.0
329.7
366.1
404.7
291.6
461.0
299.4
356.2
240.1
307.5
314.9
300.1
320.9
267.7
256.0
316.0
375.2
408.1
290.8
485.5
300.9
357.3
240.9
307.6
315.0
299.7
321.1
267.2
255.5
314.6
375.6
407.8
289.7
487.4
300.7
358.6
241.4
308.3
315.6
299.9
320.9
263.5
255.5
325.0
376.0
410.9
287.8
487.0
301.6
360.2
242.3
309.0
316.4
300.4
322.1
262.6
255.8
331.6
374.3
410.6
286.6
481.2
302.7
362.0
242.2
309.3
316.6
300.0
324.5
264.2
255.9
323.5
373.9
410.9
286.4
479.5
303.0
363.5
242.9
312.0
319.5
303.9
324.6
274.0
257.0
325.6
373.4
411.9
286.6
477.6
303.1
364 .2
243.4
314.5
322.3
307.3
326.7
282.2
256.9
327.2
373.9
412.6
287.1
476.9
304.5
365.2
243.0
315.0
322.8
307.5
326.8
284.0
257.1
324.2
373.5
413.0
285.1
475.5
305.2
366.6
243.4
315.4
323.3
307.9
326.8
284.4
258.6
322.9
374.4
412.8
284.1
477.7
305.9
367.3
243.5
Housing ..............................................................................................................
S h e lt e r .............................................................................................................
R e n te rs’ co sts ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................................................
Rent, re s id e n tia l.....................................................................................
O th e r re n te rs’ c o s t s .............................................................................
H o m e ow ne rs' co sts ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
O w n e rs’ e q u iva le nt rent (1 2 /8 4 = 100) .........................................
H ousehold insuran ce ( 1 2 /8 4 — 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
M a in ten an ce and r e p a ir s .......................................................................
M ain ten an ce and repair se rvice s ....................................................
M ain ten an ce and re p air c o m m o d itie s ............................................
Fuel and o th e r u tilitie s ...............................................................................
Fuels .............................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and b ottle d g a s .........................................................
G as (piped) and e le ctricity ................................................................
O th e r utilities and pub lic se rvice s ......................................................
H ouse h old furnishin g s and o p e ra tio n s ................................................
H o usefurnishings ......................................................................................
H ouse ke ep in g s u p p lie s ..........................................................................
H ouse ke ep in g s e rv ic e s ..........................................................................
329.2
350.0
343.3
370.4
347.5
377.1
348.3
379.3
349.1
380.4
350.1
381.8
349.7
382.9
350.1
385.0
351.1
388.1
354.3
389.4
354.5
391.5
356.6
395.2
282.2
428.9
110.0
110.0
110.4
370.6
430.7
261.1
389.1
467.1
456.6
460.3
256.2
247.5
199.4
317.9
349.5
355 .6
397.1
283.6
426.7
110.5
110.5
110.8
373.1
431.1
264.3
379.3
449.2
454.8
439.6
257.8
247.5
199.3
317.8
350.1
A pp a rel and u p k e e p ......................................................................................
211.0
211.9
See footnotes at end of table.
Digitized for76
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
351.6
388.8
-
-
-
248.6
372.4
356.3
403.5
257.2
388.6
485.0
644.3
444.1
231.2
239.1
197.0
300.2
328.0
263.7
397.9
103.1
103.0
103.2
364.1
415.0
261.1
394.7
487.5
622.0
451.6
241.6
243.4
197.6
310.7
340.2
268.9
411.6
104.8
104.8
105.2
364.6
417.4
260.5
396.3
487.2
618.1
452.0
245.7
244.5
197.7
312.7
343.9
270.7
408.0
105.5
105.5
105.2
367.7
420.9
262.7
393.2
481.0
644.3
439.5
246.8
245.1
198.3
313.5
344.5
271.5
397.5
105.9
105.9
105.7
368.5
420.1
264.2
394.3
483.1
659.9
438.8
246.7
245.2
197.8
315.0
345.0
272.5
400.8
106.3
106.3
106.3
373.2
426.2
267.2
395.6
484.1
652.7
441.4
248.3
245.1
197.3
315.8
345.6
272.8
403.5
106.6
106.6
107.8
374.0
426.5
268.1
390.9
475.7
593.6
443.2
248.8
245.3
197.2
316.4
346.3
274.1
405.4
107.4
107.3
108.2
364.7
416.6
261.1
386.3
467.1
552.8
441.2
249.9
246.0
198.5
315.5
346.6
277.0
411.6
108.1
108.1
108.5
364.6
419.2
259.4
382.6
459.1
521.5
438.0
252.1
246.0
198.1
316.3
347.1
277.5
411.3
108.3
108.3
109.0
363.8
420.0
258.0
383.0
459.7
499.9
443.0
252.2
246.1
198.4
315.7
347.4
278.5
415.5
108.4
108.4
109.1
363.2
422.6
255.7
394.9
477.3
489.9
465.7
255.8
246.2
198.2
316.8
347.8
280.3
420.4
108.8
108.8
110.1
366.7
425.2
259.0
390.3
469.1
462.9
461.4
256.3
246.5
198.4
317.1
348.4
355.4
392.9
280.8
426.1
109.3
109.2
110.1
371.5
428.6
263.5
390.6
469.3
450.7
464.1
256.6
246.6
198.3
317.3
349.1
199.1
205.0
210.2
210.2
208.1
204.1
203.1
205.2
206.1
205.1
203.0
201.8
205.9
-
30. Continued— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
S eries
Annual
average
1985
1986
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
191.3
198.2
171.3
311.7
212.5
203.1
318.5
196.6
203.5
180.0
314.8
212.6
202.4
323.2
196.5
203.7
178.3
320.7
215.9
202.5
323.6
194.1
202.2
174.5
317.3
213.6
202.4
324.4
189.4
198.8
166.1
332.7
209.9
203.5
327.2
188.2
196.8
165.2
328.6
208.4
204.2
328.1
190.4
198.0
169.0
329.6
210.7
203.5
329.0
191.2
199.3
169.3
331.3
212.1
204.1
330.2
190.1
200.0
165.9
334.3
212.0
203.8
330.9
187.7
198.0
162.0
335.6
210.6
204.5
331.9
186.3
195.4
160.8
323.7
209.6
206.5
332.2
190.8
197.1
169.3
328.6
209.9
209.5
332.3
196.2
202.3
178.1
326.2
212.0
209.0
334.2
197.1
203.6
178.1
329.2
215.3
207.9
335.6
313.9
310.1
207.3
207.9
375.7
372.2
371.8
342.2
274.2
203.9
295.4
376.8
321.6
317.4
214.2
214.5
379.7
375.4
375.0
352.6
287.7
204.7
312.3
391.7
322.2
317.6
215.3
215.5
375.3
376.3
375.8
356.9
289.2
205.0
314.1
399.3
324.6
320.1
217.5
217.8
376.4
378.7
378.1
357.2
293.7
203.7
320.2
400.1
325.3
320.8
218.6
218.8
375.6
379.6
378.9
359.0
294.7
204.3
321.3
400.2
325.1
320.2
219.0
219.2
374.1
375.3
374.6
359.4
296.9
205.6
323.7
408.6
320.1
314.8
219.4
219.7
370.7
353.0
352.3
360.4
298.4
205.4
325.7
412.6
310.3
304.5
219.4
219.5
367.2
309.6
308.8
360.9
300.6
206.0
328.3
412.0
303.5
297.4
220.2
220.4
364.8
280.1
279.1
362.2
300.4
204.6
328.5
413.0
305.9
299.9
222.0
222.3
363.6
290.3
289.6
362.8
299.8
204.9
327.7
413.8
308.7
302.8
223.2
223.4
362.5
300.6
300.3
363.6
301.2
203.9
329.6
415.1
304.6
298.3
223.7
223.9
360.3
280.9
280.5
365.0
302.4
203.8
331.2
418.0
300.9
294.4
223.6
223.9
358.0
266.7
266.1
365.7
302.2
204.0
330.9
418.4
301.8
295.3
223.3
223.7
359.5
271.9
271.4
366.6
299.7
202.7
328.1
418.8
302.2
295.7
225.7
226.3
360.6
264.0
263.4
367.2
305.2
201.1
335.4
418.9
M edical c a r e .....................................................................................................
M edical care c o m m o d itie s .......................................................................
M edical care s e rv ic e s ................................................................................
P rofessional s e r v ic e s ..............................................................................
O th e r m edical care s e rv ic e s ................................................................
377.7
239.7
407.9
346.5
484.7
401.2
256.3
432.7
367.7
513.9
408.5
260.9
440.6
373.7
524.4
410.9
262.2
443.2
375.8
527.5
412.6
262.3
445.4
377.6
530.4
416.0
264.1
449.2
379.3
536.9
420.0
267.0
453.5
382.2
543.0
423.5
268.8
457.3
385.6
547.3
425.7
270.7
459.5
387.4
550.0
427.3
271.7
461.3
388.8
552.3
429.6
272.5
464.0
390.8
555.8
432.4
274.6
466.9
392.3
560.7
435.0
275.2
470.1
394.0
565.8
437.1
275.8
472.6
396.6
568.1
439.7
276.6
475.6
398.4
572.7
E n te rta in m e n t..................................................................................................
E nte rtainm en t c o m m o d itie s .....................................................................
E n te rtainm en t s e rv ic e s ..............................................................................
251.2
247.7
258.5
260.1
254.2
271.6
263.0
257.1
274.6
263.7
257.2
276.3
263.0
255.7
276.8
265.4
257.8
280.0
266.5
258.3
282.0
266.5
258.3
282.1
266.9
258.4
283.0
267.3
258.7
283.6
268.4
259.8
284.8
269.0
259.6
286.5
269.2
259.8
286.7
270.0
259.8
288.9
271.1
260.6
290.7
O th e r g oo d s and se rvices ..........................................................................
T o ba cco p ro du cts .......................................................................................
P ersonal c a r e ................................................................................................
T o ile t g oo d s and p ersonal care a p p lia n c e s ....................................
P ersonal care s e r v ic e s ..........................................................................
P ersonal and edu catio n al e x p e n s e s .....................................................
S cho o l boo ks and s u p p lie s ..................................................................
P ersonal and e d u catio n al s e r v ic e s ...................................................
304.9
309.7
269.4
270.3
268.8
368.2
327.5
378.2
322.7
328.1
279.6
279.0
280.5
399.3
355.7
410.1
330.1
334.0
282.7
282.0
283.7
416.5
369.2
428.1
330.5
334.3
283.1
281.9
284.8
417.3
369.3
428.9
331.9
337.1
284.0
283.3
285.2
417.4
369.4
429.1
334.9
342.4
285.9
285.9
286.4
418.9
375.6
429.7
336.1
344.4
286.8
286.7
287.4
419.9
378.4
430.3
337.0
345.2
288.0
288.1
288.4
420.1
379.0
430.5
337.6
346.0
288.2
288.4
288.4
421.2
379.1
431.8
338.0
346.0
288.6
288.6
289.0
422.0
379.1
432.8
338.4
346.7
288.6
287.6
290.0
422.9
380.2
433.6
341.2
354.0
288.8
287.8
290.2
423.8
380.5
434.6
342.6
355.9
289.9
289.7
290.5
425.1
381.4
436.0
347.5
356.5
289.5
288.7
290.8
446.1
393.9
458.7
348.8
356.8
290.8
290.5
291.6
448.7
396.7
461.3
All it e m s ................................................................................................................
C o m m o d itie s .....................................................................................................
Food and b e v e ra g e s ..................................................................................
C o m m o d ities less foo d and b e v e ra g e s ...............................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d and beve ra ge s .......... .................................
A pp a rel c o m m o d itie s ............................................................................
N ond u ra ble s less food, b everages, and a pparel ......................
D u ra b le s .......................................................................................................
307.6
280.4
295.2
269.3
277.5
186.6
327.0
261.1
318.5
286.5
301.8
321.3
287.6
302.2
322.6
288.9
303.4
323.4
289.7
305.4
324.3
289.8
307.7
323.2
287.0
307.5
321.4
283.1
307.6
320.4
280.4
308.3
321.4
281.3
309.0
323.0
282.0
309.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
322.9
281.1
312.0
-
323.4
281.1
314.5
-
324.9
282.6
315.0
-
325.0
282.6
315.4
-
283.8
191.3
334.2
265.2
287.0
196.6
336.5
264.5
288.5
196.5
338.8
265.7
288.7
194.1
340.1
265.7
286.9
189.4
339.6
265.6
280.1
188.2
330.1
264.6
269.6
190.4
313.2
263.7
262.0
191.2
301.6
263.3
263.6
190.1
304.5
263.5
265.2
187.7
308.0
263.6
260.1
186.3
301.0
263.2
258.1
190.8
295.9
262.6
261.5
196.2
298.4
263.0
260.2
197.1
296.0
264.0
S e r v ic e s ..............................................................................................................
R ent o f sh elte r ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................
H o use h old se rvice s less rent o f sh elte r ( 1 2 / 8 4 = 1 0 0 ) .................
T ra n spo rta tion s e r v ic e s .............................................................................
M edical care s e rv ic e s ................................................................................
O the r se rvice s ..............................................................................................
358.0
377.3
103.2
102.6
332.2
432.7
310.1
383.0
105.1
103.3
335.5
440.6
316.7
384.2
105.8
102.1
339.3
443.2
317.8
385.1
106.1
102.0
340.5
445.4
318.3
387.2
106.4
102.6
343.3
449.2
320.4
388.8
106.7
103.0
345.4
453.5
321.6
390.5
107.4
102.8
347.0
457.3
322.1
392.2
108.3
102.7
347.5
459.5
322.9
393.2
108.5
103.4
347.3
461.3
323.6
396.4
108.7
106.4
348.9
464.0
324.6
397.7
109.2
106.0
350.6
466.9
325.6
399.0
109.6
106.4
350.7
470.1
326.0
400.4
110.3
106.0
349.2
472.6
332.2
401.0
110.8
103.8
353.8
475.6
333.8
322.9
305.4
102.6
316.9
274.5
282.4
323.1
295.7
103.9
374.5
426.6
313.0
312.7
258.8
411.2
377.3
324.2
306.4
103.0
318.1
275.9
283.8
325.0
297.1
103.9
375.5
425.4
314.5
314.2
259.5
416.3
379.8
324.6
307.2
103.2
318.9
275.9
283.9
326.3
298.2
104.2
376.2
426.8
315.3
314.6
259.2
418.9
380.8
325.1
307.9
103.5
319.6
275.0
282.3
325.9
298.4
104.9
378.2
424.7
316.5
315.4
258.8
414.1
382.9
323.8
306.4
103.0
318.3
270.9
276.1
317.5
295.0
105.5
379.5
408.1
316.9
316.1
258.5
387.3
384.5
321.5
303.8
102.3
316.2
264.9
266.4
302.6
289.8
105.7
381.0
379.0
317.8
317.2
258.7
343.3
386.5
320.2
302.1
101.8
315.2
260.7
259.4
292.2
286.3
105.9
382.7
358.4
318.8
318.3
258.8
312.9
388.8
321.2
303.0
102.1
316.1
261.6
260.9
294.9
287.5
106.2
383.6
364.6
319.2
318.6
258.8
319.8
389.4
323.2
304.8
102.7
317.7
262.6
262.4
298.0
288.4
107.6
386.8
378.1
319.7
319.1
258.5
328.1
390.8
322.3
304.3
102.6
317.4
259.6
257.7
291.8
287.2
107.8
387.9
363.1
321.1
320.1
258.5
307.2
392.6
322.2
304.6
102.7
317.8
258.3
255.8
287.3
287.5
108.1
389.0
354.8
322.4
321.0
259.3
292.9
393.7
323.9
305.9
103.2
319.3
260.3
259.1
289.6
289.5
108.3
390.3
356.9
323.9
322.7
260.9
298.2
395.7
324.0
305.7
103.2
319.3
260.0
257.8
287.4
289.0
108.2
390.6
344.8
325.3
324.4
261.7
290.9
398.2
31.1
26.8
31.0
26.7
30.9
26.6
30.8
26.5
30.9
26.6
31.1
26.8
31.2
26.8
31.1
26.8
31.0
26.6
31.0
26.6
30.9
26.6
30.8
26.5
30.8
26.5
1984
1985
A pp a rel c o m m o d itie s .................................................................................
M e n 's and boys' a p p a r e l.......................................................................
W o m e n ’s and g irls’ a pparel .................................................................
Infa nts’ and to d d le rs' a p p a r e l..............................................................
F o o tw e a r......................................................................................................
O the r a pparel c o m m o d itie s ..................................................................
A pp a rel s e rv ic e s ..........................................................................................
186.6
192.9
165.0
297.6
210.0
204.5
302.9
T ra n spo rta tion .................................................................................................
Private tra n s p o rta tio n .................................................................................
N ew v e h ic le s ..............................................................................................
N ew c a r s ..................................................................................................
Used c a r s ...................................................................................................
M o to r fuel ....................................................................................................
G a s o lin e ...................................................................................................
M a in ten an ce and r e p a ir .........................................................................
O the r priva te tra n s p o rta tio n .................................................................
O th e r private tra nsp o rtatio n c o m m o d itie s ....................................
O th e r private tra nsp o rtatio n s e rv ic e s .............................................
Public tra n s p o rta tio n ..................................................................................
-
317.2
407.9
292.9
S pecial indexes:
All item s less foo d ......................................................................................
All ite m s less sh elte r .................................................................................
All item s less h om e o w n e rs’ co sts ( 1 2 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) .............................
All ite m s less m edical c a r e ......................................................................
C o m m o d ities less f o o d ..............................................................................
N o nd u ra ble s less foo d ..............................................................................
N ond u ra ble s less foo d and a pparel .....................................................
N o n d u ra b le s ..................................................................................................
S ervices less rent o f sh elte r ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .......................................
S ervices less m edical c a r e ......................................................................
E n e rg y ..............................................................................................................
All ite m s less ene rg y .................................................................................
All ite m s le ss fo o d and e nergy ..............................................................
C o m m o d ities less foo d and e n e r g y ......................................................
E nergy co m m o dities ..................................................................................
S ervices less e n e rg y ..................................................................................
350.5
423.3
298.3
295.8
250.5
410.5
350.8
319.4
303.4
101.8
314.3
272.8
279.0
320.3
293.9
102.6
369.0
426.3
309.9
308.7
256.8
410.9
371.1
P urchasing p o w e r o f th e co nsu m e r dollar:
1967 —$ 1 .0 0 ..................................................................................................
1957-59 $1.00 ...........................................................................................
32.5
28.0
31.4
27.0
307.5
295.1
-
304.0
267.1
272.6
313.2
287.4
-
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
77
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
31.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all Items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
A ll U rban C onsu m e rs
A re a 1
sch e
d ule 2
O the r
index
base
1986
Nov.
June
July
Aug.
O ct.
O ct.
Nov.
June
July
Aug.
325.5
326.6
327.9
328.0
328.6
330.2
330.5
321.3
322.6
323.0
322.9
323.4
324.9
325.0
-
322.6
319.7
324.2
323.1
330.4
321.0
331.1
318.4
331.4
323.2
333.9
321.1
328.7
324.3
308.9
309.7
310.9
313.2
315.6
310.2
316.0
307.5
316.2
312.8
318.3
310.5
313.4
313.6
326.1
325.0
331.3
330.9
330.9
334.6
336.2
320.0
319.1
324.5
323.8
323.5
326.8
328.3
317.4
317.4
319.9
318.8
322.8
321.7
325.1
323.0
325.9
323.1
326.6
325.8
327.8
324.7
309.9
320.3
312.5
321.5
314.4
323.5
316.5
324.6
317.2
324.4
317.5
326.7
318.7
326.1
1 1 /7 7
-
-
-
286.2
334.0
328.2
333.0
362.9
174.3
332.9
311.3
318.0
325.7
385.9
326.3
332.3
-
-
277.9
330.9
325.2
324.7
357.2
174.5
351.7
310.2
306.3
320.7
347.4
312.3
334.6
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
278.4
327.9
320.8
324.9
352.4
171.6
350.1
307.8
303.4
320.6
345.0
310.1
330.2
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
280.1
326.3
323.0
326.2
354.1
174.9
353.2
309.6
307.3
318.5
341.9
310.8
330.5
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
286.3
330.2
323.6
332.4
358.4
171.2
331.3
309.0
314.7
325.6
383.1
323.7
329.3
-
-
286.9
327.3
325.4
333.4
359.4
173.9
333.9
310.6
317.1
321.6
379.0
324.0
326.9
_
333.0
309.3
348.6
343.9
295.6
337.6
323.1
_
_
-
339.9
309.4
352.1
345.9
302.2
334.0
323.7
330.0
295.3
327.0
337.5
302.7
335.0
312.9
_
-
338.9
307.5
352.7
346.2
301.5
332.9
323.9
_
-
338.5
308.9
350.6
344.7
299.2
333.3
322.9
342.1
328.6
344.0
-
340.3
330.1
345.5
-
-
-
340.9
331.8
347.7
336.0
309.9
331.0
-
176.4
176.5
177.5
180.4
170.3
171.4
175.3
174.8
177.6
179.9
178.3
175.9
174.5
168.7
174.6
173.6
174.1
174.9
174.2
180.3
177.6
184.2
166.1
173.1
175.7
174.6
178.0
174.0
180.0
179.2
171.8
169.5
173.9
178.4
M
M
_
A nch o rag e , A laska
(1 0 /6 7 - 100) ..........................
B altim ore, M d ................................
B oston, M a ss.................................
C incinnati, O hio-K y.-In d ..............
D enver-B oulder, C o lo .................
Miami, Fla. (1 1 /7 7 = 1 0 0 )......
M ilw aukee, W is.............................
N ortheast, Pa.................................
P ortland, O re g.-W ash .................
St. Louis, M o .-lll............................
San Diego, C a lif............................
S ea ttle-E ve re tt, W a sh .................
W a sh ing ton , D .C .-M d.-V a..........
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 0 /6 7
-
M
M
M
-
A lanta, G a .......................................
B uffalo, N .Y ....................................
C leveland, O hio ..........................
D allas-Ft. W orth, T e x..................
H onolulu, H a w a ii.........................
H ouston, T e x .................................
Kansas City, M o.-K ansas ........
M inneapolis-S t. Paul,
M inn .-W is.......................................
P ittsburgh, P a................................
San Fran cisco-O akla n d, Calif.
2
2
2
-
340.6
328.4
336.7
R e gion 3
N o r th e a s t...................................
N orth C e n tr a l.............................
S o u t h ...........................................
W e st ............................................
2
2
2
2
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
172.5
174.9
175.7
176.9
-
P opulation size cla ss3
A-1 ................................................
A - 2 ................................................
B .....................................................
C ....................................................
D ...................................................
2
2
2
2
2
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
172.9
177.6
176.3
173.8
173.8
-
R e g io n /p o p u la tio n size cla ss
cro ss cla ssifica tio n 3
C lass A:
N o rth ea st ................................
N orth C e n t r a l.........................
S outh ........................................
W e s t ..........................................
2
2
2
2
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 1 /7 7
169.6
178.2
175.6
179.1
C lass B:
N o rth ea st ................................
N orth C e n tr a l.........................
S outh ........................................
W e s t ..........................................
2
2
2
2
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
1 2 /7 7
174.9
173.4
177.4
177.9
78
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1985
O ct.
C hicago, III.-N orthw estern
Ind ....................................................
D etroit, M ich ...................................
Los A ng e les-Lo n g Beach,
A naheim , C a lif.............................
N e w Y ork, N .Y .-N o rthe a ste rn
N .J....................................................
P hiladelphia, P a.-N .J...................
See footnotes at end of table.
U rban W age E arners
1986
-
U.S. city a v e r a g e .......................
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1985
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
174.2
176.1
176.3
178.7
-
175.7
178.9
177.0
174.7
173.4
-
171.8
180.3
176.8
181.8
175.2
174.1
178.5
178.3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sept.
175.0
176.2
176.4
179.0
-
176.6
179.1
176.6
175.0
173.8
-
173.1
180.7
176.7
182.0
174.7
172.5
178.6
178.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
_
335.5
294.0
328.2
337.4
306.5
330.9
311.4
_
_
335.4
292.5
329.9
339.1
308.3
330.5
311.9
-
336.2
308.3
338.1
-
334.5
309.2
339.0
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
171.6
172.2
175.2
176.3
-
171.0
175.2
174.1
174.6
174.2
-
167.7
174.7
176.1
177.1
172.2
169.7
174.6
178.7
-
-
-
-
_
_
_
-
Sept.
_
Oct.
-
_
_
_
_
335.9
294.2
329.3
338.5
308.8
331.7
311.3
-
334.6
310.6
341.1
_
-
172.2
172.2
175.3
176.4
_
-
171.8
175.3
173.5
174.8
174.5
_
-
-
-
168.8
175.0
176.1
176.9
_
_
171.8
168.1
174.6
178.3
_
-
_
_
-
173.5
172.4
176.3
177.8
172.5
176.0
175.1
175.7
175.1
169.7
174.5
176.9
179.0
174.6
169.5
175.7
179.3
31. Continued— Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1 9 6 7 = 1 0 0 , u nless o th e rw ise indicated)
All Urban Consumers
Area1
Pricing Other
sche index
dule2
base
Oct.
Class C:
Northeast ..........................
North Central....................
South .................................
West...................................
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
181.7
170.1
174.3
169.7
Class D:
Northeast ..........................
North Central....................
South .................................
West...................................
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
175.6
171.6
174.8
174.5
Nov.
-
June
July
-
Aug.
183.4
170.7
174.5
171.6
-
182.8
171.2
174.8
173.0
176.1
171.3
173.9
174.1
"
176.8
171.4
174.3
174.9
-
1 A rea is g en erally th e S ta n da rd M e tro po lita n S ta tistica l A rea (SMSA),
e xclusive o f farm s. L.A .-Long Beach, A naheim , Calif, is a co m b ina tio n of
tw o S M S A ’s, a nd N.Y., N .Y .-N o rthe a ste rn N.J. and C hicago, lll.-N o rthw e stern Ind. are th e m ore e xte n sive S ta n da rd C o nso lid a ted A reas. A re a d e fin i
tio n s are th o se e sta b lish ed by th e O ffice o f M an ag em en t and B ud g et in
1973, e xce p t fo r D enver-B oulder, Colo, w h ich d o e s n ot in clu de D ouglas
C ounty. D e finition s do n o t in clu de revisions m ade sin ce 1973.
2 Foods, fuels, and several o th e r item s price d every m o n th in all areas;
m o st o th e r g oo d s and se rvice s priced as indicated;.
M - E very m onth.
1 - January, M arch, May, July, S eptem ber, and Novem ber.
2 - February, April, June, A ugust, O ctob er, a nd D ecem ber.
3 Regions are defin ed as the fo u r C e nsus regions.
T h e pop ulatio n size cla sses are agg re ga tio ns o f a reas w hich have urban
pop ulatio n as d efined:
A-1 - M ore than 4,000,000.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Urban Wage Earners
1986
1985
1985
Sept.
-
-
“
Oct.
Oct.
183.8
172.3
175.8
173.1
186.5
166.9
175.7
168.3
178.1
171.7
175.4
175.3
175.3
173.1
176.2
176.0
1986
Nov.
-
-
“
June
187.8
167.2
175.2
169.9
175.5
172.6
174.6
175.4
July
-
-
-
Aug.
187.2
167.7
175.3
171.1
176.2
172.4
175.0
176.3
Sept.
-
-
-
Oct.
188.1
168.7
176.3
171.2
177.2
172.7
175.9
176.7
A -2 - 1,250,000 to 4 ,000,000.
B - 385 ,00 0 to 1,250,000
C
- 75,0 00 to 385,000.
D
- Less tha n 75,000.
P opulation size cla ss A is the agg re ga tio n o f p o p ulatio n size cla sses A-1
and A-2.
- D ata n o t available.
NO TE: Local a rea CPI in dexes a re b ypro d u cts o f the natio na l CPI p ro
gram . B eca u se each lo cal in de x is a sm all su bse t o f th e n atio na l index, it
has a sm a lle r sam p le size and is, th e re fo re , su b je ct to su b sta ntia lly m ore
sam pling and o th e r m e a sure m e n t e rro r tha n the natio na l index. A s a result,
lo cal a rea in de xe s sh ow g re a te r v o la tility than the natio na l index, altho ug h
th e ir lo ng -te rm tre n d s are quite sim ilar. T h e refo re , th e B ureau o f L ab or S ta
tistics stro n g ly u rges users to c o n sid e r a do ptin g th e natio na l averag e CPI
fo r use in e sca la to r clauses.
l
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
32. Annual data: Consumer Price Index all items and major groups
S eries
C o nsu m e r Price Index fo r A ll U rban Consum ers:
A ll item s:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
Food and beverages:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
Housing:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercen t c h a n g e ............................................................................
A pp a rel and upkeep:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
Tran spo rta tion :
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercen t c h a n g e ............................................................................
M e d ical care:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
E ntertainm ent:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
O th e r g oo d s and services:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
C o nsu m e r Price Index fo r U rban W age E arners and
C lerical W orkers:
A ll item s:
In d e x ................................................................................................
P ercent c h a n g e ............................................................................
80
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
181.5
6.5
195.4
7.7
217.4
11.3
246.8
13.5
272.4
10.4
289.1
6.1
298.4
3.2
311.1
4.3
322.2
3.6
188.0
6.0
206.3
9.7
228.5
10.8
248.0
8.5
267.3
7.8
278.2
4.1
284.4
2.2
295.1
3.8
302.0
2.3
186.5
6.8
202.8
8.7
227.6
12.2
263.3
15.7
293.5
11.5
314.7
7.2
323.1
2.7
336.5
4.1
349.9
4.0
154.2
4.5
159.6
3.5
166.6
4.4
178.4
7.1
186.9
4.8
191.8
2.6
196.5
2.5
200.2
1.9
206.0
2.9
177.2
7.1
185.5
4.7
212.0
14.3
249.7
17.8
280.0
12.1
291.5
4.1
298.4
2.4
311.7
4.5
319.9
2.6
202.4
9.6
219.4
8.4
239.7
9.3
265.9
10.9
294.5
10.8
328.7
11.6
357.3
8.7
379.5
6.2
403.1
6.2
167.7
4.9
176.6
5.3
188.5
6.7
205.3
8.9
221.4
7.8
235.8
6.5
246.0
4.3
255.1
3.7
265.0
3.9
172.2
5.8
183.3
6.4
196.7
7.3
214.5
9.0
235.7
9.9
259.9
10.3
288.3
10.9
307.7
6.7
326.6
6.1
181.5
6.5
195.3
7.6
217.7
11.5
247.0
13.5
272.3
10.2
288.6
6.0
297.4
3.0
307.6
3.4
318.5
3.5
33.
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1967 = 100)
A nn u al average
1985
1986
G r o u p in g
F in is h e d g o o d s
...............................................................
Finished co nsu m e r g oo ds ..............................
Finished co nsu m e r f o o d s .............................
Finished co nsu m e r g oo ds excluding
foo d s .................................................................
N ond u ra ble goo ds less foo d ..................
D urable g oo ds ..............................................
C apital e q u ip m e n t..............................................
1984
1985
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
M ay
Ju ne
July
Aug.
291.1
290.3
273.3
293.7
291.8
271.2
296.4
294.4
271.8
297.2
295.4
275.0
296.0
293.8
275.0
291.9
288.4
272.0
288.0
283.4
271.6
287.2
281.9
271.9
288.9
284.1
274.8
289.3
284.5
275.1
288.0
282.7
280.7
288.3
283.1
283.6
287.5
282.7
282.2
290.5
284.9
282.9
294.1
337.3
236.8
294.0
297.3
339.3
241.5
300.5
300.7
342.6
245.0
303.8
300.7
343.2
244.3
303.7
298.3
339.6
243.5
303.9
291.8
328.0
243.9
304.3
284.6
315.4
243.7
304.3
282.2
309.8
245.7
305.6
284.0
313.0
245.5
305.7
284.4
313.5
245.9
306.1
278.8
303.4
246.3
306.4
278.0
302.0
246.2
306.3
278.1
304.8
242.7
304.2
281.0
301.9
253.6
310.1
320.0
318.7
318.1
318.9
317.4
313.5
309.5
307.1
306.7
306.8
305.0
304.5
306.1
304.9
301.8
271.1
290.5
325.1
287.5
299.5
258.8
285.9
320.2
291.5
297.7
254.0
282.8
317.5
292.3
297.9
254.3
283.1
317.6
292.4
297.1
252.8
283.8
313.4
293.1
296.5
249.2
282.4
313.1
293.6
296.4
246.7
282.5
313.6
293.7
295.5
244.8
279.3
313.7
294.1
295.4
248.7
278.2
313.2
294.1
295.1
247.9
277.8
312.9
294.1
295.8
251.6
278.2
313.3
294.6
296.0
255.7
277.2
313.4
294.9
296.2
254.3
277.3
314.5
295.1
296.5
253.2
277.7
315.4
294.9
310.3
566.2
302.3
283.4
315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2
315.0
550.5
309.8
285.6
315.7
557.2
310.6
285.7
316.2
540.8
311.2
286.6
316.5
500.8
310.9
286.4
317.0
453.4
312.3
286.8
318.3
428.5
312.8
287.2
318.3
424.2
313.6
287.1
317.8
426.7
314.0
287.3
318.0
401.6
314.2
287.4
317.6
395.2
316.4
287.1
317.9
409.1
317.8
287.9
317.3
395.1
318.4
287.5
330.8
259.5
484.5
306.1
235.0
459.2
304.7
236.6
451.6
304.3
236.8
450.0
301.0
231.7
450.6
289.0
227.2
422.7
281.1
224.4
403.9
273.7
220.3
389.4
279.4
229.9
386.9
276.9
227.1
384.8
278.0
233.6
374.1
275.5
236.3
360.0
275.5
231.9
369.6
276.7
233.7
369.8
294.8
750.3
265.1
257.8
262.3
299.0
720.9
269.2
261.3
268.7
302.4
729.5
271.6
263.4
271.8
302.4
733.8
272.2
264.3
271.4
300.7
700.9
272.7
264.8
272.1
296.3
629.3
272.2
264.0
272.5
291.2
554.1
272.1
263.9
272.5
289.9
517.2
273.1
264.9
273.9
291.2
534.1
274.0
266.1
274.0
291.6
536.4
274.3
266.3
274.3
287.8
467.8
276.4
269.0
275.0
287.2
459.1
277.2
270.0
275.0
286.6
477.2
275.4
268.4
273.1
290.5
454.9
279.7
272.2
278.8
Sept.
Oct.
In t e r m e d ia t e m a te r ia ls , s u p p lie s , a n d
c o m p o n e n t s ......................................................................
M a terials and co m p o n e n ts for
m anufa ctu rin g ...................................................
M a terials fo r foo d m a n u fa c tu rin g ..............
M a terials fo r non du ra b le m anufa ctu rin g .
M a terials fo r durable m a n u fa c tu rin g ........
C o m p on e nts fo r m a n u fa c tu rin g .................
M aterials and co m p o n e n ts fo r
c o n s tru c tio n ........................................................
P rocessed fue ls and lu b r ic a n ts .....................
C o n ta in e rs .............................................................
S u p p lie s .................................................................
C r u d e m a t e r i a l s f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e s s i n g ...
F o od stuffs and fe e d stu ffs ............................
N o nfo od m a te r ia ls '..........................................
S p e c ia l g r o u p in g s
Finished goods, e xcluding f o o d s .....................
Finished ene rg y g oo ds .......................................
Finished g oo d s less e n e r g y ..............................
Finished co nsu m e r g oo ds less e n e r g y .........
Finished g oo d s less fo o d and e n e r g y ..........
Finished co nsu m e r g oo d s less foo d and
e n e r g y ......................................................................
C o nsu m e r non du ra b le goo ds less fo o d and
e n e rg y ......................................................................
245.9
252.1
255.0
254.6
255.5
256.0
256.0
257.3
257.5
257.7
258.6
258.6
256.9
262.4
239.0
246.2
248.5
248.3
250.5
251.1
251.2
252.0
252.3
252.5
253.8
253.8
253.6
254.4
310.4
229.8
380.5
303.9
Inte rm e d iate m a terials less fo o d s and
f e e d s ........................................................................
Inte rm e d iate fo o d s and f e e d s ..........................
Inte rm e d iate e nergy g oo d s ...............................
Inte rm e d iate goo ds less e n e r g y ......................
Inte rm e d iate m a terials less fo o d s and
e n e r g y ......................................................................
325.0
253.1
545.0
303.8
325.0
232.8
528.3
304.0
324.5
231.4
529.3
303.2
325.3
232.7
536.2
303.5
323.6
232.6
520.0
303.4
319.7
228.9
482.0
303.0
315.5
227.8
437.0
303.3
313.0
227.0
413.3
303.1
312.4
229.3
409.1
303.0
312.5
229.0
411.1
302.9
310.5
230.3
387.1
303.4
309.9
232.4
380.8
303.5
311.5
233.3
393.8
304.0
303.6
305.2
304.2
304.5
304.3
304.2
304.5
304.3
304.0
303.8
304.2
304.2
304.7
304.9
C rude e nergy m a te ria ls .......................................
C rude m a terials le ss e nergy .............................
C rude n o n foo d m a terials less e n e rg y ...........
785.2
255.5
266.1
748.1
233.2
249.7
737.1
233.2
244.6
735.6
233.0
242.9
732.8
229.8
245.8
662.9
226.5
246.5
614.5
224.7
247.9
577.0
221.9
249.1
570.6
229.2
249.3
563.9
227.3
250.1
538.7
232.0
249.2
524.5
231.1
236.1
544.1
228.5
239.2
539.2
230.5
242.3
1 C rude n on foo d m a terials e xcep t fuel.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
81
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
34.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
Producer Price indexes, by durability of product
(1967 = 100)
1986
1985
A nnual average
G r o u p in g
1984
1985
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
Sept.
June
July
Aug.
300.0
294.9
300.1
294.0
299.2
295.6
302.3
294.2
T o ta l durable g o o d s ............................................
T o ta l non du ra b le g o o d s ......................................
293.6
323.3
297.3
317.2
298.5
317.6
298.5
318.8
298.1
316.8
298.4
308.4
298.6
300.7
299.7
296.0
299.6
297.9
299.7
297.7
T o ta l m a n u fa c tu re s ...............................................
302.9
293.9
312.3
304.3
298.1
310.5
305.4
299.5
311.4
306.0
299.5
312.5
304.8
299.0
310.6
301.1
299.3
302.9
297.3
299.4
294.9
296.1
300.5
291.2
296.7
300.4
292.6
296.9
300.5
293.0
295.4
300.9
289.2
295.6
300.9
289.7
296.2
300.1
292.0
297.0
303.2
290.2
346.6
266.7
351.4
327.9
252.2
332.4
326.2
245.2
331.2
327.6
244.3
332.7
326.0
248.2
330.6
316.3
251.2
320.2
310.3
252.4
313.6
303.0
253.1
305.8
306.2
252.1
309.3
304.2
251.2
307.2
304.3
248.9
307.4
299.7
252.4
302.3
299.2
253.2
301.7
298.8
252.0
301.4
N o n d u ra b le ..........................................................
T o ta l raw o r slig h tly pro cesse d g oo d s .........
N o ndurable .......................................... ...............
35.
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1967 = 100)
In d e x
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
181.7
180.7
184.6
195.9
194.9
199.2
217.7
217.9
216.5
247.0
248.9
239.8
269.8
271.3
264.3
280.7
281.0
279.4
285.2
284.6
287.2
291.1
290.3
294.0
293.7
291.8
300.5
201.5
215.6
243.2
280.3
306.0
310.4
312.3
320.0
318.7
195.4
203.4
282.5
188.3
188.7
208.7
224.7
295.3
202.8
198.5
234.4
247.4
364.8
226.8
218.2
265.7
268.3
503.0
254.5
244.5
286.1
287.6
595.4
276.1
263.8
289.8
293.7
591.7
285.6
272.1
293.4
301.8
564.8
286.6
277.1
301.8
310.3
566.2
302.3
283.4
299.5
315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2
209.2
192.1
245.0
372.1
234.4
216.2
272.3
426.8
274.3
247.9
330.0
507.6
304.6
259.2
401.0
615.0
329.0
257.4
482.3
751.2
319.5
247.8
473.9
886.1
323.6
252.2
477.4
931.5
330.8
259.5
484.5
931.3
306.1
235.0
459.2
909.6
F in is h e d g o o d s :
T o t a l...................................................................................
C o nsu m e r goo ds .......................................................
C apital e q u ip m e nt ....................................................
In t e r m e d ia t e m a te r ia ls , s u p p lie s , a n d
c o m p o n e n ts :
T o ta l ...................................................................................
M a terials and co m p o n e n ts for
m a n u fa c tu rin g ...........................................................
M aterials and co m p o n e n ts fo r co n stru ctio n ....
P rocessed fu e ls and lu brica nts ............................
C o n ta in e r s ...................................................................
S u p p lie s ........................................................................
C r u d e m a te r ia ls f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e s s in g :
To ta l ...................................................................................
Fo od stuffs and fe e d stu ffs ......................................
N o nfo od m a terials e xcep t fuel ............................
Fuel ................................................................................
82
O ct.
M ay
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36.
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(June 1 9 7 7 = 1 0 0 , unless o th e rw ise indicated)
C a te g o ry
1974
SITO
June
1986
1985
1984
Mar.
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
Ju ne
Sept.
100.2
101.5
99.3
98.1
97.5
97.5
96.5
96.7
97.0
96.7
95.1
( 3 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................................................
M eat ( 3 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................................................................................
Fish ( 3 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ..........................................................................................................
G rain and grain p re pa ra tion s ( 3 / 8 0 — 100) .........................................................
V eg e ta b les and fru it ( 3 / 8 3 — 100) ..........................................................................
F e e d stuffs fo r a nim als (3 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ).......................................................................
M isc. fo o d p ro du cts (3 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................
0
01
03
04
05
08
09
106.2
108.9
99.8
102.7
116.2
106.9
104.9
109.6
108.7
98.7
107.4
126.9
98.8
110.6
103.5
105.6
98.0
101.2
125.6
83.5
109.5
96.5
104.4
98.7
92.9
114.7
82.4
108.4
95.8
103.9
101.0
92.4
119.5
72.8
110.6
94.0
104.7
103.6
90.3
120.2
68.6
109.2
90.2
106.1
102.6
82.6
126.9
75.7
108.1
93.6
112.2
101.8
87.1
118.9
83.4
107.7
90.5
111.5
102.2
82.1
115.3
88.5
106.0
89.5
114.7
106.2
79.1
125.8
85.5
104.7
77.2
122.0
111.2
59.0
131.4
90.2
106.6
(6 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................
B eve ra ge s ( 9 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................................................................................
T o b a c c o and to b a cco p ro du cts (6 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
1
11
12
101.6
102.3
101.6
101.9
102.9
101.8
102.8
103.3
102.7
101.3
103.7
101.1
99.9
104.0
99.5
100.1
105.3
99.6
99.7
101.8
99.5
98.6
100.9
98.4
95.6
101.9
95.1
96.5
103.0
95.9
96.3
102.2
95.8
( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................................
R aw hides and skin s ( 6 / 8 0 — 1 0 0 ) .........................................................................
O ilse ed s and o lea g in ou s fru it (9 /7 7 — 1 0 0 ) .........................................................
C rude rubber (including syn th e tic a nd reclaim ed) (9 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ..................
W o o d .................................................................................................................................
Pulp and w a ste p ap er (6 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................
T e xtile fib e r s ...................................................................................................................
C rude fe rtilize rs and m in e ra ls ..................................................................................
M e talliferou s o re s and m etal scra p .......................................................................
2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
112.5
145.6
93.9
103.3
131.1
112.5
120.5
146.6
100.2
118.3
154.7
104.3
106.0
129.4
122.1
125.6
147.7
98.5
105.2
153.7
79.9
104.1
123.8
120.8
109.4
163.0
93.2
101.4
133.6
74.8
104.0
125.4
114.2
106.7
163.2
92.4
97.5
121.0
71.0
106.4
128.7
100.5
102.4
165.6
89.2
96.8
126.2
71.2
106.3
125.7
96.1
105.8
167.9
82.0
93.3
129.0
64.2
107.1
124.5
93.8
103.6
169.4
80.1
92.5
139.9
63.9
106.0
128.1
92.7
97.7
165.5
78.7
95.8
138.9
66.9
106.0
128.7
98.8
101.6
168.0
83.4
95.6
148.9
65.8
106.1
128.7
109.7
98.6
166.1
80.5
92.3
138.0
64.5
105.3
129.7
120.7
74.7
164.3
84.6
M i n e r a l f u e l s ...............................................................................................................................................
3
99.1
99.7
99.7
99.7
100.1
99.2
97.6
96.6
91.9
86.7
85.7
A n i m a l a n d v e g e t a b l e s o i l s , f a t s , a n d w a x e s ..............................................................
Fixed ve g e ta b le oils and fa ts ( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................................
4
42
129.8
133.2
164.5
176.4
145.7
159.0
147.9
156.7
142.0
152.9
144.5
164.8
114.5
128.8
101.4
108.7
90.8
95.4
84.4
95.3
76.5
80.8
( 3 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................................
O rg an ic ch em icals (1 2 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ............................................................................
Fertilizers, m an ufa ctu re d ( 3 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................
5
51
56
101.4
100.2
108.3
99.7
101.0
96.9
98.3
97.4
97.4
97.7
94.7
94.8
97.0
93.8
92.5
96.8
96.5
87.9
97.1
97.1
89.8
96.6
95.4
90.0
96.5
93.5
88.6
95.4
89.3
84.0
93.1
88.0
77.4
101.0
83.5
146.7
150.2
95.9
94.2
103.1
101.3
81.2
147.5
154.7
96.1
92.9
104.5
102.0
80.8
148.9
160.0
96.8
90.4
105.1
100.4
79.0
148.5
159.5
96.5
82.5
105.0
99.4
82.5
150.2
155.0
95.5
79.7
105.4
99.2
79.2
149.0
151.6
95.3
79.6
105.2
99.2
75.9
148.3
149.6
95.9
79.8
105.4
99.1
78.5
148.7
148.2
98.2
78.2
104.4
100.3
77.8
151.0
152.2
98.4
80.2
105.3
101.2
82.5
150.0
158.7
99.4
79.1
105.5
102.2
84.2
150.4
165.3
100.2
79.4
105.6
67
68
69
7
71
72
73
74
75
76
138.5
158.4
152.3
150.8
148.6
101.4
133.0
110.2
130.2
183.1
139.4
156.9
152.8
151.2
149.0
101.5
132.3
112.6
131.2
187.7
140.1
160.6
153.7
151.7
149.3
99.8
134.4
113.8
131.0
189.6
141.5
167.5
153.4
151.9
150.2
101.4
134.3
114.6
131.8
191.7
142.3
165.3
155.0
153.4
152.4
100.9
133.3
114.9
133.1
195.5
142.9
167.4
155.7
155.1
152.0
100.0
133.3
116.1
133.9
196.6
143.1
167.1
156.0
156.3
152.4
99.9
134.1
115.3
133.8
199.3
143.3
167.5
156.2
158.4
152.2
99.4
134.5
113.8
135.0
200.7
144.0
169.1
155.5
159.0
152.3
99.9
136.5
115.1
135.5
203.3
144.1
169.2
154.7
158.9
153.3
99.2
137.0
114.2
136.4
205.6
144.4
169.5
155.0
160.4
154.4
98.8
137.8
114.2
136.5
206.0
77
78
79
100.6
101.9
171.8
100.4
102.1
172.0
100.7
103.9
175.8
99.3
103.4
171.7
99.5
104.7
175.5
100.4
104.7
178.3
100.3
105.0
178.7
100.3
105.3
178.8
102.6
103.4
104.1
182.1
183.8
183.8
8
132.0
131.3
132.7
130.3
128.0
129.1
127.5
128.5
131.6
132.9
132.7
M iscellan eo u s m an ufa ctu re d articles, n .e .s..........................................................
84
98.5
97.9
95.2
94.1
92.4
93.1
93.1
92.4
95.6
95.6
97.6
G o l d , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................................
971
95.8
93.5
81.7
79.5
69.1
75.4
77.4
77.5
81.8
82.2
97.5
A L L C O M M O D IT IE S
( 9 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ............................................................................
Food
B e v e ra g e s a n d to b a c c o
C r u d e m a te r ia ls
C h e m ic a ls
( 9 / 8 1 - 1 0 0 ) ........................................
L eather and fu rskin s ( 9 / 7 9 — 1 0 0 ) ..........................................................................
R ubb e r m an ufa ctu re s .................................................................................................
P aper and paperbo a rd p ro du cts (6 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................................
Iron and stee l ( 3 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................................
N onfe rro u s m etals ( 9 / 8 1 —100) ..............................................................................
M etal m a nufactures, n.e.s. (3 /8 2 = 100) ..............................................................
In t e r m e d ia t e m a n u fa c tu r e d p r o d u c t s
6
61
62
64
-
M a c h in e r y a n d t r a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t, e x c lu d in g m ilita r y
(1 2 /7 8 — 100) ...............................................................
P ow er gen eratin g m achinery and equ ip m e nt ( 1 2 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ........................
M ach ine ry sp ecia lize d fo r p articula r industries ( 9 / 7 8 — 100) ........................
M e talw orking m achinery ( 6 / 7 8 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................
G eneral industrial m ach ine s and p arts n.e.s. 9 / 7 8 — 1 0 0 ) .............................
O ffice m ach ine s and a u to m a tic d ata pro cessin g e qu ip m e nt .......................
T e le com m un ica tion s, sound reco rding and reprod u cin g e q u ip m e n t.........
E lectrical m ach ine ry and e q u ip m e n t......................................................................
R oad ve hicles and p arts ( 3 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................
O th e r tra n sp o rt equipm ent, excl. m ilitary and co m m e rcia l a viation .........
a n d c o m m e r c ia l a ir c r a ft
O th e r m a n u fa c tu r e d a r tic le s
......................................................................................................
A pp a rel ( 9 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ....................................................................................................
P rofessional, scie ntific, and co n tro llin g in stru m en ts a nd a p p a ra tu s ..........
P ho tog ra ph ic a pp aratu s a nd supplies, o ptica l g oods, w a tch e s and
c lo c k s ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................................
-
-
-
-
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
83
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
37. U.S. import price indexes by Standard international Trade Classification
(June 1 9 7 7 = 1 0 0 , u nless o th e rw ise indicate d)
C a te g o ry
1974
SITC
( 9 / 8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................
1984
Sept.
1986
1985
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
96.7
95.7
93.5
93.0
92.9
94.2
88.5
83.2
83.8
0
01
02
03
102.0
135.4
98.9
134.2
98.1
132.3
98.4
133.9
98.5
130.4
98.3
132.9
96.8
118.2
97.9
129.4
94.9
120.6
99.1
129.7
102.8
131.2
100.5
132.7
113.4
122.7
106.7
139.3
104.7
118.5
107.1
144.8
109.1
126.9
109.4
149.6
04
05
06
07
132.9
135.4
119.0
60.3
132.8
117.2
118.5
58.4
131.8
127.1
118.4
57.0
132.3
129.4
122.6
56.0
136.3
120.2
123.1
54.4
141.9
131.3
111.9
64.6
146.9
119.4
124.6
85.9
149.2
119.4
121.6
69.2
154.0
127.1
123.9
71.8
1
11
157.1
153.5
156.5
152.8
156.2
154.2
157.1
154.3
158.0
156.0
162.1
159.1
163.2
161.8
165.5
163.9
165.8
165.5
C rude rubber (inc. syn th e tic & recla im e d) ( 3 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .................................
W o o d ( 9 / 8 1 - 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................................................
Pulp and w a ste p ap er (1 2 /8 1 —1 0 0 ) .....................................................................
C rude fe rtilize rs and cru d e m inerals ( 1 2 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................
M e ta llife ro u s o re s a nd m etal scra p ( 3 / 8 4 — 1 0 0 ) ..............................................
C rude ve g e ta b le and anim al m aterials, n .e .s.......................................................
2
23
24
25
27
28
29
100.6
90.7
99.6
96.3
98.0
100.1
101.1
98.9
83.8
104.0
93.2
98.6
95.6
106.4
94.0
77.6
100.7
84.0
100.3
90.4
104.3
93.6
76.4
106.9
80.4
101.7
87.6
104.9
91.5
68.9
101.6
76.8
102.7
89.5
102.5
91.2
73.2
99.4
75.8
102.1
90.1
102.5
94.2
78.8
104.3
74.9
101.5
94.5
103.6
95.3
75.5
106.3
79.9
100.0
95.6
104.4
98.2
76.9
109.4
86.0
100.4
98.2
104.8
(6 /8 2 — 1 0 0 ) .............................................................
P etro le um and p e tro le um p ro d u cts ( 6 / 8 2 — 100) ...............................................
3
33
86.9
87.0
85.2
85.2
82.9
83.8
80.9
81.6
79.8
80.3
79.1
80.1
55.3
54.7
37.5
36.1
33.3
31.8
( 9 / 8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................................
V eg e ta b le oils (9 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................................
4
42
124.4
125.3
114.9
115.3
89.9
89.5
76.7
75.9
57.6
56.2
50.6
48.9
41.4
39.3
39.3
37.4
35.5
33.5
( 9 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................................
M e d icin al and pha rm a ce utica l p ro du cts ( 3 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................
M an ufa ctu re d fe rtilize rs (3 /8 4 — 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................
C h em ica l m a terials and products, n.e.s. ( 9 / 8 4 — 1 0 0 ) .....................................
5
54
56
59
98.8
96.4
98.5
100.0
97.1
94.6
92.9
97.5
95.7
91.6
94.2
96.1
94.9
95.1
82.0
95.6
94.5
95.3
80.8
96.9
94.2
96.7
78.5
97.8
94.6
102.9
79.2
99.9
93.3
104.9
79.7
100.3
93.4
110.0
77.4
101.0
(1 2 /7 7 — 100) .....................................
L ea the r and f u r s k in s ....................................................................................................
R ubb e r m a nufactures, n .e .s........................................................................................
C ork and w o od m a n ufa ctu re s .................................................................................
P aper and pap erbo a rd p ro du cts .............................................................................
T e x tile s ..............................................................................................................................
N o n m e ta llic m ineral m anufa ctu re s, n .e .s...............................................................
Iron and steel (9 /7 8 — 100) ................. .....................................................................
N o n fe rro u s m e tals (1 2 /8 1 — 100) ............................................................................
M e tal m anufa ctu re s, n.e .s...........................................................................................
6
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
137.2
144.0
139.6
126.4
156.1
131.6
156.6
124.7
90.2
119.3
136.8
140.4
140.5
126.1
157.5
132.9
159.4
123.7
87.3
119.3
133.1
135.3
139.5
121.3
157.6
130.4
154.2
121.0
81.9
117.4
132.4
133.3
138.6
121.2
157.2
127.5
151.7
120.1
82.3
117.8
133.6
137.0
137.3
123.4
157.8
126.5
157.6
119.1
83.7
119.5
133.4
141.3
138.1
124.0
156.5
128.1
162.2
118.3
80.4
121.6
134.0
141.6
136.5
130.8
157.1
131.2
164.2
117.3
79.4
124.4
135.6
143.0
137.7
134.3
157.1
132.9
169.6
118.1
78.9
127.8
138.8
147.4
138.1
137.4
157.5
135.4
178.2
119.0
83.5
129.1
M a c h i n e r y a n d t r a n s p o r t e q u i p m e n t ( 6 / 8 1 — 1 0 0 ) ..................................................
7
72
73
74
102.6
98.8
92.1
92.4
102.9
98.0
89.9
91.3
101.6
96.2
86.3
89.2
102.6
97.0
90.5
91.1
103.5
101.4
94.2
94.3
107.2
104.9
98.1
98.0
111.5
112.1
105.0
103.8
115.3
115.4
107.7
109.0
118.1
120.1
110.7
112.8
A L L C O M M O D IT IE S
( 9 / 7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................................................................................
M eat ...................................................................................................................................
D airy p ro du cts a nd eggs (6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................................
Food
B akery goods, pasta pro du cts, grain and grain pre pa ra tion s
( 9 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................................................................
Fruits and ve ge tab le s .................................................................................................
S ugar, sugar prepa ra tion s, and hon ey ( 3 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ........................................
C offe e , tea, c o c o a ........................................................................................................
B e v e ra g e s a n d to b a c c o
..................................................................................................................
B eve ra ge s .......................................................................................................................
C r u d e m a t e r i a l s .......................................................................................................................................
F u e ls a n d r e la te d p r o d u c t s
F a t s a n d o ils
C h e m ic a ls
In te r m e d ia te m a n u fa c tu r e d p r o d u c ts
M a ch ine ry specia lize d fo r p articula r in du strie s (9 /7 8 = 100) ........................
M e talw orking m a ch ine ry ( 3 / 8 0 — 100) ...................................................................
G en e ra l industrial m ach ine ry and parts, n.e.s. (6 /8 1 — 100) ........................
O ffice m a ch ine s and a u to m a tic d ata pro cessin g e qu ip m e nt
( 3 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................................................
T e le co m m u n ica tio n s, sound re co rding and re p rod u cin g apparatu s
( 3 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................................................
E le ctrical m ach ine ry and e qu ip m e nt (1 2 /8 1 — 1 0 0 ) .........................................
R oad ve hicles a nd parts (6 /8 1 — 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................
75
94.1
92.2
89.6
89.4
90.3
93.7
96.9
100.8
102.1
76
77
78
93.6
87.0
109.8
91.3
86.4
111.3
90.0
82.1
111.5
88.8
83.9
112.1
88.3
81.4
112.7
88.6
83.1
117.8
89.4
84.5
123.4
91.6
87.5
127.1
93.7
89.5
129.8
( 3 / 8 0 — 1 0 0 ) ............................................................
P lum bing, heating, and lighting fixtures ( 6 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................
Furniture and p arts ( 6 / 8 0 — 100) .............................................................................
C lo thing ( 9 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................................................
F o o tw e a r...........................................................................................................................
P rofessional, scie ntific, and co n tro llin g in stru m en ts and
a pp aratu s (1 2 /7 9 — 1 0 0 ) ............................................................................................
P ho tog ra ph ic a pp aratu s and supplies, o p tica l g oods, w a tche s, and
c lo cks ( 3 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................................................
Mise, m a n ufa ctu re d article s, n.e.s. ( 6 / 8 2 — 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
8
81
82
84
85
99.7
110.7
138.4
135.4
138.4
100.0
111.6
142.5
138.5
142.5
97.0
113.9
137.4
136.7
137.4
98.0
114.1
136.7
133.9
136.7
99.6
117.8
142.1
134.5
142.1
100.8
115.0
142.7
134.5
142.7
103.3
120.1
147.0
133.4
147.0
104.8
123.5
142.2
135.3
142.2
109.5
125.5
145.8
137.8
145.8
87
95.6
92.9
89.2
92.3
98.8
102.4
106.4
112.5
118.5
88
89
91.2
98.3
91.3
96.3
88.9
91.2
89.5
95.2
91.1
96.4
94.5
97.9
99.3
102.1
103.2
103.4
106.8
112.3
G o l d , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................................
971
106.4
103.6
90.1
98.3
101.1
101.0
106.7
107.3
126.9
M is e , m a n u f a c t u r e d a r tic le s
84
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
38.
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category
(S e pte m b er 1983 =
100 u nless o th e rw ise indicated)
C a te g o ry
P er
ce nta ge
o f 1980
trade
value
Foods, feeds, and beve ra ge s ........................................................
R aw m a te r ia ls ................................................................
R aw m aterials, non du ra b le ......................................................_ ............
R aw m aterials, d u r a b le .........................................................
C apital g o o d s (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................
A u to m o tive ve hicles, parts and e ng in es (1 2 /8 2 = 100) ....................
C o nsu m e r g o o d s ....................................................................
D urables ............................................................
N o n d u ra b le s .....................................................................
39.
1984
Sept.
16.294
30.696
21.327
9.368
30.186
7.483
7.467
3.965
3.501
1985
Dec.
88.8
100.5
102.8
95.0
104.6
105.3
101.3
99.4
103.0
Mar.
83.0
99.1
101.4
93.3
105.6
105.7
100.8
99.3
102.3
June
81.5
97.6
99.6
92.6
106.2
106.7
100.9
99.1
102.7
1986
Sept.
80.9
97.2
99.5
91.6
106.6
108.0
101.1
99.2
103.0
Dec.
76.2
96.5
98.7
91.1
106.6
108.1
101.9
100.4
103.3
Mar.
77.5
95.9
97.9
91.0
106.6
109.2
101.4
99.5
103.3
June
75.5
96.0
97.5
92.5
107.4
109.5
103.7
101.8
105.5
Sept.
74.7
94.9
96.1
91.9
107.5
110.4
104.5
101.8
107.2
66.0
93.4
93.7
92.5
107.6
110.8
104.5
102.1
106.9
U.S. import price indexes by end-use category
(D ece m b er 1 9 8 2 = 1 0 0 )
C a te g o ry
A u to m o tive vehicles, parts and e n g in e s ................................................
40.
7.477
31.108
19.205
9.391
9.814
13.164
11.750
14.250
5.507
8.743
105.6
87.5
102.5
101.7
103.3
98.0
104.0
100.6
98.8
103.0
101.8
85.7
101.1
100.7
101.6
97.8
105.2
101.1
98.5
104.6
100.4
82.1
95.8
93.9
97.8
96.3
105.9
99.4
97.0
102.5
102.1
84.4
96.3
95.0
97.7
94.8
105.4
99.5
97.0
103.0
115.8
55.4
94.5
91.1
98.1
102.8
115.6
104.5
103.4
106.0
99.0
80.9
95.4
93.5
97.4
97.6
106.4
101.0
98.9
103.9
106.0
80.5
93.9
91.8
96.2
100.0
111.4
102.4
100.7
104.7
Dec.
Mar.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
Sept.
1986
1985
1984
Perce n ta g e
o f 1980
trade
value
112.3
32.3
95.3
89.5
101.4
109.4
121.0
110.1
111.2
108.6
108.2
36.8
94.0
89.7
98.7
106.7
119.0
106.5
106.5
106.6
U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
1986
1985
1984
In d u s try g ro u p
Sept.
M a nufacturing:
Food and kindred p ro du cts (6 /8 3 — 100) ................................
L um be r and w o od pro du cts, e xce p t furnitu re
( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................................
Furniture and fixtures (9 /8 3 — 100) ............................................
P aper and allied p ro du cts (3 /81 — 1 0 0 ) ....................................
C h em ica ls and allie d p ro du cts (1 2 /8 4 — 1 0 0 ) ........................
P etro le um a nd co al p ro du cts (1 2 /8 3 — 1 0 0 ) ..........................
P rim ary m etal p ro du cts (3 /8 2 — 100) ........................................
M achinery, e xce p t e le ctrica l ( 9 / 7 8 — 100) ...............................
E le ctrical m a ch ine ry (1 2 /8 0 — 100) ............................................
T ra n sp o rta tio n e q u ip m e nt (1 2 /7 8 — 1 0 0 ) .................................
S cie n tific instru m en ts; o ptica l goods; clo cks
( 6 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................................
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
June
Sept.
105.6
103.3
99.5
99.5
96.7
98.1
97.0
95.0
95.2
97.0
103.5
106.1
101.3
100.7
100.0
138.0
110.7
157.7
97.9
104.9
103.6
100.7
100.4
95.8
139.9
111.1
158.8
99.9
105.2
97.1
100.3
101.3
91.2
140.4
111.3
160.4
99.5
106.5
94.7
99.6
102.7
92.7
140.5
112.4
161.8
98.3
107.1
93.2
99.7
102.0
93.6
140.6
111.9
162.6
101.2
108.4
92.1
99.2
99.1
93.6
140.5
111.2
164.1
101.5
109.2
95.7
98.9
93.5
96.4
140.6
112.6
165.1
101.2
109.7
101.5
98.3
83.1
96.6
140.3
112.3
166.8
102.1
110.1
106.4
96.2
83.1
101.6
140.5
112.5
167.1
156.0
153.0
154.9
156.6
156.2
156.7
159.7
161.2
161.5
1 SIC - based cla ssifica tion .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
85
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
41.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
1984
1985
1986
Industry group
Sept.
M anufacturing:
Fo od and kindred p ro du cts (6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................
T e xtile mill p ro du cts ( 9 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) .......................................................
A pp a rel and re la ted p ro du cts ( 6 / 7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................
L um ber and w o od pro du cts, e xce p t furniture
(6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................................
Furniture and fixtures (6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
P aper and allied p ro du cts ( 6 / 7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................
C h em ica ls and allie d p ro du cts ( 9 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................
R ubb e r and m iscellan eo u s p lastic p ro du cts
( 1 2 / 8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................................
L ea the r a nd le a th e r p ro du cts ..............................................................
P rim ary m etal p ro du cts (6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................
F a bricate d m etal p ro du cts (1 2 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................
M achinery, e xce p t e le ctrica l (3 /8 0 = 100) .......................................
E le ctrical m ach ine ry (9 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ).......................................................
T ra n sp o rta tio n e q u ip m e nt (6 /81 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................
S cie n tific instrum ents; o ptica l goods; clo cks
( 1 2 / 7 9 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................................
M iscellan eo u s m an ufa ctu re d co m m o dities
( 9 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................................
Dec.
Mar.
Sept.
Mar.
Dec.
June
Sept.
124.1
104.3
133.9
122.6
104.7
138.2
118.8
102.8
135.6
115.0
101.0
133.0
114.2
100.4
133.9
115.1
101.8
134.4
117.7
104.7
133.4
115.6
106.4
135.1
118.1
107.4
137.8
117.3
96.2
146.1
99.8
120.0
95.6
145.5
98.2
116.3
93.9
141.5
95.3
120.6
96.1
139.8
93.9
117.5
97.7
138.7
93.3
115.8
98.2
137.4
95.8
122.1
101.2
137.6
98.6
124.8
103.5
139.4
102.1
127.9
105.4
142.2
103.8
97.8
141.6
88.3
95.5
100.0
110.7
98.0
144.2
86.6
100.0
94.1
98.6
112.9
96.9
139.1
82.2
99.0
91.8
95.1
113.1
96.7
138.9
83.0
99.1
93.4
95.8
114.2
96.6
142.3
83.4
101.0
96.6
94.5
114.8
97.5
144.0
81.9
102.6
100.0
95.8
119.6
100.9
145.8
82.0
104.9
105.5
97.0
123.9
100.6
144.6
82.4
108.5
108.9
100.2
128.0
101.9
147.7
86.4
110.3
112.5
102.6
130.4
94.4
93.2
90.7
91.7
94.6
98.8
103.9
109.1
113.7
95.8
96.4
95.1
95.1
96.6
98.7
99.9
101.7
106.9
-
1 SIC - based cla ssifica tion .
42.
June
-
Data n o t available.
Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
(1977 = 100)
A nnual
average
Q ua rte rly Indexes
Item
1984
1985
1986
1984
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
Business:
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
C om p en sa tion per h o u r ...............................................
Real co m p e n sa tio n per h o u r .......................................
U nit labor co sts .................................................
U nit n o n la bo r paym en ts ................................................
Im p licit price d e fla to r ......................................................
105.3
168.1
98.1
159.7
156.3
158.5
104.9
165.9
98.1
158.2
154.1
156.7
105.6
167.1
97.9
158.3
156.7
157.7
105.5
169.0
98.1
160.2
157.0
159.0
105.5
170.6
98.2
161.7
157.7
160.3
105.7
172.3
98.4
163.1
158.3
161.4
106.4
174.5
98.7
164.0
160.0
162.6
107.3
176.4
99.1
164.4
161.4
163.4
106.4
178.0
99.0
167.3
159.6
164.6
107.3
179.1
99.2
167.0
162.2
165.3
107.4
180.4
100.3
168.0
161.9
165.8
107.4
181.7
100.4
169.1
163.7
167.2
104.3
167.9
98.0
161.0
156.1
159.3
103.9
165.6
97.9
159.4
153.2
157.2
104.6
166.9
97.8
159.5
156.4
158.4
104.4
168.7
98.0
161.5
157.2
160.0
104.3
170.4
98.1
163.3
157.9
161.4
104.4
172.1
98.2
164.8
158.9
162.7
104.9
174.0
98.4
165.9
160.8
164.1
105.4
175.4
98.5
166.3
163.0
165.2
104.5
177.0
98.4
169.3
160.3
166.2
105.6
178.3
98.8
168.8
163.9
167.1
105.7
179.3
99.8
169.6
163.7
167.5
105.8
180.4
99.7
170.5
165.9
168.9
105.6
165.9
96.8
161.5
157.0
174.6
133.4
160.1
158.1
105.3
163.6
96.8
159.4
155.4
171.1
134.4
158.3
156.4
105.9
164.8
96.6
160.1
155.7
173.1
138.5
161.0
157.5
105.5
166.6
96.7
162.6
157.9
176.4
130.3
160.3
158.7
105.8
168.3
96.8
163.8
159.1
177.5
130.5
161.0
159.8
106.0
169.9
97.0
164.9
160.3
178.5
129.3
161.3
160.6
106.5
171.6
97.0
165.8
161.1
179.8
130.2
162.5
161.6
107.8
173.1
97.2
165.0
160.5
178.3
141.7
165.5
162.2
107.0
174.5
97.0
167.2
163.0
179.8
131.2
162.8
162.9
106.9
175.4
97.1
168.3
164.0
181.1
131.7
163.8
164.0
106.8
176.1
97.9
168.6
164.8
179.9
132.3
163.2
164.3
106.9
176.8
97.7
169.8
165.4
182.8
134.4
165.9
165.6
116.6
168.2
98.1
144.2
114.7
165.4
97.8
144.1
115.7
166.8
97.8
144.2
117.8
169.1
98.2
143.5
118.2
171.5
98.7
145.1
119.3
173.8
99.2
145.7
121.7
175.6
99.3
144.3
123.0
178.1
100.0
144.8
122.9
179.3
99.7
145.8
123.7
180.2
99.8
145.7
124.7
181.4
100.9
145.5
125.8
182.5
100.9
145.0
Nonfarm business:
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
C o m p en sa tion p er h o u r .................................................
R eal co m p en satio n per h o u r .......................................
U nit la bo r co sts .............................................................
U nit n o n la bo r paym en ts ................................................
Im plicit price d e fla to r ......................................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
O utp ut per hou r of all e m p lo y e e s ..............................
C o m p en sa tion per h o u r ........................................
R eal co m p e n sa tio n per h o u r .......................................
Total unit c o s t s ...............................................
Unit labor co sts .............................................................
U nit n o n la bo r c o s t s ......................................................
U nit p r o fits ...........................................
U nit n on la bo r paym en ts ................................................
Im p licit price d e fla to r ...............................................
Manufacturing:
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
C om p en sa tion per h o u r .................................................
Real co m p e n sa tio n per h o u r .......................................
U nit la bo r co sts ........................................................
86
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
43.
Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1974
1973
1976
1979
1978
1981
1980
1982
1984
1983
P r iv a te b u s in e s s
P roductivity:
O utp ut per hour of all p e r s o n s ................................
O u tp u t per unit o f ca pita l s e rv ic e s .........................
M u ltifa cto r p ro d u c tiv ity ................................................
O u t p u t ..................................................................................
Inputs:
H ours o f all p e r s o n s .....................................................
C apital se rvice s .............................................................
C om b in ed units of labor and capital in p u t ..........
C a pita l per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
P riv a te n o n fa r m
67.3
102.4
78.2
55.3
88.4
102.0
92.9
80.2
95.9
105.3
99.1
93.0
93.8
98.8
95.6
91.2
98.4
97.2
98.0
94.5
100.8
102.0
101.2
105.8
99.5
99.8
99.7
107.9
99.2
94.2
97.4
106.6
100.6
92.4
97.7
108.9
100.3
86.6
95.2
105.4
103.0
88.3
97.6
109.9
105.4
92.4
100.6
118.9
82.2
54.0
70.7
65.7
90.8
78.7
86.3
86.7
96.9
88.3
93.8
91.1
97.2
92.4
95.5
95.0
96.1
97.2
96.5
101.2
105.0
103.8
104.5
98.8
108.4
108.0
108.2
99.7
107.5
113.1
109.4
105.3
108.2
117.8
111.5
108.8
105.2
121.7
110.7
115.7
106.7
124.4
112.6
116.7
112.8
128.7
118.1
114.1
70.7
103.7
80.9
54.4
89.2
102.8
93.7
79.9
96.4
106.0
99.6
92.9
94.3
99.2
96.0
91.1
98.5
97.3
98.1
94.4
100.8
101.9
101.2
106.0
99.2
99.0
99.1
107.9
98.7
93.4
96.9
106.6
99.6
91.1
96.7
108.4
99.1
85.1
94.1
104.8
102.4
87.3
97.0
110.0
104.3
90.9
99.6
118.9
77.0
52.5
67.3
68.2
89.6
77.7
85.3
86.8
96.3
87.6
93.3
91.0
96.6
91.9
95.0
95.1
95.8
97.0
96.2
101.3
105.1
104.0
104.7
98.9
108.8
109.0
108.9
100.1
108.0
114.1
110.0
105.6
108.8
119.0
112.2
109.4
105.7
123.2
111.4
116.5
107.4
126.1
113.5
117.4
114.0
130.8
119.4
114.7
62.2
102.5
71.9
52.5
80.8
98.6
85.2
78.6
93.4
111.4
97.9
96.3
90.6
101.2
93.3
91.7
97.1
96.2
96.8
93.1
101.5
102.1
101.7
106.0
101.4
99.7
101.0
108.1
101.4
91.2
98.7
103.2
103.6
89.2
99.8
104.8
105.9
81.8
99.2
98.4
112.0
86.9
105.1
104.7
116.6
94.4
110.7
116.0
84,4
51.2
73.0
60.7
97.3
79.7
92.2
82.0
103.1
86.4
98.4
83.8
101.2
90.6
98.3
89.5
95.9
96.7
96.1
100.9
104.4
103.7
104.2
99.4
106.5
108.4
107.0
101.7
101.7
113.1
104.5
111.2
101.1
117.5
105.0
116.2
92.9
120.3
99.2
129.4
93.5
120.6
99.7
129.0
99.5
122.9
104.8
123.6
b u s in e s s
P roductivity:
O utp ut per hour o f all p e r s o n s ................................
O utp ut per unit o f capital s e rv ic e s .........................
M u ltifa cto r p ro d u c tiv ity ................................................
O u t p u t ..................................................................................
Inputs:
H ours o f all p e r s o n s .....................................................
C a pita l se rvice s .............................................................
C om b in ed units o f la bo r and capita l in p u t ..........
C apital per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
M a n u fa c tu r in g
P roductivity:
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ................................
O utp ut per unit o f capita l s e rv ic e s .........................
M u ltifa cto r p ro d u c tiv ity ................................................
O u t p u t ..................................................................................
Inputs:
H ours o f all p e r s o n s .....................................................
C a pita l se rvices ............................................................
C om b in ed units of labor a nd capital in p u t s ........
C apital per hour o f all p e r s o n s ...................................
44.
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1976
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
/
B u s in e s s :
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ....................................
C o m p en sa tion per h o u r .................................................
Real co m p en satio n per h o u r .......................................
U n it la bo r co sts ................................................................
U nit n o n la bo r paym en ts ................................................
Im p licit price d e fla to r ......................................................
N o n fa rm
1974
1973
67.6
33.6
68.9
49.7
46.4
48.5
88.4
57.8
90.2
65.4
59.4
63.2
95.9
70.9
96.7
73.9
72.5
73.4
93.9
77.6
95.4
82.7
76.4
80.5
98.3
92.8
98.7
94.3
93.3
94.0
100.8
108.5
100.8
107.6
106.7
107.3
99.6
119.1
99.4
119.5
112.5
117.0
99.3
131.5
96.7
132.5
118.7
127.6
100.7
143.7
95.7
142.7
134.6
139.8
100.3
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.6
148.1
103.0
161.5
98.2
156.8
146.3
153.0
105.3
168.1
98.1
159.7
156.3
158.5
106.4
1 /5 .3
98.8
164.8
159.7
163.0
71.0
35.3
72.3
49.7
46.3
48.5
89.3
58.2
90.8
65.2
60.0
63.4
96.4
71.2
97.1
73.9
69.3
72.3
94.3
78.0
95.9
82.7
74.0
79.7
98.5
92.8
98.8
94.3
93.0
93.8
100.8
108.6
100.9
107.7
105.6
107.0
99.3
118.9
99.2
119.7
110.5
116.5
98.8
131.3
96.6
132.9
118.5
127.8
99.8
143.6
95.7
144.0
133.5
140.3
99.2
154.8
97.2
156.0
136.5
149.2
102.4
161.5
98.2
157.7
148.1
154.3
104.3
167.9
98.0
161.0
156.1
159.3
104.8
174.6
98.4
166.7
160.6
164.6
73.4
36.9
75.5
50.2
51.5
50.7
91.1
59.2
92.4
65.0
60.1
63.3
97.5
71.6
97.6
73.4
68.9
71.9
94.6
78.2
96.1
82.6
73.1
79.4
98.4
92.9
98.9
94.3
93.8
94.2
100.6
108.4
100.7
107.8
104.4
106.6
99.8
118.7
99.1
119.0
108.4
115.4
99.1
131.1
96.4
132.3
118.6
127.6
99.6
143.3
95.5
143.8
137.8
141.7
100.4
154.3
96.9
153.8
142.1
149.8
103.5
159.9
97.3
154.5
152.1
153.7
105.6
165.9
96.8
157.0
160.1
158.1
106.8
172.3
97.0
161.2
163.0
161.8
62.2
36.5
74.8
58.7
60.0
59.1
80.8
57.4
89.5
71.0
64.1
69.0
93.4
68.8
93.8
73.7
70.7
72.8
90.6
76.2
93.6
84.1
67.7
79.3
97.1
92.1
98.1
94.9
93.5
94.5
101.5
108.2
100.5
.10 6 .6
101.9
105.2
101.4
118.6
99.1
117.0
98.9
111.7
101.4
132.4
97.4
130.6
97.8
121.0
103.6
145.2
96.7
140.1
111.8
131.8
105.9
157.5
98.9
148.7
114.0
138.6
112.0
162.4
98.8
145.0
128.5
140.2
116.6
168.2
98.1
144.2
136.9
142.1
121.7
176.7
99.5
145.1
134.4
142.0
b u s in e s s :
O utp ut per hou r o f all p e r s o n s ...................................
C o m p en sa tion per h o u r .................................................
Real co m p en satio n per hour .......................................
U nit la bo r co sts ................................................................
U n it n o n la b o r paym en ts ................................................
Im p licit price d e fla to r ......................................................
N o n fin a n c ia l c o r p o r a tio n s :
O utp ut per hour o f all e m p lo y e e s ..............................
C o m p en sa tion per h o u r .................................................
Real co m p e n sa tio n per h o u r .......................................
U nit la bo r co sts ................................................................
U nit n o n la bo r paym en ts ................................................
Im p licit price d e fla to r ......................................................
M a n u fa c tu r in g :
O utp ut p er hour of all p e r s o n s ....................................
C o m p en sa tion per h o u r .................................................
R eal co m p en satio n per h o u r .......................................
U n it la bo r co sts ................................................................
U nit n o n la bo r p aym ents ................................................
Im p licit price d e f la t o r ......................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
88
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
45.
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
Unemployment rates in nine countries, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
A nn u al average
1985
1986
C ountry
1984
1985
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
T o t a l la b o r f o r c e b a s is
U nited S ta t e s .............................................
C anada ........................................................
A ustra lia ......................................................
Ja pa n ...........................................................
7.4
11.2
8.9
2.7
7.1
10.4
8.2
2.6
7.2
11.0
8.5
2.6
7.2
10.5
8.4
2.5
7.1
10.2
8.1
2.6
6.9
10.1
7.8
2.9
7.0
9.7
7.9
2.6
Fra n ce .........................................................
G e r m a n y ......................................................
G re at Britain ..............................................
Italy
2 ........................................................
S w eden .......................................................
9.7
7.6
12.8
5.8
3.1
10.1
7.7
13.0
5.9
2.8
10.2
7.7
12.9
5.8
3.0
10.1
7.8
13.0
5.7
2.9
10.2
7.7
13.2
5.9
2.7
9.9
7.7
12.8
6.2
2.7
10.0
7.6
13.0
6.2
2.8
10.3
7.5
13.1
6.3
2.6
U nited S ta t e s .............................................
C anada ........................................................
A ustra lia ......................................................
Ja pa n ...........................................................
7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
7.3
11.1
8.6
2.6
7.3
10.6
8.5
2.6
7.2
10.2
8.2
2.7
7.0
10.1
7.9
2.9
7.1
9.7
8.0
2.7
7.2
9.6
F rance .........................................................
G e rm a n y ......................................................
G re at Britain ..............................................
Italy ...............................................................
S w e de n .......................................................
9.9
7.8
12.9
5.9
3.1
10.4
7.9
13.1
6.0
2.8
10.5
7.9
13.1
5.9
3.0
10.4
7.9
13.2
5.8
2.9
10.4
7.9
13.4
6.0
2.8
10.1
7.8
13.0
6.3
2.7
10.2
7.8
13.1
6.3
2.8
7.1
9.5
_
6.8
9.6
_
2.8
10.4
7.3
_
6.0
2.6
C iv ilia n la b o r f o r c e b a s is
1 Q ua rte rly ra tes are fo r th e first m o n th o f th e quarter.
2 M ajor ch an ge s in the Italian la bo r fo rc e survey, in tro
duce d in 1977, resu lted in a large in cre ase in p erson s e nu
m e ra ted as unem ployed. H ow ever, m any p erson s re p orte d
th a t the y had not a ctively so ug ht w o rk in th e p ast 30 days,
and the y have been p ro visio na lly exclud e d fo r co m p ara b ility
w ith U.S. co n ce pts. Inclusion o f such p erson s w o uld m ore
_
6.9
9.7
_
2.8
-
10.5
7.6
13.3
6.5
2.6
-
10.7
7.5
6.1
2.6
tha n d ou ble the Italian u n e m p lo ym e nt rate show n.
- D ata n o t available.
NO TE: Q ua rte rly fig ures fo r France, G erm any, and G reat
B ritain are ca lculate d by a pplying annual a d ju stm e n t fa cto rs
to cu rre n t p ublished d ata and th e re fo re sh ould be view ed as
less precise in dicato rs o f u n e m p lo ym e nt u nd er U.S. c o n
c e p ts tha n th e a nnual figures.
46.
Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, 10 countries
(N um bers in thousands)
E m p loym en t statu s a nd co un try
1976
1977
1983
1984
96,158
10,203
6,244
53,100
2 2,000
2 5,900
25,290
20,300
4,890
4,149
99,009
10,500
6,358
53,820
22,300
25,870
25,430
20,530
4,950
4,168
102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,470
26,000
25,620
20,630
5,010
4,203
104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,670
26,250
25,710
20,910
5,100
4,262
106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,790
26,520
25,870
21,210
5,290
4,312
108,670
11,904
6,810
56,320
22,930
26,650
25,870
21,410
5,500
4,326
110,204
11,958
6,910
56,980
23,150
26,710
25,880
21,450
5,560
4,350
111,550
12,183
6,997
58,110
23,130
26,740
26,010
21,610
5,720
4 ,369
113,544
12,399
7,133
5 8,480
2 3,290
26,880
2 6,530
21,680
5,740
4,385
115,461
12,639
7,272
5 8,820
2 3,330
27,090
26,960
21,800
5,690
4,418
61.6
61.1
62.7
62.4
57.3
53.8
63.2
47.8
49.1
66.0
62.3
61.6
62.7
62.5
57.6
53.4
63.2
48.0
49.0
65.9
63.2
62.7
62.0
62.8
57.5
53.3
63.3
47.7
48.8
66.1
63.7
63.4
61.7
62.7
57.5
53.3
63.2
47.8
49.0
66.6
63.8
64.1
62.2
62.6
57.2
53.2
63.2
48.0
50.0
67.0
63.9
64.8
62.0
62.6
57.1
52.9
62.2
48.0
51.3
66.8
64.0
64.1
61.8
62.7
57.1
52.7
61.9
47.4
51.2
66.8
64.0
64.4
61.5
63.1
56.6
52.5
61.9
47.2
52.1
66.7
64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.6
62.7
47.3
52.0
66.8
64.8
65.2
61.8
62.3
56.4
53.2
63.6
47.2
51.2
67.2
8 8,752
9,477
5,946
52,020
21,010
25,010
23,810
19,600
4 ,630
4,083
92,017
9,651
6,000
52,720
2 1,180
2 4,970
2 3,840
19,800
4 ,700
4,093
96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
2 1,260
2 5,130
2 4,040
19,870
4,750
4,109
98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
24,360
20,100
4,830
4,174
99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
2 1,320
25,750
24,100
20,380
4,960
4,226
100,397
11,006
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,560
23,190
20,480
4,990
4,218
99,526
10,644
6,415
55,620
21,230
25,130
22,820
20,430
4,930
4,213
100,834
10,734
6,300
56,550
21,170
24,750
22,680
20,470
4,890
4,218
105,005
11,000
6,490
56,870
20,980
24,790
23,100
20,390
4,880
4,249
107,150
11,311
6,670
57,260
20,910
24,960
23,420
20,490
4,890
4,293
56.8
56.7
59.7
61.1
54.8
52.0
59.5
46.1
46.5
64.9
57.9
56.6
59.2
61.2
54.7
51.6
59.3
46.3
46.5
64.8
59.3
57.5
58.1
61.3
54.4
51.5
59.4
45.9
46.3
64.6
59.9
58.7
57.9
61.4
54.0
51.7
59.8
45.9
46.4
65.3
59.2
59.3
58.4
61.3
53.5
51.7
58.9
46.1
46.9
65.6
59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
55.8
45.9
46.5
65.1
57.8
57.0
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
54.6
45.2
45.4
64.7
57.9
56.7
55.4
61.4
51.8
48.6
54.0
44.7
44.5
64.4
59.5
57.4
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
54.6
44.5
44.2
64.7
60.1
58.4
56.6
60.6
50.5
49.0
55.2
44.4
44.0
65.3
7,406
726
298
1,080
990
890
1,480
700
260
66
6,991
849
358
1,100
1,120
900
1,590
740
250
75
6,202
908
405
1,240
1,210
870
1,580
760
260
94
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,370
780
1,350
810
270
88
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
1,770
830
330
86
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,730
1,090
2,680
920
510
108
10,678
1,314
495
1,360
1,920
1,580
3,060
1,020
630
137
10,717
1,448
697
1,560
1,960
1,990
3,330
1,140
830
151
8,539
1,399
642
1,610
2,310
2 ,090
3,430
1,280
860
136
8,312
1,328
602
1,560
2,420
2,130
3,540
1,310
800
125
7.7
7.1
4.8
2.0
4.5
3.4
5.9
3.4
5.3
1.6
7.1
8.1
5.6
2.0
5.0
3.5
6.3
3.6
5.0
1.8
6.1
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.4
3.4
6.2
3.7
5.2
2.2
5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
5.3
3.9
5.3
2.1
7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
6.8
3.9
6.2
2.0
7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.5
4.1
10.4
4.3
9.3
2.5
9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.9
11.8
4.8
11.3
3.1
9.6
11.9
10.0
2.7
8.5
7.4
12.8
5.3
14.5
3.5
7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8
9.9
7.8
12.9
5.9
15.0
3.1
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.9
13.1
6.0
14.1
2.8
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1985
L a b o r fo rc e
U nited S ta t e s .....................................................................
C anada ................................................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ....................................................................................
F ra n c e ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re at B r ita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
P a r tic ip a tio n r a te
U nited S t a t e s .....................................................................
C a nada ................................................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ....................................................................................
Fra n ce ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re at B rita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
E m p lo y e d
U nited S ta t e s .....................................................................
Canada ................. ,.............................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ....................................................................................
F ra n c e ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re a t B r ita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
E m p lo y m e n t-p o p u la tio n r a tio
U nited S ta tes ....................................................................
C anada ................................................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ...................................................................................
F rance ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re at B rita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
U n e m p lo y e d
U nited S ta t e s .....................................................................
C anada ................................................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ...................................................................................
Fra n ce ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re a t B rita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
U n e m p lo y m e n t ra te
U nited S ta t e s .....................................................................
Canada ................................................................................
A u s tra lia ...............................................................................
Ja pa n ....................................................................................
F ra n c e ..................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..............................................................................
G re at B rita in .......................................................................
I t a ly ........................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ........................................................................
S w e d e n ................................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
47. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures, 12 countries
(1977 = 100)
Item and coun try
1960
1970
1973
1974
1976
1977
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
121.8
115.1
159.9
O u tp u t p e r h o u r
U nited S t a t e s .........................................................................................................
Ja pa n ........................................................................................................................
F ra n ce .......................................................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..................................................................................................................
I t a ly .............................................................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s .............................................................................................................
62.2
50.3
23.2
32.8
37.2
36.4
40.3
36.5
32.4
54.6
42.3
53.8
80.8
76.8
64.8
60.0
65.5
69.6
71.2
72.7
64.3
81.7
80.7
77.6
93.4
91.3
83.1
78.7
83.2
82.2
84.0
90.9
81.5
94.6
94.8
92.9
90.6
93.4
86.5
83.2
86.0
85.2
87.4
95.3
88.1
97.7
98.8
95.2
97.1
96.2
94.3
95.3
98.2
95.0
96.5
98.9
95.8
99.7
101.7
99.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.4
104.2
114.8
111.8
106.5
110.3
108.2
110.5
112.3
107.1
110.9
102.2
101.4
101.9
122.7
119.3
112.3
112.0
108.6
116.9
113.9
109.3
112.7
101.2
103.6
104.0
127.2
127.2
114.2
116.4
111.0
121.0
116.9
109.7
113.2
107.9
105.9
101.0
135.0
132.8
114.6
123.5
112.6
123.4
119.4
112.6
116.5
112.7
112.9
107.6
142.3
141.0
117.3
129.3
119.0
126.6
126.1
119.2
125.5
121.2
118.5
111.5
152.2
145.5
118.3
135.0
124.7
135.0
139.3
122.3
132.6
126.2
52.5
41.5
19.2
41.7
49.2
35.4
50.0
37.4
44.8
55.1
52.6
71.0
78.6
75.1
69.9
78.1
82.0
73.3
86.6
78.0
84.4
87.0
92.5
94.7
96.3
94.6
91.9
95.8
95.9
88.6
96.1
90.5
95.8
99.5
100.3
104.7
91.7
98.0
91.7
99.6
97.4
91.8
95.4
96.3
100.0
104.0
105.7
103.5
93.1
98.1
94.8
99.5
99.6
96.1
98.0
97.9
99.0
101.4
106.1
98.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.1
110.9
113.9
104.2
105.4
106.1
106.6
108.6
106.1
100.3
103.6
100.5
103.2
107.7
124.1
107.2
110.1
106.6
106.6
115.4
106.6
101.3
104.0
91.7
104.8
108.8
129.8
105.9
106.6
105.9
104.9
114.3
106.7
100.1
100.6
86.2
98.4
96.4
137.3
109.1
108.3
106.0
102.4
111.6
105.0
99.8
100.1
86.4
105.6
101.7
148.2
110.7
112.2
107.4
103.5
109.2
105.3
98.8
105.2
88.9
117.9
110.1
165.2
112.8
118.6
108.4
107.4
113.2
110.8
101.3
112.4
92.4
121.0
115.2
175.8
122.3
109.0
113.0
115.3
84.4
82.6
82.7
127.0
132.4
97.2
123.8
102.3
138.4
101.0
124.4
131.9
97.3
97.7
107.9
130.1
125.1
105.3
121.7
107.4
131.2
106.4
114.6
122.1
103.1
103.6
110.7
121.8
115.2
107.8
114.4
99.6
117.6
105.1
105.7
112.7
101.2
105.0
106.1
119.7
113.2
107.8
109.2
101.0
113.5
106.5
107.0
108.7
95.9
102.0
100.6
104.4
101.4
101.2
101.6
99.0
103.3
101.7
104.3
99.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.5
106.4
99.3
93.2
99.0
96.2
98.5
98.2
94.4
93.6
93.4
98.3
101.7
105.7
101.2
89.9
98.1
95.2
98.1
98.7
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.7
101.1
104.6
102.0
83.3
93.4
91.0
94.6
94.5
91.2
91.3
88.9
79.9
92.9
95.4
101.7
82.1
94.5
85.9
91.0
90.4
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.7
93.5
94.6
104.2
78.5
95.7
83.0
87.0
86.2
83.5
82.9
83.9
73.3
99.5
98.7
108.5
77.5
100.2
80.3
86.2
83.9
79.5
82.8
84.8
73.2
99.3
100.1
110.0
36.5
27.1
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.1
18.8
8.3
12.5
15.8
14.7
14.8
57.3
46.5
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.6
48.0
26.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
30.8
68.8
59.2
55.1
53.5
56.1
52.3
67.5
43.7
60.5
54.5
54.2
44.8
76.2
68.5
72.3
65.2
67.9
62.0
76.9
54.5
71.9
63.6
63.8
56.9
92.1
89.9
90.7
89.5
90.4
88.9
91.3
84.2
91.9
88.8
91.5
88.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
118.6
118.3
113.4
117.6
123.1
129.3
116.1
134.7
117.0
116.0
120.1
137.7
132.4
130.6
120.7
130.4
135.9
147.5
125.6
160.2
123.6
128.0
133.6
165.8
145.2
151.5
129.8
144.6
149.6
170.3
134.5
197.1
129.1
142.8
148.1
188.9
157.5
167.1
136.6
152.0
162.9
200.8
141.0
237.3
137.5
156.0
158.9
206.4
163.2
179.3
140.7
163.7
174.3
226.2
148.4
276.4
144.7
173.5
173.3
222.4
169.1
182.1
144.8
176.6
183.9
246.5
155.3
303.0
152.8
188.3
190.7
237.2
176.6
191.4
148.3
195.5
262.7
164.7
334.0
205.2
205.8
257.0
58.7
53.9
38.4
42.0
33.8
41.6
46.6
22.8
38.5
29.0
34.8
27.6
70.9
60.6
52.3
58.1
55.4
52.6
67.4
36.0
60.7
46.4
47.7
39.7
73.7
64.8
66.4
68.0
67.4
63.6
80.3
48.1
74.3
57.6
57.2
48.2
84.1
73.3
83.6
78.3
79.0
72.8
88.0
57.2
81.6
65.2
64.6
59.7
94.9
93.5
96.2
93.9
92.1
93.6
94.6
85.1
96.0
89.1
90.0
89.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
117.0
113.5
98.8
105.2
115.7
117.3
107.3
121.9
104.1
108.2
108.3
134.7
130.6
128.1
98.4
109.3
121.0
131.7
115.7
137.0
108.5
117.0
118.6
163.8
140.1
145.7
102.0
113.6
131.1
146.3
121.2
162.9
110.4
130.2
130.9
175.1
148.7
165.4
101.2
114.4
142.2
162.6
125.2
192.4
115.2
138.6
136.3
183.1
144.5
166.7
98.9
116.1
148.6
175.0
124.7
218.3
114.7
145.5
138.1
183.5
142.8
163.2
95.1
121.4
155.5
182.5
124.6
224.5
109.7
154.0
143.8
187.9
145.0
166.3
92.7
165.1
187.4
124.9
240.1
58.7
59.0
28.5
30.2
29.5
41.7
25.9
32.5
25.1
21.7
30.1
44.4
70.9
61.7
39.1
42.0
44.4
46.8
42.9
50.6
41.2
34.5
41.1
54.4
73.7
68.8
65.6
62.8
67.2
70.4
70.4
73.1
65.6
53.4
58.7
67.7
84.1
79.7
76.8
72.1
77.9
74.5
79.1
77.6
74.6
62.8
65.1
80.1
94.9
100.7
86.9
87.2
91.5
96.3
87.3
90.5
89.1
86.9
92.3
92.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
117.0
103.0
121.3
128.5
132.0
135.5
135.9
129.5
127.4
113.8
112.9
163.9
130.6
116.4
116.8
134.1
129.0
153.4
147.9
141.4
134.2
126.2
125.3
218.3
140.1
129.1
123.8
109.9
110.3
132.2
124.9
126.3
108.9
120.6
115.4
203.1
148.7
142.3
108.8
89.5
102.3
121.5
119.7
125.4
105.8
114.2
96.9
183.5
144.5
143.7
111.5
81.3
97.5
112.9
113.4
126.8
98.6
106.1
80.4
159.4
142.8
133.9
107.2
75.3
90.1
102.7
101.6
112.8
83.9
100.4
77.7
143.9
145.0
129.4
104.2
93.5
102.6
98.6
111.1
101.7
79.1
147.3
-
118.4
140.2
131.9
139.1
125.0
135.2
129.7
O u tp u t
B e lg iu m .....................................................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s .............................................................................................................
T o ta l h o u rs
C o m p e n s a tio n p e r h o u r
U n it la b o r c o s ts :
N ational cu rre n cy basis:
Ja pa n ........................................................................................................................
B e lg iu m .....................................................................................................................
G e r m a n y ...................................................................................................................
I t a ly .............................................................................................................................
U n it la b o r c o s ts :
U.S. d ollar basis:
Ja pa n .......................................................................................................................
B e lg iu m ....................................................................................................................
G e r m a n y ..................................................................................................................
I t a ly ............................................................................................................................
N e th e rla n d s ............................................................................................................
N o rw a y .....................................................................................................................
103.7
114.6
95.0
-
103.3
77.8
85.7
82.9
83.0
84.8
73.3
"
164.2
152.2
198.1
-I---------
D ata n ot available.
90
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48. Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incide nce ra tes per 100 fu ll-tim e w o rke rs2
Industry and type o f c a s e 1
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
P R IV A T E S E C T O R 3
T o ta l c a s e s ...............
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses
L ost w o rk d a y s .........
9.2
3.5
60.5
9.3
3.8
61.6
9.4
4.1
63.5
9.5
4.3
67.7
8.7
4.0
65.2
8.3
3.8
61.7
7.7
3.5
58.7
7.6
3.4
58.5
8.0
3.7
63.4
11.0
4.7
83.3
11.5
5.1
81.1
11.6
5.4
80.7
11.7
5.7
83.7
11.9
5.8
82.7
12.3
5.9
82.8
11.8
5.9
86.0
11.9
6.1
90.8
12.0
6.1
90.7
11.0
5.8
114.4
10.9
6.0
128.8
11.5
6.4
143.2
11.4
6.8
150.5
11.2
6.5
163.6
11.6
6.2
146.4
10.5
5.4
137.3
8.4
4.5
125.1
9.7
5.3
160.2
15.3
5.5
105.0
15.5
5.9
111.5
16.0
6.4
109.4
16.2
6.8
120.4
15.7
6.5
117.0
15.1
6.3
113.1
14.6
6.0
115.7
14.8
6.3
118.2
15.5
6.9
128.1
14.5
5.2
100.0
15.0
5.7
100.2
15.9
6.3
105.3
16.3
6.8
111.2
15.5
6.5
113.0
15.1
6.1
107.1
14.1
5.9
112.0
14.4
6.2
113.0
15.4
6.9
121.3
16.3
5.5
109.2
16.0
5.7
116.7
16.6
6.2
110.9
16.6
6.7
123.1
16.3
6.3
117.6
14.9
6.0
106.0
15.1
5.8
113.1
15.4
6.2
122.4
14.9
6.4
131.7
15.3
5.6
105.8
15.6
6.1
115.5
15.8
6.6
111.0
16.0
6.9
124.3
15.5
6.7
118.9
15.2
6.6
119.3
14.7
6.2
118.6
14.8
6.4
119.0
15.8
7.1
130.1
13.2
4.8
79.5
13.1
5.1
82.3
13.2
5.6
84.9
13.3
5.9
90.2
12.2
5.4
86.7
11.5
5.1
82.0
10.2
4.4
75.0
10.0
4.3
73.5
10.6
4.7
77.9
22.1
9.7
167.3
22.3
10.4
178.0
22.6
11.1
178.8
20.7
10.8
175.9
18.6
9.5
171.8
17.6
9.0
158.4
16.9
8.3
153.3
18.3
9.2
163.5
19.6
9.9
172.0
16.9
6.0
94.5
17.2
6.0
92.0
17.5
6.9
95.9
17.6
7.1
99.6
16.0
6.6
97.6
15.1
6.2
91.9
13.9
5.5
85.6
14.1
5.7
83.0
15.3
6.4
101.5
16.1
6.4
114.1
16.9
6.9
120.4
16.8
7.8
126.3
16.8
8.0
133.7
15.0
7.1
128.1
14.1
6.9
122.2
13.0
6.1
112.2
13.1
6.0
112.0
13.6
6.6
120.8
16.6
6.3
114.8
16.2
6.8
119.4
17.0
7.5
123.6
17.3
8.1
134.7
15.2
7.1
128.3
14.4
6.7
121.3
12.4
5.4
101.6
12.4
5.4
103.4
13.3
6.1
115.3
18.9
6.8
109.8
19.1
7.2
109.0
19.3
8.0
112.4
19.9
8.7
124.2
18.5
8.0
118.4
17.5
7.5
109.9
15.3
6.4
102.5
15.1
6.1
96.5
16.1
6.7
104.9
14.2
4.6
70.6
14.0
4.7
69.9
14.4
5.4
75.1
14.7
5.9
83.6
13.7
5.5
81.3
12.9
5.1
74.9
10.7
4.2
66.0
9.8
3.6
58.1
10.7
4.1
65.8
8.5
2.8
44.9
8.6
3.0
46.7
8.7
3.3
50.3
8.6
3.4
51.9
8.0
3.3
51.8
7.4
3.1
48.4
6.5
2.7
42.2
6.3
2.6
41.4
6.8
2.8
45.0
12.4
4.7
73.8
11.8
5.0
79.3
11.5
5.1
78.0
11.6
5.5
85.9
10.6
4.9
82.4
9.8
4.6
78.1
9.2
4.0
72.2
8.4
3.6
64.5
9.3
4.2
68.8
7.2
2.4
36.7
7.0
2.4
37.4
6.9
2.6
37.0
7.2
2.8
40.0
6.8
2.7
41.8
6.5
2.7
39.2
5.6
2.3
37.0
5.2
2.1
35.6
5.4
2.2
37.5
11.7
4.0
59.4
11.5
4.0
58.7
11.8
11.7
4.7
67.7
10.9
4.4
67.9
10.7
4.4
68.3
9.9
4.1
69.9
9.9
4.0
66.3
10.5
A g r ic u ltu r e , f o r e s t r y , a n d f is h in g 3
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ................................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ............................................................................
M in in g
T o ta l c a s e s ...............
L o st w o rkd ay ca ses
L o st w o rk d a y s .........
C o n s tr u c tio n
T o ta l c a s e s ............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ..........................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ......................................................
G eneral building co ntra ctors:
T o ta l c a s e s ............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ..........................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ......................................................
H eavy co n stru ctio n co ntra ctors:
T o ta l c a s e s ............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ..........................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ......................................................
S pe cia l tra de co ntra ctors:
T o ta l c a s e s ....................................................... .
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ..........................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ......................................................
M a n u fa c tu r in g
T o ta l c a s e s ...............
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses
L ost w o rk d a y s .........
D u r a b le g o o d s
Lum ber and w o od products:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
S tone, clay, and glass products:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
Prim ary m etal industries:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
Fa bricate d m etal products:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
Lost w o rkd ay c a s e s .............................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ........................................................
M achinery, e xce p t electrical:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
E le ctric and e le ctro n ic equipm ent:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
T ra n sp o rta tio n equipm ent:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
Instru m e n ts a nd related products:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
M iscellan eo u s m a n ufa ctu rin g industries:
T o ta l c a s e s ..............................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s .............................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ........................................................
S ee fo o tn o te s at end o f table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4.5
66.4
4.3
70.2
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1986
•
Injury and Illness Data
48. Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incide nce rates per 100 full-tim e w o rke rs2
Industry and type o f c a s e 1
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
N o n d u r a b le g o o d s
Food and kindred products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ............................................................
T o b a cco m anufacturing:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
Lost w o rk d a y s ............................................................
T e xtile mill products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L o st w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ............................................................
A pp a rel and o th e r te xtile products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ............................................................
P aper and allied products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ............................................................
P rinting and publishing:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L o st w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ...........................................................
C h em ica ls and allied p roducts:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ...........................................................
P etroleum and co al products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ...........................................................
R ubb e r and m iscellan eo u s plastics products:
T o ta l c a s e s .................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ................................................
Lost w o rk d a y s ...........................................................
L ea the r and le a th e r products:
T o ta l c a s e s ................ ..... ..........................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ...............................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ..........................................................
19.3
8.0
123.8
19.5
8.5
130.1
19.4
8.9
132.2
19.9
9.5
141.8
18.7
9.0
136.8
17.8
8.6
130.7
16.7
8.0
129.3
16.5
7.9
131.2
16.7
8.1
131.6
10.0
4.1
62.5
9.1
3.8
66.7
8.7
4.0
58.6
9.3
4.2
64.8
8.1
3.8
45.8
8.2
3.9
56.8
7.2
3.2
44.6
6.5
3.0
42.8
7.7
3.2
51.7
10.5
2.7
55.5
10.2
2.9
57.4
10.2
3.4
61.5
9.7
3.4
61.3
9.1
3.3
62.8
8.8
3.2
59.2
7.6
2.8
53.8
7.4
2.8
51.4
8.0
3.0
54.0
6.7
1.9
31.0
6.7
2.0
31.7
6.5
2.2
32.4
6.5
2.2
34.1
6.4
2.2
34.9
6.3
2.2
35.0
6.0
2.1
36.4
6.4
2.4
40.6
6.7
2.5
40.9
13.7
4.7
94.8
13.6
5.0
101.6
13.5
5.7
103.3
13.5
6.0
108.4
12.7
5.8
112.3
11.6
5.4
103.6
10.6
4.9
99.1
10.0
4.5
90.3
10.4
4.7
93.8
6.8
2.6
40.3
6.8
2.7
41.7
7.0
2.9
43.8
7.1
3.1
45.1
6.9
3.1
46.5
6.7
3.0
47.4
6.6
2.8
45.7
6.6
2.9
44.6
6.5
2.9
46.0
8.2
3.1
50.6
8.0
3.1
51.4
7.8
3.3
50.9
7.7
3.5
54.9
6.8
3.1
50.3
6.6
3.0
48.1
5.7
2.5
39.4
5.5
2.5
42.3
5.3
2.4
40.8
7.9
3.2
62.5
8.1
3.3
59.2
7.9
3.4
58.3
7.7
3.6
62.0
7.2
3.5
59.1
6.7
2.9
51.2
5.3
2.5
46.4
5.5
2.4
46.8
5.1
2.4
53.5
16.8
7.1
113.3
16.8
7.6
118.1
17.1
8.1
125.5
17.1
8.2
127.1
15.5
7.4
118.6
14.6
7.2
117.4
12.7
6.0
100.9
13.0
6.2
101.4
13.6
6.4
104.3
11.6
4.1
69.0
11.5
4.4
68.9
11.7
4.7
72.5
11.5
4.9
76.2
11.7
5.0
82.7
11.5
5.1
82.6
9.9
4.5
86.5
10.0
4.4
87.3
10.5
4.7
94.4
9.8
5.0
94.0
9.7
5.3
95.9
10.1
5.7
102.3
10.0
5.9
107.0
9.4
5.5
104.5
9.0
5.3
100.6
8.5
4.9
96.7
8.2
4.7
94.9
8.8
5.2
105.1
7.5
2.8
43.2
7.7
2.9
44.0
7.9
3.2
44.9
8.0
3.4
49.0
7.4
3.2
48.7
7.3
3.1
45.3
7.2
3.1
45.5
7.2
3.1
47.8
7.4
3.3
50.5
8.1
3.3
51.8
8.5
3.6
52.5
8.9
3.9
57.5
8.8
4.1
59.1
8.2
3.9
58.2
7.7
3.6
54.7
7.1
3.4
52.1
7.0
3.2
50.6
7.2
3.5
55.5
7.2
2.6
39.7
7.4
2.7
40.5
7.5
2.8
39.7
7.7
3.1
44.7
7.1
2.9
44.5
7.1
2.9
41.1
7.2
2.9
42.6
7.3
3.0
46.7
7.5
3.2
48.4
2.0
.7
11.6
2.0
.8
10.4
2.1
.8
12.5
2.1
.9
13.3
2.0
.8
12.2
1.9
.8
11.6
2.0
.9
13.2
2.0
.9
12.8
1.9
.9
13.6
5.3
2.0
38.4
5.5
2.2
35.4
5.5
2.4
36.2
5.5
2.5
38.1
5.2
2.3
35.8
5.0
2.3
35.9
4.9
2.3
35.8
5.1
2.4
37.0
5.2
2.5
41.1
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s
T o ta l c a s e s ......
Lost w o rkd ay ci
L ost w o rkdays
W h o le s a le a n d r e ta il t r a d e
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses ........................................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ....................................................................
W h o le sa le trade:
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
L o st w o rkd ay c a s e s ........................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s ....................................................................
R e tail trade:
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay c a s e s ........................................................
L o st w o rk d a y s ....................................................................
F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d r e a l e s ta te
T o ta l c a s e s ...................................................................................
L ost w o rkd ay ca ses .................................................................
L ost w o rk d a y s .............................................................................
S e r v ic e s
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................
L o st w o rkd ay c a s e s ......................................
L ost w o rk d a y s .................................................
1 T o ta l ca ses inclu de fatalities.
2 The in cid en ce ra tes re p rese n t th e n um ber o f injuries and illne sses or lo st
w o rkd a ys per 100 fu ll-tim e w o rke rs and w ere ca lcu la te d as:
(N /E H ) X 200,000, w here:
N = n um be r o f inju rie s and illne sses o r lo st w orkdays.
92
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
EH = to ta l hours w o rke d by all e m p loye e s during ca le n d a r year.
2 00 ,00 0 = base fo r 100 full-tim e e q u iva le nt w o rke rs (w orking 40 h ours per
w e ek, 50 w e eks per year.)
3 E xclu de s farm s w ith fe w e r tha n 11 e m p loye e s sin ce 1976.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Index o f Volume 109
January 1986 through December 1986
93
INDEX TO VOLUME 109
JANUARY 1986 THROUGH DECEMBER 1986
ABSENTEEISM
Missed work and lost hours, May 1985. 1986 Nov. 26-30.
ACCIDENTS (See Work injuries.)
ARBITRATION (See also Collective bargaining.)
Postal arbitration: issues surrounding the award, The 1984. 1986 June.
31-32.
AUSTRALIA
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
How do Australian unions maintain standing during adverse periods? 1986
June. 37-39.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
AUTOMATION (See Technological change.)
AUTO WORKERS (uaw)
Constitutional convention marks golden anniversary of the uaw. 1986 Oct.
23-25.
BELGIUM
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacutring.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
CANADA
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (See also Arbitration.)
Collective bargaining during 1986: pressures to curb costs remain. 1986
Jan. 16-33.
Communications Workers focus on bargaining with at&t . 1986 July. 3739.
Labor and management continue to combat mutual problems in 1985. 1986
Jan. 3-15.
Steelworkers press organizing and coordinated bargaining. 1986 Nov. 48 49.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Postal arbitration: issues surrounding the award, The 1984. 1986 June.
31-32.
Wage restraints continue in 1985 major contracts. 1986 Apr. 22-28.
COMPUTERS (See Technological change.)
CONFERENCES AND CONVENTIONS
Communications Workers of America (cwa), 48th annual convention, May
24, 1986. 1986 July. 37-39.
Industrial Relations Research Association, 38th annual meeting, December
1985, Papers from. 1986 Apr. 45-49; 1986 May. 28-34; 1986 June.
28-39.
United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America (uaw), 28th constitutional convention, June 1-6, 1986. 1986
Oct. 23-25.
United Steelworkers of America (afl-CIO, clc), 23rd constitutional conven
tion, August 25-29, 1986. 1986 Nov. 48-49.
CONSTRUCTION
Foreign housing voucher systems: evolution and strategies. 1986 May.
21-27.
CONSUMER EXPENDITURES
Consumer expenditures: results from the Diary and Interview surveys.
1986 June. 14-18.
Distribution of consumption examined using aggregate expenditure shares.
1986 Apr. 50-53.
Spending patterns of older persons revealed in expenditure survey. 1986
Oct. 15-17.
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (See also Prices.)
A half-year decline in inflation: its antecedents and structure. 1986 Oct.
3-14.
Inflation remained mild again during 1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
Revised Consumer Price Index: changes in definitions and availability,
The. 1986 July. 15-23.
COST OF LIVING
Spending patterns of older persons revealed in expenditure survey. 1986
Oct. 15-17.
DENMARK
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12—17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
DEREGULATION
Airline deregulation and labor relations. 1986 June. 29-30.
DISCRIMINATION (See Equal Employment Opportunity.)
Work experience profile, 1984: the effects of recovery continue. 1986 Feb.
37-43.
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Sex segregation. 1986 Feb. 2.
DISPLACED WORKERS
Displaced workers: one year later. 1986 July. 40-42.
EARNINGS AND WAGES
General
area wage surveys will cover more areas. 1986 June. 19-23.
white-collar pay survey now covers small firms. 1986 Oct. 26-28.
Declining middle class: a further analysis, The. 1986 Sept. 22-27.
Hourly paid workers: who they are and what they earn. 1986 Feb. 20-26.
Measuring wage premiums for job risks. 1986 June. 42-43.
Overtime work: an expanded view. 1986 Nov. 36-39.
Preferred hours of work and corresponding earnings. 1986 Nov. 40-44.
Reconciling divergent trends in real income. 1986 July. 24-29.
Wage restraints continue in 1985 major contracts. 1986 Apr. 22-28.
Weekly earnings in 1985: a look at more than 200 occupations. 1986 Sept.
28-32.
bls
bls
Specified industries and occupations
Minimum wage stability affects shirt and nightwear industry pay. 1986
Mar. 32-33.
Occupational pay in the manufacture of men’s and boys’ suits and coats.
1986 Jan. 67-68.
Occupational pay in textile dyeing and finishing plants. 1986 Dec 33—34.
Occupational pay structure in petroleum refineries. 1986 July. 43-44.
Postal arbitration: issues surrounding the award, The 1984. 1986 June.
31-32.
FOREIGN TRADE
Aggregate export price comparisons developed for U.S., Germany, Japan.
1986 June. 40-41.
Import, export prices reflect declining dollar and oversupply in 1985. 1986
Apr. 3-16.
FRANCE
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct.
18-22.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
GERMANY
Aggregate export price comparisons developed for U .S., Germany, Japan.
1986 June. 40-41.
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
West German labor unrest: are unions losing ground to worker councils?
1986 Feb. 46-48.
GREAT BRITAIN (See United Kingdom.)
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH
Business cycle effects on productivity and costs, 1947-86. 1986 Dec.
18-22.
HEALTH AND INSURANCE PLANS
ECONOMIC POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Health insurance trends in cost control and coverage. 1986 Sept. 3-8.
Hospital employment under revised medicare payment schedules. 1986
Aug. 37-45.
Sensitivity of bls economic projections to exogenous variables. 1986 Dec.
23-29.
HEALTH AND SAFETY (See also Work injuries and illnesses.)
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
What happened to the high school class of 1985? 1986 Oct. 28-30.
ELECTRONICS
bls and Alice Hamilton: pioneers in industrial health. 1986 June. 24-27.
Employment in health services: long-term trends and projections, 1986
Aug. 17-36.
ilo adopts asbestos standard, focuses on employment issues, 1986 Oct.
31-32.
Employment lessons from the electronics industry. 1986 Feb. 27-36.
HOSPITALS
EMPLOYMENT (See also Labor force; Unemployment.)
Hospital employment under revised medicare payment schedules. 1986
Aug. 37-45.
A view of the 80’s. 1986 Sept. 2.
An analysis of regional employment growth, 1973-85. 1986 July. 3-14.
Business services industry sets pace in employment growth, The. 1986
Apr. 29-36.
Declining middle class: a further analysis, The. 1986 Sept. 22-27.
Deindustrialization and the shift to services. 1986 June. 3-13.
Displaced workers: one year later. 1986 July. 40-42.
Employment and unemployment: developments in 1985. 1986 Feb. 3-12.
Employment benchmark. 1986 June. 2.
Employment expansion in retail trade, 1973-85, The. 1986 Aug. 9-16.
Employment growth in the temporary help industry. 1986 Apr. 37-44.
Employment in health services: long-term trends and projections. 1986
Aug. 17-36.
Employment lessons from the electronics industry. 1986 Feb. 27-36.
Employment up, unemployment stable in the first half of 1986. 1986 Aug.
3-8.
Hospital employment under revised medicare payment schedules. 1986
Aug. 37-45.
ilo adopts asbestos standard, focuses on employment issues. 1986 Oct.
31-32.
Part-time workers: who are they? 1986 Feb. 13-19.
Temporary help workers: who they are, what jobs they hold. 1986 Nov.
45-47.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
HOUSING (See Construction.)
HOURS OF WORK
Computer-aided telephone interviewing used in the Hours at Work Survey.
1986 May. 39-41.
Moonlighting by women jumped to record highs. 1986 Nov. 22-25.
Overtime work: an expanded view. 1986 Nov. 36-39.
Part-time workers: who are they? 1986 Feb. 13-19.
Preferred hours of work and corresponding earnings. 1986 Nov. 40-44.
Shift work and flexitime: how prevalent are they? 1986 Nov. 14-21.
Growing diversity of work schedules, The. 1986 Nov. 7-13.
Work at home: new findings from the Current Population Survey. 1986
Nov. 31-35.
Work schedules of Americans: an overview of new findings. 1986 Nov.
3-6.
IMMIGRATION
Estimating the number of undocumented aliens. 1986 Sept. 33.
Immigration effects. 1986 Mar. 2.
IMPORTS (See Foreign trade.)
95
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Index to Volume 109
INCOME (See Earnings and wages.)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION
Thirty-Eighth Annual Meeting. Papers from, 1985 Dec. 1986 Apr. 45-49;
1986 May. 28-34; 1986 June. 28-39.
INFLATION
A half-year decline in inflation: its antecedents and structure. 1986 Oct.
3-14.
Inflation remained mild again during 1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION
adopts asbestos standard, focuses on employment issues. 1986 Oct.
31-32.
ilo
ITALY
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct.
18-22.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
LABOR LAW
Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1985. 1986 Jan.
55-60.
Key workers’ compensation laws enacted by States in 1985. 1986 Jan.
61-67.
Labor law study. 1986 July. 2.
State labor legislation enacted in 1985. 1986 Jan. 34-54.
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
Competitiveness. 1986 Mar. 2.
Environmental factors in the labor-management relationship. 1986 Apr.
47-48.
Labor and management continue to combat mutual problems in 1985. 1986
Jan. 3-15.
‘Union avoidance:’ management’s new industrial relations strategy. 1986
Apr. 45-46.
Union response to changes in printing technology. 1986 May. 37-38.
LABOR MARKET
Airline deregulation and labor relations. 1986 June. 29-30.
An analysis of regional employment growth, 1973-85. 1986 July. 3-14.
Declining middle class: a further analysis, The. 1986 Sept. 22-27.
Labor-market data: supplementary sources. 1986 June. 28-29.
Labor market segmentation in Japan: how rigid is it? 1986 June. 35-37.
JAPAN
Aggregate export price comparisons developed for U .S., Germany, Japan.
1986 June. 40-41.
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Labor market segmentation in Japan: how rigid is it? 1986 June. 35-37.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
JOB CREATION
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
Canadian unions achieve strong gains in membership. 1986 Apr. 48-49.
Communications Workers focus on bargaining with at&t . 1986 July. 3739.
How do Australian unions maintain standing during adverse periods? 1986
June. 37-39.
Union membership trends: a study of the Garment Workers. 1986 June.
33-35.
Union response to changes in printing technology: another view. 1986
May. 37-38.
West German labor unrest: are unions losing ground to worker councils?
1986 Feb. 46-48.
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct.
18-22.
LAYOFFS
LABOR FORCE
A new leading indicator: workers recently laid off. 1986 May. 35-37.
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct.
18-22.
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
Business services industry sets pace in employment growth, The. 1986
Apr. 29-36.
Changing demographics. 1986 Aug. 2.
Employment and unemployment: developments in 1985. 1986 Feb. 3-12.
Employment growth in the temporary help industry. 1986 Apr. 37-44.
Employment up, unemployment stable in the first half of 1986. 1986 Aug.
3-8.
Hourly paid workers: who they are and what they earn. 1986 Feb. 20-26.
Military and civilian wives: update on the labor force gap. 1986 Dec.
31-33.
Part-time workers: who are they? 1986 Feb. 13-19.
Rise in mothers’ labor force activity includes those with infants. 1986 Feb.
43-45.
Temporary help workers: who they are and what jobs they hold. 1986 Nov.
45-47.
What happened to the high school class of 1985? 1986 Oct. 28-30.
Women veterans total 1 million in first half of 1986. 1986 Dec. 30-31.
Work experience profile, 1984: the effects of recovery continue. 1986 Feb.
37-43.
Work, poverty, and the working poor: a multifaceted problem. 1986 Sept.
17-21.
Work schedules of Americans: an overview of new findings. 1986 Nov.
3-6.
LABOR HISTORY
BLS and Alice Hamilton: pioneers in industrial health. 1986 June. 24-27.
Ellis Island a welcome site? Only after years of reform. 1986 July. 30-36.
Digitized for96
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MANUFACTURING
Computer manufacturing enters a new era of growth. 1986 Sept. 9-16.
Deindustrialization and the shift to services. 1986 June. 3-13.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
MULTIPLE JOBHOLDERS
Moonlighting by women jumped to record highs. 1986 Nov. 22-25.
NETHERLANDS, THE
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12—17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
NORWAY
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
bls
and Alice Hamilton: pioneers in industrial health. 1986 June. 24-27.
OLDER WORKERS
STEELWORKERS
Spending patterns of older persons revealed in expenditure survey. 1986
Oct. 15-17.
Steelworkers press organizing and coordinated bargaining. 1986 Nov. 4 8 49.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS
SURVEY METHODS
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct.
18-22.
bls area wage surveys will cover more areas. 1986 June. 19-23.
Computer-aided telephone interviewing used in the Hours at Work Survey.
1986 May. 39-41.
Expert panel offers suggestions on 1990 census methodology. 1986 Mar
33-34.
Interview group bias. 1986 June. 43.
Revised Consumer Price Index: changes in definitions and availability,
The. 1986 July. 15-23.
POVERTY (See also Unemployment.)
Work, poverty, and the working poor: a multifaceted problem. 1986 Sept.
17-21.
PRICES
A half-year decline in inflation: its antecedents and stmcture. 1986 Oct
3-14.
Aggregate export price comparisons developed for U.S., Germany, Japan.
1986 June. 40-41.
Distribution of consumption examined using aggregate expenditure shares.
1986 Apr. 50-53.
Import, export prices reflect declining dollar and oversupply in 1985. 1986
Apr. 3-16.
Inflation remained mild again during 1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
Revised Consumer Price Index: changes in definitions and availability,
The. 1986 July. 15-23.
PRODUCER PRICE INDEX
Inflation remained mild again during 1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
SWEDEN
An international comparison of labor force participation, 1977-84. 1986
May. 3-12.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing
1986 Dec. 1 2 -1 7 .
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE
Computer-aided telephone interviewing used in the Hours at Work Survey
1986 May. 39-41.
Computer manufacturing enters a new era of growth. 1986 Sept. 9-16.
Contribution of r&d to productivity growth, The. 1986 Mar. 16-20.
Employment lessons from the electronics industry. 1986 Feb. 27-36.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
PRODUCTIVITY
Beauty and barber shops: the trend of labor productivity. 1986 Mar. 21-26.
Computer manufacturing enters a new era of growth. 1986 Sept. 9-16.
Contribution of r&d to productivity growth, The. 1986 Mar. 16-20.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 1 2 -1 7 .
Measuring single-factor and multifactor productivity. 1986 Dec. 3—11.
Productivity continued to increase in many industries during 1984. 1986
Mar. 11-15.
Productivity and labor costs trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3—10.
Productivity in the metal doors, sash, and trim industry. 1986 Mar. 27-31.
Trends of labor productivity in metal stamping industries. 1986 May
13-20.
U.S. productivity growth since 1982: the post-recession experience. 1986
Dec. 18-22.
PROJECTIONS
Employment in health services: long-term trends and projections. 1986
Aug. 17-36.
Sensitivity of bls economic projections to exogenous variables. 1986 Dec
23-29.
SALARIES (See Earnings and wages.)
SERVICE SECTOR
Business services industry sets pace in employment growth, The. 1986
Apr. 29-36.
Deindustrialization and the shift to services. 1986 June. 3-13.
STATE GOVERNMENT
Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1985. 1986 Jan.
55-60.
Key workers’ compensation laws enacted by States in 1985. 1986 Jan
61-67.
State labor legislation enacted in 1985. 1986 Jan. 34-54.
UNEMPLOYMENT
A new leading indicator: workers recently laid off. 1986 May. 35-37.
Displaced workers: one year later. 1986 July. 40-42.
Employment and unemployment: developments in 1985. 1986 Feb. 3-12.
Employment up, unemployment stable in the first half of 1986. 1986 Aug
3-8.
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1985. 1986 Jan.
55-60.
UNION MEMBERSHIP
Canadian unions achieve strong gains in membership. 1986 Apr. 48-49.
Union membership of employed wage and salary workers, 1985. 1986
May. 44—46.
Union membership trends: a study of the Garment Workers. 1986 June
33-35.
UNIONS (See Labor organizations.)
UNITED KINGDOM
European job creation in the wake of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct
18-22.
International experiences with technological change. 1986 Mar. 35-40.
International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in manufacturing.
1986 Dec. 12-17.
Productivity and labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986
Mar. 3-10.
VETERANS
Women veterans total 1 million in first half of 1986. 1986 Dec. 30-31.
WAGES (See Earnings and wages.)
WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS
bls
white-collar pay survey now covers small firms. 1986 Oct. 26-28.
STATISTICS
WOMEN
Labor market data: supplementary sources. 1986 June. 28-29.
Military and civilian wives: update on the labor force gap. 1986 Dec. 31—33.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
97
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Index to Volume 109
Moonlighting by women jumped to record highs. 1986 Nov. 22-25.
Rise in mothers’ labor force activity includes those with infants. 1986 Feb.
43-45.
Women veterans total 1 million in first half of 1986. 1986 Dec. 30—31.
WORK AT HOME
Work at home: new findings from the Current Population Survey. 1986
Nov. 31-35.
WORK INJURIES AND ILLNESSES
Occupational illness. 1986 Jan. 2.
Work-related deaths in 1984: bls survey findings. 1986 May. 42-44.
Perlman, Richard and James J. Hughes. The Economics o f Unemployment:
A Comparative Analysis o f Britain and the United States. 1986 July. 50.
Rosen, Howard. Servants o f the People: The Uncertain Future o f the
Federal Civil Service. 1986 May. 52-53.
Sheflin, Neil, and Leo Troy. Union Sourcebook—Membership, Structure,
Finance, Directory. 1986 Jan. 70-71.
Sinicropi, Anthony V. and Marvin Hill, Jr. Management Rights: A Legal
and Arbitral Analysis. 1986 Dec. 41.
Troy, Leo and Neil Sheflin. Union Sourcebook—Membership, Structure,
Finance, Directory. 1986 Jan. 70-71.
Zieger, Robert H. American Workers, American Unions, 1920-T985. 1986
Nov. 54.
AUTHORS
WORK SHARING
Short-time compensation: assessing the issues. 1986 May. 28-30.
Short-time compensation: the AFL-Cio perspective. 1986 May. 33-34.
Work sharing programs: an evaluation of their use. 1986 May. 31-33.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
Key workers’ compensation laws enacted by States in 1985. 1986 Jan.
61-67.
WORKING LIFE
Work experience profile, 1984: the effects of recovery continue. 1986 Feb.
37-43.
YOUTH (See Labor force.)
DEPARTMENTS
Book Notes. June issue.
Book Reviews. Each issue except April.
Communications. May issue.
Conference Papers. April, May, and June.
Conventions. July, October, and November.
Current Labor Statistics. Each issue.
Developments in Industrial Relations. Each issue except January.
Foreign Labor Developments. February, March, and October.
Labor Month in Review. Each issue.
Major Agreements Expiring Next Month. Each issue.
Research Notes. June issue.
Research Summaries. Each issue except August and November.
Technical Notes. May issue.
BOOK REVIEWS AND BOOK NOTES (Listed by author of book.)
Bain, George Sayers, ed. Industrial Relations in Britain. 1986 Jan. 71.
Baldwin, David A. Economic Statecraft. 1986 June. 51.
Bogue, Donald J. The Population o f the United States: Historical Trends
and Future Projections. 1986 Feb. 54.
Gresser, Julian. Partners in Prosperity. 1986 Feb. 53-54.
Hammerman, Herbert. A Decade o f New Opportunity: Affirmative Action
in the 1970’s. 1986 Aug. 51.
Hill, Marvin, Jr. and Anthony V. Sinicropi Management Rights: A Legal
and Arbitral Analysis. 1986 Dec. 41.
Hirschhom, Larry. Beyond Mechanization. 1986 Mar. 45-46.
Hoffman, Saul D. Labor Market Economics. 1986 May. 52.
Holloway, William J. and Michael J. Leech. Employment Termination:
Rights and Remedies. 1986 Aug. 50-51.
Hughes, James J. and Richard Perlman. The Economics o f Unemployment:
A Comparative Analysis o f Britain and the United States. 1986 July. 50.
Jacoby, Sanford M. Employing Bureaucracy: Managers, Unions, and the
Transformation o f Work in American Industry, 1900-1945. 1986 Sept.
42-43.
Kaufman, Stuart B., ed., The Samuel Gompers Papers: Vol. I, The Making
o f a Union Leader, 1850-86. 1986 Aug. 50.
Keyssar, Alexander. Out o f Work: The First Century o f Unemployment in
Massachusetts. 1986 Dec. 41—42.
Leech, Michael J. and William J. Holloway. Employment Termination:
Rights and Remedies. 1986 Aug. 50-51.
Maggiolo, Walter A. Techniques o f Mediation. 1986 Oct. 38.
Digitized for 98
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Ahmed, Ziaul Z. and Horst Brand. Beauty and barber shops: the trend of
labor productivity. 1986 Mar. 21-26.
Alic, John A. and Martha Caldwell Harris. Employment lessons from the
electronics industry. 1986 Feb. 27-36.
Appelbaum, Eileen and Cherlyn Skromme Granrose. Hospital employment
under revised medicare payment schedules. 1986 Aug. 37-45.
Bahr, Richard C. and John L. Marcoot. The revised Consumer Price Index:
changes in definitions and availability. 1986 July. 15-23.
Becker, Eugene. Book review. 1986 Jan. 70-71.
Bingman, Charles F. Book review. 1986 May. 52-53.
Boissevain, Harry, Edwin Dean, and James Thomas. Productivity and
labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986 Mar. 3-10.
Borum, Joan and James Conley. Wage restraints continue in 1985 major
contracts. 1986 Apr. 22-28.
Brand, Horst and Ziaul Z. Ahmed. Beauty and barber shops: the trend of
labor productivity. 1986 Mar. 21-26.
--------- and Clyde Huffstutler. Trends of labor productivity in metal stamp
ing industries. 1986 May. 13-20.
Brown, Phyllis I., David J. Schlein, and Fehmida Sleemi. Collective
bargaining during 1986: pressures to curb costs remain. 1986 Jan. 1633.
Cappelli, Peter. Book review. 1986 Dec. 41.
--------- and John Chalykoff. ‘Union avoidance:’ management’s new indus
trial relations strategy. 1986 Apr. 45-46.
Carey, Max L. and Kim L. Hazelbaker. Employment growth in the tempo
rary help industry. 1986 Apr. 37-44.
Carr, Darrell E. Overtime work: an expanded view. 1986 Nov. 36-39.
Cavin, Edward, Stuart Kerachsky, Walter Nicholson, and Alan Hershey.
Work sharing programs: an evaluation of their use. 1986 May. 31-33.
Chalykoff, John and Peter Cappelli. ‘Union avoidance:’ management’s
new strategy. 1986 Apr. 45-46.
Clark, Donald E. and Anne Kahl. Employment in health services: long
term trends and projections. 1986 Aug. 17-36.
Clem, Andrew and Craig Howell. Inflation remained mild again during
1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
Cohany, Harry P. Book review. 1986 Nov. 54.
Cohany, Sharon R. What happened to the high school class of 1985? 1986
Oct. 28-31.
Conley, James and Joan Borum. Wage restraints continue in 1985 major
contracts. 1986 Apr. 22-28.
Cotter, Diane M. Work-related deaths in 1984: bls survey findings. 1986
May. 42-44.
Cullity, John P. and Geoffrey H. Moore. A new leading indicator: workers
recently laid off. 1986 May. 35-37.
Curtin, William J. Airline deregulation and labor relations. 1986 June.
29-30.
Danziger, Sheldon and Peter Gottschalk. Work, poverty, and the working
poor: a multifaceted problem. 1986 Sept. 17-21.
Dean, Edwin, Harry Boissevain, and James Thomas. Productivity and
labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986 Mar. 3-10.
Deutsch, Steven. International experiences with technological change.
1986 Mar. 35-40.
Devens, Richard M. Jr. Book review. 1986 June. 51.
--------- .Displaced workers: one year later. 1986 July. 40-42.
Donahue, Steven M. Communications Workers focus on bargaining with
at&t . 1986 July. 37-39.
Dworkin, James B. and Charles J. Hobson. West German labor unrest: are
unions losing ground to worker councils? 1986 Feb. 46-48.
Early, John F., Walter Lane, and Philip Sturm. A half-year decline in
inflation: its antecedents and structure. 1986 Oct. 3-14.
Einstein, Marcus E. and James C. Franklin. Computer manufacturing
enters a new era of growth. 1986 Sept. 9-16.
Eisen, David J. Union response to changes in printing technology: another
view. 1986 May. 37-38.
Evans, Robert, Jr. Book review. 1986 Feb. 53-54.
Flaim, Paul O. Work schedules of Americans: an overview of new find
ings. 1986 Nov. 3-6.
Franklin, James C. and Marcus E. Einstein. Computer manufacturing
enters a new era of growth. 1986 Sept. 9-16.
Frumkin, Robert N. Health insurance trends in cost control and coverage.
1986 Sept. 3-8.
Fulco, Lawrence J. U.S. productivity growth since 1982: the post-reces
sion experience. 1986 Dec. 18-22.
Getz, Patricia M. and Susan E. Shank. Employment and unemployment:
developments in 1985. 1986 Feb. 3-12.
Gieseman, Raymond and John Rogers. Consumer expenditures: results
from the Diary and Interview surveys. 1986 June. 14—18.
Golden, Lonnie. Book review. 1986 Dec. 41-42.
Gottschalk, Peter and Sheldon Danziger. Work, poverty, and the working
poor: a multifaceted problem. 1986 Sept. 17-21.
Granrose, Cherlyn Skromme and Eileen Appelbaum. Hospital employment
under revised medicare payment schedules. 1986 Aug. 37-45.
Gunderson, Morley and Noah M. Meltz. Canadian unions achieve strong
gains in membership. 1986 Apr. 48-49.
Guzda, Henry P. Book review. 1986 Sept. 42-43.
--------- .Constitutional convention marks golden anniversary of the uaw.
1986 Oct. 23-25.
--------- .Ellis Island a welcome site? Only after years of reform. 1986 July.
30-36.
Harris, Martha Caldwell and John A. Alic. Employment lessons from the
electronics industry. 1986 Feb. 27-36.
Harrison, Beth. Spending patterns of older persons revealed in expenditure
survey. 1986 Oct. 15-17.
Haugen, Steven E. The employment expansion in retail trade, 1973-85.
1986 Aug. 9-16.
--------- and Earl F. Mellor. Hourly paid workers: who they are and what
they earn. 1986 Feb. 20-26.
Hayghe, Howard V. Military and civilian wives: update on the labor force
gap. 1986 Dec. 31-33.
--------- Rise in mothers’ labor force activity includes those with infants
1986 Feb. 4 3 -4 5 .
Hazelbaker, Kim L. and Max L. Carey. Employment growth in the tempo
rary help industry. 1986 Apr. 37-44.
Henle, Peter. Book review. 1986 Aug. 50.
Herman, Arthur S. Productivity continued to increase in many industries
during 1984. 1986 Mar. 11-15.
Hershey, Alan, Stuart Kerachsky, Walter Nicholson, and Edward Cavin.
Work sharing programs: an evaluation of their use. 1986 May. 31-33.
Hobson, Charles J. and James B. Dworkin. West German labor unrest: are
unions losing ground to worker councils? 1986 Feb. 46-48.
Horvath, Francis W. Work at home: new findings from the Current Popu
lation Survey. 1986 Nov. 31-35.
Howe, Wayne J. Business services industry sets pace in employment
growth, The. 1986 Apr. 29-36.
--------- .Temporary help workers: who they are and what jobs they hold.
1986 Nov. 45-47.
Howell, Craig and Andrew Clem. Inflation remained mild again during
1985. 1986 Apr. 17-21.
Howenstine, E. Jay. Foreign housing voucher systems: evolution and
strategies. 1986 May. 21-27.
Huffstutler, Clyde and Horst Brand. Trends of labor productivity in metal
stamping industries. 1986 May. 13-20.
Jacoby, Sanford M. and Daniel J.B. Mitchell. Labor market data: supple
mentary sources. 1986 June. 28-29.
Johnson, David S. Aggregate export price comparisons developed for
U.S., Germany, Japan. 1986 June. 40-41.
Jones, David R. and William Schweke. European job creation in the wake
of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct. 18-22.
Kahl, Anne and Donald E. Clark. Employment in health services: long
term trends and projections. 1986 Aug. 17-36.
Kahn, Shulamit. Union membership trends: a study of the Garment Work
ers. 1986 June. 33-35.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Kaneer, Kirk, Distribution of consumption examined using aggregate ex
penditure shares. 1986 Apr. 50-53.
Kerachsky, Stuart, Walter Nicholson, Edward Cavin, and Alan Hershey.
Work sharing programs: an evaluation of their use. 1986 May. 31-33.
Klein, Bruce W. Missed work and lost hours, May 1985. 1986 Nov.
26-30.
Kutscher, Ronald E. and Valerie A. Personick. 1986 June. 3-13.
Lane, Walter, John F.Early, and Philip Sturm. A half-year decline in
inflation: its antecedents and structure. 1986 Oct. 3-14.
Linsenmayer, Tadd. ilo adopts asbestos standard, focuses on employment
issues. 1986 Oct. 31-32.
Loewenberg, J. Joseph. The 1984 postal arbitration: issues surrounding the
award. 1986 June. 31-32.
McMahon, Patrick J. An international comparison of labor force participa
tion, 1977-84. 1986 May. 3-12.
--------- and John H. Tschetter. The declining middle class: a further analy
sis. 1986 Sept. 22-27.
McCollum, James K. Book review. 1986 Jan. 71.
Maccoby, Michael. Book review. 1986 Mar. 45-46.
Marcoot, John L. and Richard C. Bahr. The revised Consumer Price Index:
changes in definitions and availability. 1986 July. 15-23.
Mark, Jerome A. Problems encountered in measuring single-factor and
multifactor productivity. 1986 Dec. 3-11.
Marquez, Janice Shack-. Interview group bias. 1986 June. 43.
Martin, John L. Book review. 1986 Oct. 38.
Meister, Shelley and Thomas A. Sherman. Import, export prices reflect
declining dollar and oversupply in 1985. 1986 Apr. 3—16.
Mellor, Earl F. Shift work and flexitime: how prevalent are they? 1986
Nov. 14-21.
--------- . Weekly earnings in 1985: a look at more than 200 occupations.
1986 Sept. 28-32.
--------- and Steven E. Haugen. Hourly paid workers: who they are and what
they earn. 1986 Feb. 20-26.
Meltz, Noah M. and Morley Gunderson. Canadian unions achieve strong
gains in membership. 1986 Apr. 48-49.
Mitchell, Daniel J.B. and Sanford M. Jacoby. Labor-market data: supple
mentary sources. 1986 June. 28-29.
Moore, Geoffrey H. and John P. Cullity. A new leading indicator: workers
recently laid off. 1986 May. 35-37.
Morton, John D. bls white-collar pay survey now covers small firms. 1986
Oct. 26-28.
Moye, William T. bls and Alice Hamilton: pioneers in industrial health.
1986 June. 24-27.
Neef, Arthur. International trends in productivity and unit labor costs in
manufacturing. 1986 Dec. 1 2 -1 7 .
Nicholson, Walter, Stuart Kerachsky, Edward Cavin, and Alan Hershey.
Work sharing programs: an evaluation of their use. 1986 May. 31-33.
Niland, John. How do Australian unions maintain standing during adverse
periods? 1986 June. 37-39.
Nardone, Thomas J. Part-time workers: who are they? 1986 Feb. 13-19.
Nelson, Richard R. State labor legislation enacted in 1985. 1986 Jan.
34-54.
Olsen, John G. and Elmer S. Persigehl. Productivity in the metal doors,
sash, and trim industry. 1986 Mar. 27-31.
Passel, Jeffrey S. Estimating the number of undocumented aliens. 1986
Sept. 33.
Persigehl, Elmer S. and John G. Olsen. Productivity in the metal doors,
sash, and trim industry. 1986 Mar. 27-31.
Personick, Valerie A. and Ronald E. Kutscher. Deindustrialization and the
shift to services. 1986 June. 3-13.
Reynolds, Joy K. Steelworkers press organizing and coordinated bargain
ing. 1986 Nov. 48-49.
Roca, Maria L. Women veterans total 1 million in first half of 1986. 1986
Dec. 30-31.
Rogers, John and Raymond Gieseman. Consumer expenditures: results
from the Diary and Interview surveys. 1986 June. 14-18.
Rones, Philip L. An analysis of regional employment growth, 1973-85.
1986 July. 3-14.
Ruben, George. Labor and management continue to combat mutual prob
lems in 1985. 1986 Jan. 3-15.
Runner, Diana. Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during
1985. 1986 Jan. 55-60.
99
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
December 1986 •
Index to Volume 109
Ruser, John W. Measuring wage premiums for job risks. 1986 June.
42-43.
Ryscavage, Paul. Reconciling divergent trends in real income. 1986 July.
24-29.
Saunders, Norman C. Sensitivity of BLS economic projections to exogenous
variables. 1986 Dec. 23-29.
Schiff, Frank W. Short-time compensation: assessing the issues. 1986
May. 28-30.
Schlein, David J., Phyllis I. Brown, and Fehmida Sleemi. Collective
bargaining during 1986: pressures to curb costs remain. 1986 Jan. 1633.
Schweke, William and David R. Jones. European job creation in the wake
of plant closings and layoffs. 1986 Oct. 18-22.
Scofea, Laura, bls area wage surveys will cover more areas. 1986 June.
19-23.
Sehgal, Ellen. Book review. 1986 Feb. 54.
Shank, Susan E. Employment up, unemployment stable in the first half of
1986. 1986 Aug. 3-8.
--------- .Preferred hours of work and corresponding earnings. 1986 Nov.
40-44.
--------- and Patricia M. Getz. Employment and unemployment: develop
ments in 1985. 1986 Feb. 3-12.
Sherman, Thomas A. and Shelly Meister. Import, export prices reflect
declining dollar and oversupply in 1985. 1986 Apr. 3-16.
Sleemi, Fehmida, David J. Schlein, and Phyllis I. Brown. Collective
bargaining during 1986: pressures to curb costs remain. 1986 Jan. 1633.
Smith, Shirley J. The growing diversity of work schedules. 1986 Nov.
7-13.
--------- .Work experience profile, 1984: the effects of recovery continue.
1986 Feb. 37-43.
Stinson, John, Jr. Moonlighting by women jumped to record highs. 1986
Nov. 22-25.
Sturm, Philip, John F. Early, and Walter Lane. A half-year decline in
inflation: its antecedents and structure. 1986 Oct. 3-14.
Sveikauskas, Leo. The contribution of r&d to productivity growth. 1986
Mar. 16-20.
Taira, Koji. Labor market segmentation in Japan: how rigid is it? 1986
June. 35-37.
Thomas, James, Edwin Dean, and Harry Boissevain. Productivity and
labor cost trends in manufacturing, 12 countries. 1986 Mar. 3-10.
Tinsley, LaVeme C. Key workers’ compensation laws enacted by States in
1985. 1986 Jan. 61-66.
Toscano, Guy A. Computer-aided telephone interviewing used in the
Hours at Work Survey. 1986 May. 39-41.
Tschetter, John H. and Patrick J. McMahon. The declining middle class:
a further analysis. 1986 Sept. 22-27.
Voos, Paula. Environmental factors in the labor-management relationship.
1986 Apr. 47-48.
Weinert, Michael. Book review. 1986 May. 52.
--------- .Book review. 1986 July. 50.
Zalusky, John. Short-time compensation: the aflcio perspective. 1986
May. 33-34.
Women’s role in the family
At the extremes, . . . the economic conditions of the United States and
Mexico have different effects on the employment behavior of married
women. The higher cost of living in the United States compels women to
seek work, even over the initial objections of their husbands. The specific
conditions of that employment must, however, mesh with wives’ dual role
as wage-earner and housekeeper/babysitter. In contrast, the lower cost of
living and lack of alternative employment in Mexico bolster husbands’
traditional objections to wives’ employment.
. . . the type and duration of employment experienced by married farm
worker women is strongly influenced by their generally disadvantaged
status, by their role in the family, and by the economic position of the
family. In almost all instances, women’s work careers are organized in
such a way as to carry out the traditional duties of wife and mother, in
addition to that of wage earner. A wife’s wage may represent an integral
part of the family budget, particularly in the case of families living in the
United States and border areas, but the range of work opportunities and the
duration of employment are limited by her subordinate status in the family.
Thus, the availability of work in low skill, seasonal production allows
women to carry out the dual roles of wife and wage-earner. At the same
time, however, the availability of this attractive labor pool facilitates ex
pansion of those jobs.
— Robert J. Thomas,
Citizenship, Gender, and Work:
Social Organization of Industrial Agriculture
(Berkeley, University of California Press, 1985), p. 193.
100
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1986 181-512/40010
B LS Periodical
Prices Reduced
BLS periodicals provide timely information on employ
ment, occupations, wages, and prices. Subscriptions
now are available at greatly reduced prices. In addi
tion, newly available 2-year subscriptions guarantee
the low prices for the next 2 years.
Monthly Labor Review
Current Wage Developments
the oliJest end most authoritative
Government research journal in
economics and social sciences.
Regular features include current
labor statistics and developments in
industrial relations
'eports monthly on spec tic wage and
bene‘ it charges from collective
bargaining agreements ncludes
data on st-ikes or lockouts, major
agreements expiring, and compensa
tion chances.
$16
S12
$24 a year
$2t a year
Occupational Outlook
Quarterly
CPi Detaiied Report
CPI Detailed Report'
;s the most comprehensive report on
monthly consumer price indexes and
rates of change.
helps students anc guidance
counselors earn about new occupa
tions, Raining opportunities salary
trends, ard career counseling
programs Written in nontechnical
language and illustrated in color
$5
$16
$26 a year
"5Sgn
a u
$ y i a year
Employment ard Earnings
a
■
□
Producer Price Indexes
Producer Price li
includes monthly price movements
of both farm and industrial com
modities b / industry ano stage of
processing, includes annual supplement.
g-ves current monthly employment
and earnings statistics for the Nation
as a whole, for Slates and for more
than 2G0 areas. Included are
household and establishment data
seasonally and not seasonally
adjusted ¡ncludes annual supplement
$22
$31’ a year
S21
$26 a year
Superintendent of Documents Subscriptions Order Form
Order processing code:
★
6174
□ YES, please send me the following indicated subscriptions:
□
□
□
□
□
□
Monthly Labor Review
Occupational Outlook Quarterly
Employment and Earnings
Current Wage Developments
CPI Detailed Report
Producer Price Indexes
□
□
□
□
□
□
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
$16.
$ 5
$22
$12
$16
$21
or
□
□
□
□
□
□
2
2
2
2
2
2
years
years
years
years
years
years
$32
$10
$44
$24
$32
$42
1. The total cost of my order is $_____ . Ali prices include regular domestic postage and handling and are subject to change. Internationa!
customers please add 25%.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington D.C. 20212
Second Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
ISSN 0098-1818
Official Business
Penalty for private use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MLR
LI3RA442L
I S S D UE 0 0 4 R
l i b r a r y
FED RESERVE BANK
P0 BOX 442
SAINT LOUIS
MO
OF ST
63166
LOUIS
-
@FedFRASER