The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
:
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
February 1989
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In this issue:
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
Japan and the United States: a comparison
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Ann McLaughlin, Secretary
Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner
Region I—Boston: Anthony J Ferrara
Kennedy Federal Building, Suite 1603
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 565-2327
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
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.
Region II—New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
201 Varick Street, Room 808, New York, NY 10014
Phone (212) 337-2400
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
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.
Region III—Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margutis
3535 Market Street
PO. 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) 347-4416
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V—Chicago: Lols 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) 767-6970
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII—Kansas City: Gunnar Engen
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone: (816) 426-2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
February cover:
Detail from Riveters , a scale model
relief sculpture by Chaim Gross,
from the exhibition, “ Special Delivery:
Murals for the New Deal Era’ ’;
photograph courtesy of the
National Museum of American Art,
Washington, DC
Cover design by Melvin B. Moxley
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Regions IX and X—San Francisco: Sam M. Hirabayashi
71 Stevenson Street, P.O Box 3766
San Francisco, CA 94119
Phone: (415) 995-5605
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
I
research
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
library
FEBRUARY 1989
VOLUME 112, NUMBER 2
! Federal Reserve Bank
of St.
L o u is
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor
MAR 2 2 1989
W. J. Howe, W. Parks, II
3
Labor market completes sixth year of expansion
Civilian and nonagricultural employment continued to rise; the unemployment rate
of 5.3 percent in the fourth quarter was the lowest since second-quarter 1974
Eva Jacobs and others
15 Families of working wives spending more on services, nondurables
When a wife becomes a second earner, families spend more on work-related
and time-saving items, such as child care and food away from home
John E. Buckley
24
Variations in holidays, vacations, and area pay levels
Higher paying localities often report more liberal leave provisions,
but factors other than pay also are important in shaping leave policy
R. W. Bednarzik, C. R. Shiells
31
Comparing U.S. and Japanese labor markets
Both countries are flexible in how they react to structural changes in the labor market,
with each using different methods and programs to adjust to such changes rather quickly
J. W. Ferris, V. L. Klarquist
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
43
Productivity in the carburetors, pistons, and valves industry
Growth in output per employee hour in the carburetors, pistons, and valves industry has been
substantially below that for all manufacturing; the industry has felt the effects of weak demand
REPORTS
Melvin Brodsky
47
oecd
social ministers focus on rising pension, health costs
DEPARTMENTS
2 Labor month in review
47
49
51
55
Foreign labor developments
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Current labor statistics
Labor Month
In Review
OLDER W ORKERS. The U S .
Department of Labor reported to the
Congress on older persons who experience
job market problems. The following are
highlights from the report, which was
prepared by Philip L. Rones and Diane E.
Herz of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Unemployment. Workers age 55 and over
consistently have the lowest rates of
unemployment of any labor force group.
However, the data do not fully depict
the extent of their problems in the job
market, especially as compared to those
of other groups. For example, by definition,
workers who retire after unsuccessfully
seeking employment are out of the labor
force. Thus, they are not counted among the
unemployed.
Older unemployed workers under the age
of 62, like their younger counterparts, have
strong labor force attachments. These
persons typically look for full-time rather
than part-time jobs. Until age 62, when they
become eligible for Social Security
retirement benefits, these workers rarely can
afford to retire or to take only part-time jobs;
thus, they generally continue seeking full
time employment until they find it. By
contrast, unemployed persons age 62 and
over—particularly those over 65—often look
for part-time or temporary jobs, search for
work less intensively than younger persons,
and end their job search by retiring rather
than finding a job. The latter option is made
possible by the availability of retirement
benefits, although the amount of such
benefits may be quite small.
Commonly available data show that the
average number of weeks of unemployment
increases with age, and some analysts have
concluded that older workers have a more
difficult time finding a job than do younger
ones. However, this conclusion is problematic
because (1) other sources of data on the
duration of unemployment suggest that
younger persons may require about as much
time as older ones to find a job, and (2) the
data reflect not only employers’ demand for
specific types of workers, but also the
available supply of workers. Older workers
may seek different work schedules or wage
arrangements than younger ones, or they may
have better nonwork (usually retirement)
options. These differences affect whether, how
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
long, and how intensely individuals will look
for work.
Permanent displacement from jobs
probably occurs about as frequently to older
workers as to others. Much permanent job
loss is the result of plant closings and other
actions from which seniority affords little
or no protection. Also, large-scale layoffs
occur most often in declining industries, in
which workers are older, on average, than
they are in growing industries.
When an older worker loses a job, that
worker typically gives up a considerable
amount of tenure and, along with the tenure,
a substantial pay premium. If the individual
must find employment in a different
occupation, the wages he or she will receive
will often be at the level of an “ in
experienced” applicant for the position. On
the other hand, a substantial proportion of
job losers do obtain jobs with wages that
match or even exceed the wages in their lost
jobs. Displacement late in one’s career,
however, can lead to premature retirement,
which is often seen as a socially acceptable
alternative to prolonged unemployment.
Such job-loss-induced withdrawal from the
labor force can be dramatically higher when
the national jobless rate is high.
Older men who lose jobs tend to experience
greater losses of earnings than do older women
upon reemployment. This is because the men’s
wages were typically far higher to begin with.
For example, when women lose factory jobs,
these jobs are typically in textiles, apparel, or
leather products industries, in which average
wages for production workers are about $6
to $7 per hour. The factory jobs men lose are
more often in industries such as steel,
machinery, or automobile manufacturing, in
which average wages range from $10 to $15
per hour. Older women who are reentering
the labor force experience problems related
to outdated skills, lack of confidence, and lack
of personal contacts that might lead to
employment. The principal labor market
problem facing reentrants is the same as that
confronting women already holding jobs—
very low earnings compared to those of men.
Barriers to employment. Older persons face
a number of barriers to employment. In many
jobs, they are presented with a choice between
full-time employment and complete
retirement. While many retirees would prefer
a phased retirement, employers generally
prefer full-time workers, and pension plan
provisions make continued employment with
a reduced schedule impossible or impractical.
Thus, those older employees who would like
to continue working beyond normal retirement
age, and who would prefer to stay with the
same employer or to have a reduced schedule,
are often unable to do so.
Even when an older worker is able to secure
a satisfactory working arrangement, continued
employment beyond the age of pension
eligibility often does not pay. Private pension
policies and Social Security regulations
frequently stipulate that added earnings
from continued employment are to be off
set by pension losses. As a result, many
workers do not find it financially worthwhile
to work beyond the normal age of
retirement.
Even those older workers who seek only
part-time work are affected by pension and
Social Security regulations. Persons who
choose to continue working part time after
receiving a pension often limit their hours
and, hence, their earnings, so as to avoid
exceeding the Social Security exempt amount.
Part-time work is often not a viable alter
native to complete retirement, as pay is often
much lower than that which experienced
workers are used to receiving. This does
not necessarily reflect age discrimination;
rather, it applies to workers of all ages and
results largely from the relatively high hourly
costs and low level of skills usually associated
with part-time, as opposed to full-time,
jobs.
The Social Security Amendments of 1983
contained a number of provisions that were
designed to eliminate some of the system’s
disincentives to work. Four in particular were
noteworthy: an increase in the normal
retirement age, an increase in the early
retirement penalty, an increase in the credit for
delayed retirement, and a decrease in the with
holding rate under the earnings test. How
ever, most analysts believe that the effect of
these changes on retirement age will be
minimal.
Single copies of the Labor Department
publication, Labor Market Problems of Older
Workers, based largely on the report to
Congress, are available from Inquiries and
Correspondence, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, DC 20212.
□
Labor market completes sixth year
of expansion in 1988
Both civilian and nonagricultural employment
continued to rise; the 5.3-percent unemployment rate
in the fourth quarter was the lowest
since the second quarter o f 1974
Wayne
J. H o w e
and
W
il l ia m
Parks
II
L abor m arket perform ance by m ost measures remained
healthy in 1988, as em ploym ent gains continued and the
civilian unem ploym ent rate fell to a 14-year low. The
economy com pleted its sixth year of expansion, the sec
ond longest period of sustained grow th since W orld W ar
II and the longest peacetime expansion.
Following are highlights of em ploym ent and unem
ploym ent developments in 1988:
• E m ploym ent grow th continued during the year, as
m easured by both the C urrent Em ploym ent Statistics
survey ( c e s ) — a survey of m ore than 300,000 business
establishm ents— and the C urrent Population Survey
( c p s ) — a survey of nearly 56,000 households. The es
tablishm ent survey showed an increase of 3.7 million
persons, or 3.5 percent, while the household survey
showed an increase of 2.4 million persons, or 2.1 per
cent. (See box on page 4.)
• The goods-producing sector showed significant job gains
for the second straight year. W ithin that sector, both
construction and manufacturing registered over-the-year
increases. The service-producing sector continued to
grow at a rapid pace, with services and wholesale trade
increasing the fastest.
• A fter declining early in 1988, the civilian worker unem
ploym ent rate fluctuated around 5.5 percent for m uch
Wayne J. Howe and William Parks II are economists in the Office of
Employment and Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The authors are grateful to James Markey, Diane Herz, and Thomas
Nardone for their assistance in gathering data for the article.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of the year before edging to 5.3 percent in the fourth
quarter. The rate was then six-tenths of a percentage
point below th at of a year earlier and at its lowest m ark
since the second quarter of 1974. All m ajor age and sex
groups benefited from the unem ploym ent decline.
• All three m ajor racial and ethnic groups shared in
1988’s job m arket improvements. Each group recorded
a drop in its unem ploym ent rate, and em ploym ent
growth, particularly strong for Hispanics, continued.
• The num ber of persons working part time for economic
reasons declined in 1988, but their proportion of total
employm ent still rem ained above w hat it was prior to
the recessions early in the decade. The num ber of dis
couraged workers showed little change over the year.
Industry developments
N onagricultural payroll employment, as m easured by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ business establishm ent
survey, continued to show a healthy employm ent gain
throughout 1988. A t 107.3 million in the fourth quarter of
1988, nonfarm employm ent increased by about 3.7 m il
lion over the year. (See table 1.) (All over-the-year com
parisons are made using fourth-quarter averages, unless
otherwise noted.) This m arks the second straight year in
which nonfarm job grow th exceeded 3 million.
As has typically been the case, em ploym ent rose at a
faster rate in the service-producing sector than it did in
the goods-producing sector, accounting for 4 of 5 of the
net job gains during 1988. Services and wholesale trade
had the fastest rates of em ploym ent grow th in this sector.
3
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
(See chart 1.) In addition, following declines in 1985 and
1986, the goods-producing sector showed a significant job
gain for the second straight year. Both construction and
m anufacturing continued to expand, while the num ber of
mining jobs declined.
The service-producing sector continued to add jobs at
about the same rapid pace that has prevailed throughout
the 6-year expansion, with em ploym ent in the sector in
creasing by 2.9 million, or 3.7 percent. The services divi
sion recorded the largest over-the-year em ploym ent gain,
adding 1.3 million jobs, or alm ost 4 of every 10 additional
jobs. (See chart 1.) This division is a heterogeneous mix
that includes such industries as business, health, educa
tio n al, social, and legal services; h otels and m otels;
entertainm ent; and auto repair. W hile the services divi
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
sion as a whole continued to grow at the brisk pace
experienced throughout the expansion, its two largest in
dustries, business and health services, showed somewhat
different over-the-year trends.
Business services exhibited a slightly lower rate of em
ploym ent grow th than in previous years, while the pace
accelerated sharply in health services. A decline in the
rate of employment growth in personnel supply services,
particularly in tem porary help, explains some of the drop
off in the pace of business services employment growth.
However, the other dynam ic business services industry—
com puter and data processing services— continued to
grow at a fast pace. M uch of the recent growth has been in
the com puter program m ing and software services com po
nent. This includes firm s w hich provide analysis and
Examining the divergences in the CPS and CES
W hile it is com m on for the household and payroll
surveys to have different patterns of grow th or even
occasionally move in different directions in the short
run, longer periods of m ajor divergence are unusual.
Between the fourth quarters of 1987 and 1988, the
establishm ent survey registered a job gain th at ex
ceeded the rise in civilian em ploym ent by nearly 1.3
million.
The two surveys do m easure different things; for
instance, the household survey includes among the em
ployed agricultural workers, the self-employed, private
household workers, workers on leave w ithout pay, and
persons working without pay in a family business for 15
hours or more. The establishment survey does not cover
such employment. These definitional differences, how
ever, do not explain the sudden divergence in the two
surveys.
A lthough there is no direct evidence to explain the
divergent survey results, several possibilities may ac
count for some of the differences:
— The household survey estimates are based on cu r
rent estimates of the population which are developed
from the 1980 census, inflated to account for births,
deaths, and m igration into and out o f the U nited
States. If the population estimates for the inter-census
period have been too low (as they were found to be
between 1970 and 1980), then the em ploym ent esti
m ates will have been similarly understated. The most
problem atical aspect of population estim ation is ac
counting for illegal imm igration. The Census Bureau
currently adds 200,000 per year to their population
estim ate to account for illegal im m igration, but if this
estim ate is too conservative, actual population growth
(and the em ploym ent totals on which they are based)
may have been underestim ated. The establishm ent sur
vey em ploym ent estimates, in contrast, are “rebench-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
m arked” each year based on counts of all employees
from adm inistrative records obtained through the un
employment insurance system.
— Because the establishm ent survey counts jobs, not
people, persons holding more than one job are counted
at each job. Thus, if an increasing num ber of workers
were holding m ore than one job, business payrolls
would register the resultant job gains while the house
hold count of employed persons would not. In fact,
between 1980 and 1985, the last 2 years in which the
c p s m easured the incidence of multiple-jobholding, the
rate jum ped considerably, particularly among women.
If that trend has continued since 1985, it may account
for some of the survey differences. (A dditional data on
m ultiple jobholding is scheduled to be collected in May
of 1989, but results will not be available until around
year’s end.)
— The establishm ent survey sample does not have a
systematic rotation of sample units, but replaces re
porters as needed. This tends to underrepresent newly
formed establishments. Because these firms might ac
count for a substantial portion of job growth, some
estim ate of their contribution to employment growth
m ust be included in the c e s employment estimate.
Otherwise, the c e s estimates would consistently fall
below those of the benchm ark count, which would in
clude new firms. Because this “bias adjustm ent” is
based on past patterns of job creation, at any point in
time it may under- or overestimate the contribution of
new businesses to job growth. The process is particu
larly likely to result in an overstatem ent of grow th as
the economy approaches a business cycle peak, and to
do the opposite at a trough. U nfortunately, a final esti
m ation of the difference between recent c e s em ploy
ment growth and that registered by the benchm ark will
not be known until m id-1990.
Chart 1. Employment increases by major Industry division,
fourth -quarter 1 9 8 7 -8 8
Thousands
Percent
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2 0 0
-2
200
600
1 ,0 0 0
1 .4 0 0
Construction
Services
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and
public utilities
Manufacturing
Government
Finance, insurance,
and real estate
Mining
design for com puter systems, development of com puter
program s or systems, com puter program m ing services,
and com puter-related systems engineering.
The rise in health services em ploym ent has been driven
by an increasingly aging population requiring more health
care, the expansion of outpatient care services, and the
grow ing w illingness of health insurance program s to
cover hom e health care. W ithin health services, employ
m ent grow th was widespread. The largest num ber of job
gains occurred, as in the past, in hospitals, where almost
half of all health services workers are employed. The larg
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
est rates of employment growth, both in 1988 and in the
last 6 years, occurred in outpatient care facilities, where
employment has risen by m ore than 80 percent over the
expansion and, to a lesser extent, in medical and dental
labs and offices of physicians.
Retail trade added 635,000 jobs in 1988, a growth rate of
3.4 percent. Retail sales were strong throughout much of the
year. However, retailers’ profits were weak, as overstocking
and subsequent discounting depressed performance.
Employment growth among the various retail industries
was mixed. Following a slack year in 1987, food stores
5
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
•
grew the fastest of any component. Consumers were appar
ently undaunted by rising food prices following the sum
in general merchandise stores expanded rapidly in the first
quarter of 1988, was unchanged in the second quarter, and
then declined in the last half of the year (on a seasonally
adjusted basis). Elsewhere, em ploym ent in eating and
drinking places continued to grow at a steady pace; em
ployment in radio, television, and music stores, which had
mer’s drought, as food sales were up significantly in 1988.
Auto dealers and service stations, which have both been
strong throughout the recovery, also experienced substan
tial employment growth throughout the year. Employment
Employees on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, seasonally adjusted, quarterly averages, 1982
oo
CO
Table 1.
[In thousands]
1982
1984
1986
1987
1988
Industry
IV
I
II
III
|Vp
Total.........................................................................
88,717
95,868
100,347
103,683
104,670
105,609
106,478
107,335
Total private................................................................
72,893
79,710
83,496
86,518
87,406
88,263
89,071
89,793
Goods-produclng....................................................................
22,980
24,935
24,443
25,116
25,260
25,498
25,650
25,827
Mining .................................................................................
Oil and gas extraction .....................................................
1,029
651
956
609
715
396
737
419
731
416
739
424
738
422
729
407
Construction........................................................................
General building contractors...........................................
3,837
959
4,499
1,187
4,843
1,302
5,089
1,347
5,142
1,375
5,261
1,402
5,345
1,402
5,396
1,404
Manufacturing.....................................................................
18,115
19,481
18,885
19,290
19,388
19,498
19,567
19,706
Durable goods ................................................................
Lumber and wood products..........................................
Furniture and fixtures..................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products...................................
Primary metal Industries...............................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products...................
Fabricated metal products...........................................
Machinery, except electrical........................................
Electrical and electronic equipment.............................
Transportation equipment............................................
Motor vehicles and equipment.................................
Instruments and related products...............................
Miscellaneous manufacturing......................................
10,484
596
425
558
824
344
1,349
2,051
1,953
1,662
659
699
367
11,631
703
492
593
843
317
1,483
2,236
2,248
1,931
877
721
381
11,137
723
501
581
729
255
1,404
2,002
2,102
2,037
868
698
360
11,353
749
531
585
768
279
1,428
2,062
2,101
2,048
855
703
378
11,403
755
535
584
770
280
1,437
2,092
2,113
2,031
837
705
381
11,484
757
536
586
777
281
1,450
2,122
2,117
2,047
850
709
382
11,550
754
539
587
787
281
1,461
2,155
2,124
2,043
854
716
385
11,634
767
541
591
795
282
1,474
2,184
2,129
2,049
860
721
383
Nondurable goods...........................................................
Food and kindred products..........................................
Tobacco manufactures................................................
Textile mill products.....................................................
Apparel and other textile products..............................
Paper and allied products............................................
Printing and publishing.................................................
Chemical and allied products.......................................
Petroleum and coal products.......................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products..............
Leather and leather products.......................................
7,631
1,628
68
729
1,139
654
1,271
1,055
200
679
209
7,850
1,608
64
726
1,155
682
1,404
1,055
188
792
176
7,748
1,616
57
709
1,094
676
1,475
1,017
165
797
143
7,937
1,635
53
732
1,107
683
1,527
1,041
167
845
145
7,985
1,648
54
731
1,105
686
1,543
1,049
165
857
147
8,014
1,645
53
727
1,099
689
1,559
1,060
166
869
146
8,017
1,631
52
722
1,091
690
1,571
1,069
167
878
146
8,072
1,658
52
723
1,091
691
1,585
1,073
168
886
145
Service-producing...................................................................
65,737
70,933
75,904
78,567
79,410
80,111
80,828
81,509
Transportation and public utilities.......................................
Transportation.................................................................
Communication and public utilities..................................
5,023
2,735
2,288
5,200
2,963
2,237
5,285
3,093
2,192
5,465
3,230
2,235
5,514
3,273
2,241
5,560
3,313
2,248
5,607
3,355
2,253
5,643
3,393
2,250
Wholesale trade.................................................................
Durable goods ................................................................
Nondurable goods...........................................................
5,213
3,034
2,179
5,644
3,336
2,308
5,761
3,381
2,380
5,959
3,516
2,443
6,035
3,573
2,462
6,117
3,635
2,482
6,195
3,697
2,498
6,275
3,761
2,514
Retail trade.........................................................................
General merchandise stores...........................................
Food stores.....................................................................
Automotive dealers and service stations........................
Eating and drinking places...............................................
15,189
2,141
2,510
1,634
4,872
16,919
2,315
2,685
1,834
5,526
18,157
2,379
2,945
1,967
6,007
18,750
2,493
2,979
2,028
6,213
19,007
2,543
3,029
2,047
6,290
19,143
2,545
3,061
2,070
6,338
19,277
2,538
3,104
2,093
6,377
19,384
2,534
3,158
2,106
6,435
Finance, insurance, and real estate...................................
Finance............................................................................
Insurance ........................................................................
Real estate .....................................................................
5,356
2,664
1,715
977
5,780
2,890
1,785
1,105
6,401
3,210
1,978
1,214
6,610
3,298
2,045
1,267
6,640
3,306
2,055
1,279
6,662
3,302
2,069
1,291
6,688
3,299
2,080
1,309
6,722
3,315
2,092
1,314
Services..............................................................................
Business services...........................................................
Health services ...............................................................
19,131
3,289
5,892
21,232
4,196
6,177
23,448
4,926
6,632
24,618
5,292
6,962
24,949
5,370
7,054
25,284
5,448
7,161
25,653
5,517
7,277
25,943
5,573
7,417
Government........................................................................
Federal............................................................................
State ...............................................................................
Local...............................................................................
15,824
2,745
3,641
9,438
16,158
2,830
3,771
9,557
16,851
2,899
3,925
10,026
17,165
2,973
3,991
10,200
17,264
2,972
4,017
10,275
17,346
2,957
4,047
10,342
17,407
2,965
4,072
10,370
17,542
2,990
4,075
10,477
p=preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
shown the largest percentage job growth of any retail in
dustry in the past few years, was little changed in 1988.
A substantial job gain in wholesale trade — 315,000—
was largely attributed to an increase in the sale of durable
goods, particularly among wholesalers of export-driven
goods such as m achinery and equipment. Some of the
strength in wholesale em ploym ent also resulted from the
increased dem and for lum ber and m aterials used by the
construction industry. In the last 6 years, these and other
durable goods com ponents of wholesale trade have ac
counted for about 70 percent of wholesale trade employ
m ent gains.
T ransportation was responsible for nearly all of the
180.000 em ploym ent gain in the transportation and public
utilities industry. W ithin transportation, trucking and air
lines continued to post gains while railroad employment
was little changed.
Employment in the finance, insurance, and real estate
industry was up by a comparatively meager 110,000 in 1988,
the smallest increase of the 6-year expansion. Insurance and
real estate continued to show steady employment gains
throughout the year. However, weakness in both the bank
ing and securities industries— the latter largely related to
the October 1987 stock market crash— held finance em
ployment in check.
Government em ploym ent increased by 375,000 in 1988,
w hich is consistent with the rate of growth evident since
1984. V irtually all of the 1988 increase was in State and
local governments.
E m ploym ent in the goods-producing sector rose by
710.000 to 25.8 million by the fourth quarter of 1988.
R ates of grow th within the sector varied: construction
advanced sharply, m anufacturing rose m oderately, and
mining declined.
Construction em ploym ent rose by 305,000 during the
year, the largest grow th since 1984. Job gains within con
struction were unevenly distributed, as strong growth in
special trades contrasted with modest gains in other in
dustry com ponents. The special trades industry, which
includes a wide variety of construction trades (plumbing,
painting, papering, electrical work, stone masonry, and
roofing), has accounted for nearly three-fourths of all new
construction jobs in the 6 years of the present expansion.
As a result, 3 of every 5 construction workers are now
employed in special trades. Elsewhere in the industry,
general building contractors experienced m oderate em
ploym ent grow th in the first half of 1988, but little change
during the last 6 m onths.
Manufacturing added 415,000 jobs in 1988, the second
straight year th at factory jobs have grown by m ore than 2
percent. These back-to-back gains m ore than offset the 3 percent em ploym ent decline in the 1985-86 period, but
still left the num ber of factory jobs below 1979 levels. The
rise in foreign dem and for products m anufactured in the
U nited States helped spur the recent growth; the decline
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2. Over-the-year employment change by major
occupation, 1983-88
[In percent]
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Total..........................
3.5
3.3
2.0
2.3
2.8
2.1
Executive, administrative,
and managerial...............
3.1
7.4
4.7
4.4
5.5
5.5
Professional specialty......
1.4
3.2
3.9
1.6
3.6
4.1
Technicians and related
support............................
1.6
3.4
2.7
3.4
.5
4.8
Sales occupations............
5.1
5.3
.7
5.5
.6
2.5
Administrative support, in
cluding clerical................
.9
1.5
4.2
2.3
3.6
-1.5
Service occupations.........
4.9
.9
2.6
1.2
2.3
2.6
Precision production, craft,
and repair........................
10.9
3.5
1.4
.6
.7
.4
Operators, fabricators, and
laborers..........................
3.5
3.1
-1.0
.8
3.8
1.7
Farming, forestry, and
fishing.............................
-6.7
.8
-7.9
2.8
1.6
1.0
Occupation
Note :
Data based on fourth-quarter comparisons.
in the value of the dollar in 1988, caused partly by con
cern over the large m erchandise trade deficit, played a
m ajor role. As the dollar fell, U.S. goods became cheaper
and more competitive in foreign markets, while the prices
of U.S. im ports rose, in turn narrow ing the trade gap.
In response to the increased dem and for both durable
and n o n d urable p roducts, in d u strial pro d u ctio n rose
throughout the year, and factory employees worked long
hours by historical standards. Average weekly hours fluc
tuated between 40.9 and 41.2 hours and overtime ranged
from 3.7 to 4.0 hours; these were the highest sustained
levels since 1973. The capacity utilization rate in m anu
facturing rose to over 84 percent, its highest level since
m id -1979, and both new and unfilled orders were growing
at yearend.
D u ra b le g o ods m a n u fa c tu rin g e m p lo y m e n t rose
steadily in 1988, accounting for more than tw o-thirds of
the overall increase in factory jobs. The capacity utiliza
tion rate am ong durable goods producers surged to record
highs, while the rate for nondurable producers was ele
vated but stable all year. Benefiting from strong exports
and investment spending on business com puting equip
m ent, the m achinery industry recorded a particularly
large job increase of 120,000 in 1988. However, employ
ment in this industry was still well below prerecession
levels. Strong, though more modest, over-the-year gains
were also made in the prim ary and fabricated m etals in
dustries, two other industries in which recent employ
ment gains failed to m atch earlier declines.
N ondurable goods industries added 135,000 jobs in
1988, as the printing and publishing, chemical and allied
products, and plastics products industries showed the
7
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
most strength. Despite m idyear job losses resulting from
1988’s drought, over-the-year em ploym ent was up in the
food products industry. The textiles and apparel indus
tries each had a sm all decline in jobs in 1988, after
experiencing increases in 1987.
F o r a n u m b er o f years, em ploym ent changes in the
m ining in d u stry have m irro red developm ents in oil and
gas ex tractio n , w hich, in tu rn , are closely tied to crude
oil prices. M ining em ploym ent was dow n in 1988 due
to th e relatively low prices o f cru d e oil an d an in te rn a
tional surplus. T his left little incentive for increased
exploratio n and, hence, em ploym ent. A t y e a r’s end, oil
pro d u cers w ere m aking efforts to reach an acco rd to
reduce p ro d u ctio n w ith th e hopes o f bolstering prices.
M ining was th e only m a jo r in d u stry division in w hich
em ploym ent at th e end o f 1988 was below th e 1982
recession tro u g h level.
Cyclical comparisons.
Since the end of W orld W ar II,
three periods of economic grow th have lasted m ore than 4
years. The present economic expansion, which completed
its sixth year in Novem ber 1988, is the second longest
period of sustained growth, surpassed only by the nearly
9-year expansion following the 1960-61 recession. The
recovery following the 1973-75 recession lasted nearly 5
years.
The three expansions are quite similar in term s of their
annualized rates of employment growth, at 3.8 percent in
the 1961-69 period, 3.9 percent in 1975-79, and 3.5 per
cent thus far during the present expansion. The com
position of employment growth by industry, however, was
markedly different over the course of the three expansions,
as may be seen in the first three columns of the following
tabulation:
Percent
contribution
1961 1975 1982
- 6 9 - 8 0 -8 8
N o n a g r i c u l tu r a l
t o t a l ......................
1 00.0 100.0 100.0
Percent
distribution
February December
1961
1988
100.0
100.0
G o o d s - p r o d u c in g ..
M in in g ....................
C o n s t r u c t i o n .........
M a n u f a c tu r in g . ..
2 7 .0
- .3
4.8
2 2.5
2 7.7
1.8
7.3
18.6
15.5
- 1 .6
8.3
8.8
3 6 .6
1.3
5.3
30.1
24.1
.7
5.0
18.3
S e rv ic e -p ro d u c in g .
T r a n s p o r t a ti o n
a n d p u b lic
u t i l i t i e s ..................
W h o le s a le t r a d e ..
R e ta il t r a d e ...........
F in a n c e , in s u r
ance, a n d real
e s ta te ......................
S e r v ic e s ....................
G o v e r n m e n t .........
7 3 .0
72.3
84.5
6 3 .4
7 5.9
3.3
4.8
15.9
4 .4
6.2
18.0
3.3
5.7
22.5
7.3
5.9
15.3
5.2
5.9
18.1
5.2
2 1.9
2 1.9
6.6
26.7
10.3
7.3
36.5
9.2
5.0
14.1
15.8
6.3
2 4.2
16.3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
The proportion of job growth made up by the goods-producing sector has been much smaller over the current expansion
than it was in the two prior growth periods. Within the
goods sector, the m anufacturing share of employment
growth declined from 23 percent in 1961-69 to 19 percent
in 1975-80, and then fell sharply to 9 percent in the current
recovery. As the last two columns show, manufacturing has
a much smaller share of total nonagricultural employment
today than it had in 1961. The construction industry gradu
ally increased its share in each successive expansion and,
despite being very hard hit in recessions, has maintained a
5-percent share of total employment. The shift towards
service-producing employment shows up principally in the
sizable gains in the services and retail trade industries.
Services has both increased its share of growth during
expansions and been relatively insulated from job losses dur
ing recessions. As a result, its share of employment has risen
dramatically since the early 1960’s; the industry now ac
counts for almost 1 of every 4 jobs. The notably small
government share of employment growth in the 1975-80
recovery has been maintained in the present expansion;
these smaller growth rates partly reflect the fact that, by the
late 1970’s, the baby-boom generation had largely passed
through the public education systems.
Occupational developments
The greatest rate of job grow th in 1988, as it was
throughout most of the expansion, was among executives,
adm inistrators, and managers. (See table 2.) Gains were
also strong in the professional specialty occupations and
am ong technicians and related support. Services and sales
occupations showed growth of a m ore m oderate nature,
but occupations concentrated in the m anufacturing and
agriculture industries (production, craft, and repair w ork
ers; operators, fabricators, and laborers; and employees in
farming, forestry, and fishing occupations) registered very
little change from the year before.
Overall employment grow th during the entire expan
sion has been widespread, but some occupations and
industries have expanded m ore than others. C harts 2 and
3 provide employm ent grow th rates of m ajor occupa
tional categories and industry divisions since the trough
of the recession.
Civilian employment
Total civilian employment, as measured by the c p s ,
rose by 2.4 million in 1988 to 115.8 million. W ith the
exception of the 2.8-percent employment jum p in 1987,
the current economic expansion has followed a “norm al”
pattern for an economic recovery— robust job gains in
the first few years (average growth was 3.4 percent in the
1983-84 rebound years), succeeded by m uch sm aller
gains in subsequent years (the 2.1-percent job increase in
1988 m atches the average employm ent gain in the 1985 —
86 period).
Chart 2. Percentage change in employment by major occupation,
fo urth -quarter 1 9 8 2 -8 8
-2 0
-1 0
--------,-------- i
Percent
10
0
*
1
1
20
'
I
30
'
1
40
'
1
Executive, administrative,
and managerial
Sales
Professional specialty
issISs•.....: :•SSsSsäääs•••..!*•••*.¿:>
Precision production,
craft, and repair
Technicians and
related support
TOTAL
Services
Operators, fabricators,
and laborers
IlliillllllÄIIII
Ü ilÄ lü lÄ i
Administrative support
(including clerical)
Farming,forestry,
and fishing
All three m ajor age and sex groups (adult men, adult
women, and teenagers) shared in 1988’s em ployment ex
pansion. (See table 3.) A dult women, who represent 45
percent of the work force, accounted for a little more than
60 percent of the over-the-year job gain, slightly more
than their share of em ploym ent grow th throughout the
first 5 years of the expansion. A dult men were responsible
for a slightly sm aller than norm al share of the employ
m ent grow th than they had experienced in recent years,
and, for the third straight year, teenagers experienced a
job gain.
The employment-population ratio provides a useful indi
cato r of the econom y’s ability to generate jobs for a
growing population, as the ratio is affected by both the
supply of jobs and the supply of workers. Thus, a 0.6percentage-point over-the-year rise in the employmentpopulation ratio reflects both the 2.4 million employment
advance in 1988 as well as a slowdown in the rate of growth
of the working-age population.
As the tabulation below shows, the overall employmentpopulation ratio for all workers declined during the 1980—
82 recessionary period, but has steadily increased ever
since; record highs have been established every quarter
since mid-1985, including the 62.5-percent level recorded in
the fourth quarter of 1988:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total
Women,
Men,
20 years 20 years
and over and over Teenagers
F o u r t h - q u a r te r :
1979 .................
1982 ................
1985 .................
6 0 .0
57.3
60.3
76.1
7 0.9
7 3 .4
48.1
48.1
5 1 .4
4 8 .5
4 1 .3
4 3 .9
1986 .................
1987 ................
1988 .................
60.9
61.9
62.5
7 3 .4
7 4 .0
7 4 .2
52.4
53.5
54.5
4 4 .5
4 5 .9
47.1
The em ploym ent-population ratios for the three age
and sex groups have shown different patterns since 1979.
The ratio for women, which has risen. steadily since the
mid-1950’s, paused in the early 1980’s and then increased
by about a percentage point a year between 1983 and
1988. In contrast, the em ploym ent-population ratio for
men dropped 5.2 percentage points between 1979 and
1982. It only partly recovered in 1983 and 1984, was
unchanged in 1985 and 1986, and edged up in 1987 and
1988. By year’s end, the ratio for men rem ained well be
low that posted in 1979, in large part attributable to a
decline in work activity among those of potential retire
ment age (55 and older). The ratio for teenagers followed
a pattern similar to that of men during the 1979-85 pe
riod. However, after edging up in 1986, it has increased
even faster than the ratio for women, growing nearly 3
9
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
percentage points in the last 2 years. Nevertheless, at
year’s end the teenage em ploym ent-population ratio re
mained below prerecession levels.
Unemployment
A fter declining in 1988, the rate of unem ploym ent for
civilian workers fluctuated around 5.5 percent for much
of the year before edging down to 5.3 percent in the fourth
quarter, the lowest rate since the second quarter of 1974.
Over the year, the num ber of unemployed persons fell by
530,000, to 6.6 million. Following a sharp decline in 1987
in the level and rate of unem ploym ent, both measures
resum ed the pattern exhibited in 1985 and 1986 of little or
no improvement.
The 1988 decline in the overall civilian jobless rate was
shared by teenagers, men, and women. The number of un
employed teenagers fell by about 13 percent. This resulted in
a 2.1-percentage-point drop in their unemployment rate, the
third straight yearly decline. The improvement was largely
attributable to a combination of rising demand in many
services jobs that have traditionally been filled by teenagers
and a dwindling supply of such young workers. At 14.6
percent in the fourth quarter of 1988, the teenage rate was
the lowest since 1973.
The unemployment rate for adult men declined by 0.3
percentage point to 4.7 percent in the second quarter of
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
1988 and remained at that rate the rest of the year. How
ever, that level was still slightly above the fourth-quarter
1979 level, as adult men were still affected by their heavy
concentration in some slow-growing (or declining) indus
tries and occupations. The rate for adult women slipped 0.5
percentage point to 4.7 percent at year’s end— its lowest
level since the first quarter of 1970 and well below the rates
recorded just before the 1980-82 recessionary period.
In the 1960’s and 1970’s, unemployment rates were much
higher for adult women than men. In the past few years,
however, the male-female unemployment rate differential
has become negligible. (See chart 4.) Im provem ent in
women’s educational attainment, their increasing attach
ment to year-round full-time jobs, and their greatly reduced
tendency to leave the labor force for child-bearing and -rear
ing have acted to lower their unemployment rates. The
continuing strong employment growth in the service-pro
ducing sector— particularly services, where 60 percent of
jobs are held by women— has also played a role.
Labor force
Civilian labor force grow th was steady throughout the
year, increasing by 1.8 million to 122.4 million in the
fourth quarter of 1988. The year’s 1.5-percent labor force
rise was som ewhat below the grow th rates in each of the
previous 4 years, which ranged from 1.7 percent to 2.0
Chart 3. Percentage change In employment by major Industry division,
fo urth -quarter 1 9 8 2 -8 8
Digitized for10
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent
Table 3.
1982-88
Selected labor force indicators by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted quarterly averages,
[Numbers in thousands]
1982
1986
1985
1988
1987
C haracteristic
I
IV
II
III
IV
Total
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Agriculture........................................................................
Nonagriculture.................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment ra te..........................................................
110,959
64.1
99,120
3,471
95,649
57.3
11,839
10.7
116,183
64.9
107,981
3,087
104,894
60.3
8,202
7.1
118,548
65.4
110,428
3,163
107,264
60.9
8,120
6.8
120,552
65.7
113,475
3,191
110,282
61.9
7,077
5.9
121,045
65.8
114,152
3,212
110,940
62.1
6,893
5.7
121,352
65.8
114,688
3,139
111,549
62.2
6,664
5.5
121,881
65.9
115,202
3,126
112,076
62.3
6,678
5.5
122,388
66.1
115,843
3,223
112,620
62.5
6,545
5.3
58,375
78.8
52,553
70.9
5,822
10.0
60,594
78.1
56,943
73.4
3,651
6.0
61,670
78.2
57,885
73.4
3,785
6.1
62,270
77.9
59,147
74.0
3,123
5.0
62,522
78.0
59,448
74.1
3,074
4.9
62,721
78.0
59,756
74.3
2,965
4.7
62,843
77.9
59,905
74.3
2,938
4.7
62,971
77.8
60,017
74.2
2,953
4.7
44,112
52.9
40,127
48.1
3,985
9.0
47,733
54.9
44,684
51.4
3,049
6.4
48,993
55.7
46,062
52.4
2,931
6.0
50,214
56.5
47,605
53.5
2,609
5.2
50,501
56.6
47,963
53.8
2,538
5.0
50,604
56.6
48,122
53.8
2,483
4.9
50,919
56.8
48,423
54.0
2,496
4.9
51,449
57.2
49,022
54.5
2,427
4.7
8,472
54.3
6,440
41.3
2,032
24.0
7,856
54.3
6,353
43.9
1,503
19.1
7,885
54.2
6,481
44.5
1,404
17.8
8,069
55.1
6,723
45.9
1,345
16.7
8,022
55.0
6,742
46.2
1,281
16.0
8,026
55.1
6,810
46.7
1,216
15.2
8,119
56.0
6,874
47.4
1,244
15.3
7,969
55.2
6,804
47.1
1,165
14.6
96,623
64.4
87,452
58.3
9,171
9.5
100,530
65.2
94,486
61.3
6,044
6.0
102,413
65.7
96,345
61.8
6,067
5.9
103,758
65.9
98,527
62.6
5,231
5.0
104,255
66.1
99,204
62.9
5,050
4.8
104,555
66.2
99,691
63.1
4,864
4.7
104,900
66.2
99,909
63.1
4,991
4.8
105,286
66.4
100,436
63.3
4,849
4.6
11,503
61.5
9,155
48.9
2,348
20.4
12,473
63.0
10,573
53.4
1,900
15.2
12,709
63.2
10,893
54.1
1,816
14.3
13,167
64.3
11,546
56.4
1,621
12.3
13,137
63.9
11,512
56.0
1,626
12.4
13,090
63.4
11,530
55.8
1,559
11.9
13,240
63.8
11,751
56.7
1,489
11.2
13,342
64.1
11,831
56.8
1,510
11.3
6,826
63.5
5,783
53.8
1,043
15.3
7,804
64.6
6,968
57.7
837
10.7
8,252
66.0
7,418
59.3
834
10.1
8,724
66.9
7,981
61.2
743
8.5
8,889
67.6
8,176
62.2
713
8.0
8,914
67.2
8,127
61.3
787
8.8
9,007
67.3
8,286
61.9
721
8.0
9,119
67.6
8,409
62.3
709
7.8
M en, 20 years and over
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment rate..........................................................
W om en, 20 years and over
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment ra te..........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment ra te..........................................................
W hite
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment ra te..........................................................
Black
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment ra te..........................................................
Hispanic origin
Civilian labor fo rc e ...................................................................
Percent of population.......................................................
Employed.............................................................................
Employment-population ratio............................................
Unemployed.........................................................................
Unemployment rate..........................................................
Note : Detail for race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because data for the "other races” group are not presented and Hispanics are included in both
the white and black population groups.
percent. Similar to recent years, the labor force participa
tion rate (the proportion of the population that is in the
labor force) grew by 0.4 percent to 66.1 percent.
C ontributing to the slower grow th in the labor force in
1988 was a 1.2-percent drop in the size of the teenage
labor force. This fall-off coincided with the first decline in
the teenage population since 1985. As a result, the teenage
labor force p articip atio n rate rem ained virtually u n
changed at 55.2 percent. The labor force participation
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
rates for adult men and women moved differently in 1988,
as they have for many years. A 0.7-percentage-point rise
in the labor force participation rate for adult women over
the year carried on a long-term uptrend. In contrast, the
labor force participation rate for adult men was flat at
about 78 percent. This measure has slowly trended dow n
ward during the four decades of the m onthly C P S , having
dropped about 10 percentage points over that period. As
with the em ploym ent-population ratio, this has largely
11
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
been the result of persons retiring at an earlier age. Be
tween 1986 and 1987, however, there was some indication
th at this long-term retirem ent tren d m ight have plateaued, as participation rates for men age 55 and older
were little changed over the period. D ata from 1988 show
a return to the dow nw ard trend, with a 1.1-percentagepoint fall in the participation rate for men ages 55 to 64.
Developments by race and ethnic origin
All three race and ethnic groups shared in 1988’s labor
m arket gains. Black and white workers registered similar
proportional declines in their levels of unem ploym ent, al
though the black unem ploym ent rate at yearend was still
somewhat higher than th at of Hispanics and m uch higher
than that for whites. W hile Hispanics did not register as
strong an unem ploym ent level decline as the others, 1988
was another exceptional year in term s of their em ploy
m ent growth.
The Hispanic population has been showing very rapid
grow th throughout the 1980’s, a tim e when overall popu
lation grow th has been slowing. The H ispanic population
surge has manifested itself in a rapidly expanding labor
force, which grew by nearly 5 percent in 1988. The rate of
labor force grow th for H ispanics has consistently ex
ceeded that of their population, and, during the current
expansion, their labor force participation rate surpassed
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
that of whites for the first time. In 1988, it continued to be
the highest am ong the race and ethnic groups, at 67.6
percent.
Following the pace-setting rates of Hispanic population
and labor force growth, Hispanic employment has also
shown the fastest rise. In 1988, Hispanic employment
grew at a very rapid rate of 5.4 percent. A fter being hit
particularly hard in the last recession, Hispanics have
since accounted for over 15 percent of total employment
gains, about twice their share of total employment. Their
proportion of total employm ent growth, large in the early
years of the expansion, has become even greater in recent
years.
Though dropping by a percentage point from the year
before, the unem ploym ent rate for black workers (11.3
percent) rem ained well above that for Hispanics (7.8 per
cent). In the second quarter, the black unem ploym ent rate
dipped below its prerecession levels for the first time, si
multaneously attaining a 14-year low. The black teenage
unem ploym ent rate did not share in the over-the-year
decline, holding at slightly above 30 percent at yearend.
As with Hispanics, blacks have shown greater rates of
employment growth than whites in the expansion. Nonethe
less, a large gap still remains between minority unemploy
ment rates and that for whites; the Hispanic rate remains
more than 1.5 times the white rate, and the black rate is still
Chart 4. Unemployment rates for men and women age 2 0 and over,
quarterly averages, 1 9 6 8 - 8 8
Percent
Digitized for 12
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent
nearly 2.5 times higher.
A fter changing little in the first half of 1988, em ploy
m ent and labor force levels for blacks m ade some gains in
the final two quarters, resulting in m oderate over-the-year
im provem ents for those measures. The second-half em
ploym ent rise propelled the em ploym ent-population ratio
for blacks to a record high 56.8 percent (since separate
statistics for blacks became available in 1972). T hat ratio
is 6.5 percentage points lower than the one for whites; the
gap between the ratios was 9.4 points at the recession
trough.
The 1988 rate of employment growth for whites returned
to its 1985-86 pace of about 2 percent, after experiencing a
sudden upturn in 1987 along with the rates for other
groups. The ratio of employed whites to their population
reached a new high— 63.3 percent— as it has done in vir
tually every quarter since the recession. The unemploy
ment situation for whites also improved in 1988, as the
absolute num ber of unemployed persons dipped to its low
est level in the decade, despite continued labor force
growth over the year. The already low unemployment rate
for white workers edged down from the previous year and
reached its lowest point since 1974— 4.6 percent.
Other labor market developments
Two additional measures of the condition of the labor
m arket are the counts of “ discouraged w orkers” and
“ persons working part tim e for economic reasons.” The
num ber of discouraged workers— persons who want jobs
but are not looking for them because they believe no work
is available— was essentially unchanged over the year, at
950,000. This was a bit unusual in th at the num ber of
discouraged workers generally follows overall movements
in the level of unem ploym ent, which fell nearly 8 percent
over the year. W omen continued to make up slightly more
than half of all discouraged workers, and black persons
m ade up nearly a quarter.
The number of persons working part time for economic
reasons— those working part time even though they would
prefer a full-time jo b — was as high as 6.7 million during the
1981-82 recession, but had fallen by a million by early
1984. From then until the beginning of 1987, the measure
was stubborn in its improvements, as it fluctuated in a very
narrow range between 5.5 million and 5.7 million. In the
last 2 years, that lower boundary was broken and, though
erratic month-to-m onth changes have still been the norm,
the level was down to 5.1 million by the end of 1988. De
spite the recent improvement, this count of underutilized
workers is still nearly 40 percent above its fourth-quarter
1979 level. Even given the present expansion’s rapid em
ployment growth, persons working part time for economic
reasons accounted for a much higher percentage of total
employment at the end of 1988 than in 1979— 4.4 percent,
compared with 3.7 percent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Duration o f unemployment.
The median duration of
unem ploym ent ended the year at a postrecession low of
5.7 weeks. D uring the last half of 1987 and all of 1988, the
num ber of persons becoming unemployed each m onth
was rem arkably consistent. T hat is, the num ber reporting
they had been jobless for less than 5 weeks was between
3.0 million and 3.2 million for each m onth of the period.
This means that the declines in the level and rate of unem
ploym ent over that period reflected a drop in the am ount
of time workers were rem aining unemployed. In particu
lar, the num ber of persons whose spell of unem ploym ent
was more than half a year declined rapidly, from around 1
million in mid-1987 to just under 750,000 in late 1988.
Those workers m ade up 11 percent of all unemployed
persons, as com pared with 15 percent in the m id-1983
highpoint (long-duration joblessness usually lags by 6
m onths or longer). The current proportion of workers
encountering such extreme job m arket difficulties is still
quite high by historical standards for this far into an eco
nomic expansion.
Reasons fo r unemployment.
Two related postrecession
trends continued in 1988: a slight increase in the propor
tion of unemployed workers who left their last job and a
slight decrease in the proportion who lost their last job.
Such trends are usually considered signs of labor m arket
health; in periods of economic uncertainty, the two trends
reverse directions, as more workers are forced into unem
ploym ent attributable to cutbacks (and thereby become
job losers) and fewer voluntarily give up their jobs (and
become job leavers).
Regional unemployment.
Just as decreases in jobless
ness were widely dispersed among the m ajor age-sex and
race-ethnic groups in 1988, unem ploym ent declined in
virtually all geographic regions of the country. However,
as is always the case, there were wide differences in the
incidence of unem ploym ent am ong the regional labor
markets. As the tabulation below shows, the unem ploy
ment rate (not seasonally adjusted) in the fourth quarter
of 1988 was m arkedly lower than the national average in
the N ortheast, especially in New England. In contrast,
jobless rates in the South C entral States continued to be
m uch higher than the national average, attributable prin
cipally to weaknesses in the energy-related industries.
T o ta l U n ite d S t a t e s ............................5.3
N o r t h e a s t ...............................
N e w E n g l a n d ...................
M i d - A tla n tic ...................
3.9
2.9
4.3
S o u th .....................................
S o u th A t l a n t i c .............
E a s t S o u th C e n tr a l . . .
W e s t S o u th C e n tr a l ..
5.7
4.5
6.9
7 .0
N o r t h C e n t r a l ......................
E a s t N o r t h C e n tr a l . . . .
W e s t N o r t h C e n tr a l . ..
5.3
5.7
4 .4
W e s t .......................................
M o u n t a i n ........................
P a c ific ..............................
5 .0
5.4
4.8
13
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
I n s u m m a r y , the economy maintained its expan
sion through a sixth full year in 1988, as growth in
employment and declines in unemployment continued.
As in past years, the service-producing sector paced
the expansion, although the manufacturing industry dem
Digitized for14
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Employment and Unemployment in 1988
onstrated strength for the second straight year. The
N ation’s civilian jobless rate, at 5.3 percent in the
final quarter, reached its lowest point since 1974,
as most major worker groups shared in the improving
job picture.
□
Shiskin award nominations
The W ashington Statistical Society invites nominations for the tenth
annual Julius Shiskin Award in recognition of outstanding achievement in
the field of economic statistics.
The award, in memory of the former Commissioner of Labor Statistics,
is designed to honor an unusually original and im portant contribution in
the development of economic statistics, or in the use of economic statistics
in interpreting the economy. The contribution could be in statistical re
search, in the developm ent of statistical tools, in the application of
computers, in the use of economic statistics to analyze and interpret the
economy, in the management of statistical programs, or in developing
public understanding of measurement issues, to all of which Mr. Shiskin
contributed. Either individuals or groups can be nominated.
The aw ard will be presented, with an honorarium of $500, at the
W ashington Statistical Society’s annual dinner in June 1989. A nom ina
tion form may be obtained by writing to the Julius Shiskin Award Com
mittee, Am erican Statistical Association, 1429 D uke Street, Alexandria,
va
22314-3402. Com pleted nom ination forms must be received by
A pril 1, 1989.
Families of working wives spending
more on services and nondurables
When a wife becomes a second earner,
husband-wife families spend more
on work-related and timesaving items
such as child care and food away from home,
according to the Consumer Expenditure Survey
E v a Ja c o b s , St e p h a n i e S h i p p ,
and
G
regory
Brow n
D uring the post-W orld W ar II era, there has been a
dram atic increase in wom en’s labor force participation.
This has generated a great deal of public interest in the
social and economic consequences of the employm ent of
women. High rates of labor force participation are preva
lent for women both with and w ithout children. Today,
m ore than half of all m others with children under age 3
w ork outside the home, com pared with fewer than onefourth of such m others in 1967. (See table 1.)
The Consum er Expenditure Survey provides data that
perm it us to examine the effects of a wife’s labor force
participation on the income and expenditures of her fam
ily. The data used in this study are from the 1984-86
Consum er Expenditure Survey.1 To determine the eco
nomic effects on the family of a wage-earning wife, two
groups of consum er units2 are compared: (1) husband-wife
families in which only the husband is an earner, and (2)
husband-wife families in which both the husband and wife
(and no others) are earners. These families will be referred
to as one- and tw o-earner families, respectively. Families
in which the wife is the only earner are not included in this
Eva Jacobs is chief o f the D ivision o f C onsum er E xpenditure Surveys,
B ureau o f L abor Statistics. Stephanie Shipp is chief o f the B ranch of
Info rm atio n and A nalysis in the Division, and G regory B rown is an
econom ist form erly w ith the Division. A n earlier version o f this article
w as p re sen te d a t th e a n n u a l m eeting o f th e A m e ric an S ta tistica l
A ssociation, A ugust 2 1 -2 5 , 1988, in New O rleans.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
study. In our analysis, expenditures generally perceived to
be associated with the wife working outside the home are
studied; these include expenditures on women’s apparel,
child care, purchase of vehicles, gasoline, public transpor
tation, housing, and Social Security and pension plan
costs. We will also discuss the additional income received
from the wife’s employment.
T here are tw o p a rts to this analysis. F irst, we co m
pare th e average an n u al incom e and expenditures o f
those consum er units in w hich th e wife becam e em
ployed du rin g th e period th e consum er u n it w as in the
survey w ith sim ilar consum er units in w hich th e wife
was n o t em ployed. T he econom ic costs an d benefits
from th e wife’s em ploym ent are defined in term s o f the
changes in expenditures an d incom e th a t result from
th e change in th e em ploym ent statu s o f th e wife. In the
second p art, we use m u ltiv ariate regression analysis to
m easure th e effect o f th e wife’s em ploym ent on con
su m er-unit expenditures for all husband-w ife units. In
this p art, we exam ine all one-earner and tw o-earner
fam ilies an d also m ake th e distinction betw een parttim e and full-tim e w orking statu s o f the wife. E ach p art
o f th e study will be described in turn.
The price of time
Intuitively, one would expect two-earner households to
spend their money differently than do one-earner house-
15
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
holds. First, households in which both the husband and
wife work have less tim e available for household-related
activities such as cooking and cleaning. This increased
dem and on a couple’s tim e raises the value of tim e as a
factor of production in household activities. Second, there
is an income effect by which the wife’s additional income
increases expenditures in accordance with the relevant
income elasticities. In addition, the wife’s contribution to
the family income m ay play an enhanced role in the deci
sion about how to allocate income am ong expenditures.
One can envision a pooling of income in which individual
preferences are weighted differently when the wife works.
The relative weighting o f these preferences m ay be altered
by the wife’s decision to work. Vicki Schram Fitzsim m ons
found th at there was a greater incidence o f joint responsi
bility for money m anagem ent tasks in tw o-earner families
than in one-earner families.3
Household production time, we assume, would be a
more valuable “com m odity” to two-earner families than to
one-earner families. Some studies suggest that time may be
more valuable today in the U nited States than in the past or
in other countries. For example, Victor Fuchs found that
women were working 20 minutes longer per day in 1983
than in 1959, if one includes working for pay, housework,
and child care.4 As early as 1965, G ary S. Becker pointed
out that Americans are much more wasteful of food and
other goods than persons in poorer countries and much
more conscious of time: “The tendency to be economical
about time and lavish about goods may be no paradox, but
in part simply a reaction to a difference in relative costs.” 5
The substitution of goods and services for tim e induced
by an increase in the cost o f tim e would often include
substitution of m ore expensive goods and services. For
example, an increase in the value of a m other’s tim e may
induce her to enter the labor force and spend less time
cooking by using prepared foods and less tim e on child
care by using day care centers or babysitters. D uring the
busiest years of raising a family and working, the value of
time is relatively high. It is during the w o rk in g -child
caring phase of the life cycle th at the individual works
m ore and has less leisure tim e.6 If the wife works outside
the home, she will be m ore inclined to pay for services
than the nonw orking wife. The value of tim e also changes
for an individual at various states in his life and, later in
the life cycle, these changes induce substitution o f rela
tively cheaper means of household production for p u r
chased goods and services.
D on Bellante and A nn C. Foster used this theory of the
allocation of tim e as the prim ary rationale underlying
their 1983 study.7 Because working wives spend fewer
hours per week in housework, Bellante and Foster exam
ined the influence o f the wife’s em ploym ent on expendi
tures for services. They also controlled for a variety of
dem ographic variables. T heir results were mixed, in that
there was a positive relationship between em ploym ent and
Digitized for16
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Expenditures o f Families o f Working Wives
Table 1. Labor force participation rates of women by age,
selected years, 1948-87
Participation rate in —
Age
1948
1967
1977
1987
Total, 16 years and over.....
32.7
41.1
48.4
56.0
16 to 19 years .............
20 to 24 years.............
25 to 34 years ............
35 to 44 years.............
45 to 54 years.............
42.0
45.3
33.2
36.9
35.0
41.9
53.3
41.9
48.1
51.8
51.2
66.5
59.7
55.8
55.8
53.3
73.0
72.4
74.5
67.1
some relevant services, such as child care, but not between
employm ent and domestic services.
Using data from the 1972-73 Consum er Expenditure
Survey, Elizabeth W aldm an and Eva E. Jacobs found that
“it is not employm ent or nonem ploym ent of the wife that
per se accounts for difference in expenditures, but rather
the interaction between earner status and the contribution
to income of the second earner.” 8
Longitudinal aspects of the study
The Consum er Expenditure Survey, which has been
continuous since 1980, has a limited longitudinal aspect.
F or the Interview portion of the survey, a sample of con
sum er units is interview ed every 3 m onths over five
consecutive quarters, w ith the num ber of interviewed
cases expected to be about 5,000 per quarter. F or reasons
of operational efficiency, the sample is rotating— onefifth of the consum er units are replaced by new units
every quarter. Each quarter of data is treated as statisti
cally independent. If a survey respondent moves, the new
residents at th at address become the sample unit. M overs
are not followed. A bout 70 percent of the consum er units
participate for all five interviews.9
The interviewer collects extensive expenditure data and
inform ation on the characteristics of the consum er unit.
Am ong these are the age, income, and w ork experience of
all the members. Because the interview is lengthy and
tim e-consum ing, the w ork and incom e questions are
asked only in the second and fifth interviews.
We have not heretofore explored the possibilities of
using the limited longitudinal aspect of the Consum er
Expenditure Survey. However, we have investigated the
types of questions we could attem pt to answer by follow
ing the same household over time. Because one of the
current issues being widely discussed is the prevalence of
the two-earner family, we decided to investigate w hat
happens to the expenditures of a consum er unit when the
wife goes to work during the survey period. F or this part
of the study, we examine the income and expenditures of
husband-wife consum er units in which the wife began
working between the second and fifth interviews and con
sum er units in which the wife was not working during
either the second or fifth interview periods.10
We identified the first group as “new earner” consumer
units. The second group we called the “ control” con
sum er units. The control households, in which the wife
was not employed in either the second or fifth interview,
were selected based on characteristics such as age, family
size, family type, and income that m ade them similar to
the new earner group. To obtain a sample of sufficient size
for analysis, consum er units were selected from the years
1984-86. The resulting sample in each group was 175
consum er units. We first examined the changes in income
and expenditures between the second and fifth interviews
within each group, and then com pared the changes be
tween the two groups. It should be noted that, for this
study, we did not take account of the actual date on which
the wife started working. Therefore, by the fifth interview
she may have been working for as little as 1 m onth or as
m uch as 9 m onths.
It was hypothesized that income and those expenditures
which are commonly associated with working would be
higher in the fifth interview than in the second interview
for the new earner households. The expenditures are for
food away from home, women’s apparel, child care, vehi
cles, gasoline, and mass transit. In addition, we looked at
housing, because the desire for hom eownership is fre
quently given as a reason for wives returning to work, and
at Social Security taxes and pension contributions, which
are directly associated with earnings.
The results as shown in table 2 are mixed. For the new
earner group, the com ponents th at met expectations are
income, with an increase of 17 percent from interview 2 to
interview 5; food away from home, with a 16-percent
increase; and child care, with a 30-percent increase. Be
cause gasoline prices were declining during the reference
period, the 7-percent rise in th at com ponent reflects a
m uch larger real increase and can be included as well.
Housing and pension costs also increased, but at a lower
rate, and expenditures on wom en’s apparel increased only
a small am ount. The result for vehicles can probably be
explained by the small num ber of reports for this cate
gory, which leads to a high variance. F o r example, if one
or two consum er units purchase an expensive automobile
or truck in interview 2 and not in interview 5, a high
variance could result with such a small num ber of obser
vations. Expenditures for mass transit are a small value,
in addition to being sparsely reported.
It is notew orthy th at the average age of the wife in the
new earner group is 42, near the upper age limit of the
high labor force participation group. C onsidering the
large proportion of younger women employed in the total
population, it appears th at a few women are leaving and
rejoining the labor force but that m ore are employed con
tinuously. On the other hand, the expenditures show that
those in the younger group often require child care as
soon as they enter or reenter the employed labor force.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W hen com paring the new earner and control groups,
we run into unexpected anomalies. The increase for the
control group is m uch larger for food away from home
and wom en’s apparel. This may be just an aberration. For
most of the categories, the results are generally satisfac
tory, with the new earner group showing larger changes
than the control group.
If these results reflect reality, one can rationalize the
discrepancy between the increase in income and the in
crease in expenditures. The new earner group wives could
have entered the labor force to help pay for the earlier or
prospective purchase of a car or house or college tuition,
or to repay previously incurred debts. The improvement
in the financial position of the new earner group, going
from expenditures equalling income after taxes in inter
view 2 to a surplus in interview 5, may be used for these
purposes. The control group, on the other hand, has a
similar surplus in both periods.
This is our first attem pt at using the longitudinal char
acter of the Consum er Expenditure Survey. We hope to
investigate the effect of other events. One approach would
be to examine the reverse of the labor force m ovement we
have examined here, that is, to look at consum er units in
which the reference person has retired during the con
sum er u n it’s participation in the survey. O ther possi
bilities are to com pare the expenditures of consum er units
with members moving in, newly born members, or other
additions to the unit with consum er units of constant size.
However, the sample size may be statistically inadequate
for some of these investigations until we accum ulate more
years of data.
Characteristics of families
Following are our findings about the differences in
expenditures between all one-earner and two-earner con
sum er units obtained from regression analysis. F irst,
Table 2. Longitudinal comparison of selected
characteristics and expenditures of one- and two-earner
husband-wife families, 1984-86
_______
Control group
New earners
Per-
Interview
Item
Per
Interview
cent
cent
2
5
change
2
5
change
2
Income before taxes...... $27,951 $32,425
16 $27,480 $28,081
Income after taxes.......... $26,006 $30,482
17 $25,237 $25,913
3
43.3
—
3.9
3.8 —
7 $23,744 $23,796
$26,160 $27,912
1,024
733
17
1,092
937
429
385
3
469
456
118
130
158
30
122
1,494
1,904
1,398 -4 2
2,423
1,066
1,081
7
1,180
1,101
18
33
35 -1 5
41
2,363
2,284
6
2,736
2,593
—
0
40
11
-9
-2 2
-1
-4 6
3
2,124
0
Age of w ife.....................
Family size.....................
Total expenditures..........
Food away from home .
Women's apparel.......
Child care....................
Vehicles.......................
Gasoline.....................
Mass transit................
Shelter........................
Social Security, pensions.........................
—
2,256
42.0
2,380
-
-
5
2,135
17
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R EV IEW
Table 3.
February 1989
Expenditures o f Families o f Working Wives
•
Demographic characteristics of husband-wife families1 classified by wife's employment status, 1984-86
All
Fam ily incom e and w ife ’s em ploym ent status
husband-w ife
Characteristic
fam ilies
Less than $20,000
$2 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 3 4 ,9 9 9
$3 5 ,0 0 0 and over
Not
Part-
Full-
Not
Part-
Full-
Not
Part-
working
Full-
tim e
Not
tim e
working
tim e
tim e
working
tim e
tim e
working
Fulltim e
tim e
Number of consumer
units (in thousands)......
14,052
9,351
18,774
6,178
3,414
4,553
4,674
3,562
7,436
3,200
2,375
6,786
Income before taxes......
$28,923
$30,820
$36,282
$12,807
$12,582
$14,216
$28,914
$29,884
$30,863
$64,140
$58,439
$57,114
$51,441
Income after ta x e s .........
$26,439
$28,221
$32,573
$11,725
$11,673
$12,879
$26,184
$26,943
$27,846
$58,973
$53,923
Size of consumer unit.....
3.4
3.4
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.4
3.5
3.0
3.3
3.5
2.9
Age of reference person .
44.5
38.3
37.9
44.1
38.1
36.6
43.8
36.8
36.6
46.5
41.0
40.1
Number In consumer unit:
Earners.....................
Vehicles....................
Children under 18.......
1.0
2.2
1.3
2.0
2.5
1.4
2.0
2.5
1.0
1.3
2.0
2.2
1.2
2.0
2.2
1.1
1.0
2.4
1.3
2.0
2.6
1.5
2.0
2.6
1.0
1.0
2.5
1.3
2.0
2.8
1.4
2.0
2.7
0.9
P ercent reporting
Housing tenure:
Homeowner with
mortgage...................
Homeowner without
mortgage...................
Renter." .....................
50
60
62
33
39
38
56
66
62
72
82
78
26
24
15
25
12
26
28
39
20
41
18
44
24
20
13
21
11
27
20
8
10
8
9
13
Race of reference
person:
Black........................
White and other..........
5
95
5
95
91
8
92
91
12
88
3
97
3
97
9
91
2
98
3
97
7
93
Education of reference
person:
Elementary (1 -8 )........
High school (9 -1 2 ).....
College........................
10
47
43
4
39
57
5
43
52
17
55
28
10
53
37
9
59
32
5
53
42
1
44
55
48
48
24
75
21
78
27
71
1Data are for complete income reporters. See text footnote 10.
however, we examine the characteristics of all husbandwife families classified by the wife’s earner status.
Families in which both the husband and wife work are
a m ajor and growing segment of A m erican society. In
alm ost 70 percent o f husband-w ife families, the wife
works outside the home. Tw o-thirds of these women work
full time, while one-third work part time. (See table 3.)
There are differences in the characteristics of families in
which the wife works full tim e and those in which the wife
is not employed. F or example, families in which both the
husband and wife work full time are younger, are more
likely to have attended college, and have fewer children.
The hom eownership rate is about the same for the two
types of families, but the two full-time earner family is
only half as likely to own its hom e m ortgage free. A
higher proportion of families with two full-time workers
are black. Also, two full-time earner families own more
vehicles than one-earner families, although both average
at least two.
Families in which the wife works part tim e exhibit
some of the characteristics of families in which the wife
works full time and some of the characteristics of those in
which the wife does not work outside the home. Families
in which the wife works part tim e are, on average, the
same age and own the same num ber of vehicles as two
full-time earner families. However, tw o-earner families in
which the wife works part tim e are m ore like one-earner
18
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
families in that, on average, they have about the same
num ber of children. This may explain, in part, why the
wife works part time, as it may not be economically feasi
ble to pay for extra child care. She may arrange her work
schedule around the schoolday or her husband’s work
schedule, or both.
A look at the characteristics presented in table 3 shows
that approxim ately the same relationships hold across all
income levels. However, there are some interesting differ
ences. N ot surprisingly, the wife works full time in more
than half of the families in the highest income group,
com pared to only one-third of the families in the lowest
income group. The average age of the highest income
group is higher. It is possible that the children are also
older, perm itting more women to work full time.
On average, women contributed substantially to family
income. Earnings of women working part time repre
sented about 29 percent of their families’ total income.
W omen who work full time contribute 40 percent of their
families’ incom e.11
The sources of income are somewhat different in gen
eral between one-earner and two-earner households. (See
table 4.) Tw o-earner families obtain a higher share of their
income from wages and salaries and a lower share from
self-employment income than one-earner families. As one
would expect, one-earner families receive a higher share
of their income from Social Security, private, and govern-
m ent retirem ent. This reflects the higher average age of
the head of the one-earner consum er unit, in which one
spouse may be retired and the other still working. Heads
of one-earner households are, on average, 6 years older
than heads of tw o-earner households.
O ne-earner families earn two to three times more from
interest and other property income, both as a share of
income and in absolute dollar term s, than two-earner
families. This m ay be because one-earner families are
older and therefore m ore likely to have accum ulated
wealth. It may also be because single-earner families may
invest and save m ore than dual-earner families to offset
som ewhat their reliance on a single paycheck. A wife’s
earnings may dim inish a family’s motive to save as a
hedge against a husband’s possible job loss. In addition, if
a working wife is covered by a pension plan, which is in
part employer financed, the family’s m otivation to save
for retirem ent may be lessened.12
Incom e is 23 percent higher for two full-time earner
families when com pared to one-earner families, whereas it
is only 7 percent higher for tw o-earner families in which
the wife works part time. Incom e for one-earner and twoearner (wife works part time) families are about the same
for the two lowest income groups. If the wife works full
time, income is between 6 and 10 percent higher than the
income of one-earner families in the two lowest income
groups. In the highest income group, the one-earner fam
ily appears to be a different type. Incom e is 14 percent
higher than th at of families in which the wife works full
tim e and 9 percent higher than th at of families with wives
employed part time. This can be explained by the fact
that the higher income group is open ended. One-earner
families in this income group have m ore self-employed
earners, and interest, dividends, and other property in
come are also substantial.
In families in which the husband earns an income that
is considerably above average, a high proportion of the
Table 4.
wives do not work. The benefit of additional income from
the wife is probably relatively low. Also, if the wife does
not have the training or inclination for professional work,
it may be relatively difficult for her to find w ork that
befits the social status she derives from her husband. A c
cording to B arbara R. Bergmann, “Such families con
stitute the last bastion of the full-time housewife.” 13
This review of the characteristics and income of these
households emphasizes that there are other variables be
sides earner status that influence spending patterns, and
that many of these variables are related to each other.
Regression analysis
M ultivariate tobit regression analysis was used to ex
amine w hether expenditure differences exist between oneand two-earner families after controlling for differences in
dem ographic characteristics.14 The tobit statistical proce
dure is particularly well suited to the analysis of data
when some consum er units incur no expenditures for
some items during the interview period. W eights were
used in the regression analysis, so that the results apply to
the total population.
The analysis was limited to those expenditures gener
ally perceived to be influenced more by the earner status
of the wife than by other dem ographic characteristics.
E ight equations were estim ated. T he eight dependent
variables were expenditures15 for food away from home,
child care and babysitting, gasoline and m otor oil, p u r
chase of new vehicles, purchase of used vehicles, wom en’s
apparel, public transportation, and shelter.
Independent variables and hypotheses.
We are investi
gating w hether the working status of the wife accounts for
differences in expenditures among husband-wife families
or w hether the differences are due to income, family size,
the presence of children, or some other characteristic. The
working status of the wife is the variable of interest for
this study. To isolate the effect of th at variable, we are
Percent distribution of income by source for husband-wife families1 classified by wife's employment status, 1984-86
Fam ily incom e and w ife’s em ploym ent status
am
nusoana-wiTe tam nies
$ 3 5,000 and over
$ 20,000 to $34,999
Less than $20,000
Incom e by source
P art-tim e
Full-tim e
Not working
P art-tim e
Full-tim e
Not working
P art-tim e
Full-tim e
Not w orking
P art-tim e
Full-tim e
Not working
Income before taxes ...
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Wages and salaries........
77.3
86.2
91.0
79.4
82.2
87.3
86.1
92.6
91.8
78.4
82.8
87.3
Self employment............
9.2
7.3
4.7
4.7
5.2
4.2
5.1
3.4
4.0
9.7
11.7
8.1
Social Security, private,
and government
retirement.....................
7.4
2.6
1.6
9.1
5.9
3.1
5.0
1.8
1.8
4.8
2.0
1.4
Interest, dividends,
rental income, and
other property income...
4.6
2.4
1.4
2.1
2.0
1.1
2.8
1.3
1.2
6.6
2.6
2.2
Other income2................
1.6
1.4
1.3
4.6
4.6
4.3
1.0
0.9
1.2
0.5
0.8
1.0
'Data are for complete income reporters. See text footnote 10.
2Other income includes unemployment and workers' compensation, veterans' benefits, public assistance, supplemental security income, food stamps, and regular
contributions for support.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
19
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
T a b le 5.
February 1989
•
Expenditures o f Families o f Working Wives
T o b it r e g re s s io n c o e ffic ie n ts
D ependent variables
In d ependent v a ria b le 1
Food away from
Child
New
Used
home
care2
vehicles
vehicles
Gasoline
m otor oil
Public
W o m en ’s
transportation
apparel
Shelter
Employment status of wife (not
working):
Part-time.................................
Full-time.............................
19.00**
27.74*
Total expenditures3 .....................
3.31*
1.79*
144.55*
30.38*
0.56*
3.89*
1.65*
11.42*
Age of reference person..............
5.12*
46.62*
-699.29*
-405.71*
7.11*
9.00**
2.33**
11.16*
Age-squared.................................
-0.04*
-0.53*
6.22*
3.19*
-0.08’
Age* part-time employment
status of wife..............................
523.37*
785.04*
—
-8.86*
Age* full-time employment
status of wife..............................
—
-13.64*
Family size...................................
-5.11
Presence of children (age 12 or
over):
Under age 6 .............................
Ages 6 - 1 1 ...............................
-79.00*
6.45
Education (high school):
Less than 12 years...................
Some college............................
College graduate or more.........
-83.76*
50.24*
99.03*
Seasons (Fall: October- Decernber):
Winter (January-March)..........
Spring (April-June)..................
Summer (July-September) .....
-45.35*
-8.72
12.37
Region (South):
Northeast.................................
Midwest...................................
W est........................................
33.32*
27.93*
14.13
-46.82*
25.73
18.05
Urbanization (urban):
Rural........................................
-44.69*
-36.31*
Number of vehicles.....................
Housing tenure (renter):
Homeowner .............................
Constant..................................
—
—
-75.63**
-14.90**
822.16*
208.96*
-87.08*
82.08*
166.42*
—
—
—
—
—
-2149.00*
-1198.57
870.19
—
—
-1553.68
12.30*
24.89*
40.59
29.40
-0.06
—
—
—
—
—
—
212.62**
-36.19**
36.23*
-0.03*
1.52*
-25.48
41.77**
-0.23*
—
-0.34
—
18.98*
17.67
-12.48*
-21.05**
-141.64*
-75.00*
-28.40*
-27.08*
47.57**
32.77
—
—
—
—
-28.88*
-18.52*
1274.55*
-1574.48*
-2461.19*
-16.42*
2.92
-10.85*
15.27
109.33*
293.42*
-40.67*
27.54*
57.01*
-4 3 93
90 59*
445.23*
8.47
5.94
33.57*
-11.06
-3.17
108.72*
46.81*
-7.73
-13.02**
-4 6 48**
-117 68*
-47.41**
-53.09*
-34.75*
-11.38*
222.62*
28.43
213.55*
15.75*
11.73
-0.09
92.84*
9.95
336.26*
-312.16
22.99*
-300.53*
-29.15*
-315.08*
1328.87*
32.85*
-76.98*
-1385.39
-874.15
-3800.40*
11.20
697.57
932.17
645.68
-24.18
-2856.01*
139.42
2006.12*
-21401.44*
1Where appropriate, characteristics of the reference group are indicated in parentheses.
Child care includes day care and babysitting.
3Values have been multiplied by 100.
controlling the other socioeconomic variables. These vari
ables are listed in table 5 and are similar, although not
identical, for each of the eight models being estimated.
W here appropriate, the characteristics of the reference
group are indicated in parentheses in the table. The refer
ence group is the group to which the com parison is made.
F or instance, in table 5, the reference group is “wife not
w orking.” The coefficients for “P art-tim e” and “F ull
tim e” are com pared to the “not working” group. By way
of example, the coefficient of 19.00 for food away from
home for wives working part tim e indicates that these
wom en’s families spend m ore on food away from home
than families in which the wife does not work. Unlike
ordinary least squares regression estimates, tobit regres
sion coefficients indicate only the direction, and not the
magnitude, of the differences between groups.
The working statu s16 of the wife is defined as follows:
(1) the wife is not employed outside the hom e (the refer
Digitized for
20FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-70.44
20.25
-449.43
518.29
-103.24
—
—
—
—
—
-6608.70*
4.54
__
_
—
—
32.34
-1261.17*
-84.11*
227.31*
'Significant at the alpha = .01 level.
* ‘ Significant at the alpha = .05 level.
Note : Dash indicates that the variable was not used in the model.
ence group); (2) the wife is working part time; or, (3) the
wife is working full time. W orking part time is defined as
working fewer than 35 hours per week or working full
time for part of the year. W orking full time is defined as
working 35 hours or more per week for at least 50 weeks.
It is hypothesized th at working will be positively related
to the expenditures under study.
Consistent with classical consumption theory and the re
sults of previous research, income is hypothesized to be
positively related to expenditures. Total expenditures are
chosen as a proxy for income for three reasons.17 First, the
permanent income hypothesis suggests that total expendi
tures are an appropriate measure of income because, in the
short run, families have more control over expenditures
than over incomes. Second, total expenditures have been
shown to give a better fit than income in models designed to
predict expenditures in a number of expenditure catego
ries.18 Third, in addition to the economic reasons, there are
operational reasons for using total expenditures. Income
data are only collected during interviews 2 and 5. Income
data are collected for the previous year while expenditure
data are collected for the previous 3 months. Thus, there is
a lag between reports of income and expenditures that dis
appears at the aggregate level but may distort results at the
micro level. Using total expenditures as proxy for income
corrects this timelag problem.
The presence of children by age group is included in the
model because it affects expenditures, particularly for
child care and food away from home. This variable is
entered as a categorical variable and is defined as (1) the
presence of children under age 6; (2) the presence of chil
dren ages 6 to 11; or, (3) the presence of children age 12
or older (the reference group).
Age and age-squared are included in the model to m ea
sure changes in expenditure patterns over the life cycle.19
(Recall that one-earner families are, on average, older.)
Fam ily size is also included because it is a m ajor determ i
nant of household consum ption patterns,20 although the
direction of its effect may differ depending on the item —
expenditures probably vary negatively with family size for
food away from home, and positively for child care. It is
not clear w hat the effect on the other expenditure catego
ries will be. Housing tenure is included in the shelter
model because of the inherent differences in the cost of
renting versus owning a home. Education is controlled for
because previous research indicates th at education in
creases efficiency in all n o n m a rk e t activ ities.21 T his
greater efficiency increases a household’s real income. E d
ucation also is used as a variable in consum er research to
m easure social status.
Regional variation in the availability of and need for
goods and services as well as regional price differences
makes it necessary to control for the region of the country
in which the consum er unit lives. The same is true for
urban and rural differences.
Results
Results of the regression analysis are displayed in table
5. To test the overall significance of the set of variables
included in each expenditure model, the likelihood ratio
test statistic was used.22 The resulting chi-square values
were statistically significant at the 0.01 level. This allowed
for the rejection of the null hypothesis th at all of the
coefficients (except the intercept) are equal to zero for all
the models considered. The coefficients from the tobit
regression models were used to calculate the predicted
expenditures and to determ ine changes in expenditure
patterns over the life cycle.
Expenditures for households in which the wife works
full tim e or part tim e were significantly greater for most of
the items under study than for households in which the
wife is not employed, after accounting for the other differ
ences. Fam ilies in w hich the wife is em ployed spend
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
significantly more on food away from home, child care,
women’s apparel,23 and gasoline and m otor oil than do
families in w hich the wife does not w ork outside the
home. If the wife works full time, her family also spends
significantly more than the one-earner family on shelter.
Child care expenditures include all expenses for nurs
ery school, day care, babysitting, camp, and so on. Child
care expenditures are a necessity for m others employed
outside the home. W hether the wife works part time or
full time, child care expenditures are significantly more
than for families in which the wife is not employed. H ow
ever, this difference narrow s as these women get older.
This makes intuitive sense because older women are more
likely to have older children, who require less outside
care. It is also confirmed by the presence-of-children vari
able that shows families with children age 11 or younger
spending significantly more for child care than families
with children age 12 or older. Based on results from the
regression equation, child care expenditures for families
in which the wife works full time increase until age 30 and
continue at that level until about age 35, at which point
they begin to decline steadily. Child care expenditures for
fam ilies in w hich the wife w orks p a rt tim e increase
through age 35, when they level out until age 40 and then
begin to decline. The wives in these families have more
children and retu rn to w ork later or w ork part time
longer.
H ouseholds in which the wife works spend significantly
more on food away from home than the one-earner house
hold. The working wife often buys lunch or breakfast, or
both, at work. In addition, she may be inclined to cook
dinner less often, due to lack of time. This means her
family will often eat dinner out as well.
Expenditures for vehicles, both new and used, are the
same for one- and two-earner families despite the fact that
two-earner families own more vehicles than do one-earner
families (2.5 versus 2.2 vehicles). Ownership of more vehi
cles is one reason why gasoline and m otor oil expenditures
are higher for two-earner families. In addition, the accrued
mileage that occurs from daily commuting increases gas
and m otor oil consumption.
Wives who work full time spend more on clothing than
wives who are not working, although the difference closes
with increasing age. Wives who work part time spend
more on apparel than nonworking wives after age 24.
Expenditures for shelter, including both owned dwell
ings and rental units, are significantly higher for families
in which the wife works full time. These families are
younger and have higher mortgages. Also, fewer twoearner families own their homes w ithout m ortgage— 12
percent versus 24 percent of one-earner families. Two full
time earner families who are renters also have higher
average rental costs. If the wife works part time, shelter
costs are about the same as for families in which the wife
is not employed. This may be explained by the fact that
21
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
one-earner and tw o-earner families in w hich the wife
works part time have the same num ber of children, on
average, and thus have sim ilar space requirem ents and
housing needs. In addition, the average income of families
in which the wife works part tim e is only slightly higher
than that of one-earner households.
While the em ploym ent status of the wife is statistically
significant in explaining differences in the levels of ex
penditures for child care, food away from home, gasoline
and m otor oil, wom en’s apparel, and shelter, it is im por
tant to note the relative im pact of the wife’s working
status on expenditures. One way to do this is by looking at
the effect of the wife’s working status on the predicted
expenditures. A fter controlling for oth er explanatory
variables, the working status of the wife has a small, al
though significant, im pact on the predicted expenditures
for these items. F o r example, families of employed wives
spend an average of 17 to 18 percent m ore per year on
child care and about 4 percent m ore on w om en’s apparel
than families of wives who are not employed. Expendi
tures on food away from hom e are between 2 and 3
percent higher if the wife works. Thus, the relative impact
on expenditures of the wife’s working appears small. This
is supported by previous studies th at yielded sim ilar re
sults, in th at significant differences are found but the
actual dollar differences are relatively sm all.24 W hat ap
pears to be happening is th at these same expenditures rise
as the income of the one-earner family rises. Therefore,
the difference in expenditures at the same income level is
not as great as might be expected.
W hat about the expenditure categories for which the
wife’s earner status is not significant, such as for the pur
chase of vehicles? All husband-wife families own more than
two vehicles, on average. Purchase of new vehicles is deter
mined by income and age while purchase of used vehicles is
determined by income, age, family size, and education. A
similar finding about other consumers’ durable goods was
made by M yra H. Strober: “ . . . although initial labor
force participation may be associated with an increase in
the durables to income ratio, after wives have been at work
for a few years, most of the substitution out of home pro
duction is likely to be into the time-saving nondurables and
services.” 25
Public transportation is another expenditure category
for which the wife’s earner status is not significant. In the
regression equations, public transportation includes large
ticket items which are often used as vacation transp orta
tion, such as airline fares, train tickets, and ship fares, as
well as local transit. The com m uter com ponent is rela
tively small. Therefore, it is not surprising that the wife’s
earner status is not significant. Public transportation ex
penditures for husband-wife families are positively related
to income and age and negatively related to the presence
of children under age 12. A nother indication th at this is
Digitized for
22FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Expenditures o f Families o f Working Wives
vacation transportation is that the regression results indi
cate that expenditures are highest in the summer.
Summary
The results from the longitudinal analysis and regres
sion analysis are sim ilar although not identical. Both
analyses yield similar findings for expenditures on child
care, gasoline, and vehicles. Child care and gasoline ex
penditures were found to be higher for the families of
working wives, while vehicle purchases and public trans
portation expenditures were com parable for all husbandwife families regardless of the wife’s employm ent status.
The low increases in shelter in the longitudinal analysis
may be explained in part by the mixed result in the regres
sion analysis section. Two full-time earner families do
spend significantly more than one-earner families on shel
ter, while tw o-earner families in which the wife works
part time spend the same am ount on shelter as one-earner
families.
Expenditures for food away from home and women’s
apparel are significantly higher for all two-earner husbandwife families when compared to one-earner husband-wife
families, according to the regression results. The longitudi
nal analysis also shows increases in expenditures for food
away from home and wom en’s apparel for families in
which the wife returns to work. The only puzzling result
here is that expenditures for food away from home and
women’s apparel increased more for the “control” (oneearner) households than for the “new earner” (two-earner)
households.
The labor force is now growing at slightly more than 1
percent a year, compared to double that rate during the
1970’s and early 1980’s. Labor shortages in some industries
are already beginning to appear. The Census Bureau’s 1982
Current Population Survey found that 26 percent of non
working mothers with preschoolers would look for work if
“reasonably priced child care were available.”26 This repre
sents a potential addition to the labor force of 1.7 million
women. Thirteen percent of employed women with pre
schoolers (about 700,000 workers) said they would work
longer hours if additional or better child care were avail
able. Given these attitudes toward work and tighter labor
supplies, it is likely that more employers will begin to offer
child care benefits to induce women to enter the labor
force. Hence, the num ber of two-earner families may be
expected to continue to grow. The ongoing Consumer Ex
penditure Survey will allow for future examination of the
spending patterns of these families.
□
---------- FOOTNOTES---------‘T he d ata used in this study were draw n from the Interview portion o f
the 1984, 1985, and 1986 C onsum er E xpenditure Survey. T he Interview
survey is the m ost com prehensive survey o f dem ographic characteristics
of A m erican consum er units. T he Interview sam ple, selected on a rotat-
ing panel basis, is targeted at 5,000 consum er units per quarter. E ach
q u arter, one-fifth o f the sam ple is new to the survey. C onsum er units
who p articipate in the survey are interview ed five times, once per q u a r
ter; th e first interview is used only for bounding purposes. D ata for
interviews 2 th ro ugh 5 are used for publication and analysis. O ver the
1 9 8 4 -8 6 tim e fram e, d ata for a consum er unit m ay be available from one
to four tim es. E ach q u arter is considered as a separate sam ple when
estim ates are calculated.
2T he term s “ household,” “fam ily,” and “consum er u n it” are used
interchangeably th ro ughout the text.
3Vicki Schram F itzsim m ons, “ Fam ily M oney M anagem ent: How
O ne-E arner and T w o-E arner Fam ilies H andle M oney,” poster presenta
tion at the an n ual m eeting of the A m erican C ouncil on C onsum er
Interests, Chicago, IL, A pril 1988.
4V ictor Fuchs, “ Sex D ifferences in E conom ic W ell-Being,”
A pr. 25, 1986, pp. 4 5 9 -6 4 .
5G.S. Becker, “ A T heory o f the A llocation of T im e,”
Journal, Septem ber 1965, pp. 4 9 3 -5 1 7 .
Science,
The Economic
6R obert T. M ichael and G ary S. Becker “O n the New T heory o f
C onsum er B ehavior,” Swedish Journal of Economics, Septem ber 1973,
pp. 3 7 8 -9 5 .
7D on Bellante and A nn C. Foster, “ W orking W ives and E xpenditure
on Services,” Journal of Consumer Research, Septem ber 1983, pp.
7 0 0 -0 7 .
8E lizabeth W aldm an and Eva E. Jacobs, “W orking W ives and Fam ily
E x penditures,” Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section of the Ameri
can Statistical Association, 1978.
9F o r the initial interview, inform ation is collected on dem ographic
and fam ily characteristics and on the inventory of m ajo r durable goods
o f each consum er unit. E xpenditure inform ation is also collected in this
interview, using a 1-m onth recall, but is used, along w ith the inventory
inform ation, solely for bounding purposes; th at is, to classify the unit for
analysis and to prevent duplicate reporting of expenditures in subsequent
interviews. D ata from the first interview are not used in the estim ates.
10C om plete incom e reporters. T he distinction between com plete and
incom plete incom e reporters is based in general on w hether the respon
dent provided values for m ajo r sources o f incom e, such as wages and
salaries, self-em ploym ent incom e, and Social Security incom e. Even
com plete incom e reporters m ay not have provided a full accounting of
all incom e from all sources. In the cu rren t survey, across-the-board zero
incom e reporting was designated as invalid, and the consum er unit was
categorized as an incom plete reporter.
D ata for the descriptive statistics (tables 2 and 3) are for com plete
incom e repo rters only. D ata used in the regression analysis are for all
husband-w ife families.
"S u san E. Shank, “ W om en and the labor m arket: the link grows
stro n g er,” Monthly Labor Review, M arch 1988, pp. 3 - 8 .
12M yra H. Strober, “W ives’ L abor Force Behavior and Fam ily C on
sum ption P attern s,” American Economic Review, F ebruary 1977, pp.
4 1 0 -1 7 .
" B a rb a ra R. Bergm ann, The
Y ork, Basic Books, Inc., 1986).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Economic Emergence of Women (New
14F o r a description o f the m ethodology, see G.S. M addala, LimitedDependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics (N ew Y ork,
C am bridge U niversity Press, 1983).
"E x p en d itu res are defined as the transaction cost, including excise
and sales taxes, o f goods and services acquired during th e interview
period. E xpenditure estim ates include expenditures for gifts, but exclude
purchases o r the portion of purchases directly assignable to business
purposes. A lso excluded are periodic credit o r installm ent paym ents on
goods o r services previously acquired. T he full cost o f each purchase is
recorded when the purchase is m ade, even though full paym ent m ay not
have been m ade on the date of purchase.
"F am ilies in which the wife w orks as a volunteer are not included in
this study. These families were dropped because they could introduce
conflicting results. T h at is, they probably m ake use o f the sam e tim esav
ing techniques th at em ployed wom en use b ut there is no additional
income.
17In addition, if a wife begins to work during the periods covered by
the th ird and fourth interviews, th at inform ation is collected. T his was
discussed in the longitudinal p art of this study. H ow ever, if th e wife
stops w orking, th at inform ation is not recorded until the fifth interview.
Hence, a family m ay be m isclassified for up to tw o quarters.
18S. J. Prais and H. S. H outhakker, The Analysis
(C am bridge, m a , T he U niversity Press, 1971).
of Family Budgets
19Age is th at o f the reference person in the consum er unit. T he refer
ence person is the first m em ber m entioned by the survey respondent
when asked to “ S tart w ith the nam e of the person or one o f the persons
who owns or rents the hom e.” It is w ith respect to this person th at the
relationship of o ther consum er unit m em bers is determ ined. T hus, age
m ay refer to the husband o r the wife.
20R obert A. Pollack and T erence J. W ales, “ D em ographic Variables,
in D em and A nalysis,” Econometrica, N ovem ber 1981, pp. 1 5 33-51.
2'See R obert T. M ichael, The Effect of Education on Efficiency in
Consumption, N ational B ureau o f E conom ic R esearch Occasional P aper
No. 116 (New Y ork, C olum bia U niversity, 1972).
22T he test statistic is X2 = -2 (lo g L ikelihood R - l o g Likelihood U).
T he statistic is asym ptotically chi-square, distributed w ith th e degrees of
freedom equal to the num ber o f coefficients set equal to zero. T he log
likelihood function for the restricted m odel, represented by R, is ob
tained when the function is m axim ized w ith respect to the intercept only.
The log likelihood of the unrestricted m odel, U, is obtained when the
function is m axim ized w ith respect to all the coefficient estim ates co rre
sponding to the intercept and all explanatory variables.
23T he part-tim e earner status coefficient for w om en’s apparel is nega
tive. H ow ever, w hen the interaction term “age* part-tim e em ploym ent
status o f the wife” is included in the equation, the net effect is th at, for
families w ith a reference person over age 24, households w ith wives
w orking p art tim e spend m ore on apparel th an those in which the wife
does not work.
24W aldm an and Jacobs, “W orking W ives.”
"S tro b e r, “ W ives’ L abor F orce B ehavior.”
" M a r tin O ’C onnell and D avid E. Bloom, “Juggling Jobs and Babies:
A m erica’s C hild C are C hallenges,” Population Trends and Public Policy,
Issue no. 12 (W ashington, P o pulation R eference B ureau, F eb ru ary
1987).
23
Variations in holidays,
vacations, and area pay levels
Higher paying localities often report
more liberal leave provisions, but
factors other than pay also are important
Jo
h n
E. Bu
ckley
W orkers with above-average holiday and vacation bene
fits are likely to be in areas that have above-average pay
levels and th at are located outside the South. F o r bluecollar workers, leave tim e also is likely to be greater in
areas w ith larger establishm ents and a relatively high
incidence of unionization and m anufacturing activity. D e
troit, for example, has these characteristics, and combined
holiday and vacation tim e for production workers in the
area is about 20 percent (nearly 4 days) above the national
average. San A ntonio, in contrast, is an area w ith belowaverage pay, unionization, and m anufacturing activity
levels, and with sm aller than average establishm ent em
ployments. Leave levels in the area also are considerably
below the national norms.
The data used in this analysis come largely from sur
veys conducted in 68 localities included in the B ureau’s
A rea W age Survey ( a w s ) program . This program pro
vides inform ation on occupational pay and em ployee
benefits derived from a statistical sample o f the N ation’s
m etropolitan areas.1 The program provides wage data
(straight-tim e earnings) for workers in selected narrowly
defined occupations, such as m aintenance m echanic, jan i
tor, secretary, and com puter program m er, reflecting the
typical practice of setting wage and salary rates by job
performed. Inform ation on benefit plans is obtained only
for two broad em ploym ent categories— production and
office w o rk ers— because em ployers generally provide
uniform benefits within each of these groups.2
The occupational wage data collected in the a w s pro
gram are used to produce indexes (labeled “ relative pay
John E. Buckley is an econom ist in the Division of O ccupational Pay and
Em ployee Benefit Levels, B ureau o f L abor Statistics.
Digitized for24
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
levels”) of interarea differences in average straight-tim e
weekly or hourly earnings for four employee groups: of
fice clerical, electronic data processing ( e d p ) , skilled
maintenance, and unskilled plant w orkers.3 These four
sets of pay relatives, together with area vacation and holi
day practice data for the production and office groups,
provide the com pensation inputs for the analysis pre
sented in this article.
Basic assumptions
To perm it com parison of area pay and leave standings,
within each m etropolitan area studied the two blue-collar
groups are assumed to receive holiday and vacation bene
fits equal to the average for the area’s production and
related workers. Also, the w hite-collar groups are as
sumed to receive the average benefits of office workers.
Furtherm ore, because the a w s program does not pro
vide sufficient detail on most employee benefits, it was
possible to include only paid holiday and vacation data in
this study.4 The holiday data are comparable to those
published in individual a w s reports, except that workers
receiving no paid holidays are included in the calculation
of area averages. In contrast, vacation data differ from
those published in a w s reports, which describe area vaca
tion schedules— th at is, lengths of vacation granted after
specified periods of service (such as 5 days’ pay after 1
year of service, 10 days’ after 3 years, and so forth). A c
cordingly, to facilitate comparisons of leave time among
areas, and to relate leave to area pay levels, the vacation
schedules in the a w s reports were converted into esti
m ates of the average num ber of vacation days granted by
applying national tenure data from the January 1983 C ur
rent Population Survey.
Finally, national tenure data were used because area data
are not available. While these data do not reflect arearelated differences in workers’ seniority, their use still pro
vides the benefits of standardization in comparisons across
areas: Area-related differences in vacation time for workers
with uniform lengths of service are revealed. This use of
national tenure data for standardization is similar to the use
of national occupational weights for computing area rela
tive pay levels.
Holidays and vacation days
Table 1 contains inform ation on paid holiday and vaca
tion provisions in all m etropolitan areas combined and in
four broad regions.5 The data span the period 1983-86,
when inform ation on benefits was collected at least once
in each area.6 W hile m ore than 90 percent of the w ork
ers received paid holidays, the num ber of days off varied
considerably am ong regions and occupational groups.
F o r example, about 8 percent of the Southern workers
received 12 or m ore holidays a year, com pared with 17
percent nationwide. Am ong the occupational groups, of
fice workers averaged one m ore holiday nationwide than
production and related workers (9.7 versus 8.7 holidays).
Vacation provisions also differed considerably between
office and production workers and among regions, espe
cially for workers with a short duration of service. Eightyfive percent of the office workers, for example, had plans
giving at least 2 weeks of vacation after 1 year of service,
while only 39 percent of the production workers had the
Table 1.
same provision. If, in each area studied, workers’ seniority
with their current employer had followed the national pat
tern revealed by the January 1983 C urrent Population
Survey, office workers would have averaged one more day
of vacation than production workers. As with holidays, va
cation benefits were not as liberal in the South as they were
in other regions.
When estimates of holidays and vacation days in individ
ual metropolitan areas were compared, it was found that
localities with liberal holiday practices generally had liberal
vacation policies as well. (See tables 2 and 3.) Correlation
coefficients measuring the degree of this association were
0.81 for production workers and 0.62 for office workers.
(Perfect correlation = 1.00.) Despite these degrees of corre
lation, some atypical observations emerged. For example,
production workers in Paterson-C lifton-P assaic received
10.7 holidays compared with a national average of 8.7, but
had only average vacation provisions. Conversely, office
workers in San Antonio received only 7.6 holidays but had
near-average vacation provisions.
Interarea comparisons
W hen holidays and vacation days w ere com bined
(called total leave here), the highest averages for produc
tion workers were reported in two M ichigan m etropolitan
areas: Saginaw, with 23.8 days, and D etroit, with 22.4
days. The national average was 18.6 days, while the low
est average, 14.4 days, was found in Gainesville, f l . Six of
the ten areas with the highest totals were located in the
N ortheast; the other four were in the Midwest, although
San Jose tied M ilwaukee for 10th place. The 10 areas with
Selected paid holiday and vacation provisions, all metropolitan areas and four broad regions, 1983-86
Production and related workers
Provision
O ffice workers
All
m etropolitan
All
Northeast
South
M idw est
W est
areas
m etropolitan
Northeast
South
M idwest
W est
areas
P a id h o lid a y s
Percent of workers in
establishments providing
paid holidays...................
5 days or more..............
10 days or more...........
12 days or more...........
Average number of
holidays..........................
94
91
48
17
97
96
63
25
92
86
31
8
97
95
60
26
92
88
43
13
99
99
58
17
99
99
76
25
99
98
40
7
99
99
57
19
99
99
55
15
8.7
9.7
7.4
9.6
8.4
9.7
10.5
8.8
9.8
9.7
P a id v a c a t i o n s
Percent of workers in
establishments providing
paid vacations................
2 weeks or more after 1
year of service.............
3 weeks or more after 5
years of service..........
4 weeks or more after 20
years of service..........
Average number of vaca
tion days.........................
98
98
97
99
98
99
99
99
99
99
39
45
35
38
42
85
88
81
83
86
33
35
27
35
41
52
58
42
46
62
67
71
54
79
65
84
86
77
88
84
9.9
10.3
9.2
10.4
10.0
10.9
11.2
10.6
11.0
11.0
18.6
20.0
16.6
20.0
18.4
20.6
21.7
19.4
20.8
20.7
T o t a l p a id le a v e '
Average number of days...
'Limited to paid holidays and paid vacations.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
25
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
Holidays, Vacations, and Area Pay Levels
Table 2. Number of leave days for production and related workers and relative pay levels for skilled maintenance and
unskilled plant workers, 68 metropolitan areas, 1983-86
Average leave days,1
R elative pay
production and related workers
levels
Metropolitan area
Skilled
maintenance
Unskilled
plant
Total2
Holidays
Vacation
Saginaw, m i .......................................................
Detroit, m i ..........................................................
Buffalo, n v .........................................................
Trenton, n j .........................................................
Toledo, oh —m i ..................................................
23.8
22.4
21.4
21.4
21.1
12.1
11.1
10.5
10.6
10.6
11.7
11.3
10.9
10.8
10.5
_
_
111
102
92
105
131
97
—
128
Boston, m a ........................................................
New York, ny - n j ..............................................
Newark, n j ........................................................
Paterson-Clifton-Passaic, nj ...........................
Milwaukee, w i....................................................
20.9
20.8
20.8
20.6
20.4
10.1
10.0
10.2
10.7
9.9
10.8
10.8
10.5
9.9
10.5
94
94
94
89
105
97
128
89
96
98
San Jose, c a .....................................................
Nassau-Suffolk, ny ...........................................
Indianapolis, in ..................................................
St. Louis, MO—IL.................................................
San Francisco-Oakland, c a .............................
20.4
20.3
20.2
20.2
20.1
9.3
10.0
9.9
9.9
9.3
11.2
10.2
10.3
10.3
10.8
115
94
106
103
117
112
98
103
99
143
Chicago, i l .........................................................
South Bend, i n ..................................................
York, pa ..............................................................
Dayton, o h .........................................................
Green Bay, w i....................................................
19.9
19.9
19.8
19.7
19.7
9.4
9.6
9.7
9.3
8.8
10.5
10.3
10.1
10.3
10.9
107
90
89
103
97
120
128
110
114
97
Davenport-Rock Island-Moline, ia- il .............
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, n y ........................
Cleveland, o h ....................................................
Huntsville, a l .....................................................
Kansas City, mo - k s ..........................................
19.6
19.5
19.4
19.4
19.4
9.7
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.3
9.8
10.2
10.1
10.0
10.1
110
89
102
99
101
130
107
107
90
105
Portland, m e ......................................................
Seattle-Everett, w a ..........................................
Worcester, m a ....................................................
Cincinnati, oh - ky - in ........................................
Hartford, c t .......................................................
19.3
19.3
19.3
19.2
19.1
9.2
8.9
9.4
9.1
9.3
10.2
10.4
9.9
10.1
9.8
—
—
87
95
90
95
116
94
99
87
Philadelphia, pa - n j ...........................................
Providence - Warwick - Pawtucket, ri - m a .........
Minneapolis-St. Paul, mn - wi............................
Richmond, v a ....................................................
Gary-Hammond-East Chicago, in ..................
Sacramento, c a .................................................
19.1
19.1
19.0
19.0
18.8
18.8
9.4
9.7
8.9
8.8
9.5
8.4
9.7
9.5
10.1
10.2
9.4
10.4
99
80
105
109
106
107
113
82
110
85
102
—
All metropolitan areas....................................
18.6
8.7
9.9
100
100
Columbus, o h ....................................................
Louisville, KY-IN................................................
Pittsburgh, pa .....................................................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, c a ..........................
Northeast Pennsylvania....................................
18.6
18.6
18.5
18.4
18.4
8.6
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.8
10.0
10.0
9.8
9.7
9.6
98
103
101
109
80
92
100
97
97
94
Witchlta, k s .......................................................
Portland, or - wa ...............................................
Salt Lake City-Ogden, u t ....................................
Fresno, c a .........................................................
Dallas-Fort Worth, t x ...........................................
18.4
18.3
18.3
18.1
17.9
8.8
8.1
8.3
8.2
8.1
9.7
10.2
10.0
9.9
9.8
94
106
94
93
95
—
114
89
94
88
Atlanta, g a .........................................................
Baltimore, m d .....................................................
Omaha, ne - ia ....................................................
Billings, m t .........................................................
San Diego, c a ....................................................
Anahelm-Santa Ana-Garden Grove, c a .........
17.7
17.7
17.5
17.3
17.3
17.2
7.9
8.3
7.8
7.3
7.8
7.6
9.7
9.3
9.7
10.0
9.5
9.6
95
100
91
—
106
96
80
82
84
—
—
96
Denver-Boulder, c o ..........................................
Memphis, tn - ar - ms ........................................
Washington, dc - md - v a ...................................
Oklahoma City, o k .............................................
Greenville-Spartanburg, s c ..............................
17.2
17.0
16.9
16.7
16.5
7.4
7.7
7.4
7.3
7.4
9.7
9.3
9.5
9.4
9.1
100
93
—
97
73
88
76
77
84
74
Houston, t x .......................................................
Chattanooga, tn - g a ........................................
Jacksonville, f l .....................................................
New Orleans, l a ................................................
Jackson, m s ......................................................
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Portsmouth, va - nc ...
16.2
16.1
15.9
15.8
15.7
15.7
7.2
7.5
7.0
7.0
7.1
6.7
9.1
8.7
8.9
8.9
8.6
9.0
100
81
94
99
94
89
72
78
74
68
76
78
Miami, f l .................................................................
Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, nc ...
San Antonio, t x ......................................................
Corpus Christi, t x ...............................................
Gainesville, f l ....................................................
15.6
15.4
15.4
15.2
14.4
6.5
6.8
6.5
6.3
5.4
9.1
8.6
8.9
8.9
9.0
83
94
79
101
—
71
77
71
69
76
1Limited to paid holidays and paid vacations.
2Because of rounding, the sum of the average number of holidays and the average number of vacation days for a given metropolitan area may not equal the total number
of leave days for that area.
Note: Dashes indicate that data do not meet publication criteria.
Digitized for26
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the lowest averages were in the South.
Average leave days for office workers were highest in
Trenton (23 days) and D avenport-R ock Island-M oline
(22.9 days). Jackson, m s , had the lowest average leave
(17.7 days). As with production workers, the 10 highest
paid leave areas were mostly in the Northeast and Midwest,
and the 10 lowest in the South.
Com parisons of the total leave and pay levels in tables 2
and 3 uncover the extent to which high leave levels are
found in areas w ith high pay levels. The results are sum
m arized as follows:
Observations of pay levels
above the national average
Total
Corresponding
leave levels
above the
average
All groups ............................
75
53
Skilled maintenance.................
Unskilled plant..........................
Office clerical ...........................
Electronic data processing.......
23
19
20
13
17
18
12
6
A parallel set of comparisons relating below-average
pay to leave levels showed that slightly more than half (57
percent) of all pay observations below the national aver
age were m atched with below-average leave provisions.
Areas in the Northeast, however, deviated sharply from this
pattern, with most localities in the region having belowaverage pay but above-average total leave.
Pay levels differed more by area than did leave days.
Among office clerical jobs, for example, the highest pay rela
tive (Davenport) was 43 percent greater than the lowest
(Norfolk and N ortheast Pennsylvania). By contrast, the
spread between areas with the highest and lowest leave levels
for office workers (Trenton and Jackson) was 30 percent. For
both pay and leave, the percentage spreads were considerably
greater for blue-collar than for white-collar groups.
Because area leave levels often are above average in
areas with above-average pay, there was a greater spread
in em ployers’ costs for paid leave than in either leave days
or pay. In New ark, for example, the average office clerical
w orker received about 9 percent m ore leave time than
sim ilar workers nationw ide and 2 percent m ore pay. Con
sequently, the N ew ark w orker was paid 11 percent above
the national average for vacation and holiday benefits.7
The broadest range in leave pay was for the unskilled
plant group, with costs in D etroit, at 158 percent of the
national average, nearly three tim es those in C orpus
Christi, at 56 percent of the national average.
Other influences on leave levels
Area leave levels appear to be influenced by many of the
forces that influence pay levels. Bureau studies of area pay
differences generally report higher pay levels in the M id
west and West and in areas with larger average establish
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ment employments and greater degrees of unionization.
These studies have also found that industrial composition
heavily influences a locality’s pay level.8
Similar patterns appeared when average num bers of
leave days were examined. Table 4 shows that areas with a
high leave level for production workers commonly were
located in the Northeast or Midwest and had above-average
degrees of unionization, sizes of establishment employ
ment, and proportions of manufacturing activity.9
The table also shows that of the 36 areas whose produc
tion w orkers’ leave levels were above average, 27 had
collective bargaining agreement coverage that was above
average, 19 had high average establishm ent employment
size, 30 were located in the N ortheast or Midwest, and 24
had high proportions of m anufacturing employment.
The type of m anufacturing within an area also is an
im portant determ inant of leave levels. F or example, two
areas with approxim ately the same percentage of workers
in m anufacturing industries, G a ry -H a m m o n d -E a s t C hi
cago and G reenville-S partanburg, had quite different
leave levels. Gary, with a high concentration of workers in
the prim ary metals industries, had a considerably higher
leave level than did Greenville, where textile mills dom i
nate among m anufacturing activities.
There may be interactions among the variables in these
simple cross tabulations. For example, large establishments
are more likely to have collective bargaining agreements,
and, for blue-collar workers, manufacturing establishments
are more likely to have collective bargaining agreements
than nonmanufacturing establishments. The appendix to
this article offers the results of a multiple regression analysis
designed to isolate the effect of each variable from others in
the study. It thus provides a more precise indication than is
given here of how the various forces under consideration
influence area leave levels.
Data limitations
The analysis undertaken com pared pay only to vaca
tion and holiday provisions; one should not assume that
similar findings would result if total benefit packages had
been used. Nationally, vacations and holidays account for
only about one-third of all employer costs for benefits,
excluding legally required item s.10 The rem aining twothirds are for sick leave, supplem ental pay, insurance,
pension and savings plans, and other benefits.
A nother note of caution concerns the length of paid
vacations. While A rea Wage Surveys report paid vacation
provisions that apply after specified lengths of service,
area-wide distributions of workers by length of service are
not provided. These distributions, however, are needed to
estimate averages of the num ber of vacation days avail
able to employees. As a substitute, national job tenure
data for occupational groups similar to the production
and office groups considered here were taken from the
January 1983 C urrent Population Survey11 and were used
27
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
T a b le
3.
N u m b e r o f le a v e
w o rk e rs , 68
m e tr o p o lita n
d a y s
February 1989
f o r o ffic e
w o rk e rs
a n d
•
Holidays, Vacations, and Area Pay Levels
r e la tiv e
p a y
le v e ls
f o r o ffic e
c le r ic a l a n d
e le c tr o n ic
d a ta
p r o c e s s in g
a re a s , 1 9 8 3 -8 6
Relative pay
levels
Average leave days,1
office workers
Metropolitan area
Electronic
data
processing
Total2
Holidays
Vacation
Office
clerical
Trenton, n j ..................................................................................
Davenport-Rock Island-Moline, i a - i l ..................
Newark, n j ..................................................................................
Detroit, m i ....................................................................................
New York, n y - n j ...................................................................
23.0
22.9
22.4
22.0
22.0
11.0
10.4
11.1
10.7
10.6
12.1
12.5
11.3
11.3
11.4
96
119
102
114
102
Saginaw, m i ................................................................................
Boston, m a ..................................................................................
Hartford, c t ................................................................................
Nassau-Suffolk, n y ..............................................................
San Jose, c a ............................................................................
Milwaukee, w i....................................................
22.0
21.9
21.8
21.8
21.6
21.5
10.9
10.5
10.4
10.8
10.2
10.4
11.1
11.3
11.4
11.0
11.4
11.1
115
96
91
93
115
99
96
95
98
115
97
Paterson-Clifton-Passaic, n j ......................................
San Francisco-Oakland, c a ..........................................
Toledo, o h — m i .........................................................................
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, n y ...................................
Buffalo, n y ..................................................................................
Portland, m e ..............................................................................
21.5
21.5
21.3
21.2
21.2
21.2
10.7
9.9
10.3
10.0
10.2
10.1
10.7
11.6
11.0
11.3
10.9
11.0
93
114
108
98
89
85
98
114
96
97
89
88
Seattle-Everett, w a ............................................................
South Bend, i n .........................................................................
Worcester, m a ...........................................................................
Philadelphia, p a - n j ..............................................................
Providence-Warwick-Pawtucket, r i - m a .............
Washington, d c - m d - v a ...................................................
21.2
21.2
21.2
21.0
20.9
20.9
10.1
10.3
10.4
10.2
10.2
9.1
11.1
10.9
10.8
10.8
10.6
11.7
108
94
94
98
86
101
95
88
94
94
90
99
Chicago, il ..................................................................................
Dayton, o h ..................................................................................
Fresno, c a ..................................................................................
Sacramento, c a .......................................................................
St. Louis, M O - I L .......................................................................
20.7
20.7
20.7
20.7
20.7
9.6
10.0
9.8
9.5
9.9
11.1
10.7
10.9
11.2
10.8
101
94
92
103
97
102
89
All metropolitan areas....................................
20.6
9.7
10.9
100
100
Cleveland, o h ....................................................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, c a ......................................
Minneapolis-St. Paul, m n - w i ........................................
Gary-Hammond-East Chicago, in ..........................
Indianapolis, i n .........................................................................
20.6
20.6
20.6
20.5
20.5
9.8
9.8
9.5
9.4
9.9
10.8
10.8
11.1
11.1
10.7
96
114
97
118
96
97
109
95
—
92
Pittsburgh, p a ............................................................................
York, p a .........................................................................................
Anaheim-Santa Ana-Garden Grove, c a .............
Denver-Boulder, c o ..........................................
Cincinnati, o h - k y - i n ..........................................................
20.5
20.5
20.4
20.3
20.2
9.8
10.0
9.8
9.3
9.5
10.7
10.5
10.6
11.0
10.7
101
92
105
99
98
96
86
102
103
94
Columbus, o h ...........................................................................
Huntsville, a l .............................................................................
San Diego, c a ...........................................................................
Kansas City, m o - k s ............................................................
Northeast Pennsylvania.....................................
20.2
20.2
20.2
20.1
20.1
9.4
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.8
10.8
10.8
10.7
10.6
10.3
91
93
100
99
83
95
—
104
97
85
Jacksonville, f l .................................................
Portland, o r - w a ...................................................................
Salt Lake City-Ogden, u t ...............................................
Richmond, v a ...........................................................................
Wichita, k s ..................................................................................
20.0
20.0
20.0
19.9
19.9
9.3
9.0
9.4
9.2
9.7
10.7
11.0
10.6
10.8
10.2
92
102
94
92
104
95
98
101
95
93
Baltimore, m d ............................................................................
Green Bay, w i....................................................
Houston, t x ................................................................................
Atlanta, g a ..................................................................................
Miami, f l .....................................................................................
19.8
19.7
19.7
19.6
19.6
9.3
9.0
8.9
9.0
8.8
10.4
10.7
10.8
10.7
10.8
98
92
109
102
95
95
85
115
103
100
Dallas-Fort Worth, t x ........................................................
Omaha, n e - i a ...........................................................................
Chattanooga, t n - g a ..........................................................
Billings, m t ..................................................................................
New Orleans, l a .....................................................................
19.5
19.5
19.2
19.1
19.1
9.0
8.7
9.0
8.8
9.1
10.5
10.7
10.2
10.3
10.0
100
93
93
90
96
97
97
—
—
97
Louisville, K Y - I N .....................................................................
Oklahoma City, o k .................................................................
Memphis, t n - a r - m s ..........................................................
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Portsmouth, v a - n c .. .
Gainesville, f l ...........................................................................
Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, n c . . .
San Antonio, t x .......................................................................
Greenville-Spartanburg, s c ..............................
Corpus Christi, t x ....................................................................
Jackson, m s ..............................................................................
19.0
19.0
18.7
18.7
18.5
8.6
8.8
8.4
8.5
8.0
10.4
10.2
10.3
10.2
10.5
18.4
18.4
18.3
17.9
17.7
8.1
7.6
8.0
8.2
7.8
10.3
10.8
10.3
9.7
9.8
95
98
92
83
—
93
89
87
92
94
100
95
90
88
—
97
97
90
—
96
93
—
104
109
105
—
—
—
98
’ Limited to paid holidays and paid vacations.
2Because of rounding, the sum of the average number of holidays and the average number of vacation days for a given metropolitan area may not equal the total number
of leave days for that area.
Note: Dashes indicate that data do not meet publication criteria.
Digitized for28
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in each area. However, because tenure data relate to a
w orker’s length of tim e with the current employer, an
area with a vibrant economy and a mobile (and possibly
younger) work force is likely to experience a lower aver
age tenure than the national average or the average for an
area in economic decline. As a result, the actual vacation
tim e available in a given area may be higher or lower than
is estim ated using national tenure data.
Yet another lim itation is th at establishm ent vacation
plans may not reflect the tenure profile of covered em
ployees. F o r example, a plan’s provisions may allow for
additional vacation pay after 20 or 25 years of service, but
it may be th at none of the com pany’s employees has as yet
attained th at length of service.
Finally, the analysis dealt with relative pay and leave
provisions th at were in effect sometime between 1983 and
1986, depending on the particular area in question. These
provisions, however, are not static. F o r example, benefits
provided in a period of economic grow th and prosperity
may not survive during a period of retrenchm ent. In the
late 1970’s and early 1980’s, for instance, workers in the
autom obile m anufacturing industry received 7 to 9 paid
personal leave days, but this benefit was dropped when
the industry experienced financial difficulties. In recent
years, workers in other industries have accepted cutbacks
Table 4. Distribution of 68 metropolitan areas by
production worker leave levels and selected area
characteristics, 1983-86
N um ber of areas w ith leave levels —
S elected characteristics
Above average
At or below average
All areas...........................................
36
32
With collective bargaining agreement
coverage:
Above average .............................
At or below average.....................
27
9
9
23
With average establishment employ
ment size:
Above average.............................
At or below average.....................
19
17
9
23
Region:
Northeast......................................
South............................................
Midwest........................................
W est.............................................
14
2
16
4
2
19
3
8
With manufacturing employment as
percent of all-industry employment:
Above average.............................
At or below average.....................
24
12
8
24
in wages or nonwage benefits or both, in exchange for
greater job security. Nevertheless, the basic finding of this
study— that area wage and leave levels, w hether high or
low, often operate in tandem — is likely to stand for some
time to come.
□
-FOOTNOTES
'Two relatively small Area Wage Survey ( a w s ) areas were excluded
from the analysis that follows because the number of occupations re
ported was insufficient for interarea calculations. Also, in a few other
areas, pay calculations could not be made for one or more of the four
occupational groups studied.
Prior to 1987, the a w s program consisted of annual surveys con
ducted in 70 metropolitan areas selected to represent all 262 Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas ( s m s a ’ s), excluding those in Alaska and
Hawaii, as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
through February 1974. In 1987, this program was replaced by a pro
gram of 32 areas studied annually and 58 areas biennially (half one year
and half the next). Thus, 61 areas are surveyed each year. The 90 areas
now in the program comprise a sample of the 326 metropolitan areas
recognized as of October 1984. For additional information on the pro
gram, see Laura Scofea, “ b l s area wage surveys will cover more areas,”
Monthly Labor Review, June 1986, pp. 19-23.
2In the a w s program, benefit provisions that apply to a majority of
the production (or office) workers in an establishment are considered to
apply to all such workers in the establishment. Conversely, a provision is
considered nonexistent if it applies to fewer than a majority of the
production (or office) workers.
"Occupations included are as follows: Office clerical— secretary;
stenographer I and II; typist I and II; file clerk I, II, and III; messenger;
switchboard operator; order clerk I and II; accounting clerk I, II, III,
and IV; payroll clerk; and key entry operator I and II. Electronic data
processing— computer systems analyst; computer programmer; and
computer operator. Skilled maintenance— carpenter; electrician;
painter; machinist; mechanic (machinery); pipefitter; motor vehicle me
chanic; and tool and die maker. Unskilled plant— janitor, porter, or
cleaner; and material handling laborer.
Descriptions of the surveyed jobs are included in individual area
bulletins. Roman numerals are used to identify skill levels studied sepa
rately in many of the occupations; the higher the numeral, the higher is
the degree of difficulty and responsibility associated with the job.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4The incidence of health and retirement plans is developed in the a w s
program, but the detailed provisions of these plans are not. The provi
sions of paid personal leave plans are collected, but not in sufficient
detail to calculate the average number of days available to employees.
"Regions are defined as follows: Northeast— Connecticut, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, Vermont; South— Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Dis
trict of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, Virginia, West Virginia; Midwest— Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,
Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin; West— Arizona, California, Colo
rado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washing
ton, Wyoming.
6Until 1987, information on employee benefits was generally collected
in an area once every 3 years. Beginning in 1988, this information will be
collected every fourth year.
7Relative leave costs can be computed for each area/occupational
group for which relative pay levels are shown by converting the area’s
leave days into a percentage of the national average and multiplying that
percentage by the area’s pay relative. In Newark again, for example,
leave time for office workers (22.4 days) was 109 percent of the national
average (20.6 days). Multiplying this percentage by the Newark office
clerical pay relative (102) and then dividing by 100 yields a leave cost
relative of 111.
8See, for example, Stephen E. Baldwin and Robert S. Daski, “Occupa
tional pay differences among metropolitan areas,” Monthly Labor
Review, May 1976, pp. 29-35; and Wage Differences among Metropoli
tan Areas, 1986, Summary 8 7 -4 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 1987).
See also George E. Johnson, “Intermetropolitan Wage Differentials in
the United States,” in Jack E. Triplett, ed., The Measurement of Labor
Cost (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1983), pp. 309-32.
29
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
Holidays, Vacations, and Area Pay Levels
•
and benefits,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1987, pp. 3-11.
11For a discussion of job tenure, see Ellen Sehgal, “Occupational
mobility and job tenure, 1983,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1984,
pp. 18-23.
9Data on collective bargaining agreement coverage, average establish
ment employment size, manufacturing activity, and regional leave level
are from the Bureau’s Area Wage Survey program.
10See Felicia Nathan, “Analyzing employers’ costs for wages, salaries,
APPENDIX:
Regression analysis
A regression model was developed to identify forces in
fluencing area leave days (the dependent variable). The six
independent (explanatory) variables in the model were area
pay level, manufacturing employment as a percent of total
area employment, percent of workers covered by collective
bargaining agreements, area population size, average em
ploym ent w ithin area establishm ents, and geographic
region. Pay relatives for skilled maintenance workers were
used in the reported analysis of production and related
workers, and pay relatives for office clerical workers in the
office worker regression. Results were similar when both
skilled maintenance and unskilled plant worker relatives
were included in the blue-collar regression and when office
clerical and electronic data processing worker relatives
were included in the white-collar study.
The results of the regression analysis are shown in table
A - 1. As indicated by the R 2 values, the model had much
success in explaining area differences in leave days, ac
counting for m ore than four-fifths of the interarea vari
ation for production workers and three-fourths for office
workers. F or each of the two groups, a statistically signifi
c a n t1 positive relationship at the 5-percent level or lower
emerged between area leave and area pay levels. Areas
with relatively high pay levels tend to be m ore liberal in
leave provisions as well. Consequently, one cannot ex
plain in terarea differentials in pay rates by claim ing
offsetting differences in leave provisions. F o r production
workers, other independent variables being held constant,
an increase of 1 percentage point in an area’s average pay
level was associated with an increase of 0.041 day in the
area’s leave time.
Several other significant relationships emerge from the
model. For example, the coefficients show interesting re
gional differences, with all regional coefficients significantly
above the South— the region against which the other three
regions were compared.2 For office workers, other things
being equal, area leave time in the N ortheast was 2.252 days
higher than in the South. Two establishment characteris
tics— unionization and average employment size— also
provided significant explanations of area leave differences,
but only for production workers.
F u rth e rm o re , a sig nificant positive relatio n sh ip is
shown between area leave days and the degree of m anu
facturing activity, but again only for production workers.
Note, however, th at the regression model did not take
account of area differences in type of m anufacturing, and,
as mentioned earlier, type of m anufacturing is an im por
Digitized for30
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table A - 1. Regression analysis of area differences in
leave days, 1983-86
Production and
Item
related workers
O ffice w orkers
Constant.............................................
9.649**
(5.97)
13.478**
(9.08)
Pay level.............................................
.041*
(2.11)
.056**
(3.16)
Manufacturing employment................
.024*
(2.45)
-.005
(-.72)
Unionization........................................
.031**
(3.16)
Area population..................................
-.001
(-.79)
-.001
(-.74)
Average establishment employment...
.007*
(2.52)
.003
(1.22)
Northeast............................................
2.035**
(5.10)
2.252**
(9.51)
Midwest...............................................
1.356**
(3.64)
1.339**
(6.05)
West....................................................
.875*
(2.26)
.885**
(3.00)
........................................................
.82
.75
Value...............................................
31.00**
19.94**
62
67
R2
F
.002
(.10)
Number of areas studied....................
Note :
Numbers in parentheses below coefficients are r-statistics.
R 2 is the coefficient of determination adjusted for degrees of freedom.
It shows the percentage of total variation in area leave days that is
explained by regression analysis.
F statistics are measures of the overall significance of the regres
sions.
** = Significant at the 0.01 level.
* = Significant at the 0.05 level.
tant determ inant of leave and pay levels.
The rem aining variable tested in the model, area popu
lation size, was not statistically related to leave levels for
either of the two occupational groups.
---------- FOO TNO TES ----------
'All estimated regression coefficients were evaluated at the 5- and 1percent significance level. An estimated regression coefficient is said to
be significant at the 5-percent level if the null hypothesis that a coeffi
cient is zero would be rejected only 5 percent of the time in repeated
sampling. Similarly, the coefficient is significant at the 1-percent level if
the null hypothesis would be rejected only 1 percent of the time.
Coefficients of the regional variables shown in table A - 1 indicate the
difference in leave relatives resulting from being located outside the
South, whose value is embodied in the equation’s constant term. A
regression equation’s constant term shows the estimated value of the
dependent variable when all the independent variables are zero, includ
ing, in this instance, when an area is in the South.
Labor market changes and adjustments:
how do the U.S. and Japan compare?
Both countries are flexible in how they react
to structural changes in the labor market,
with each using different methods and programs
to adjust to such changes rather quickly
R
obert
W. Bed
C
l in t o n
R . Sh
n a r z ik
a n d
ie l l s
Japan is beginning to experience the same sort of eco
nom ic restru ctu rin g th at the U nited States has faced
during the last decade or so. A lthough m anufacturing
em ploym ent is declining (both in an absolute and relative
sense), it still plays a larger role in total em ployment and
output in Japan than in the U nited States.
Large trade deficits in the aggregate or in specific in
dustries m ay lead to w orker dislocations. The ability of
the labor m arket to respond and adjust to change can be
considered a competitive factor. F or example, if workers
can move quickly from declining industries to growing
industries, the economy can be m ore responsive to inter
national com petition. Because m uch of U.S. trade is in
m erchandise, not services, the m anufacturing industry
plays a prom inent role in international trade. How, then,
does the continued job shift to services affect our ability to
lower our trade deficit?
This article analyzes labor m arket flexibility and ad
justm ent capabilities of Japan and the U nited States. It
examines the job shift to services and trends in wages,
productivity, and exchange rates to judge the interna
tional competitive position of each country.
Robert W. Bednarzik and Clinton R. Shiells are international economists
in the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Job shift to services
The num ber and proportion of jobs in the service sector
of Japan and the U nited States are increasing. However,
the m agnitude and the timing of the increase are different.
In 1987, for example, 71 percent of U.S. workers were
employed in services, com pared with 58.5 percent of Japa
nese workers. (See table 1.)
In 1960, Japanese agricultural employment constituted
30 percent of total employment, and was higher than em
ploym ent in m anufacturing. By 1987, agricultural em
ploym ent in Japan had dropped to 8 percent of total
employment. This is almost 3 times higher than in the
U nited States, where agricultural employment as a per
cent of the total has been declining for m ost of this
century. The m anufacturing share of total employment
peaked in Japan in the early 1970’s at around 28 percent,
slipping to 24 percent in 1987. In the U nited States, the
share has been drifting downward for a m uch longer pe
riod, and fell below 19 percent in 1987. (See table 1.)
From an employment standpoint, the service sector is
dom inant in both countries. A griculture and m anufactur
ing play a larger role in Japan than in the U nited States,
but their share in Japan is declining. A lthough the two
countries are following the same path, the shift from an
agricultural to an industrial economy, then to a service or
information-based economy started m uch sooner in the
31
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
Labor Market Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
•
in the U nited States and Japan, 1970—85:2
United States and has, therefore, progressed further.
Does the shift to services, especially in the United States,
imply that the United States and Japan are losing their
industrial base? Given that around 70 percent of U.S. m er
ch an d ise e x p o rts are in m a n u fa c tu rin g , a d eclin in g
industrial base would make it more difficult for the United
States to lower its trade deficit unless exports of services
increase dramatically. So, is the job shift to services an
other factor contributing to the large U.S. merchandise
trade deficit?
A recent study by R onald K utscher and Valerie Personick examined w hether changes in em ploym ent and
output in m anufacturing declined either in absolute or in
relative term s.1 K utscher and Personick noted th at an
absolute decline is m ore serious than a relative one, and
that production declines are a m ore alarm ing signal of a
reduction in the industrial base th an em ploym ent de
clines. F or example, a decline in em ploym ent need not
necessarily signify an erosion of the industrial base if real
output is still increasing.
Manufacturing employment in the United States in abso
lute terms has been around 20 million for the last 20 years.
At 19.2 million in 1987, it was only slightly below its pre
recession level. A lthough the percentage of total U.S.
employment in manufacturing has declined, real U.S. manu
facturing output as a percent of real gross domestic product
( g d p ), at 22 percent in 1985, has actually increased some
what recently. The following tabulation shows real m anu
facturing output as a percent of real gross domestic product
Table 1.
1970
1975
1980
1985
United States
(1982 dollars).............
21.1
20.5
21.2
22.1
Japan (1981 yen) ...........
25.9
25.9
29.3
35.0
On this basis, the U.S. industrial base at the aggregate
level is not disappearing. However, there have been steady
declines in both output and employment for individual
U.S. industries such as steel, leather, and tires.
A recent Office of Technology Assessment study shows
that only 6 of 21 m ajor manufacturing industries experi
enced an increasing share of gross national product from
1979 to 1986— about enough of a rise to offset the decline
in the majority of industries. Interestingly, nonelectrical
machinery, which includes computers, was the only m ajor
industry showing a big increase in shares. The study con
cludes that if it were not for the computer industry, the U.S.
economy might well be deindustrializing.3
In Japan, moreover, m anufacturing output as a percent
of gross domestic product increased substantially from 29
to 35 percent between 1980 and 1985. Regardless of the
reason, m anufacturing accounts for a m uch higher per
centage of gross domestic product in Japan than in the
U nited States. M ore im portantly, the gap between the two
countries is widening. This implies that as recently as
1985, the Japanese were successfully com peting interna
tionally in m anufacturing. Can the U nited States keep
pace? A discussion of these issues follows.
Percent distribution of civilian employment by economic sector, 1960-87
Goods-producing sector
Service s e c to r
A gricultural sector1
M anufacturing
T otal“1
Y ear
United States
Japan
U nited States
Japan
United States
Japan
United States
Japan
1960 .................................................
1965 .................................................
8.5
6.3
29.5
22.7
33.4
34.2
28.5
32.5
26.1
27.0
21.7
24.8
58.1
59.5
41.9
44.8
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
4.5
4.4
4.4
4.2
4.2
16.9
15.5
14.4
13.1
12.6
33.1
31.7
31.4
32.0
31.4
35.7
35.9
36.2
37.0
36.8
26.4
24.7
24.3
24.8
24.2
27.4
27.4
27.3
27.8
27.6
62.3
63.8
64.2
63.8
64.5
47.4
48.6
49.4
49.9
50.6
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.7
3.6
12.4
11.9
11.6
11.4
10.8
29.5
29.6
29.7
30.0
30.2
35.6
35.6
35.1
34.8
34.7
22.7
22.8
22.7
22.7
22.7
26.1
25.8
25.3
24.8
24.6
66.4
66.5
66.6
66.3
66.3
52.0
52.5
53.3
53.8
54.5
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
.................................................
3.6
3.5
3.6
3.5
3.3
10.1
9.7
9.4
8.9
8.5
29.3
28.9
27.2
26.8
27.2
35.1
35.0
34.5
34.4
34.5
22.1
21.7
20.4
19.8
20.0
25.0
25.1
24.7
24.8
25.2
67.1
67.6
69.2
69.7
69.4
54.8
55.3
56.0
56.6
56.9
1985 .................................................
1986 .................................................
1987 .................................................
3.1
3.1
3.0
8.4
8.1
8.0
26.9
26.6
26.0
34.6
34.2
33.5
19.5
19.1
18.6
25.3
24.9
24.3
70.0
70.4
71.0
57.0
57.6
58.5
1 Includes aariculture, forestry, hunting, and fishing.
2 Includes manufacturing, mining, and construction.
3 Includes transportation, communication, public utilities, trade, finance, public
administration, private household services, and miscellaneous services.
Digitized for 32
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Note: Data have not been fully adjusted for comparability with U.S. definitions.
Also, some employment could not be distributed by economic sector. Because of
rounding, subtotals may not add to totals.
Source: S ta tistica l S u pplem ent to Inte rn a tion a l C om parisons o f Unem ploym e rit , Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 1988).
Manufacturing productivity and labor costs
The ability of the U.S. m anufacturing industry to com
pete internationally hinges on several factors, such as the
cost and quality of the product. This in tu rn depends on
overall labor costs, exchange rates, and labor productivity
rates.4 A n exam ination o f some recent trends reveals that
the U.S. com petitive situation is improving relative to
Japan.
In 1987, as a result of a labor productivity increase in
m anufacturing (for the fifth consecutive year) and contin
ued wage restraint, the U nited States showed a decline in
unit labor cost— a useful m easure of competitiveness. In
assessing changes in unit labor costs in competitive terms,
changes in the m arket value of each country’s currency
m ust be taken into account. The U.S. dollar has depreci
ated strongly against the yen and other currencies since
1985. Therefore, the relative im provem ent in U.S. m anu
facturing labor costs m easured in national currency has
been greatly enhanced by exchange rate movement. Ja
pan’s unit labor costs, m easured in U.S. dollars, rose more
than 40 percent in 1986 and 13.5 percent in 1987. (See
table 2.)
M anufacturing output growth, which is related to a
variety of factors, including im proved international com
petitiveness, was higher in the U nited States than in Japan
during 1986. A lthough outp u t grow th slowed signifi
cantly in 1986 in Jap an , possibly a reflection of the
appreciating yen, it recovered quickly in 1987. D uring
th at year, the percent change in output per hour in m anu
facturing was once again m ore than th at in the U nited
S tates. M a n u fa c tu rin g em p lo y m en t, w hich declined
slightly in Japan in 1986, dropped significantly (1.1 per
cent) in 1987. A t 14.2 million in 1987, m anufacturing
em ploym ent in Japan is still very near its all-time high of
14.5 million, reached in 1985.
In the U nited States, the com parable m anufacturing
em ploym ent figure has hovered around 20.9 million over
the past 4 years.5 However, there have been significant
em ploym ent shifts among individual m anufacturing in
dustries. Also, some w orker groups were m ore likely to
suffer job losses than other groups.
Employment changes and job losses
Given the size of the m erchandise trade deficit and the
recent swings in exchange rates, there is little doubt that
distribution of em ploym ent by industry has been affected.
In theory, exchange rate changes affect the m ovement of
labor between industry sectors prim arily through changes
in export and im port prices. D epreciation of the dollar
raises dollar prices of U.S. im ports, leading to increased
production and em ploym ent in im port-com peting indus
tries. Also, depreciation lowers foreign currency prices of
U.S. exports, m aking them m ore com petitive in interna
tional m arkets, which leads to increased production and
em ploym ent in export-oriented industries. The result is an
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2. Changes in productivity and related measures in
manufacturing, United States and Japan, 1960-87
[In percent]
Y ear
United States
Japan
Output per hour:
1960-87 .......................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-87 ........................................
2.8
3.2
2.5
7.7
10.3
5.3
1973-79......................................
1979-87......................................
1.4
3.4
5.5
5.1
1985 ........................................
1986
...................................
1987 ........................................
5.1
3.7
2.8
7.3
1.7
4.1
Hourly compensation (in national
currency):
1960-87 .......................................
1960-73 ......................................
1973-87
.....................................
6.2
5.0
7.3
11.3
15.1
8.0
1973-79......................................
1979-87......................................
9.5
5.7
12.8
4.5
1985 ........................................
1986 ........................................
1987 ........................................
5.3
3.3
1.3
4.9
4.9
1.4
Unit labor costs (in national
currency):
1960-87 .......................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-87 ........................................
3.3
1.8
4.7
3.4
4.3
2.6
1973-79......................................
1979-87......................................
8.0
2.2
6.9
-0.6
1985 ........................................
1986
.................................
1987 ........................................
0.2
-0.4
-1.5
-2.3
3.2
-2.5
Unit labor costs (in U.S. dollars):
1960-87
...............................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-87 ........................................
3.3
1.8
4.7
6.9
6.6
7.3
1973-79......................................
1979-87 ....................................
8.0
2.2
10.8
4.7
1985 .....................................
1986
...............................
1987 ........................................
0.2
-0.4
-1.5
-2.7
46.1
13.5
Output:
1960-87 ........................................
1960-73 ........................................
1973-87 ........................................
3.4
4.8
2.2
8.7
12.8
6.2
1973-79 ...................................
1979-87......................................
1.9
2.4
3.6
6.2
1985 ......................................
1986 ........................................
1987 ........................................
4.3
2.8
3.8
8.4
0.6
3.4
Note :
Rates of change based on the compound rate method.
"Trends in manufacturing productivity and labor costs in the U.S.
and abroad," M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1987, pp. 25-30; and "Interna
tional Comparisons of Manufacturing Productivity and Labor Cost Trends
1987," N e w s R e le a s e , 88-326 (U.S. Department of Labor, July 6,1988).
Source :
im provem ent in the trade balance, at least once trade
volumes have had time to adjust to price changes.
It is difficult to tie changes in the U.S. trade deficit to
changes in exchange rates on a country-by-country basis.
The extent of U.S. dollar depreciation varies substantially
across trading partners. Also, there are several measures
of currency movements, differing in their estimates of
change depending on the methodology used.6 W hat is
im portant for the U.S. trade deficit is m ovement of the
U.S. dollar against a basket of other currencies. Based on
the Federal Reserve System Board of G overnors widely
33
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
used 10-country inflation-adjusted exchange rate index,
the U.S. dollar had begun to appreciate in 1979, peaked in
1985, and had nearly fallen back to its 1979 level as of
fourth-quarter 1987.7 (See table 3.) A M organ G uaranty
T rust Co. index cited by b l s shows a sim ilar tren d .8 New
b l s dollar exchange rate indexes in national currency
term s for export and im port levels separately show that
the trade-w eighted value of the dollar fell 33 percent for
im ports and 27 percent for exports between the first quar
ter of 1985 and the last quarter of 1987.9
Paralleling exchange rate m ovem ent, the U.S. m er
chandise trade balance worsened between 1980 and late
1986, but has im proved subsequently. G row th in export
volume, which began in 1984, finally outpaced the contin
ued grow th in im port volume in 1987. (See table 4.) It is
surprising that im port volume continued to rise after the
dollar weakened. Possible explanations of this phenom e
non include foreign exporters absorbing some of the
currency shift and increased trade with countries whose
currency did not appreciate against the dollar.10
Of course, import and export volume varies by industry.
Useful measures of “ trade sensitivity” are: for imports, the
percentage of an industry’s new supply accounted for by
imports, and for exports, the percentage of an industry’s
shipments that are exported. In 1985, export-oriented in
dustries included chemicals, m achinery, transportation
equipment, and instruments. All of these industries experi
enced declines in export shares during the period of dollar
appreciation. (See table 5.)
Table 3.
Foreign exchange rates, 1967-87
[Currency units per U.S. dollar, except as noted]
Period
Japan (yen)
Multilateral trade-weighted value
of the U.S. dollar
Nominal
Real'
March 1973.............................
261.83
100.0
100.0
1967....................................
1968....................................
1969....................................
362.13
360.55
358.36
120.0
122.1
122.4
_
1970....................................
1971....................................
1972....................................
1973....................................
1974....................................
358.16
347.78
303.12
271.30
291.84
121.1
117.8
109.1
99.1
101.4
98.8
99.2
1975....................................
1976....................................
1977....................................
1978....................................
1979....................................
296.78
296.95
268.62
210.38
219.02
98.5
105.6
103.3
92.4
88.1
93.9
97.3
93.1
84.2
83.2
1980....................................
1981....................................
1982....................................
1983....................................
1984....................................
226.63
220.63
249.06
237.55
237.45
87.4
102.9
116.6
125.3
138.3
84.8
100.8
111.7
117.3
128.5
1985....................................
1986....................................
1987....................................
238.47
168.35
144.60
143.2
112.2
96.9
132.0
103.3
90.6
'Adjusted by changes in consumer prices.
Note :
Dashes indicate data not available.
Source :
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Digitized for34
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—
_
_
Labor Market Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
Table 4.
U.S. merchandise exports and imports, 1979-87
[In billions of 1982 dollars]
Year
Exports
Im ports
Net exports
1979........................................
1980......................................
1981........................................
218.2
241.8
238.5
277.9
253.6
258.7
-59.7
-11.8
-20.2
1982......................................
1983....................................
1984.............................
214.0
207.6
223.8
249.5
282.2
351.1
-35.5
-74.6
-127.3
1985...................................
1986...............................
1987'.................................
231.1
244.6
282.0
370.2
420.2
443.5
-139.1
-175.6
-161.5
'Preliminary.
Data are based on National Income and Product Accounts; season
ally adjusted annual rates.
Note :
Source :
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Im port-sensitive industries, in which im port penetra
tion rose as the dollar strengthened, included apparel,
leather, prim ary metals, machinery, transportation equip
ment, instrum ents, and miscellaneous m anufactures. As
shown, some industries are both export-oriented and im
port-sensitive.
Employment changes.
A lthough m anufacturing em
ploym ent in the U nited States has increased during the
current economic recovery, it has not returned to its pre
recession peak in 1979. However, some import-sensitive
m anufacturing industries, such as prim ary metal indus
tries, apparel and other textile products, and leather and
other leather products, have continued to experience job
losses. (See table 6.) It is not clear how m uch appreciation
of the dollar may have contributed to these long-term
employm ent declines.
M any im port-sensitive industries have experienced
continuing em ploym ent declines largely u n related to
movements in the exchange rate. On the export side, em
ploym ent in some export-oriented industries declined
following the dollar’s appreciation. However, it is difficult
to isolate effects of currency appreciation from other fac
tors (such as slow grow th in Europe). Finally, many
industries are in the service sector where the level of trade
is m uch lower than in m anufacturing, and where employ
m ent grow th has been strong during periods of depre
ciation as well as appreciation.
Job losses.
M ajor structural economic changes such as
those in international competition, technological change,
deregulation, and dem and shifts can lead to job losses,
often referred to as “structural” unem ploym ent. There
are several useful measures of structural unem ployment:
long-term unem ploym ent, job-loser unem ploym ent, and
the num ber of displaced workers. A lthough the evidence
is mixed as to which of the two countries is experiencing
greater “structural unem ploym ent,” both countries still
have a problem.
Table 5. U.S. imports as a percent of new supply (import penetration) and U.S. exports as a percent of product shipments
(export proportion), by major manufacturing group, selected years
Export proportion
Im port penetration
Industry
1972
1979
1985
1972
1979
1985
All manufacturing...................................
6.1
7.8
11.7
5.6
8.5
7.9
F o od...............................................
Tobacco..........................................
Textiles...........................................
Apparel...........................................
Lumber...........................................
3.9
0.6
5.6
7.0
9.4
4.3
0.6
4.6
12.7
10.4
4.3
0.5
7.7
22.4
10.5
2.9
5.7
2.9
1.2
4.1
4.9
11.8
6.0
3.4
7.6
3.6
8.1
3.6
1.8
5.3
Furniture.........................................
P aper.............................................
Printing and publishing...................
Chemicals.......................................
Petroleum refining..........................
2.6
5.6
1.0
3.2
7.1
4.5
6.7
1.0
4.2
7.3
9.2
7.1
1.2
6.5
9.5
0.6
4.1
1.3
7.6
1.9
1.7
5.1
1.7
12.8
1.5
1.6
4.3
1.2
11.6
3.1
Rubber............................................
Leather...........................................
Stone, clay, and glass....................
Primary metals...............................
Fabricated metals..........................
4.7
15.9
3.7
8.9
2.5
5.4
29.4
4.8
11.0
3.6
6.3
49.6
7.6
16.6
5.5
3.1
1.8
2.4
2.8
3.9
4.8
5.2
3.8
4.0
5.6
3.9
6.1
3.4
3.7
4.7
Machinery, except electrical...........
Electrical machinery.......................
Transportation equipment..............
Instruments....................................
Miscellaneous manufactures..........
5.4
7.6
9.8
6.7
13.3
7.8
11.0
11.8
10.3
20.0
13.9
17.0
18.4
13.7
35.0
14.9
6.7
9.2
12.6
7.6
20.3
12.2
13.3
18.3
12.7
20.1
10.1
13.0
15.5
8.1
Note :
New supply is defined as imports plus domestic product shipments. Imports as a percent of new supply is a commonly used measure of import penetration.
Source :
U.S. Department of Commerce.
Historically, the unem ploym ent rate in Japan has been
lower than in the U nited States, even when adjusted for
conceptual differences.11 However, a different view results
when a m ore com prehensive m easure of labor underutili
zation is used: the unem ploym ent gap between the two
countries is not as wide as it first appears because the
broader m easure includes groups in which a substantial
part of Jap an ’s labor underutilization falls. (See table 7.)
F rom a policy standpoint, the focus is usually on w ork
ers w ho m ay have d ifficulty becom ing em ployed or
re-employed. This latter group would include workers
who are involuntarily out of work, often referred to as
displaced workers. A lthough both countries attem pt to
count such workers, the definitions are so different that
the data are not com parable. However, indirect measures
of displacem ent are available, derived from data collected
in regular labor m arket surveys. In m ost industrialized
countries, these surveys collect data on reasons for unem
ployment: new entrants, re-entrants, job leavers, and job
losers. The latter group includes mostly workers whose
jobs ended and who immediately began looking for work.
W orkers involved in a plant closing would be tabulated as
job losers. W orkers on layoff are also included among job
losers, but they are excluded from this analysis because
our m ain interest is workers who have perm anently lost
their jobs. The percentage of total unem ploym ent that
was accounted for by job losers was sim ilar in both
countries, and rising in the 1980’s. Perm anent job loss
accounted for around a third of total unem ploym ent in
1986 in both countries.12
It is also useful and straightforw ard to com pare long
term unem ploym ent, defined here as being jobless for 1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
year or longer. A lthough Japan’s unem ploym ent rate is
less than half the U nited States rate, long-term unem ploy
m ent as a percent of total unem ploym ent was about twice
as high in Japan than in the U nited States in 1986. A ppar
ently, once a worker becomes unemployed, it is more
difficult for him or her to become re-employed in Japan
than it is for a worker in the U nited States.
Demographic limitations on flexibility
The characteristics of workers are im portant in understand
ing overall labor market flexibility. Also, the analysis of
significant past and future employment and population
trends will help explain unemployment differences between
the United States and Japan and give some idea of the
ability of each labor force to adjust to structural change.
The labor force participation rate was roughly the same
in each country in 1986. This masks im portant age-sex
differences. (See table 8.) F or example, the rate for teenag
ers (defined as age 15 and over for Japan and age 16 and
over for the U nited States) is very low in Japan, 18 per
cent, co m p ared w ith 55 p ercen t for U.S. teenagers.
Japanese teens are less likely to work even part time while
in school. This partially explains why teenage unem ploy
m ent in Japan is low, which also helps to keep overall
unem ploym ent low. A rough estim ate was that in 1985,
the overall U.S. unem ploym ent rate would be about 0.8
percentage point lower if U.S. teenagers had the same
unem ploym ent rate and labor force participation rate as
teenagers in Jap an .13 In Japan, most would-be workers do
not pursue their first job until all formal schooling is
completed.
35
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
In contrast, a m uch greater percentage of older w ork
ers, m ainly men, stay longer in the labor force in Japan
than do com parable workers in the U.S. labor force. For
example, in 1986, the labor force participation rate for
men 55 years of age and over in Japan was 61 percent,
versus 37 percent for their U.S. counterparts.
These m agnitudes and patterns of labor force participa
tion are im portant in gauging the flexibility of the labor
force. This is easily seen by examining trends in fertility
rates and population structure.
All industrialized countries have experienced declining
fertility rates since the mid-1960’s. As a result, their popu
lations are aging. The decline in fertility rates started
sooner in Japan, falling alm ost continuously since the late
1940’s. Thus, the aging of the w ork force is occurring
m ore rapidly. This shift m ay have some effect on the
general productivity of the work force, although it is not
entirely clear to w hat extent the experience and skills of
older workers may offset the greater flexibility, mobility,
and energy of younger workers.
M oreover, by the year 2000, the percentage of the pop
ulation in Japan age 65 years and older will pass the U.S.
percentage, and the gap will widen into the next cen
tu ry .14 Given the high proclivity of Japan’s older workers
Table 6.
Labor M arket Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
to stay in the labor force, the aging population structure is
perhaps their num ber one problem in m aintaining a flexi
ble labor force and in keeping unem ploym ent low. Also,
these trends may lead to m ismatches between jobs and
worker skills. W hen there are a large num ber of older
workers rem aining in the labor force whose skills may
become obsolete and there is a low participation rate
among younger workers, it is not surprising, especially
given Ja p a n ’s low unem ploym ent rate, for skill m is
m atches to occur.
In time, an aging w ork force will be a problem for all
industrialized countries. However, in the near future, the
declining fertility rates, especially in the U nited States,
will help low er the overall unem ploym ent rate, as a
sm aller num ber of younger workers, whose unem ploy
m ent rate is higher than that for adult workers, will enter
the labor force. Unless the skills of workers are continu
ally upgraded, especially am ong the growing proportion
that are older, the U nited States may soon face significant
m ism atch problems.
Trends in labor force participation are also im portant.
F or example, is labor force participation declining among
older workers in Japan? This is indeed the case, which will
soften the im pact of Japan’s aging population structure.
Nonagricultural U.S. employment by industry, selected years, annual averages
[In thousands]
Industry
Total..........................................................................
1973
1979
1982
1986
76,790.0
89,823.0
89,566.0
99,525.0
1987
102,310.0
Mining..............................................................
642.0
958.0
1,128.0
777.0
721.0
Construction.....................................................
4,097.0
4,463.0
.3,905.0
4,816.0
4,998.0
Manufacturing............................................................
20,154.0
21,040.0
18,781.0
18,965.0
19,065.0
Durable goods.....................................................................
Lumber and wood products.............................................
Furniture and fixtures..................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products.......................................
Primary metal industries.......................................
Fabricated metal products.............................................
11,891.0
759.2
506.8
715.7
1,259.1
1,651.1
12,760.0
766.9
497.8
708.7
1,253.9
1,717.7
11,039.0
597.5
432.0
576.9
921.9
1,426.9
11,230.0
710.3
498.2
585.1
751.7
1,423.3
11,218.0
739.6
518.2
582.2
749.4
1,407.4
Machinery, except electrical............................................
Electrical and electronic equipment.................................
Transportation equipment................................................
Instruments and related products.....................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing...........................................
2,089.0
1,969.5
1,929.3
557.3
454.4
2,484.8
2,116.9
2,077.2
691.2
444.8
2,243.9
2,008.0
1,734.7
715.5
382.1
2,052.8
2,116.3
2,025.1
706.2
361.3
2,023.4
2,084.1
2,048.2
693.3
369.6
Nondurable goods.......................................................
Food and kindred products.............................................
Tobacco manufactures ....................................................
Textile mill products.......................................................
Apparel and other textile products...................................
Paper and allied products................................................
8,262.0
1,714.8
77.5
1,009.8
1,438.1
704.6
8,280.0
1,732.5
70.0
885.1
1,304.3
706.8
7,741.0
1,635.9
68.7
749.4
1,161.1
662.4
7,734.0
1,609.3
58.6
703.2
1,100.8
673.7
7,847.0
1,623.9
54.3
724.5
1,099.9
679.0
Printing and publishing.....................................................
Chemicals and allied products..........................................
Petroleum and coal products...... ....................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products...................
Leather and leather products...........................................
1,110.7
1,037.6
192.9
692.2
284.0
1,235.1
1,109.3
209.8
781.6
245.7
1,272.1
1,075.1
200.8
696.9
218.9
1,458.5
1,021.8
168.8
790.3
149.1
1,507.2
1,025.6
165.3
823.1
143.7
Transportation and public utilities............................................
Wholesale and retail trade......................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate........................................
4,656.0
16,607.0
4,046.0
5,136.0
20,192.0
4,975.0
5,082.0
20,457.0
5,341.0
5,255.0
23,683.0
6,283.0
5,385.0
24,381.0
6,549.0
Services..............................................................................
12,857.0
17,112.0
19,036.0
23,053.0
24,196.0
Government.............................................................................
13,732.0
15,947.0
15,837.0
16,693.0
17,015.0
Source: Compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor.
Digitized for36
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 7. Severity of joblessness in the United States and
Japan, 1979 and 1986
[In percent]
________________________________________
Characteristic
U.S.
Japan
5.8
7.0
2.1
2.8
Unemployment rate1
1979....................................................
1986....................................................
Percent of total unemployment
sectors increased during the 1973-86 period. In m anufac
turing, the percentage of workers w ithout a high school
diplom a decreased substantially. The same was true for
workers in service-producing industries. The following
tabulation, based on data from the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics, show s th e p ercen t o f U.S. em ployees in th e
service-producing and m anufacturing sectors, by educa
tional attainm ent, 1973 and 1986:
Long term unemployment:2
1979................................................
1986................................................
Job loser unemployment:3
1979 ................................................
1986 ................................................
4.2
8.7
17.0 (March)
17.1 (February)
29
36
30 (March)
32 (February)
U-7 unemployment rate4
1980....................................................
1986....................................................
10.1
10.3
57.0-8.7 (March)
58 .9 -11.8 (Febru
ary)
1 Approximating U.S. concepts.
2 Unemployed 1 year or longer.
3 For the United States, the reason for unemployment was permanent job
loss; for Japan, the reason for unemployment was Involuntary job loss.
4 U-7 measures seekers of full-time jobs, plus one-half the number of seekers
of part-time jobs, plus one-half the number of part-time workers who want full
time work, plus discouraged workers as a percent of the civilian labor force,
adjusted to exclude one-half of the part-time labor force and to Include the
discouraged workers.
5 This range for Japan reflects two different groups of discouraged workers.
Sources ; S t a tis tic a l S u p p le m e n t to I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a ris o n s o f U n e m
p lo y m e n t, Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 1988); E m p lo y m e n t
a n d E a rn in g s (Bureau of Labor Statistics, January 1980 and 1987); Constance
Sorrentino, "Japanese Unemployment: bls updates its analysis,” M o n th ly L a
b o r R e v ie w , June 1987, pp. 47-53; and the special annual March or February
household survey in Japan.
Labor force participation rates among older workers are
declining in m ost other industrialized countries as well.
The labor force participation rate of women is still ris
ing in the U nited States, but it appears to be falling
slightly in Japan. (See table 9.) M ore im portantly, the
participation rate of women in Japan is m ore cyclical than
that of women in the U nited States. This phenom enon is
unique to Japan among the industrialized countries. Per
haps this gives employers in Japan m ore flexibility in
dealing w ith business dow nturns than it gives employers
in the U nited States and in other countries.
Other factors
A lthough there are m any other w ork force characteris
tics which affect labor m arket flexibility, only three will
be discussed here: educational level, occupational mobil
ity, and geographical mobility of the work force.
Educational level.
Educational attainm ent is a powerful
predictor of the ability to adjust to unem ploym ent, espe
cially for workers suffering a perm anent job loss. In the
U nited States, the educational attain m en t of w orkers
(m easured by the num ber of years of school completed)
has been increasing. W orkers in the service sector in the
U nited States have always been, on average, more highly
educated than m anufacturing workers. This is still the
case, as the educational level of U.S. workers in both
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Educational
attainment
Less than high school...
High school...................
More than high school..
Service-producing
sector
Manufacturing
1973
1986
1973
1986
26
39
35
14
38
48
38
43
20
21
45
33
Com parable data for Japan are not available. The data
that are available yield somewhat conflicting results on
how the educational level of Japanese workers compares
with th at of U.S. workers. F or example, the percentage of
17-year-olds attending educational institutions in 1984
was slightly higher in Japan than in the U nited States.
The percentage of young people obtaining credentials for
university entrance in 1984 was m uch higher in Japan (92
percent) than in the U nited States (73 percent).15
In contrast, a W orld Bank study of prim ary, secondary,
and higher form al education showed th at twice as many
U.S. labor force participants had a higher (post-second
ary) education than their Japanese counterparts around
the same tim e period.16 M oreover, the m ean years of
schooling for U.S. labor force participants was 12.6 years
in 1981, com pared with 9.8 years for Japanese labor force
participants in 1979.17 It is significant, however, that edu
cation and training outside the ordinary education system
was not included. This type of training accounts for a
substantial part of the hum an capital stock embodied in
the labor forces of both countries. In fact, the level of
education and training provided in firms is widely re
garded as a m ajor determ inant of Jap an ’s impressive
postw ar economic perform ance.18
Occupational mobility.
Occupational mobility is a diffi
cult concept to measure and to assess. In m ost countries,
occupations have emerged historically, reflecting particu
lar features of industrial development. In this process,
relatively few occupations have disappeared entirely, but
m ost have changed substantially in term s of the composi
tion and level of skills required.
In the U nited States, it is estim ated that about 10 per
cent of the employed change occupations in a given year.
The percentage is highest for youth and declines signifi
cantly with age.19 Given the m uch higher labor force
participation rates of teenagers in the U nited States than
in Japan, and the fact that teenagers are the most mobile
group (30 to 40 percent change occupations each year),
37
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
occupational mobility is probably higher in the U nited
States than in Japan.
A lthough occupational mobility data for Japan are not
available, fairly com parable data on occupational shifts
exist. Japan, as well as the U nited States, is experiencing a
dram atic shift in occupational distribution o f em ploy
ment. (See table 10.) In both countries, rapid grow th is
occurring in professional and technical occupations, which
generally require a lot of education and training.
M anagerial and sales occupations also have increased
in both countries over the 1972-86 period, but m ore so in
the U nited States. Generally, there was slower grow th in
occupations that do not require post-secondary education.
A few exceptions were the rapid grow th in both countries
in the service occupations, which generally do not require
advanced training or education, and a puzzling increase in
Japan in the num ber of laborers.
Geographic mobility.
G eographic mobility is higher in
the U nited States than in Japan. F o r example, in 1980, 6.2
percent of the U.S. population moved to another county
within the same State; in Japan, the com parable rate was
2.6 percent.20
Several factors may account for this low mobility rate in
Japan. The population and industries are very densely con
centrated geographically, with supplier industries usually
located near m ajor clients. It is not unusual for workers to
Table 8. Percent distribution of labor force status by
gender, United States and Japan, 1986
Total, 16
C h aracteristic
P ercent distribution
years1
and over
Total
M en2
Population:
United States..................... 180,587
Japan................................. 95,870
100.0
100.0
43.5
43.6
48.5
46.6
8.0
9.7
Labor force:
United States..................... 117,834
Japan ................................. 60,200
100.0
100.0
52.0
58.8
41.2
38.5
6.7
2.7
Employment:
United States..................... 109,597
Japan ................................. 58,530
100.0
100.0
52.5
58.9
41.6
38.5
5.9
2.6
Unemployment:
United States.....................
Japan .................................
8,237
1,670
100.0
100.0
45.5
55.1
36.8
37.7
17.6
7.2
Labor force participation rate:
United States.....................
Japan .................................
65.3
62.8
—
78.1
84.6
55.5
51.8
54.7
17.6
Employment-population ratio:
United States.....................
Japan .................................
60.7
61.1
—
—
73.3
82.4
52.0
50.4
44.6
16.3
Unemployment rate:
United States.....................
Japan .................................
7.0
2.8
—
6.1
2.6
6.2
2.7
18.3
7.3
—
—
W om en2 T eenagers1
1 Includes, for Japan, 15-year-olds. Population, labor force, employment, and
unemployment numbers are in millions.
2 20 years and older.
Note : U.S. data are for the civilian labor force; Japanese data include the
National Defense Force.
Source : U.S. data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data for Japan
are from the Japan Statistics Bureau Management and Coordination Agency,
1986.
A n n u a l R e p o r t o n th e L a b o u r F o r c e S u rv e y ,
Digitized for38
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor M arket Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
move from their primary industry to a supplier industry.
There is also a high degree of internal (intrafirm) mobility.
As a result, job turnover is lower and job tenure is higher in
Japan, compared with the United States. Fewer than onethird of employees in Japan, primarily in large manufac
turing firms, are covered by implicit lifetime employment
agreements with their firms.21 Though no formal commit
ments are made by either the employer or employee, it is
understood that employment will be stable with few or no
periods of layoff.
Speed of adjustment
A variety of evidence suggests th at the speed with
which firms adjust labor input (num ber of workers times
the average num ber of hours worked) to fluctuations in
p ro d u ctio n does not differ significantly betw een the
U nited States and Japan. W hen production slows, U.S.
firm s tend to reduce the num ber of employees m ore
quickly than do Japanese firms; Japanese firms rely more
on reducing hours.
A 1980 study by H aruo Shimata, professor of econom
ics at Keio University, examines trends in m anufacturing
production, em ployment, and labor input from November
1973 to D ecem ber 1975 (a recessionary period) for Japan,
the U nited States, the U nited K ingdom , West G erm any,
and France.22 A substantial drop in production occurred
in each country following an increase in energy and other
raw m aterial prices at the beginning of this period. The
depth of em ploym ent adjustm ent relative to the size of the
production drop in Japan was com parable to th at in E u
rope, but was m uch less severe than in the U nited States.
In contrast, labor input (as m easured by the ratio of per
centage changes in labor input and production) ad just
m ent was greater in the U nited States than in Japan and
Europe.
Shim ata presents econom etric estimates of adjustm ent
speeds for em ploym ent and labor input on a com parable
basis for Japan, the U nited States, and the U nited K ing
dom ."3 The U nited States adjusted em ploym ent levels
m ore quickly than did either Japan or the U nited K ing
dom; whereas the speed with which Japanese firms ad
justed labor input was similar to the U nited States and
som ewhat faster than in the U nited Kingdom.
A more detailed 1985 study by Shim ata and others
analyzes trends in em ploym ent and production for seven
m anufacturing industries in the U nited States and Japan,
using data over a longer period that included two com
plete business cycles (1968-79).24 Tim ing and depth of
em ploym ent and production changes in U.S. m anufactur
ing industries were very similar. In contrast, there was a
m arked absence of employm ent fluctuations in Japanese
m anufacturing industries.
The study also presents econom etric estimates of em
ploym ent adjustm ent speeds for 14 U.S. and Japanese
m anufacturing industries. It found that employm ent gen-
Table 9.
Civilian labor force participation rates by gender, 1960-87
W om en
Men
Total
Year
United States
Japan
United States
Japan
United States
Japan
I960
1961
1962
1963
1964
.................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..............................................
..................................................
59.4
59.3
58.8
58.7
58.7
67.9
67.8
66.9
65.7
64.8
83.3
82.9
82.0
81.4
81.0
84.2
84.3
83.6
82.5
81.5
37.7
38.1
37.9
38.3
38.7
52.7
52.4
51.3
50.0
49.3
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
58.9
59.2
59.6
59.6
60.1
64.4
64.6
64.8
64.9
64.6
80.7
80.4
80.4
80.1
79.8
81.1
81.1
81.0
81.7
81.5
39.3
40.3
41.1
41.6
42.7
48.8
49.2
49.6
49.2
48.8
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
.................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
60.4
60.2
60.4
60.8
61.2
64.5
64.2
63.8
64.0
63.0
79.7
79.1
78.7
81.5
81.9
81.9
81.9
81.6
43.3
43.4
43.9
44.7
45.7
48.7
47.7
46.8
47.3
45.7
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
61.2
61.6
62.3
63.2
63.7
62.4
62.4
62.5
62.8
62.7
77.9
77.5
77.7
77.9
77.8
81.2
81.0
80.4
80.1
79.9
46.3
47.3
48.4
50.0
50.9
44.8
44.9
45.7
46.4
46.6
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
..................................................
63.8
63.9
64.0
64.0
64.4
62.6
62.6
62.7
63.1
62.7
77.4
77.0
76.6
76.4
76.4
79.6
79.6
79.3
79.2
78.5
51.5
52.1
52.6
52.9
53.6
46.6
46.7
47.0
48.0
47.8
1985 ..................................................
1986 ..................................................
1987 ..................................................
64.8
65.3
65.6
62.3
62.1
61.9
76.3
76.3
76.2
77.9
77.6
77.1
54.5
55.3
56.0
47.6
47.6
47.6
7 9 .0
7 8 .8
Note : Data relate to the total labor force approximating U.S. concepts as a percent of the total noninstitutionalized working age population. Working age is defined as
16-year-olds and older In the United States; 15-year-olds and older in Japan. The institutionalized working age population is included in Japan.
Source :
S t a tis tic a l S u p p le m e n t to I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a ris o n s o f U n e m p lo y m e n t ,
erally adjusts m ore quickly in U.S. m anufacturing indus
tries and th at differences between the U nited States and
Japan are sm aller when the volume of em ployment is
m easured in term s of labor input.25
Adjustment mechanisms
Aside from the overall speed of adjustm ent, U.S. and
Japanese firms have traditionally used different methods to
cut labor costs in response to decreased dem and.26 In the
United States, firms are quick to lay off workers and shut
down inefficient plants. Reliance on private financial capi
tal m arkets leads firms to reallocate productive capital to
more productive plants in the United States or to locations
outside the country. W orkers at the older plants may be
displaced and new w orkers (possibly elsewhere in the
United States or overseas) take their places. There has been
little sharing of information or communication between
management and labor prior to layoffs and plant shut
downs.27 Collective bargaining agreements between m an
agement and unions specify, in detail, the seniority-based
rules for layoffs. However, only about a fourth of all U.S.
workers are covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
In Japan, there is extensive reallocation of so-called
regular workers (mainly those covered by lifetime em
ploym ent) to different operations w ithin the firm , to
subsidiaries, or even to a different firm. Overtime hours
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 1988).
are reduced; wages and sem iannual bonuses are cut.
W orkers on the shop floor are regularly consulted and
informed regarding the plan for employment reduction;
detailed em ploym ent adjustm ent plans usually are form u
lated after the need for adjustm ent becomes clear. Layoffs
are rarely used. W hile these features are typical for large
Japanese firms in export-oriented industries, it is im por
tant to note that employm ent adjustm ent often proceeds
less sm oothly in small and medium Japanese firms.
Also in Japan, extensive training is given to newly hired
regular workers on all aspects of the com pany’s organiza
tion, p ro d u c t lines, p ro d u c tio n technology, and the
competition. W orkers are rotated every 2 or 3 years to
gain a variety of skills. Base pay is low, rises more steeply
than in the U nited States, and peaks at about age 45.
Raises are based mostly on seniority and tenure, rather
than on the specific job performed. All nonm anagerial
regular workers in a com pany are represented by the com
pany union. M anagem ent is usually p ro m o ted from
within the company; first-line shop m anagers are key
points of contact, prom oting good com m unication be
tween m anagem ent and shop-floor workers. Given the
Japanese firm ’s substantial investm ent in the w orker and
the flexibility of labor within the firm, it makes sense to
move workers internally rather than resort to layoffs.
39
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
In large U.S. m anufacturing companies, the firm usu
ally provides little training unrelated to the specific job
for which workers are employed. Pay is closely attached
to job classification. Prom otion is usually achieved by
changing jobs rath er than on acquisition of a broad range
of skills, with tenure either at the com pany or at a p articu
lar job being the basis for selection. Wage and com pen
sation levels are usually set out in long-term contracts.
There is very little com m unication and inform ation shar
ing between m anagem ent and unions. These features of
U.S. internal labor m arkets m ake reallocation of labor
within the firm costly and difficult. Given this, it is clear
why U.S. companies reduce labor costs by readily using
layoffs rath er than by intra-firm or inter-firm transfers.
Adjustment policies
The U.S. and Japanese Governments use a variety of
employment adjustm ent policies to assist displaced work
ers. M ost U.S. workers, when unemployed, are also entitled
to income m aintenance under Federal-State unem ploy
ment insurance, which may be augmented by employerfinanced supplemental unemployment benefits. The United
States has two prim ary employment adjustm ent programs
to provide job search aid to displaced workers: Trade A d
justm ent Assistance, and the Economic Dislocation and
W orker A djustm ent Assistance Act of 1988, which incor
porated and substantially amended Title III of the Job
Training Partnership Act.
Japan has several different em ploym ent ad justm ent
program s th at fall essentially into two groups: em ploy
m ent stabilization measures and vocational training. In
addition, the Japanese G overnm ent has recently insti
tuted a program which provides loans to firms adversely
affected by the yen appreciation. This type of program
indirectly assists in the em ploym ent adjustm ents for bene
ficiary firm s.28
Jobless workers in the U nited States can receive weekly
paym ents of 35 to 40 percent of previous wages for 26 to
39 weeks and job-search assistance through the State E m
ploym ent Service. W orkers m ust actively search for work
to receive benefits.
U.S. Trade Adjustment Assistance.
This program , ex
panded in the Trade Act of 1974, provides assistance to
workers displaced as a result of increases in imports. Such
workers are eligible to receive enhanced unemployment
compensation and assistance in retraining, job search, and
relocation. Expenditures of the program increased dram ati
cally between 1979 and 1980, reaching more than $2 billion,
because many laid-off automobile workers were eligible for,
and collected, trade adjustm ent assistance. Amendments in
1981 to the Trade Act reduced the weekly monetary bene
fits a displaced worker could receive by switching benefits
from a national to individual State level. As a result of these
and other changes to the trade adjustm ent assistance pro
Digitized for40
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor M arket Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
gram, it is no longer a m ajor source of aid to tradedisplaced workers. It now functions mainly as an extended
unemployment insurance program. That is, trade adjust
ment assistance extends the eligibility period for receiving
unemployment insurance benefits from 26-39 weeks to 52
weeks for workers displaced as a result of increased im
ports. However, coverage under the program has recently
been extended to include workers in industries that provide
essential goods or services to a trade-affected industry and
to workers in firms that engage in exploration or drilling for
oil or natural gas.
Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustment Assistance
Act o f 1988.
This new $980 million program is now the
m ajor U.S. Federal employment adjustm ent program. The
act replaces and expands the Job training Partnership Act,
Title III program. It still provides block grants of funds to
States, which in turn decide the type and am ount of em
ployment and training assistance to be provided to dis
located workers, regardless of the cause of displacement.
The act improves on the past, fragm ented approach to
worker readjustm ent by: establishing closer links with the
unem ploym ent insurance system and T rade A djustm ent
Assistance, responding earlier and m ore quickly to w ork
ers’ needs once they are laid off, improving the targeting
of funds to areas of greatest need, emphasizing training
and reem ploym ent rather than income support, and faciliTable 10. Employment change by occupation, United
States and Japan, 1972-86
Occupation
P ercent change,
1 9 7 2 -8 6
U n ite d S ta te s
Total employment..........................................
Executive, administrative, and managerial w orkers...........
Professional workers.............................................
Technicians and related support workers..........................
Salesworkers............................................
Administrative support workers, including clerical..............
33.4
73.7
57.5
74.5
54.6
35.2
Private household workers..................................
Service workers, except private household workers..........
Precision production, craft, and repair workers...................
Operators, fabricators, and laborers...................................
Farming, forestry, and fishing workers...............................
-31.9
45.9
29.6
-1.3
-10.4
Japan
Total employment..........................................
Professional and technical workers ........................
Salesworkers...........................................
Managers and officials.....................................
Clerical and related workers............................
Service workers............................................
Craftsmen and production process workers..................
Workers in transport and communications.........................
Laborers............................................
Farmers, lumbermen, and fishermen..........................
14.2
64.4
29 5
21.0
31.8
24.8
6.9
-3.3
49 4
-34.6
Source : 1972-86 rates of change in the United States were derived from
Current Population Survey data. See Ronald E. Kutscher and Constance E
Sorrentino, "Employment and Unemployment Patterns in the U.S. and Europe,
1973-87," J o u r n a l o f L a b o r R e s e a rc h (George Mason University, Department
of Economics, forthcoming). For Japan, data are from Statistics Bureau, Prime
Minister's Office, A n n u a l R e p o r t o n th e L a b o u r F o rc e S u rv e y , 1979 and 1986.
Occupational definitions for the two countries are not directly comparable.
tating labor-m anagem ent and governm ent-com m unity
cooperation in responding to plant closings and layoffs.
Japan's transfer and retraining programs.
In Japan, em
ployment measures are aimed at preventing unemployment.
The government does provide unemployment benefits in the
event of job loss (60 to 80 percent of previous wages for 90 to
300 days, depending upon age and tenure). As mentioned
earlier, under Japanese employment practices, it is very
difficult for people once displaced to be re-employed. Em
ployment adjustments are mainly done internally through
intra- and inter-company transfers or retraining programs,
often with government financial assistance. Japanese firms
often pay wage subsidies to workers who are moved to other
companies for a limited period of time. It is important to
note that these comments apply primarily to regular work
ers. Nonregular employees are usually the first to be let go
during an economic downturn, often leaving the labor force
entirely.
In sharp contrast to U.S. practice, the government of
Japan provides wage and training cost subsidies directly
to employers. G overnm ent assistance is given under the
1983 Special M easures Law for Em ploym ent Security for
W orkers in Specified Depressed Industries and Areas to
those employers forced to reduce the scale of their busi
ness activities, who tem porarily shift workers to other
enterprises, prom ptly recruit those leaving from stru ctu r
ally depressed industries, or offer training to workers who
are obliged to leave their jobs entirely. These measures are
largely financed through em ployers’ contributions to the
Em ploym ent Insurance Scheme; the G overnm ent does
not provide large am ounts of financial aid.
Fast adjustments although methods differ
The role of m anufacturing in total o utput has not
declined in either the U nited States or Japan. Thus, m an
ufacturing continues to play a prom inent role in both
economies, with the com petitive position of the U.S. m an
ufacturing industry recently improving relative to Japan.
In both countries, however, m anufacturing employment
has declined recently and the industry share of total em
ployment has continued to fall.
The ability of labor m arkets to respond to structural
change depends upon many factors such as the character
istics of the work force and available adjustm ent m ech
anisms and policies. W hen we examined labor m arket
flexibility by com paring labor force characteristics, we
found that on one hand, a larger proportion of U.S. than
of Japanese workers are young and m ore likely to change
occupations and geographic areas than older workers. On
the other hand, Japanese women are more likely than U.S.
women to exit the labor force in economic downturns.
Overall, the U.S. labor m arket adjusts as quickly as the
Japanese labor m arket. N ot surprisingly, employment ad
ju stm en t m echanism s in the two countries are quite
different. In Japan, layoffs are rare. W orkers’ broad-based
training provided by their employers allows them more
access to different jobs in other parts of the same com
pany or to a differen t com pany a lto g e th e r w ith o u t
entering the unem ploym ent pool. Overtime hours, wages,
and bonuses are cut. In the U nited States, employers rely
on layoffs to reduce labor costs.
Correspondingly, U.S. and Japanese employment ad
justm ent policies are tailored to their respective labor
markets. In the U nited States, unem ploym ent compensa
tion is available to job losers, which provides income
support while awaiting recall or searching for a new job.
Training, job search, and relocation assistance is provided
to workers whose job loss appears to be perm anent and 60
days notice is provided in the case of plant closings and
mass layoffs.
In Japan, a variety of program s have been designed to
prevent workers from ever becoming unemployed. G ov
ernm ent subsidies are paid directly to firms to finance
both wages and vocational training of underem ployed
workers.
□
■FOOTNOTES
Acknowledgment: The authors are grateful to Constance Sorrentino
o f the Division o f Foreign Labor Statistics and Trade, Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, for her comm ents, suggestions, and invaluable assistance with
the data.
'Ronald E. Kutscher and Valarie A. Personick, “ Deindustrialization and
the shift to services,” Monthly Labor Review, June 1986, pp. 3-13.
2U .S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis database;
Japan Economic Planning Agency, Annual Report on National Accounts,
1987.
3U .S. Congress, Office o f Technology Assessm ent,
Manufacturing and America’s Trade Deficit,
U .S. Governm ent Printing Office, June 1988).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Paying the Bill:
ota- ite-3 9 0 (W ashington,
4Arthur Neef and James Thomas, “ Trends in manufacturing productivity
and labor costs in the U .S. and abroad,” Monthly Labor Review, Decem
ber 1987, pp. 25-30.
5These data and the figures in table 1 are a count of workers in the
manufacturing industry derived from the Current Population Survey, a
national sample o f households. Data from the Current Employm ent Sta
tistics program , a national survey o f business establishments, provide a count
o f the num ber o f jobs in the m anufacturing industry. In 1987, there were
19.1 million m anufacturing jobs. The larger num ber in the cps is due in
large part to the contrasting ways o f counting w orkers on unpaid absences.
M anufacturing has a relatively large num ber of unpaid absences and they
are counted as employed only in the cps, not in the establishm ent survey.
See Christopher G. Gellner, “ A 25-year look at em ploym ent,” Monthly
Labor Review, July 1973, pp. 14-23. Figures in table 6 are based on the
establishm ent survey.
41
M O N T H L Y LA BO R REV IEW
February 1989
Labor Market Adjustments in U.S. and Japan
•
'E lizab eth G ibbons and G erald F. H alpin, “ Im port price declines in
1986 reflected reduced oil prices,” Monthly Labor Review, A pril 1987,
pp. 3 -1 7 .
'’Economic Report of the President (W ashington, U.S, G overnm ent
P rinting Office, 1988).
l6George P sacharopoulos and A na M aria A rriagada, "T he educa
tional com position of the labour force: an international com parison,"
International Labour Review, S e p tem b er-O cto b er 1986, pp, 5 6 -7 4 .
17Ibid.
1%
Ibid.
“G ibbons and Halpin, chart 2, p. 5.
'R obert Blanchfield and W illiam M arsteller, "R ising export and im
port prices in 1987 reversed the trend of recent years," Monthly Labor
Review, June 1988, pp. 3 -1 9 ,
]0Ibid.,
20Ibid.
"W ein er, "W hy is Jap an 's U nem ploym ent R ate So Low?" p. 16.
pp. 5 - 6 .
"C o n stan ce Sorrentino, "Jap a n ’s low unem ploym ent: an in-depth
analysis," Monthly Labor Review, M arch 1984, pp. 18 -2 7 ; and C on
stance Sorrentino, “Japanese unem ploym ent: bls updates its analysis,"
Monthly Labor Review, June 1987, pp. 4 7 -5 3 .
"O rg an izatio n for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent (oecd ),
Panel One, Phase II, "M easures to Assist W orkers D isplaced by Struc
tural C hange" (Paris, o ecd , M arch 1988).
Stuart E. W einer, "W hy is Ja p a n ’s U nem ploym ent R ate So Low and
So Stable?" Economic Review (Federal Reserve Bank of K ansas City),
A pril 1987, pp. 3 -1 8 .
"O rg an izatio n for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent (oecd ),
“T he Social Policy Im plications o f Aging P opulations” (Paris, o ecd ,
forthcom ing), table 12.
1 O rganization for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent (oecd ),
oec d , 1987),
table 1.1.
Structural Adjustment and Economic Performance (Paris,
42FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1'O rganization for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent (oecd ),
o ecd , 1986), table I I - 9 .
Flexibility in the Labor Force (Paris,
" H a r u o Shim ada, "T he Japanese Em ploym ent System ," Japanese
Industrial Relations Series, Series 6 (Tokyo, Japan Institute of Labour,
1980).
23Ibid.
" J a m e s A. O rr, H aruo Shim ada, and A tsushi Seike, United StatesJapan Comparative Study of Employment Adjustment, R eport to the
U.S. D epartm ent of L abor and Japan M inistry of Labor, M arch 1985.
25Ibid.
" T h is section draw s heavily on O rr, Shim ada, and Seike,
" T h is m ay change in the future with the recent passage of the W orker
A d justm ent and R etraining N otification A ct o f 1988, which requires
firm s th at em ploy 100 or m ore w orkers to give w orkers 60 days notice
that the plant m ay close or th at a mass layoff will occur.
"“O rganization for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent (oecd ),
"Measures to Assist Workers. ”
The importance of basic academic skills
W hy are basic skills im portant? Because those w ith b etter basic
skills— defined as the ability to read, write, communicate, and com
p u te— do better in school, at work, and in other key areas of their lives.
They are more likely to perform well in school, obtain a high school
diploma, go on to and complete college, work more hours, earn higher
wages, be m ore productive workers, and avoid bearing children out of
wedlock. Conversely, those who are deficient in basic skills are more
likely to be school dropouts, teenage parents, jobless, welfare dependent,
and involved in crime. M oreover, in an interdependent world economy,
the skills of the N atio n ’s w ork force are becoming an increasingly
im portant determ inant of A m erican industry’s com petitive position,
w orkers’ real wages, and our overall standard of living. In short, basic
skills bear a distinct relation to the future well-being of workers, families,
firms, and the country itself.
— G
United
States-Japan Comparative Study.
o rd o n
B
e r l in
a n d
A
n d rew
Su m
Toward A More Perfect Union: Basic Skills,
Poor Families, and Our Economic Future
(N e w Y o rk , F o r d F o u n d a tio n , 1988), p p . 1 - 2 .
Productivity in the carburetors,
pistons, and valves industry
Growth in output per employee hour
in the carburetors, pistons, and valves
industry has been substantially below
that for all manufacturing; the industry
has felt the effects o f weak demand
Jo h n
W. F e r r i s
and
V ir g in ia
L. K l a r q u i s t
Productivity in the carburetors, pistons, and valves indus
try, as m easured by output per employee hour, declined
slightly at an average annual rate of 0.4 percent from 1972
to 1986.1 This was below the rate for all m anufacturing,
which grew at a rate of 2.4 percent per year during the
same period. The decline in productivity reflected a small
decrease in output of 0.1 percent per year and a rise in
employee hours of 0.3 percent per year. Adversely affect
ing the industry were cyclical dow nturns in the economy,
which resulted in sizable drops in production in several
years and corresponding declines in productivity.
The productivity trends in the industry can be divided
into two distinct periods. F rom 1972 to 1980, productivity
declined at an average annual rate of 3.1 percent. O utput
fell 1.3 percent per year, while hours rose 1.9 percent per
year. In the two recessions which occurred during this
period, output dropped sharply. In the recession year of
1974, output fell 14.3 percent and hours decreased 4.7
percent. This resulted in a productivity falloff of 10.0
percent. In the recession year of 1980, a 17.1-percent de
crease in output and a 13.2-percent decline in hours led to
a 4.5-percent drop in industry productivity.
From 1980 to 1986, productivity rebounded, increasing
at a rate of 4.5 percent per year. This was a result of out
put’s having risen at an average annual rate of 4.2 percent
while hours changed little, falling 0.3 percent per year. Pro
ductivity advanced in each year from 1980 to 1985; how
ever, in 1986 output per hour declined.2
Industry description
The carburetors, pistons, and valves industry includes
establishments engaged prim arily in the m anufacture of
all types of carburetors, pistons and piston rings, and
valves for aircraft, m otor vehicles, and engines. The
breakdown of industry production in 1972 was 46 percent
carburetors, 29 percent pistons and piston rings, and 25
percent valves. By 1986, the distribution had changed to
61 percent carburetors, 28 percent pistons and piston
rings, and 11 percent valves. M ichigan, New York, K en
tucky, and Indiana are the leading States in employment
in the industry, accounting for about 50 percent of the
industry’s employm ent in 1982 (the year of the most re
cent Census of M anufactures).
Establishm ents in the industry are large: The eight larg
est of the industry’s 171 establishments accounted for
m ore than one-half of the value of the industry’s ship
ments in 1982. The average num ber of employees per
establishm ent in 1982 was 182, com pared to an average of
53 employees for all m anufacturing.
Output and demand
Jo h n W. F erris and Virginia L. K larquist are econom ists in the Division
o f In d u stry P roductivity and T echnology Studies, B ureau o f L abor
Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The change in industry output over the entire period
from 1972 to 1986 was negligible. However, annual output
movements have varied significantly in certain years. (See
43
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
table 1.) In 1973, the industry recorded its largest increase
in output, 30.2 percent. The largest decrease— 17.4 per
c e n t- o c c u rr e d in 1975. Approxim ately three-fourths of
the industry’s output is purchased by m otor vehicle m anu
facturers. Hence, the level of production in the m otor
vehicle industry is the prim ary determ inant of industry
output.3
From 1972 to 1980, output declined at an average an
nual rate o f 1.3 percent, a reflection of a decline in output
in the m otor vehicle industry.4 D uring this period the
num ber of cars, trucks, and buses produced fell by 1.4
percent per year. The shift in autom obile production in
the U nited States from large cars to small and medium
cars also adversely affected the industry. In 1972, the
distribution of autom obile production was 9 percent four
cylinders, 11 percent six cylinders, and 80 percent eight
cylinders. By 1980, the distribution had changed to 31
percent four cylinders, 37 percent six cylinders, and 32
percent eight cylinders.
By contrast, from 1980 to 1986, industry output grew
at an average annual rate of 4.2 percent. This was prim ar
ily due to an 8.4-percent annual grow th rate in m otor
vehicle production. However, other factors tem pered the
recovery of the carburetors, pistons, and valves industry.
One of these was the continuing shift tow ard sm all-car
production. By 1986, m ore than half of all automobiles
produced in the U nited States had four-cylinder engines.
Correlatively, the proportions of cars with six- and eightcylinder engines both declined from 1980 levels, to 29 and
20 percent, respectively. Also tem pering the grow th rate
of industry output was the increasing num ber of installa
tions o f electronic fuel injection system s in place of
Table 1. Productivity and related indexes for the
carburetors, pistons, and valves industry, 1972-86
O utput per em ployee hour
Y ear
All
Production
em ployees
workers
Nonpro
Employee hours
Output
duction
workers
All
Production
em ployees
workers
Nonpro
duction
workers
1972
1973
1974
1975
.....
.....
.....
.....
113.6
120.4
108.3
100.1
113.8
119.3
108.8
102.8
112.9
124.9
106.3
89.3
94.3
122.8
105.3
87.0
83.0
102.0
97.2
86.9
82.9
102.9
96.8
84.6
83.5
98.3
99.1
97.4
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
107.3
100.0
94.6
94.6
90.3
108.4
100.0
95.1
94.2
93.3
102.0
100.0
92.5
96.4
78.7
102.9
100.0
96.5
105.7
87.6
95.9
100.0
102.0
111.7
97.0
94.9
100.0
101.5
112.2
93.9
100.9
100.0
104.3
109.6
111.3
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
91.7
92.0
99.6
110.3
114.0
93.1
97.4
102.9
111.5
116.8
85.6
73.7
86.3
105.2
102.8
90.1
85.3
91.6
115.3
110.8
98.3
92.7
92.0
104.5
97.2
96.8
87.6
89.0
103.4
94.9
105.2
115.7
106.1
109.6
107.8
1986 .....
111.1
114.9
96.3
101.3
91.2
88.2
105.2
A verage annual rates of change (in percent)
1972-86
1972-80
1980-86
-0.4
-3.1
4.5
-0.1
-3.0
4.4
Digitized for44
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-1.4
-3.9
4.9
-0.1
-1.3
4.2
0.3
1.9
-0.3
0.0
1.7
-0.2
1.3
2.7
-0.6
Productivity in Carburetors, Pistons, and Valves
conventional carburetor systems in new cars. Before 1980,
electronic fuel injection systems were virtually nonexist
ent in A m erican-m ade autom obiles. By 1986, nearly
tw o-thirds of the automobiles produced in the United
States were equipped with such systems.
Employment and hours
Industry employm ent grew at an average annual rate of
0.2 percent from 1972 to 1986. Em ploym ent increased
from 26,700 in 1972 to a high of 36,200 in 1979 and fell to
28,800 in 1986. Total employee hours grew at a slightly
faster pace of 0.3 percent per year. The num ber of pro
duction w orkers rose slightly from 21,600 in 1972 to
22,300 in 1986. N onproduction worker employm ent grew
at a faster rate of 1.4 percent per year as the num ber of
nonproduction workers increased from 5,100 in 1972 to
6,500 in 1986. The proportion of production workers to
total employm ent fell from 80.9 percent in 1972 to 77.4
percent in 1986.
Average hourly earnings of production workers were sig
nificantly higher in the industry than in all manufacturing
industries. In 1972, industry average hourly earnings were
$4.65, compared with $3.82 in all manufacturing indus
tries. By 1986 the gap had widened, and industry average
hourly earnings were $12.66 compared with $9.73 in all
manufacturing.
Capital spending
M easured in constant dollars,5 industry capital expend
itures increased at an average annual rate of 6.6 percent
from 1972 to 1986, as capital spending per employee was
brought up to the level for all m anufacturing industries.
Strained production capacity, which peaked in the late
1970’s, was the main reason for the high levels of capital
spending. D uring the same years, capital expenditures by
all m anufacturing industries rose 2.5 percent per year.
From 1972 to 1980, investments in plant and equip
m ent by companies in the industry rose 10.6 percent per
year while all m anufacturing industries increased their
capital expenditures 5.2 percent per year. A t the begin
ning of this period, the level of capital spending per
employee in the industry was about one-half the level of
all m anufacturing industries. By the late 1970’s, the in
dustry was investing in plant and equipm ent at a level
com parable to that of all m anufacturing.
Following this period of high capital spending, industry
productivity benefited from 1980 to 1986, growing 4.5 per
cent annually. The lag between capital expenditures and
productivity is due in part to the lapse of time that occurs
before the new facilities made possible by the capital ex
penditures, which incorporate technological advances,
become fully operational.
B etw een 1980 and 1986, c a p ital spending slow ed
slightly throughout the m anufacturing segment of the
economy, declining by 0.1 percent per year. In contrast,
investm ent in plant and equipm ent in the carburetors,
pistons, and valves industry increased 9.3 percent per
year. M uch of the capital spending by the industry was on
the conversion to the production of electronic fuel injec
tion systems.6
Technology
A lthough productivity has been dam pened by decreas
ing d em and, th e in d u stry has in tro d u c e d som e new
technology into its production processes. Changes in tech
nology have centered on im provem ents in metalworking
m achinery, as well as autom atic m ovem ent and position
ing of work.
In carburetor manufacturing, new technology has cen
tered on improvements in assembly line production.7 In the
earliest years of the study period, loading and transferring
the workpiece were manual operations. Soon, establish
ments increasingly installed automatic transfer lines. As a
result, many metalworking operations (for example, mill
ing, grinding, drilling, and reaming) became automated. In
the newer system, workers perform the initial tool setup,
m onitor performance, and provide maintenance. Testing
and inspection may or may not be automated. For the in
stallation and continued use of such m achinery to be
economical, the volume of production must be very high.
In recent years the volume of production of carburetors
has declined sharply, as more new cars are equipped with
electronic fuel injection systems. M ajor m anufacturers who
once produced thousands of carburetors daily now produce
only hundreds daily. The reduced volume of production has
resulted in a shift away from the newer assembly line pro
duction technique toward cell manufacturing and job-order
production. In cell manufacturing, the workpiece is assem
bled at one location, and jigs and fixtures are provided as
operator aids. Convenient parts bins and state-of-the-art
tools are also provided to minimize labor and increase pro
duction. D irect labor requirem ents are higher in cell
manufacturing than in assembly line production.
In piston manufacturing, new technology has centered on
improvements in metalworking and transfer machines. T ra
ditionally, pistons were manufactured on a succession of
lathes and grinders, requiring much manpower to transport
and position the work in process. Some establishments in
the industry have now installed automatic-dial transfer ma
chines.8 These machines perform all the operations of the
lathes and grinders at a faster rate than the machines they
replaced. The machine cycle consists of two trips around
the seven-station dial with the pistons automatically posi
tioned. Two pistons are always in place at each work
station— one in a vertical position for the first series of
machine operations and one in a horizontal position for the
second series. A t the first station an operator loads a casting
that is indexed for the second station into the load-assist,
which places the casting in a three-jaw compensating lathe.
A t the second station, a horizontal feed unit with a boring
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
spindle drills the wrist-pin hole and counterbores, faces,
and chamfers (grooves) the piston skirt. A t the third sta
tion, the near and far sides of the w rist-pin hole are
recessed to hold a snap ring. The wrist-pin hole is bored
further at the fourth station, and polishing takes place at
the fifth station. A t the sixth station a tool peens the
surface of the piston, hardening the bore to the desired
depth. A t the final station in its first trip around the
seven-station dial, the wrist-pin bore is gaged. The part is
then autom atically unloaded from the vertical position
and reloaded in the horizontal position.
The second cycle begins at station 2, where the outside
diam eter of the piston is rough-turned. A t the third sta
tion, the piston dom e is rough-cut and finish-cut. A
horizontal positioning unit with a grooving spindle then
cuts the ring groove at the fourth station. A t the fifth
station, the outside diam eter is finish-turned to the de
sired roundness tolerance. A t the sixth station, the outside
diam eter is gaged. Finally, at the seventh station, the dial
indexes the piston to its original position and autom ati
cally unloads it into a chute. Pistons produced on the
autom atic-dial transfer machine are of consistently higher
quality than those produced on a succession of lathes and
grinders. Also, labor requirem ents are significantly lower
due to the reduced m aterial handling and reworking of
pistons.
Outlook
The carburetor segment of the carburetors, pistons, and
valves industry is expected to decline sharply. In 1987, the
proportion of new A m erican-m ade cars with electronic
fuel injection systems rose to 77 percent. Industry sources
predict th at carburetors will cease to exist as original
equipm ent on new A m erican cars by 1991. However,
m anufacturers will continue to produce carburetors for
replacem ents in older cars and for nonautom otive use.
The low level of dem and will probably be responsible for
the failure to adopt, on a widespread basis, new technolo
gies such as autom atic transfer lines.
The outlook for the remaining segments of the industry
appears better. Diffusion of the more efficient metalworking
and transfer machinery is far from complete. In addition,
establishments in the industry may adopt computer-inte
grated manufacturing, a system in which engineers use
computers to design products. Computers can also guide
workpieces among machines and direct machine tools.
The m ajor reason for the lack of diffusion of the newer
technologies throughout the industry is weak and volatile
dem and. C ontributing to the weakness in dem and is
strong foreign competition. F or example, in 1972 im ports
of piston rings were virtually nonexistent. Today, one in
du stry source estim ates th a t im ports account for 20
percent of the piston ring m arket. The volatility in de
m and is a byproduct of the cyclical patterns in m otor
vehicle production.
□
45
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Productivity in Carburetors, Pistons, and Valves
---------- FOOTNOTES---------‘The carburetors, pistons, and valves industry is designated by the
Office o f M anagem ent and B udget as s ic 3592 in the Standard Industrial
Classification Manual, 1987. T his industry com prises establishm ents en
gaged prim arily in the m anufacture o f carburetors, pistons, piston rings,
and engine intake and exhaust valves.
A verage annual rates m entioned in the text and tables are based on the
linear least squares tren d o f the logarithm s of the index num bers. The
indexes for p roductivity and related variables are updated annually and
published in Productivity Measures for Selected Industries and Govern
ment Services, Bulletin 2296 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, N ovem ber
1987).
“By definition, the least squares rate of change is the rate resulting
from the best fit o f the trend line. T he overall rate is not necessarily the
average o f the year-to-year rates o f change. In this case, the overall rate
o f change is not an average o f the tw o subperiod rates of change.
3Census of Manufactures (\J.S. D epartm ent o f Com m erce, 1972, 1977,
1982), table 6a.
APPENDIX:
5C apital expenditures were deflated by the im plicit price deflator for
p roducers’ durable equipm ent; see The Economic Report to the President,
transm itted to the C ongress Jan u ary 1988, table B3.
i n d u s t r y sources. It should be noted th at production of electronic
fuel injection system s is done prim arily in the m otor vehicle p arts and
accessories industry (s ic 3714). Conversion to electronic fuel injection
system s will lead to a reduction in the size of the carburetors, pistons,
and valves industry as presently defined in the Standard Industrial Clas
sification Manual.
1Ibid.
^ ‘T ransfer M achine for M ini P istons,” American Machinist, M arch
1981, pp. 11 2 -1 4 ; and “ M achine o f the M onth: H ardinge P iston T u rn
ing M achine,” Manufacturing Engineering, M arch 1979, p. 43.
Measurement techniques and limitations
Indexes of output per employee hour m easure changes
in the relation between the output of an industry and
employee hours expended on th at output. A n index of
output per employee hour is derived by dividing an index
of output by an index of industry employee hours.
The preferred output index of m anufacturing industries
would be obtained from data on quantities o f the various
goods produced by the industry, each weighted (m ulti
plied) by the employee hours required to produce one unit
of each good in some specified base period. Thus, those
goods which require m ore labor for production are given
more im portance in the index.
In the absence of adequate data on quantities produced,
the output index for the carburetors, pistons, and valves
industry was constructed by a deflated-value technique.
The values of shipm ents of the various product classes
were adjusted for price changes by appropriate producer
price indexes and industry sector price indexes to derive
real output measures. These, in turn, were combined with
employee hour weights to derive the overall output m eas
ure. The result is a final output index th at is conceptually
close to the preferred output measure.
Digitized for46
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4A11 m otor vehicle data in this article com e from Facts and Figures ’86
(M otor Vehicles M anufacturers A ssociation o f the U nited States, Inc.,
1987); or Ward’s Automotive Yearbook (W ard ’s C om m unications, Inc.,
1987).
The annual output index series was then adjusted (by
linear interpolation) to the index levels of the “bench
m ark ” output series. This benchm ark series incorporates
m ore comprehensive, but less frequently collected, eco
nomic census data.
The indexes of output per employee hour relate total
output to one in p u t— labor. The indexes do not measure
the specific contribution of labor, capital, or any other
single factor. R ather, they reflect the joint effects of fac
tors such as changes in technology, capital investment,
capacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and
effort of the work force, m anagerial ability, and laborm anagem ent relations.
The average annual rates of change presented in the
text are based on the linear least squares trend of the
logarithm s of the index numbers. Extensions of the in
dexes will appear annually in the b l s bulletin, Produc
tivity Measures fo r Selected Industries and Government
Services. A technical note describing the m ethods used to
develop the indexes is available from the Bureau’s Office
of Productivity and Technology, Division of Industry
Productivity and Technology Studies.
Foreign Labor
Developments
OECD social ministers focus
on rising pension, health costs
M
e l v in
Brodsky
The economic im plications of social policies are becoming
a m ajor concern of the O rganization for Economic Coop
eration and Developm ent ( o e c d ) as social expenditures
account for a larger share of the gross national product
( g n p ). In their first meeting, social policy ministers of the
o e c d m et on July 6 -7 , 1988, to discuss social policies for
the 1990’s. Secretary of H ealth and H um an Services Otis
R. Bowen led the U.S. delegation. The specific issues ad
dressed were work and welfare; retirem ent pensions; and
health care systems.
In their discussions, the m inisters recognized that so
cial protection systems m ust adapt to changing economic,
social, and dem ographic conditions. In addition, in
creased care m ust be taken to minimize economic dis
incentives of social programs.
The need for efficient, economical, and flexible social
program s will increase over the next 50 years when social
expenditures in real term s are expected to rise by oneth ird .1 A m ajor reason for this increase is the aging of the
population. The o e c d projects th at the proportion of the
population age 65 and older will increase from slightly
m ore than 12 percent to alm ost 22 percent in the year
2040 when the num ber of older workers is expected to
peak,2 creating a greater need for public sector social ex
penditures, particularly old age pensions, disability pay
ments, and medical care. G overnm ents will also be faced
with other dem ands as well. Increasing num bers of single
parent families, long-term unemployment, and persistent
poverty all call out for increased government assistance.
Work and welfare
M inisters expressed support for a closer relationship
between social policies, employment, the labor market,
M elvin B rodsky is an econom ist in the Office of International O rgani
zations, B ureau of International L abor Affairs, and serves as the D e p art
m en t’s oecd coordinator.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and education, noting that all are im portant elements in a
dynamic system of social protection. Secretary-General
Jean Claude Paye rem arked, “Policies for income support
should not simply ‘passively’ support people during peri
ods of unem ploym ent, but should have an active role,
more closely integrated with education and training poli
cies, in developing the skills and characteristics which
would improve the labor m arket opportunities of the indi
vidual.” Secretary Bowen agreed, noting th at welfare
program s should be judged on how they prom ote inde
pendence. He added that num erous State program s are
now experimenting with “workfare” program s to encour
age welfare recipients to enter the U.S. labor market.
The m inisters agreed to four m ajor policies. First, that
incom e su p p o rt policies should include both incom e
m aintenance and training services. Second, that the im
plem entation of income support, child care, and other
policies will enable the growing num ber of single-parent
families with low incomes to combine work and family
responsibilities. Third, that the development of tax, em
ployment, welfare, and supporting services should assist
in m aintaining strong and stable families. For example,
Canada and New Zealand have introduced the concept of
a refundable tax credit whereby working m others can take
the credit against their tax liability, or if not working, can
receive refu n d ab le cred its as d irect cash paym ents.
Fourth, that top priority should be given to the elimina
tion of poverty and its causes.
Retirement and pensions
Discussions revealed a sense of urgency among the
m inisters to act at once in the face of rapid growth in
public pension expenditures in the o e c d countries. Some
ministers observed that changes in their pension systems
would be very slow and difficult to bring about. It was
noted that in most countries, severe dem ographic pres
sures will probably not occur during the next 15 to 20
years, but reforms need to be put in place to allow people
to plan for their retirement.
The o e c d ’s analytical work in the area of pensions
h ig h lig h ts the seriousness of th e situ atio n . Betw een
1960-84, the share of national wealth devoted to financ
ing pensions has doubled, making pensions the largest
47
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
F ebruary 1989
•
item in the budgets of m ost countries.3 Because both the
benefit levels and the share of the older population eligible
for pensions will continue to increase for some time, the
situation will worsen. A fter the year 2010, alm ost all
o e c d countries will be faced with a substantial increase in
the ratio of aged to working population, reaching a peak
around 2040. The o e c d estimates th at between 1988 and
2040, the dem ographic effect on pension expenditures rel
ative to the n ational incom e will double the pension
burden for the o e c d area as a whole and will increase by
about 80 percent in the U nited States.4
The m inisters considered a num ber of policy options
for meeting this challenge. One option is to increase the
retirem ent age with opportunities for individual choice
and part-tim e employment. The o e c d estim ates th at an
increase in the retirem ent age— from 65 to 66 years o ld—
would reduce pension outlays by 5 to 10 percent.5 A
second possibility is to alter the balance between public,
occupational, and private pension schemes. The o e c d
notes th a t a shift from public to n o n p u b lic pension
schemes would ease the pressures on the public system,
although not necessarily on society as a whole.
Foreign Labor Developments
health care delivery systems. The Canadian delegate ob
served that a com plicating factor was the high public
expectation for health care, and that any change required
strong public support. C ountry discussions showed a
strong interest in measures for long-term cost control with
the need to encourage healthier life styles. Secretary
Bowen’s intervention stressed U.S. actions to control costs
and maintain quality of health care.
The subject of a i d s as an economic burden proved to
be a main focus of discussion. The observer for the W orld
H ealth O rganization noted th at a i d s cases reportly have
increased 25 percent in the last 6 m onths to slightly more
than 100,000 and th at the disease has entered the epi
demic stage. The total cost to health care systems will rise
substantially as the num ber of a i d s cases increases. For
example, it is estim ated th at the total direct costs of medi
cal care for a i d s patients in the U nited States in 1991 will
be between $8 billion and $16 billion.8 M inisters sup
ported research tow ard controlling and eliminating the
disease, increased educational program s, and improved
medical care and support systems for a i d s patients.
Q
Health care systems
The m inisters noted that while today’s health care sys
tems provide excellent services in o e c d countries, these
systems have become increasingly complex and costly.
H ealth care budgets in o e c d countries have climbed
steadily from a 4.2-percent share of g n p in 1960 to a 7.5percent share in 1986.6 This represents a grow th rate
alm ost twice th at of g n p . H ealth care expenditures in
countries with private insurance schemes sim ilar to the
U nited States have risen ju st as rapidly. F o r example,
total national health expenditures in the U nited States
have increased from $215.1 billion in 1979 to $387.4 bil
lion in 19 84.7
In discussing cost control and management, the minis
ters examined changes in patient cost sharing, restructur
ing hospital and medical payment systems, and alternative
Digitized for48
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
---------- FOOTNOTES---------'See “ M aking Provision for Aging P opulations,”
O c to b er-N o v e m b er 1987, p. 6.
The o e c d Observer,
2Ibid. p. 5.
3Aging Populations, The Social Implications (W ashington, O rganiza
tion for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent, 1988), p. 69.
4Retirement Pensions, Demographic Pressures and Economic Con
straints (W ashington, O rg an izatio n for E conom ic C ooperatio n and
D evelopm ent, 1988), p. 12.
5Ibid., p. 6.
bHealth Care Systems: Needs, Control and Efficiency (W ashington,
O rganization for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent, 1988), p. 5.
1Structural Adjustment and Economic Performance (W ashington, O r
ganization for Econom ic C ooperation and D evelopm ent, 1987), p. 323.
fb id , p. 11.
Major Agreements
Expiring Next Month
T his list o f selected collective bargaining agreem ents expiring in M arch is based on inform ation collected
by the B u reau ’s O ffice of C om pensation and W orking C onditions. The list includes agreem ents covering
1,000 w orkers or m ore. P riv a te in d u stry is arran ged in o rder of S ta n d ard In d u strial C lassification.
Industry or activity
Employer and location
Labor organization1
Number of
workers
Private
Construction.................................
Associated Building Contractors of Northern Ohio (O hio)...................
Associated General Contractors of Connecticut (Hartford, ct) ...........
Associated General Contractors of Connecticut (Hartford, ct) ...........
Associated General Contractors (Central Connecticut)........................
Associated General Contractors and Wabash Valley Contractors
Association (Illinois)
Carpenters...........................................
Carpenters...........................................
Laborers.............................................
Carpenters...........................................
Laborers..............................................
1,800
1,200
5,000
1,750
1,500
Associated General Contractors and Construction Employers
Association (Houston, tx)
Associated General Contractors and Construction Employers
Association (Houston, tx)
Heavy Constructors Association (Kansas City, mo) ..............................
Heavy Constructors Association (Kansas City, mo) ..............................
Houston Sheet Metal Contractors Association (Texas)..........................
Operating Engineers..........................
1,000
Laborers..............................................
1,000
Laborers..............................................
Operating Engineers..........................
Sheet Metal Workers........................
3,000
1,000
1,500
Food products ..............................
Dairy Industry Industrial Relations Association (Southern California)
Winery Employers Association (California)............................................
Teamsters ...........................................
Distillery Workers.............................
2,500
1,300
Tobacco ........................................
Loews Theatres Inc., Lorillard Division (North Carolina)....................
Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco
Workers
2,100
Paper..............................................
Lily Tulip, Inc. (Springfield,
mo) ...............................................................
Electrical Workers ( ibew) ................
1,000
Printing and publishing................
Printing Industries of Metropolitan New York, Printers League
Section (New York)
Printing Industries of Metropolitan New York (New York).................
Graphic Communications.................
1,600
Graphic Communications.................
2,000
Stone, clay, and glass products...
Owens-Coming Fiberglas Corp. (Newark,
......................................
Various unions....................................
1,600
Fabricated metal products..........
American Can Co. (Interstate)..................................................................
Continental Group, Inc. (Interstate).........................................................
Machinists .........................................
Machinists .........................................
1,100
1,800
Transportation equipment..........
Bethlehem Steel Corp., shipbuilding (Maryland)....................................
Teledyne Industries Inc., Ryan Aeronautical Division
(San Diego, ca)
Marine and Shipbuilding Workers...
Auto Workers ....................................
1,500
1,500
Instruments..................................
Xerox Corp. (Rochester,
Clothing and Textile Workers..........
3,400
Trucking........................................
Moving and Storage Industry of New York (New York,
ny ) ................
Teamsters ...........................................
1,500
Air transportation........................
Delta Air Lines, pilots (Interstate)............................................................
American Airlines, ground service (Interstate) .......................................
Air Line Pilots....................................
Transport Workers.............................
4,200
12,000
Communication ...........................
American Broadcasting Co. (Interstate) ..................................................
3,200
20,000
ny )
oh)
....................................................................
General Telephone Co. of California........................................................
Broadcast Employees and Technicians
Communications Workers................
U tilities.........................................
Virginia Electric and Power Co. (Interstate) ...........................................
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Co. (Ohio)...................................................
Electrical Workers ( ibew) ................
Independent Utilities Union (Ind.) ..
4,700
1,200
Retail trade....................................
Independent food stores (Illinois and Indiana)........................................
Acme Markets (Interstate).........................................................................
Kroger and National Stores (St. Louis, mo) ............................................
Food and Commercial Workers.......
Food and Commercial Workers.......
Food and Commercial Workers.......
2,000
1,900
1,350
See footnote at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
49
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
Major Agreements Expiring Next Month
Continued—Major Agreements Expiring Next Month
E m p lo y e r a n d lo c a tio n
In d u s tr y or a c tiv ity
N u m ber of
L ab or o r g a n iz a tio n 1
w orkers
Restaurants ..................................
Restaurant-Hotel Employers’ Council (California).................................
Hyatt Hotels (California)............................................................................
Hotel Employees and Restaurant
Employees
Hotel Employees and Restaurant
Employees
8,000
1,000
Bronx Realty Advisory Board (New York, NY)......................................
Service Employees.............................
4,000
Am usem ents.................................
Distribution and film service companies (Interstate)..............................
Theatrical Stage Em ployees.............
1,200
Hospitals .......................................
Appalachian Regional Hospitals, Inc. (Interstate)..................................
Steelworkers......................................
1,850
Massachusetts:
State, County and Municipal
Employees; Service Employees
Real estate.....................................
P u b lic
General governm ent....................
E ducation.....................................
General government....................
'Affiliated with
a f l - cio
Digitized for50
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
30,000
Michigan:
Wrentham State Mental and Physically Handicapped
School, paraprofessionals
University of Michigan, graduate student teachers...
State, County and Municipal
Employees
Teachers..............................................
1,950
1,800
Ohio:
Cleveland, municipal u n it............................................
State, County and Municipal
Employees
1,800
Cleveland Police Department, patrol officers ...........
Police Patrolmen’s Association (Ind.)
1,500
Southeast Pennsylvania Transit A uthority.................
Milwaukee City School District, recreation
employees
Transport W orkers.............................
State, County and Municipal
Employees
5,200
Law enforcement..........................
T ran sit...........................................
State government, general em ployees........................
Pennsylvania:
Wisconsin:
except where noted as independent (Ind.).
1,950
Developments in
Industrial Relations
Pan Am settles with Flight Attendants
Financially-troubled Pan A m erican W orld Airways
moved closer to its goal of winning $ 180 million a year in
labor and cost reductions from its unions by settling with
the Independent U nion of Flight A ttendants on a 39m onth contract calling for a reported cut of $33 million a
year. Earlier in 1988, members of the A ir Line Pilots and
the Flight Engineers Beneficial A ssociation had accepted
cuts and Pan Am had imposed an 8-percent pay cut on
Team sters’ members under provisions of the Railway L a
bor A ct after the employees had refused to use arbitration
to resolve bargaining differences.
U nder the Flight A ttendants’ contract, wages were cut
by differing am ounts, depending on the tier: for the upper
tier or “A ” scale (those hired prior to M ay 1985), the cut
was 11.715 percent; for the lower tier or “ B” scale (those
hired after M ay 1985), the cut was 2 percent. The only
increase was in the starting rate for B scale employees
hired during the contract term; they begin at $1,000 a
m onth, instead of $907.
In return for the cuts, Pan Am agreed to move tow ard
elim ination of the two tiers. This was accomplished by
lengthening the pay progression schedule to 13 years,
from 7 years, for B scale employees; but merging it with
the schedule for A scale employees after 10 years of ser
vice. Previously, top B rates were lower than top A rates.
The accord also provided for cuts in paid vacation for
some shorter service A and B scale employees, for de
creases in per diem allowances, and for an increase in the
num ber of foreign nationals Pan Am may hire (from 150 to
350).
A t the tim e of the Flight A ttendants’ settlement, Pan
A m was negotiating with the Team sters on a contract to
replace the imposed term s for ram p service employees,
and was in arbitration to settle differences with the T rans
port W orkers over term s for mechanics.
Retail trade contracts
In Southern California, a total of 18,000 workers were
covered by contracts the Food and Commercial W orkers
“ D evelopm ents in Industrial R elations” is prepared by George R uben of
the Division o f D evelopm ents in L abor-M anagem ent R elations, B ureau
o f L abor Statistics, and is largely based on inform ation from secondary
sources.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and the Teamsters unions negotiated with the Food Em
ployees Council, comprising eight grocery store chains.
The Food and Commercial W orkers agreement for meat
departm ent employees provides for wage increases totaling
35 cents an hour over the term; expands apprenticeship
opportunities; more precisely defines m eatcutters’ duties;
reduces employee eligibility for medical and dental insur
ance coverage to 64 hours of work per month; and guaran
tees 16 hours of work per week to part-tim e employees to
assure that they will benefit from the eased eligibility.
The 21-m onth contract, which will expire at the same
time as the existing contract for retail clerks, also repre
sented by the Food and Comm ercial W orkers, provides
for a July 1989 m erger of pension and health and welfare
funds for the two groups of employees.
The 3-year Team sters’ accord, covering 8,000 ware
house personnel and truck drivers employed by the eight
chains, also was expected to set a pattern for Team sters
settlem ents for 4,000 employees of other firms.
Over the term , employees will receive wage increases
totaling $1.30 an hour. Pay progression from the starting
rate to the top rate was cut to 18 months, from 3 years,
and the employers also agreed to two 10-cent-an-hour
increases in benefits funding. U nder the prior agreement,
maxim um pay rates were $14.52 an hour for drivers and
$14.19 for warehouse employees.
In the Eugene, o r , area, 1,000 grocery, bakery, and meat
departm ent employees were covered by a November settle
ment between Food and Commercial W orkers Local 555
and Food Employers, Inc., comprising Safeway Stores,
Albertson’s Inc., Fred Meyer Inc., and other chains.
D uring the 3-year agreement, which was retroactive to
February 7, 1988, full-time employees will receive two
20-cent-an-hour increases in their wage rates, bringing the
rates to $12.46 for m eatcutters and $10.03 for other em
ployees. The increases do not apply to part-tim e courtesy
clerks, who will now advance to $4 an hour, from $3.80,
after they have worked 520 hours.
The settlem ent also extends the progression period for
journey persons to 30 m onths, from 24, and obligates the
employers to increase their financing of health and wel
fare benefits to $112 a m onth, from $84.
Elsewhere, the Food and Commercial W orkers settled
with Bradlees D epartm ent Store Co. for 3,000 employees
of 24 stores in New Jersey and upstate New York.
51
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
A ccording to the union, the m ajor issues were company
proposals to assume sole adm inistration of the health and
welfare and pension funds and to reduce fund reserves.
U nder the settlem ent, the parties will continue to jointly
adm inister the funds and the m inim um level of reserves
was determ ined by an actuarial firm.
Over the 3-year term , hourly wage increases will range
from $1.15 for employees with less than 1 year of service
to $1.40 for those with 10 or m ore years. Previous wage
rates ranged from $5 to $7 an hour.
In addition to a requirement that health and welfare ben
efits be maintained at current levels, the contract calls for
increases in the schedule of dental benefits; a $2 increase in
the $14 a m onth pension rate for each year of service for
current employees; and a “bonus” lump-sum payment in
1989 and 1990 to current retirees. The bonus will be equal
to 1 m onth’s pension check.
Two Chicago newspapers complete negotiations
The Chicago Sun-Times settled with The Newspaper
G uild and The Chicago Tribune settled with the Chicago
Typographical U nion, a unit o f the C om m unications
Workers.
The Sun-Times, in its negotiations, initially sought a 3year contract calling for an imm ediate 3-percent wage
cut, which would have been restored after 18 m onths,
while The N ew spaper G uild sought three wage increases
totaling 19.5 percent. A lthough the newspaper was oper
ating at a profit, it ap p aren tly w anted the wage cut
because it was losing circulation and advertising to the
larger Chicago Tribune, and also faced large interest pay
ments on money it borrow ed after it was purchased by an
investm ent group.
The Sun-Times settlement was reached a few hours after
a strike deadline, but the 250 reporters, editors, and photog
raphers remained on the job, continuing The Newspaper
G uild’s strike-free history at the 40-year-old publication.
The new 40-month contract, which was retroactive to the
June 1, 1988, termination date of the preceding contract,
did not provide for a first-year wage change. The employees
will receive a $500 lump-sum payment and a 3-percent
wage increase at the beginning of the second year, followed
by an additional 3-percent increase at the beginning of the
third year. Prior to the accord, reporters’ pay ranged from
$625 a week at hiring to $895 after 5 years of service.
O ther term s include com pany provision of attorneys to
defend reporters against charges of libel resulting from
their work; extension of m aternity leave for female em
ployees to cover adoptions; establishm ent o f 2 weeks’
paternity leave for male employees; and a new plan to
finance child care with pre-tax dollars, subject to Internal
Revenue Service approval.
A t the Chicago Tribune, the settlement ended a dispute
that began in 1985, when 240 printers walked out to protest
management efforts to gain greater control over hiring and
52 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Developments in Industrial Relations
assignments in the composing room. U nder the 3-year set
tlement, negotiated with the aid of former Secretary of
Labor William J. Usery, the 120 people still on strike have
the option of a $30,000 cash buyout of their job and pen
sion rights or a lifetime annuity of $500 to $570 a m onth
and company-paid health insurance. Fifty printers still on
the job after unconditionally returning to work in 1986
have the choice of a $30,000 buyout or remaining on the
job under the new contract, which provides for an immedi
ate $ 150 a week wage increase to bring printers’ pay up to
the $630 level at the Sun-Times. They will also receive
guaranteed wage increases and possible autom atic cost-ofliving pay adjustm ents in the second and third years. When
these employees leave their jobs, they will be replaced by
lower paid “typographical associates.”
Bakery workers rewarded for perfect attendance
Keebler Co. and the Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco
Workers negotiated a 3-year contract for 3,500 cookie and
cracker workers at six plants. The contract provided for
wage increases totaling $1.45 an hour for production work
ers and $4.65 for skilled trades workers. According to the
union, previous wage rates ranged from $11.97 to $14.55 an
hour.
B enefit changes in clu d ed a new p ro g ram offering
employees 1 day’s pay for each 4 m onths of perfect atten
dance; a $10 increase in the weekly sickness and accident
benefit, bringing the maximum to $160; and two $50 in
creases in the $700 monthly pension for future retirees with
25 years of service, or with age and service totaling 80.
T he p arties also agreed to fu rth e r discussions on
retraining employees to avoid their being displaced by
technological changes in the industry.
The agreem ent runs to O ctober 31, 1991. The plants
are in Denver, c o ; A tlanta and M acon, g a ; Cincinnati,
o h ; G rand Rapids, M i; and Van Nuys, c a .
n j
Transit System contract runs 7 years
The New Jersey Transit System and its largest union,
the U nited T ransportation Union, negotiated a 7-year
co n tract th a t was expected to lead m anagem ent and
leaders of 10 other unions to add 3 years to their recently
negotiated 4-year contracts scheduled to expire in June
1989. The 7-year agreem ent and the 4-year agreements
were all retroactive to the July 1, 1985, date when condi
tions of em ploym ent were subject to am endm ent under
provisions of the Railway Labor Act. Com m on term s for
the U nited T ransportation Union and the other unions
during the 4-year period ending in June 1989 include a
$1,000 lum p-sum paym ent in lieu of a wage increase ret
roactive to July 1, 1985, 3-percent wage increases retro
active to July of 1986 and 1987, and a 4-percent increase
retroactive to July 1988.
Term s for the 3 additional years of the U nited T rans
portation U nion accord, which were expected to set a
pattern for the other unions, included 5-percent wage in
creases in July of 1989, 1990, and 1991; adoption of a
pension plan supplem enting benefits under the Railroad
R etirem ent System and financed by an employer obliga
tion equal to 3 percent of employee earnings; adoption of
a savings plan perm itting the 600 conductors and brakem en to defer paying taxes on up to $7,500 of their annual
earnings; one new uniform a year plus $175 for m ainte
nance (was one or two uniform s a year with the transit
authority paying half the cost); and a reduction to 1 hour
(previously 2 hours) in the m axim um perm itted unpaid
layover between split shifts (meaning th at employees on a
2-hour layover will now norm ally receive 9.5 hours’ pay
for their w orkday— two 4-hour split shifts at straighttim e rates plus 1 hour of the layover paid at time and
one-half).
The transit authority employs m ore than 4,000 people
serving the State of New Jersey.
Pulp mill adopts team approach
K im berly-C lark Corp. announced a 5-year, $200 m il
lion m odernization plan for its pulp and newsprint mill in
Coosa Pines, a l , after members of three unions agreed to
con tract changes intended to reduce labor costs. The
changes, to be worked out by a joint committee, are revi
sions in work rules and adoption of a team approach
u n d er w hich em ployees w ould w ork interchangeably
w ithin small groups and participate in determ ining pro
duction m ethods and standards. The cost-saving changes
include perm itting operators to m ake routine inspections
and adjustm ents of their machines, rather than waiting
for a skilled trad es em ployee, and perm itting skilled
trades employees to assist in m aintenance w ork outside
their current duties.
Com pany officials said the cooperative approach was a
vital aspect of its plan to enable the 40-year-old mill to
compete with several new mills expected to be completed
by other companies by 1992.
The agreement stipulates that no employees on the pay
roll on April 27, 1988, will be laid off, but the company did
indicate that it hoped to cut about 250 jobs— 160 through
new early retirement inducements and 90 through attrition.
The settlem ent, which extends the expiration date of
the existing contract by 3 years, to September 15, 1992,
also provides for lum p-sum paym ents of $500 to employ
ees on the payroll on O ctober 1, 1988, and $750 to those
on the payroll on September 15, 1989, and wage increases
of 25 cents an hour on January 1, 1989, 2.5 percent on
September 15, 1990, and 2 percent on September 15, 1991.
In addition, employees affected by changes in methods
and procedures will receive, by June 1, 1989, pay adjust
m ents from an allocation equal to an expected 20 cents an
hour when averaged over all employees. Skilled trades
workers will receive an additional 50-cent-an-hour in
crease on June 1, 1989, in return for the broadening of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
their duties. A n official of one the unions, the U nited
Paperworkers, said th at prior to the increases, his m em
bers were paid $10 to $22 an hour, and some earned as
m uch as $70,000 a year, with overtime.
The two other unions involved in the settlem ent were
the M achinists and Aerospace W orkers and the Interna
tional B ro th erh o o d of E lectrical W orkers. W ith the
U nited Paperworkers, the three unions represent 1,300 of
the plant’s 1,800 employees.
Omak Wood Products employees buy company
In the forest products industry, the 635 employees of
O m ak W ood Products, Inc., of Omak, w a , became own
ers of the log-cutting and plywood m anufacturing facility
when Sir James G oldsm ith accepted their offer of nearly
$35 million. A spokesperson for the British industrialist
said that G oldsm ith gave preferential treatm ent to the
employees’ bid because he “believed it would be in the
best interests of the com m unity” if they owned the opera
tion. The employees’ decision to join in the purchase
bidding was impelled by their concern that a purchase by
another party m ight lead to cuts in operation in an area
already suffering from an unem ploym ent rate of about 14
percent. Operations cuts had occurred after each of a
succession of ownership changes preceding G oldsm ith’s
acquisition of the property.
The purchase drive was led by Lloyd Groomes, business
agent of the local union of the Lumber and Sawmill W ork
ers, a unit of the Carpenters union. He expects the purchase
to be accomplished from operating profits, if possible. If
not, money will be drawn from a contingency fund accu
m ulated by setting aside 10 percent of each w orker’s
earnings. The current 4-year contract, negotiated prior to
the bidding, was not changed. N onunion employees also
participated in the purchase.
Disney World employees settle
A fter rejecting two earlier proposals, employees of
W alt Disney W orld in Lake Buena Vista, f l , approved a
3-year contract calling for a wage increase averaging 7.6
percent, retroactive to the O ctober 30 term ination date of
the prior contract, and for an increase averaging 6 percent
on A pril 1, 1989. The com pany said th at the initial in
crease am ounted to 50 cents for employees at the top of
rate ranges and 35 cents for others, and the 1989 increase
am ounted to 45 and 30 cents, respectively. U nder the
prior contract, starting and top rates were generally $4.85
and $6.80 an hour.
O ther wage term s included a $500 lum p-sum paym ent
to tipped food service employees, who will now be paid a
flat rate equal to half the top rate for other employees and
will now receive a 15-percent gratuity Disney will add to
the bill for groups of 10 diners or more.
Benefit changes include a maxim um m onthly pension
53
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
of $530 after 25 years of service (was $420 after 20 years);
a fourth week of paid vacation after 17 years of service;
and the employee option of converting two days of annual
sick leave to personal leave.
The settlem ent covered 11,400 employees, including
1,200 at the Disney W orld Village Marketplace recently
Digitized for
54FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Developments in Industrial Relations
organized by the Food and Commercial Workers. The five
other unions in the Service Trades Council that negotiated
the settlement are the Hotel Employees and Restaurant
Employees, the Teamsters, the Service Employees, the
Transportation*C om m unications Union, and the T heatri
cal Stage Employees.
A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes com m unications that supple
ment, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be
considered for publication, com m unications should be factual and
analytical, not polemical in tone. Com m unications should be addressed
to th e E d ito r-in -C h ie f, M onthly Labor Review, B u reau o f L ab o r
Statistics, U.S. D epartm ent of Labor, W ashington, DC 20212.
Current
Labor Statistics
Schedule of release dates for major
statistical series ..........................................................................................................
56
Notes on Current Labor Statistics .....................................................................................................................................................................
57
b ls
Comparative indicators
1. L abor m arket indicators ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
67
2. A nnual and quarterly percent changes in com pensation, prices, and p ro d u c tiv ity .......................................................................................
68
3. A lternative m easures of wage and com pensation ch an g es...................................................................................................................................
68
Labor force data
4. Em ploym ent status of the total population, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................................................................
69
5. E m ploym ent status of the civilian population, data seasonally adjusted ............. .............. . .........................................................................
70
6. Selected em ploym ent indicators, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d ................................................................................................................................
71
7. Selected unem ploym ent indicators, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d ............................................................................................................................
72
8. U nem ploym ent rates by sex and age, data seasonally a d ju s te d .........................................................................................................................
73
9. U nem ployed persons by reason for unem ploym ent, d ata seasonally adjusted ..............................................................................................
73
10. D u ration o f unem ploym ent, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d .........................................................................................................................................
73
11. U nem ploym ent rates o f civilian w orkers, by S t a te ...............................................................................................................................................
74
12. E m ploym ent of w orkers by State ..............................................................................................................................................................................
74
13. E m ploym ent of w orkers by industry, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d ..........................................................................................................................
75
14. A verage weekly hours by industry, d ata seasonally a d ju s te d ..............................................................................................................................
76
15. A verage hourly earnings by i n d u s tr y ........................................................................................................................................................................
77
16. Average weekly earnings by in d u s try ........................................................................................................................................................................
78
17. H ourly E arnings Index by in d u stry ................................................................. .........................................................................................................
79
18. Indexes o f diffusion: proportion of industries in w hich em ploym ent increased, seasonally a d ju s te d ....................................................
79
19. A n nual data: E m ploym ent status o f the noninstitutional p o p u la tio n .............................................................................................................
80
20. A n nual data: E m ploym ent levels by industry ........................................................................................................................................................
80
21. A n nual data: A verage hours and earnings levels by in d u s try ...........................................................................................................................
81
Labor compensation and collective bargaining data
22. E m ploym ent C ost Index, com pensation, by occupation and industry g ro u p ................................................................................................
82
23. E m ploym ent C ost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group .......................................................................................
83
24. E m ploym ent C ost Index, private nonfarm w orkers, by bargaining status, region, and area size.............................................................
84
25. Specified com pensation and wage adjustm ents from co ntract settlem ents, and effective wage adjustm ents, situations
covering 1,000 w orkers or m o re ..................................................................................................................................................................................
85
26. A verage specified com pensation and wage adjustm ents, bargaining situations covering 1,000 w orkers or m o r e ...............................
85
27. A verage effective wage adjustm ents, bargaining situations covering 1,000 w orkers o r m o re ...................................................................
86
28. Specified com pensation and wage adjustm ents, State and local governm ent bargaining situations covering 1,000
w orkers o r m ore .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
86
29. W ork stoppages involving 1,000 w orkers o r m ore ...............................................................................................................................................
86
Price data
30. C onsum er Price Index: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and com m odity and service groups .............................................
87
31. C onsum er Price Index: U.S. city average and local data, all ite m s ..................................................................................................................
90
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
55
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics
32. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items and major groups....................................................................................................................
91
33. P roducer Price Indexes by stage o f processing ......................................................................................................................................................
92
34. P ro d u cer Price Indexes, by durability of p r o d u c t.................................................................................................................................................
93
35. A nnual data: P roducer Price Indexes by stage of processing .......................................................................................
93
36. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International T rade C lassification.....................................................................................................
94
37. U.S. im port price indexes by S tandard In ternational T rade C lassific a tio n .........................................................................................
95
38. U.S. export price indexes by end-use c ateg o ry ........................
96
39. U.S. im port price indexes by end-use c a te g o r y ......................................................................................................................................................
96
40. U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial C lassific a tio n .......................................................................................................................
96
41. U.S. im port price indexes by Standard In d u strial C lassification.......................................................................................................................
97
Productivity data
42. Indexes o f productivity, hourly com pensation, and unit costs, d ata seasonally adjusted .........................................................................
97
43. A n n u al indexes o f m ultifactor p ro d u c tiv ity .............................................................................................................................................................
98
44. A n n u al indexes of productivity, hourly com pensation, unit costs, and prices .............................................................................................
99
International comparisons
45. U nem ploym ent rates in nine countries, d ata seasonally adjusted ....................................................................................................................
100
46. A n n u al data: E m ploym ent status of civilian w orking-age population, ten c o u n trie s ..................................................................................
101
47. A n n u al indexes o f productivity and related m easures, twelve c o u n trie s .................................................... ........................... ........................
102
Injury and illness data
48. A nnual data: O ccupational in ju ry and illness incidence r a t e s ..........................................................................................................................
103
Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series
S e rie s
E m p lo y m e n t s itu a tio n .......................................
R e le a s e
d a te
P e rio d
c o v e re d
R e le a s e
d a te
P e rio d
c o v e re d
R e le a s e
d a te
M a r c h 10
F e b ru a ry
A p r il
F e b ru a ry
3
J a n u a ry
F e b ru a ry
6
4 th q u a r t e r
7
P e rio d
c o v e re d
M a rc h
M L R ta b le
num ber
1; 4 - 2 1
P r o d u c tiv it y a n d c o s ts :
N o n fa rm b u s in e s s a n d
m a n u f a c tu r in g .............................................
N o n fin a n c ia l c o r p o r a t io n s .........................
M a rc h
7
?• 4? 44
?■ 4? 44
4 th q u a r t e r
P r o d u c e r P r ic e I n d e x .........................................
F e b r u a r y 10
J a n u a ry
M a rc h 17
F e b ru a ry
C o n s u m e r P r ic e In d e x .....................................
F e b ru a ry 2 2
J a n u a ry
M a r c h 21
F e b ru a ry
R e a l e a r n i n g s .........................................................
F e b ru a ry 2 2
J a n u a ry
M a rc h 21
F e b ru a ry
A p r il 14
M a rc h
2; 3 3 - 3 5
A p r il 18
M a rc h
2; 3 0 - 3 2
A p r il 18
M a rc h
1 4 -1 7
M a jo r c o lle c t iv e b a r g a in in g s e ttle m e n ts .
A p r il 2 5
3' 25 28
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t I n d e x ...................................
A p r il 2 5
1 3' 22 24
U .S . Im p o r t a n d E x p o rt P ric e In d e x e s . . .
A p r il 2 7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1st q u a rte r
3 6 -4 1
N O T E S O N C U R R E N T LA B O R STA TISTIC S
T his section o f the Review presents the principal statistical series
collected and calculated by the B ureau o f L abor Statistics: series on
labor force, em ploym ent, unem ploym ent, collective bargaining settle
m ents, consum er, producer, and international prices, productivity,
international com parisons, and injury and illness statistics. In the notes
th at follow, th e d ata in each group of tables are briefly described, key
definitions are given, notes on the d ata are set forth, and sources of
additional inform ation are cited.
changes in price. These adjustm ents are m ade by dividing current
dollar values by the C onsum er Price Index or the ap propriate
com ponent o f the index, then m ultiplying by 100. F o r exam ple, given a
cu rren t hourly wage rate of $3 and a cu rren t price index num ber o f 150,
where 1977 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1977 dollars is $2 ($ 3 /
150 X 100 = $2). T he $2 (or any o ther resulting values) are described
as “ real,” “ co nstant,” o r “ 1977” dollars.
Additional Information
General notes
T he following notes apply to several tables in this section:
S e a s o n a l a d ju stm e n t.
C ertain m onthly and quarterly d ata are
adju sted to elim inate the effect on the d ata o f such factors as clim atic
conditions, indu stry production schedules, opening and closing of
schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which m ight
prevent short-term evaluation o f the statistical series. Tables containing
d ata th at have been adjusted are identified as “ seasonally a d ju sted .”
(All o th er d ata are not seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal effects are
estim ated on the basis of past experience. W hen new seasonal factors
are com puted each year, revisions m ay affect seasonally adjusted d ata
for several preceding years. (Seasonally adjusted d ata appear in tables
1 - 3 , 4 - 1 0 , 13, 14, 17, and 18.) Beginning in January 1980, the bls
introduced two m ajo r m odifications in the seasonal adjustm ent m eth
odology for labor force data. F irst, the d ata are seasonally adjusted with
a procedure called x-11 arim a , which was developed at Statistics
C an ad a as an extension of the stan d ard x - 1 1 m ethod previously used by
BLS. A detailed description o f the procedure appears in The x-11 a r i m a
Seasonal Adjustment Method by E stela Bee D agum (Statistics C anada,
C atalogue No. 1 2 -5 6 4 E , F ebruary 1980). T he second change is th at
seasonal factors are calculated for use during the first 6 m onths o f the
year, ra th e r th an for the entire year, and then are calculated at m idyear
for the July-D ecem ber period. H ow ever, revisions o f historical data
continue to be m ade only at the end o f each calendar year.
Seasonally adjusted labor force d ata in tables 1 and 4 - 1 0 were
revised in the F ebruary 1989 issue o f the Review, to reflect experience
th ro u g h 1988.
A n n u al revisions o f the seasonally adjusted payroll d ata show n in
tables 13, 14, and 18 were m ade in the July 1988 Review using the x-11
arim a seasonal ad ju stm en t m ethodology. New seasonal factors for
productivity d ata in table 42 are usually introduced in the Septem ber
issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent changes from m onth to
m o n th and from q u arter to q u arter are published for num erous
C onsum er and P ro d u cer Price Index series. How ever, seasonally
ad ju sted indexes are n ot published for the U.S. average All Item s cpi .
O nly seasonally adjusted percent changes are available for this series.
A d ju s t m e n t s fo r p r ic e c h a n g e s .
Some d ata— such as the H ourly
E arnings Index in table 17— are adjusted to elim inate the effect of
D ata th at supplem ent the tables in this section are published by the
B ureau in a variety o f sources. News releases provide the latest
statistical inform ation published by the Bureau; the m ajo r recurring
releases are published according to the schedule preceding these general
notes. M ore inform ation about labor force, em ploym ent, and unem
ploym ent d ata and the household and establishm ent surveys underlying
the d ata are available in Employment and Earnings, a m onthly
publication o f the Bureau. M ore data from the household survey are
published in the d ata books— Revised Seasonally Adjusted Labor Force
Statistics, B ulletin 2306, and Labor Force Statistics Derived From the
Current Population Survey, B ulletin 2307. M ore d ata from th e establish
m ent survey appear in tw o d ata books— Employment, Hours, and
Earnings, United States, and Employment, Hours, and Earnings, States
and Areas, and the supplem ents to these d ata books. M ore detailed
inform ation on employee com pensation and collective bargaining
settlem ents is published in the m onthly periodical, Current Wage
Developments. M ore detailed data on consum er and prod u cer prices are
published in the m onthly periodicals, The c p i Detailed Report, and
Producer Price Indexes. D etailed d ata on all o f the series in this section
are provided in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, w hich is published
biennally by the Bureau, bls bulletins are issued covering productivity,
injury and illness, and o ther d ata in this section. Finally, the Monthly
Labor Review carries analytical articles on annual and longer term
developm ents in labor force, em ploym ent, and unem ploym ent; em
ployee com pensation and collective bargaining; prices; productivity;
international com parisons; and injury and illness data.
Symbols
p =
prelim inary. To increase the tim eliness o f som e series,
prelim inary figures are issued based on representative
but incom plete returns.
r =
revised. G enerally, this revision reflects the availability
o f later d ata but m ay also reflect other adjustm ents,
n.e.c.
=
not elsew here classified,
n.e.s.
=
not elsew here specified.
COMPARATIVE INDICATORS
(Tables 1-3)
C om parative indicators tables provide an overview and com parison
o f m ajo r bls statistical series. C onsequently, although m any of the
unem ploym ent rates for m ajo r dem ographic groups based on the
C u rren t P opulation (“household” ) Survey are presented, while m eas
included series are available m onthly, all m easures in these com parative
ures of em ploym ent and average weekly hours by m ajo r industry sector
tables are presented quarterly and annually.
are given using nonagricultural payroll data. T he E m ploym ent Cost
Index (com pensation), by m ajo r sector and by bargaining status, is
include em ploym ent m easures from two
chosen from a variety of bls com pensation and wage m easures because
m ajo r surveys and inform ation on rates of change in com pensation
provided by th e Em ploym ent C ost Index ( eci) program . T he labor
it provides a com prehensive m easure o f em ployer costs for hiring labor,
not ju st outlays for wages, and it is not affected by em ploym ent shifts
force p articipation
am ong occupations and industries.
Labor
m ark et
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in d ic a t o r s
rate, the em ploym ent-to-population ratio, and
57
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
D ata on
changes
in
c o m p e n sa tio n ,
F ebruary 1989
p r ic e s ,
and
p r o d u c tiv ity
•
are
presented in table 2. M easures of rates o f change o f com pensation and
C u r r e n t L a b o r S ta tis tic s
series, contribute to the variation in changes am ong the individual
m easures.
wages from the Em ploym ent C ost Index program are provided for all
civilian nonfarm w orkers (excluding F ederal and household w orkers)
and for all private nonfarm workers. M easures o f changes in: consum er
prices for all urb an consum ers; p roducer prices by stage of processing;
and the overall export and im port price indexes are given. M easures of
p roductivity (o u tp u t per h our o f all persons) are provided for m ajor
sectors.
A lte r n a tiv e
m easu res
o f w age
and
c o m p e n sa tio n
r a te s
o f change,
w hich reflect th e overall trend in labor costs, are sum m arized in table 3.
Differences in concepts and scope, related to the specific purposes o f the
Notes on the data
D efinitions o f each series and notes on the d ata are contained in later
sections o f these notes describing each set of data. F o r detailed
descriptions o f each d ata series, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Bulletin
2285 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1988), as well as the additional
bulletins, articles, and other publications noted in the separate sections
o f the Review's “ C urrent L abor Statistics N otes.” U sers m ay also wish
to consult Major Programs, Bureau of Labor Statistics, R epo rt 718
(B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1985).
EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DATA
(Tables 1; 4-21)
H o u seh o ld su rvey data
r a t i o is total em ploym ent (including the resident A rm ed
Forces) as a percent o f the noninstitutional population.
p o p u la t io n
Description of the series
Notes on the data
e m p l o y m e n t
D A T A in this section are obtained from the C urrent
Popu latio n Survey, a p rogram o f personal interview s conducted
m onthly by the B ureau o f the C ensus for the B ureau o f L abor Statistics.
T he sam ple consists of about 55,800 households selected to represent
the U.S. population 16 years of age and older. H ouseholds are
interview ed on a ro tatin g basis, so th at three-fourths o f the sam ple is the
sam e for any 2 consecutive m onths.
F rom tim e to tim e, and especially after a decennial census, a d ju st
m ents are m ade in the C u rren t P opulation Survey figures to correct for
estim ating errors during the preceding years. These adjustm ents affect
the com parability o f historical data. A description o f these adjustm ents
and th eir effect on the various d ata series appear in the E xplanatory
N otes o f Employment and Earnings.
D ata in tables 4 - 1 0 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through D ecem ber 1988.
Definitions
E m p l o y e d p e r s o n s include (1) all civilians who w orked for pay any
tim e d uring the week w hich includes the 12th day o f the m onth or who
w orked unpaid for 15 hours or m ore in a fam ily-operated enterprise and
(2) those who were tem porarily absent from th eir regular jobs because
o f illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or sim ilar reasons. M em bers of
th e A rm ed Forces stationed in the U nited States are also included in the
em ployed total. A person w orking at m ore th an one job is counted only
in the job at which he o r she w orked the greatest num ber of hours.
U n e m p l o y e d p e r s o n s are those who did not w ork during the survey
week, but were available for w ork except for tem porary illness and had
looked for jobs w ithin th e preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did n ot look
for w ork because they were on layoff or w aiting to start new jobs w ithin
th e next 30 days are also counted am ong the unem ployed. T he o v e r a l l
u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e represents the num ber unem ployed as a percent of
the labor force, including the resident A rm ed Forces. T he c i v i l i a n
e m p l o y m e n t r a t e represents the num ber unem ployed as a percent o f the
civilian labor force.
T he l a b o r f o r c e consists o f all em ployed or unem ployed civilians plus
m em bers o f the A rm ed Forces stationed in the U nited States. Persons
n o t i n t h e l a b o r f o r c e are those not classified as em ployed or
unem ployed; this group includes persons who are retired, those engaged
in th eir own housew ork, those not w orking while attending school,
those unable to work because o f long-term illness, those discouraged
from seeking w ork because of personal or job-m arket factors, and those
who are voluntarily idle. T he n o n i n s t i t u t i o n a l p o p u l a t i o n com prises all
persons 16 years o f age and older who are not inm ates of penal or
m ental institutions, sanitarium s, o r hom es for the aged, infirm , or
needy, and m em bers o f the A rm ed Forces stationed in the U nited
States. T he l a b o r f o r c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e is the proportion o f the
n o ninstitutional population th at is in the labor force. T he e m p l o y m e n t -
Digitized for58
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Additional sources of information
F o r detailed explanations of the data, see b l s Handbook of Methods,
B ulletin 2285 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1988). H istorical unadjusted
d ata from 1948 to 1987 are available in Labor Force Statistics Derived
from the Current Population Survey, B ulletin 2307 (B ureau of L abor
Statistics, 1988). H istorical seasonally adjusted data appear in Labor
Force Statistics Derived from the Current Population Survey: A Data
book, Vol. II, Bulletin 2096 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1982), and
Revised Seasonally Adjusted Labor Force Statistics, 1978-87, Bulletin
2306 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1988).
A com prehensive discussion o f the differences betw een household
and establishm ent d ata on em ploym ent appears in G loria P. G reen,
“ C om paring em ploym ent estim ates from household and payroll su r
veys,” Monthly Labor Review, D ecem ber 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
E sta b lish m en t su rvey data
Description of the series
Em ploym ent , hours , a n d earning s data in this section are
com piled from payroll records reported m onthly on a voluntary basis to
the B ureau o f L abor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by
m ore th an 300,000 establishm ents representing all industries except
agriculture. In m ost industries, the sam pling probabilities are based on
the size o f the establishm ent; m ost large establishm ents are therefore in
the sam ple. (A n establishm ent is not necessarily a firm; it m ay be a
branch plant, for exam ple, or w arehouse.) Self-em ployed persons and
others not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope o f the
survey because they are excluded from establishm ent records. This
largely accounts for the difference in em ploym ent figures between the
household and establishm ent surveys.
Definitions
A n e s t a b l i s h m e n t is an econom ic unit which produces goods or
services (such as a factory or store) at a single location and is engaged in
one type o f econom ic activity.
E m p l o y e d p e r s o n s are all persons who received pay (including
holiday and sick pay) for any part o f the payroll period including the
12th o f the m onth. Persons holding m ore th an one job (about 5 percent
o f all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establishm ent
w hich reports them .
P r o d u c t i o n w o r k e r s in m anufacturing include w orking supervisors
and nonsupervisory w orkers closely associated w ith production opera
tions. Those w orkers m entioned in tables 1 2 -1 7 include production
w orkers in m anufacturing and m ining; construction w orkers in con
struction; and nonsupervisory w orkers in the following industries:
tran sp o rtatio n and public utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance,
insurance, and real estate; and services. These groups account for about
four-fifths o f the total em ploym ent on private nonagricultural payrolls.
E a r n i n g s are the paym ents production o r nonsupervisory w orkers
receive d uring th e survey period, including prem ium pay for overtim e
o r late-shift w ork but excluding irregular bonuses and oth er special
paym ents. R e a l e a r n i n g s are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of
changes in consum er prices. T he deflator for this series is derived from
the C onsum er Price Index for U rban W age E arners and Clerical
W orkers ( cpi-w ). T he H o u r l y E a r n i n g s I n d e x is calculated from
average hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two
types o f changes th at are unrelated to underlying wage-rate develop
m ents: fluctuations in overtim e prem ium s in m anufacturing (the only
sector for w hich overtim e data are available) and the effects of changes
and seasonal factors in the proportion o f w orkers in high-wage and lowwage industries. Publication o f the H ourly E arnings Index series shown
in table 17 will be discontinued with the initial publication of D ecem ber
1988 d ata in the F ebruary 1989 issue of the Review (see G. D onald
W ood, “ Em ploym ent C ost Index series to replace H ourly Earnings
In d ex ,” Monthly Labor Review, July 1988, pp. 3 2 -3 5 ).
H o u r s represent the average weekly hours of production o r nonsu
pervisory w orkers for which pay was received, and are different from
stan d ard or scheduled hours. O v e r t i m e h o u r s represent the portion of
average weekly hours w hich was in excess o f regular hours and for
w hich overtim e prem ium s were paid.
T h e D i f f u s i o n I n d e x , introduced in the M ay 1983 Review, represents
th e percent o f 185 nonagricultural industries in which em ploym ent was
rising over the indicated period. O ne-half of the industries w ith
unchanged em ploym ent are counted as rising. In line w ith Bureau
practice, d ata for the 1-, 3-, and 6-m onth spans are seasonally adjusted,
while those for th e 12-m onth span are unadjusted. T he diffusion index
is useful for m easuring the dispersion o f econom ic gains or losses and is
also an econom ic indicator.
Notes on the data
E stablishm ent d ata collected by the B ureau o f L abor Statistics are
periodically adju sted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called
“ben ch m ark s”). T he latest com plete ad justm ent was m ade with the
release o f M ay 1988 data, published in the July 1988 issue of the
Review. C onsequently, d ata published in the Review p rior to th at issue
are not necessarily com parable to cu rrent data. U n adjusted d ata have
been revised back to A pril 1986; seasonally adjusted d ata have been
revised back to Jan u ary 1983. These revisions were published in the
Supplement to Employment and Earnings (B ureau o f L abor Statistics,
1988). U n ad ju sted d ata from A pril 1987 forw ard, and seasonally
ad ju sted d ata from Jan u ary 1984 forw ard are subject to revision in
futu re benchm arks.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In the establishm ent survey, estim ates for the 2 m ost recent m onths
are based on incom plete returns and are published as prelim inary in the
tables (13 to 18 in the Review). W hen all returns have been received, the
estim ates are revised and published as final in the th ird m o n th of their
appearance. T hus, A ugust data are published as prelim inary in O ctober
and N ovem ber and as final in Decem ber. F o r the sam e reason,
quarterly establishm ent d ata (table 1) are prelim inary for the first 2
m onths of publication and final in the th ird m onth. T hus, secondq u arter data are published as prelim inary in A ugust and Septem ber and
as final in October.
Additional sources of information
D etailed national d ata from the establishm ent survey are published
m onthly in the bls periodical, Employment and Earnings. E arlier
com parable unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in
Employment, Hours, and Earnings, United States, 1909-84, Bulletin
1 3 1 2 -1 2 (B ureau of L abor Statistics 1985) and its annual supplem ent.
F o r a detailed discussion of the m ethodology o f the survey, see bls
Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2285 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1988).
A com prehensive discussion o f the differences between household
and establishm ent d ata on em ploym ent appears in G lo ria P. Green,
“ C om paring em ploym ent estim ates from household and payroll su r
veys,” Monthly Labor Review, D ecem ber 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
U n em p lo y m en t d ata b y S ta te
Description of the series
D ata presented in this section are obtained from tw o m ajo r sources—
the C urrent P opulation Survey (cps) and the Local A rea U nem ploy
m ent Statistics ( laus ) program , w hich is conducted in cooperation
with State em ploym ent security agencies.
M onthly estim ates o f the labor force, em ploym ent, and unem ploy
m ent for States and sub-State areas are a key indicato r o f local
econom ic conditions and form the basis for determ ining the eligibility
of an area for benefits under F ederal econom ic assistance program s
such as the Job T raining P artnership A ct and the Public W orks and
E conom ic D evelopm ent Act. Insofar as possible, the concepts and
definitions underlying these d ata are those used in the national
estim ates obtained from the cps .
Notes on the data
D ata refer to State o f residence. M onthly d ata for 11 States—
California, Florida, Illinois, M assachusetts, M ichigan, N ew Y ork, New
Jersey, N o rth C arolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas— are obtained
directly from the CPS, because the size o f the sam ple is large enough to
m eet bls standards o f reliability. D ata for the rem aining 39 States and
the D istrict o f C olum bia are derived using standardized procedures
established by bls . O nce a year, estim ates for the 11 States are revised
to new population controls. F o r the rem aining States and the D istrict o f
Colum bia, d ata are benchm arked to annual average cps levels.
Additional sources of information
Inform ation on the concepts, definitions, and technical procedures
used to develop labor force d ata for States and sub-State areas as well as
additional d ata on sub-States are provided in the m onthly B ureau o f
L abor Statistics periodical, Employment and Earnings, and the annual
report, Geographic Profde of Employment and Unemployment (B ureau
o f L abor Statistics). See also bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2285
(B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1988).
59
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics
COMPENSATION AND WAGE DATA
(Tables 1-3; 22-29)
Com pensation
a n d wage data are gathered by the B ureau from
business establishm ents, State and local governm ents, labor unions,
collective bargaining agreem ents on file w ith the Bureau, and secondary
sources.
E m p loym en t C o st In d ex
Description of the series
T he E m p l o y m e n t C o s t I n d e x (eci) is a quarterly m easure of the rate
o f change in com pensation per h o u r w orked and includes wages,
salaries, and em ployer costs o f em ployee benefits. It uses a fixed m arket
basket o f labor— sim ilar in concept to the C onsum er Price Index’s fixed
m ark et basket o f goods and services— to m easure change over tim e in
em ployer costs o f em ploying labor. T he index is not seasonally
adjusted.
Statistical series on to tal com pensation costs, on wages and salaries,
an d on benefit costs are available for private nonfarm w orkers
excluding proprietors, th e self-em ployed, and household workers. The
to tal com pensation costs and wages and salaries series are also available
for State and local governm ent w orkers and for the civilian nonfarm
econom y, w hich consists o f private industry and State and local
governm ent w orkers com bined. F ederal w orkers are excluded.
T he E m ploym ent Cost Index probability sam ple consists o f about
3,400 p rivate nonfarm establishm ents providing about 18,000 occupa
tional observations and 700 State and local governm ent establishm ents
providing 3,500 occupational observations selected to represent total
em ploym ent in each sector. O n average, each reporting unit provides
wage and com pensation inform ation on five well-specified occupations.
D ata are collected each q u a rte r for the pay period including the 12th
day o f M arch, June, Septem ber, and Decem ber.
Beginning w ith June 1986 data, fixed em ploym ent weights from the
1980 C ensus o f P opulation are used each q u a rte r to calculate the
indexes for civilian, private, and State and local governm ents. (P rior to
June 1986, th e em ploym ent weights are from the 1970 C ensus o f
P o pulation.) These fixed weights, also used to derive all of the industry
and occupation series indexes, ensure th a t changes in these indexes
reflect only changes in com pensation, n ot em ploym ent shifts am ong
industries o r occupations w ith different levels o f wages and com pensa
tio n . F o r th e b a r g a in in g s ta tu s , re g io n , a n d m e t r o p o l i t a n /
nonm etro p o litan area series, however, em ploym ent d a ta by industry
and occupation are not available from the census. Instead, the 1980
em ploym ent w eights are reallocated w ithin these series each qu arter
based on the cu rren t sam ple. T herefore, these indexes are not strictly
com parable to those for the aggregate, industry, and occupation series.
Definitions
T o ta l c o m p e n sa tio n
costs include wages, salaries, and the em ployer’s
costs for em ployee benefits.
W a g e s a n d s a l a r i e s consist of earnings before payroll deductions,
including produ ctio n bonuses, incentive earnings, com m issions, and
cost-of-living ad justm ents.
B e n e f i t s include th e cost to em ployers for paid leave, supplem ental
pay (including no n p ro d uction bonuses), insurance, retirem ent and
savings plans, and legally required benefits (such as Social Security,
w orkers’ com pensation, and unem ploym ent insurance).
E xcluded from wages and salaries and em ployee benefits are such
item s as paym ent-in-kind, free room and board, and tips.
60
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Notes on the data
T he Em ploym ent Cost Index for changes in wages and salaries in the
private nonfarm econom y was published beginning in 1975. Changes in
total com pensation cost— wages and salaries and benefits com bined—
were published beginning in 1980. T he series for changes in wages and
salaries and for total com pensation in the State and local governm ent
sector and in the civilian nonfarm econom y (excluding F ederal
em ployees) were published beginning in 1981. H istorical indexes (June
1981 = 100) o f the quarterly rates o f change are presented in the M arch
issue o f the bls periodical, Current Wage Developments.
Additional sources of information
F o r a m ore detailed discussion o f the Em ploym ent Cost Index, see
the Handbook of Methods, B ulletin 2285 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics,
1988), and the following Monthly Labor Review articles: “ Em ploym ent
C ost Index: a m easure o f change in the ‘price of labor’,” July 1975;
“ How benefits will be incorporated into the E m ploym ent C ost Index,”
Jan u ary 1978; “ E stim ation procedures for the E m ploym ent Cost
Index,” M ay 1982; and “ Introducing new weights for the E m ploym ent
C ost Index,” June 1985.
D ata on the eci are also available in bls quarterly press releases
issued in the m onth following the reference m onths o f M arch, June,
Septem ber, and Decem ber; and from the Handbook of Labor Statistics,
B ulletin 2217 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1985).
C o lle ctiv e b argain in g se ttle m e n ts
Description of the series
C o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g s e t t l e m e n t s d ata provide statistical m easures of
negotiated adjustm ents (increases, decreases, and freezes) in com pensa
tion (wage and benefit costs) and wages alone, quarterly for private
industry and sem iannually for State and local governm ent. C om pensa
tion m easures cover all collective bargaining situations involving 5,000
w orkers o r m ore and wage m easures cover all situations involving 1,000
w orkers or m ore. These data, covering private nonagricultural indus
tries and State and local governm ents, are calculated using inform ation
obtained from bargaining agreem ents on file w ith the B ureau, parties to
th e agreem ents, and secondary sources, such as new spaper accounts.
T he data are not seasonally adjusted.
Settlem ent d ata are m easured in term s of future specified a d ju st
m ents: those th at will occur w ithin 12 m onths o f the co n tract effective
date— first-year— and all adjustm ents th at will occur over the life o f the
co n tract expressed as an average annual rate. A d justm ents are w orker
weighted. B oth first-year and over-the-life m easures exclude wage
changes th at m ay occur under cost-of-living clauses th at are triggered
by future m ovem ents in the C onsum er Price Index.
E f f e c t i v e w a g e a d j u s t m e n t s m easure all adjustm ents occurring in the
reference period, regardless o f the settlem ent date. Included are changes
from settlem ents reached during the period, changes deferred from
co ntracts negotiated in earlier periods, and changes under cost-of-living
ad ju stm en t clauses. E ach wage change is w orker weighted. T he changes
are pro rated over all w orkers u n der agreem ents during the reference
period yielding the average adjustm ent.
Definitions
W a g e r a t e c h a n g e s are calculated by dividing newly negotiated wages
by the average straight-tim e hourly wage rate plus shift prem ium at the
tim e the agreem ent is reached. C om pensation changes are calculated by
dividing the change in the value of the newly negotiated wage and
benefit package by existing average hourly com pensation, which
includes the cost of previously negotiated benefits, legally required
social insurance program s, and average hourly earnings.
C o m p e n s a t i o n c h a n g e s are calculated by placing a value on the benefit
portion of the settlem ents at the tim e they are reached. The cost estimates
are based on the assum ption that conditions existing at the tim e of
settlem ent (for example, m ethods of financing pensions or com position of
labor force) will rem ain constant. The data, therefore, are m easures of
negotiated changes and not of total changes of employer cost.
C o n t r a c t d u r a t i o n runs from the effective date o f the agreem ent to
th e expiration d ate or first wage reopening date, if applicable. A verage
annual percent changes over the co n tract term take account of the
com pounding o f successive changes.
Notes on the data
C om parisons o f m ajo r collective bargaining settlem ents for State and
local governm ent w ith those for private industry should note differences
in occupational mix, bargaining practices, and settlem ent characteris
tics. Professional and w hite-collar employees, for exam ple, m ake up a
m uch larger prop ortion o f the w orkers covered by governm ent than by
private industry settlem ents. L um p-sum paym ents and cost-of-living
ad ju stm en t (cola ) clauses, on the oth er hand, are rare in governm ent
but com m on in private industry settlem ents. Also, State and local
governm ent bargaining frequently excludes item s such as pension
benefits and holidays, th at are prescribed by law, while these item s are
typical bargaining issues in private industry.
Additional sources of information
F o r a m ore detailed discussion on the series, see the b l s Handbook of
Methods, B ulletin 2285 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1988). C om prehen
sive d ata are published in press releases issued quarterly (in January,
A pril, July, and O ctober) for private industry, and sem iannually (in
F ebruary and A ugust) for State and local governm ent. H istorical data
and additional detailed tabulations for the p rior calendar year appear in
th e A p ril issue o f the bls periodical, Current Wage Developments.
W ork stop p ages
T he num ber of w orkers directly involved in the
N u m b e r o f d a y s i d l e : The aggregate num ber of w orkdays lost by
w orkers involved in the stoppages.
D a y s o f i d l e n e s s a s a p e r c e n t o f e s t i m a t e d w o r k i n g t i m e : A ggregate
w orkdays lost as a percent o f the aggregate num ber o f standard
w orkdays in the period m ultiplied by total em ploym ent in the period.
Notes on the data
T his series is not com parable w ith the one term inated in 1981 th at
covered strikes involving six w orkers or m ore.
Additional sources of information
D ata for each calendar year are reported in a bls press release issued
in the first q u arter of the following year. M onthly and historical d ata
appear in the bls periodical, Current Wage Developments. H istorical
d ata appear in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f L abor Statistics, 1985).
O th er co m p en sation data
O ther bls d ata on pay and benefits, not included in the C urrent
L abor Statistics section o f the Monthly Labor Review, appear in and
consist of the following:
Industry Wage Surveys provide data for specific occupations selected
to represent an in d u stry ’s wage stru ctu re and the types o f activities
perform ed by its workers. T he B ureau collects inform ation on weekly
w ork schedules, shift operations and pay differentials, paid holiday and
vacation practices, and inform ation on incidence of health, insurance,
and retirem ent plans. R eports are issued throughout the year as the
surveys are com pleted. Sum m aries o f the d ata and special analyses also
appear in the Monthly Labor Review.
Area Wage Surveys annually provide d ata for selected office, clerical,
professional, technical, m aintenance, toolroom , pow erplant, m aterial
m ovem ent, and custodial occupations com m on to a wide variety of
industries in the areas (labor m arkets) surveyed. R eports are issued
thro u g h o u t the year as the surveys are com pleted. Sum m aries o f the
d ata and special analyses also appear in the Review.
The National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay provides detailed inform ation annually on salary levels and
Description of the series
D ata on w o r k s t o p p a g e s m easure the num ber and d u ration o f m ajor
strikes o r lockouts (involving 1,000 w orkers or m ore) occurring during
th e m o n th (or year), the num ber o f w orkers involved, and the am ount
o f tim e lost because o f stoppage.
D ata are largely from new spaper accounts and cover only establish
m ents directly involved in a stoppage. They do not m easure the indirect
o r secondary effect o f stoppages on o ther establishm ents whose
employees are idle owing to m aterial shortages or lack o f service.
Definitions
T he num ber o f strikes and lockouts involving
w orkers o r m ore and lasting a full shift o r longer.
N u m b e r o f s to p p a g e s:
1,000
W o r k e r s in v o lv e d :
stoppage.
distributions for the types of jobs m entioned in the survey’s title in private
employm ent. A lthough the definitions o f the jobs surveyed reflect the
duties and responsibilities in private industry, they are designed to m atch
specific pay grades o f Federal white-collar employees under the General
Schedule pay system. Accordingly, this survey provides the legally
required inform ation for com paring the pay of salaried employees in the
Federal civil service with pay in private industry. (See Federal Pay
Com parability A ct o f 1970, 5 u .s .c . 5305.) D ata are published in a bls
news release issued in the sum m er and in a bulletin each fall; sum m aries
and analytical articles also appear in the Review.
Employee Benefits Survey provides nationw ide inform ation on the
incidence and characteristics of em ployee benefit plans in m edium and
large establishm ents in the U nited States, excluding A laska and Hawaii.
D a ta 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
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
base period (1982 = 100 for many Producer Price Indexes or 1982-84 = 100
for many Consumer Price Indexes, unless otherwise noted).
61
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics
P ro d u cer P r ic e In d e x es
C onsum er P r ic e In d e x es
Description of the series
T he C onsum er P rice Index (cpi) is a m easure o f the average change
in the prices paid by urb an consum ers for a fixed m arket basket of
goods and services. T he cpi is calculated m onthly for tw o population
groups, one consisting only o f urban households whose prim ary source
o f incom e is derived from the em ploym ent o f wage earners and clerical
w orkers, an d th e o th er consisting of all urban households. T he wage
earn er index ( cpi- w ) is a continuation o f the historic index th a t was
introduced well over a half-century ago for use in wage negotiations. As
new uses were developed for the cpi in recent years, the need for a
b ro ad er an d m ore representative index becam e apparent. T he all urban
consum er index (cpi- u ), introduced in 1978, is representative o f the
1 9 8 2 -8 4 buying habits o f about 80 percent of the noninstitutional
population o f th e U nited States at th at tim e, com pared w ith 32 percent
represented in the cpi-w . In addition to wage earners and clerical
w orkers, th e CPi-u covers professional, m anagerial, and technical
w orkers, the self-em ployed, short-term workers, the unem ployed,
retirees, and others not in the labor force.
T he cpi is based on prices o f food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs,
tran sp o rtatio n fares, d o cto rs’ and dentists’ fees, and o ther goods and
services th at people buy for day-to-day living. T he quantity and quality
o f these item s are kept essentially unchanged between m ajo r revisions
so th at only price changes will be m easured. All taxes directly
associated w ith the p u rchase and use o f item s are included in the index.
D ata collected from m ore th an 21,000 retail establishm ents and
60,000 housing units in 91 urban areas across the country are used to
develop th e “ U.S. city average.” Separate estim ates for 27 m ajo r urban
centers are presented in table 31. The areas listed are as indicated in
footnote 1 to the table. The area indexes m easure only the average
change in prices for each area since the base period, and do not indicate
differences in th e level of prices am ong cities.
Description of the series
P roducer P ric e Indexes ( ppi) m easure average changes in prices
received by dom estic producers of com m odities in all stages of
processing. T he sam ple used for calculating these indexes currently
contains about 3,100 com m odities and about 75,000 quotations per
m onth selected to represent the m ovem ent o f prices of all com m odities
produced in the m anufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, m ining,
gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. T he stage o f processing
stru ctu re o f P roducer Price Indexes organizes products by class of
buyer and degree o f fabrication (th at is, finished goods, interm ediate
goods, and crude m aterials). T he traditional com m odity stru ctu re o f ppi
organizes products by sim ilarity of end use or m aterial com position.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating P roducer Price
Indexes apply to the first significant com m ercial transaction in the
U nited States from the production or central m arketing point. Price
d ata are generally collected m onthly, prim arily by m ail questionnaire.
M ost prices are obtained directly from producing com panies on a
voluntary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the
T uesday o f the week containing the 13th day o f the m onth.
Since January 1987, price changes for the various com m odities have
been averaged together w ith im plicit quantity weights representing their
im portance in the total net selling value o f all com m odities as o f 1982.
T he detailed d ata are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage-ofprocessing groupings, com m odity groupings, durability-of-product
groupings, and a num ber of special com posite groups. All Pro d u cer
Price Index d ata are subject to revision 4 m onths after original
publication.
Notes on the data
Beginning w ith the January 1986 issue, the
Notes on the data
In Jan u ary 1983, the B ureau changed the way in w hich hom eow nership costs are m easured for the cpi-u . A rental equivalence m ethod
replaced th e asset-price approach to hom eow nership costs for th at
series. In Jan u ary 1985, the sam e change was m ade in the cpi-w . The
central purpose o f th e change was to separate shelter costs from the
investm ent com ponent o f hom eow nership so th at the index would
reflect only the cost o f shelter services provided by ow ner-occupied
hom es. A n u pdated cpi-u and cpi-w were introduced w ith release o f the
Jan u ary 1987 data.
Review is no longer
presenting tables o f P roducer Price Indexes for com m odity groupings,
special com posite groups, o r s ic industries. H ow ever, these d ata will
continue to be presented in the B ureau’s m onthly publication
Producer
Price Indexes.
T he B ureau has com pleted the first m ajo r stage of its com prehensive
overhaul o f the theory, m ethods, and procedures used to construct the
P roducer Price Indexes. Changes include the replacem ent o f judg m en t
sam pling w ith probability sam pling techniques; expansion to system atic
coverage o f the net o u tput of virtually all industries in the m ining and
m anufacturing sectors; a shift from a com m odity to an industry
orientation; the exclusion of im ports from , and the inclusion of exports
in, the survey universe; and the respecification of com m odities priced to
Additional sources of information
F o r a discussion o f the general m ethod for com puting the cpi, see b l s
Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2285 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1988).
T he recent change in the m easurem ent o f hom eow nership costs is
discussed in R obert G illingham and W alter Lane, “ C hanging the
treatm en t o f shelter costs for hom eow ners in the cpi,” Monthly Labor
Review, July 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 . A n overview of the recently introduced
revised cpi, reflecting 1 9 8 2 -8 4 expenditure patterns, is contained in
The Consumer Price Index: 1987 Revision, R eport 736 (B ureau of L abor
Statistics, 1987).
A dditional detailed cpi d ata and regular analyses of consum er price
changes are provided in the c p i Detailed Report, a m onthly publication
o f the Bureau. H istorical d ata for the overall cpi and for selected
groupings m ay be found in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin
2217 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1985).
Digitized for62
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
conform to B ureau of the C ensus definitions. These and oth er changes
have been phased in gradually since 1978. T he result is a system of
indexes th at is easier to use in conjunction with data on wages,
productivity, and em ploym ent and oth er series th at are organized in
term s of the Standard Industrial Classification and the C ensus product
class designations.
Additional sources of information
F o r a discussion of the m ethodology for com puting P roducer Price
Indexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2285 (B ureau o f L abor
Statistics, 1988).
A dditional detailed d ata and analyses of price changes are provided
m onthly in Producer Price Indexes. Selected historical data m ay be
found in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (B ureau of
L abor Statistics, 1985).
each weight category and are then aggregated to the sitc level. The
values assigned to each weight category are based on trad e value figures
com piled by the Bureau of the Census. The trade weights currently used
to com pute both indexes relate to 1985.
International Price Indexes
Description of the series
T he bls I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r i c e P r o g r a m produces quarterly export and
im port price indexes for nonm ilitary goods traded between the U nited
States and the rest o f the world. T he export price index provides a
m easure o f price change for all products sold by U.S. residents to
foreign buyers. (“ R esidents” is defined as in the national incom e
accounts: it includes corporations, businesses, and individuals but does
not require the organizations to be U.S. owned n o r the individuals to
have U.S. citizenship.) T he im port price index provides a m easure of
price change for goods purchased from other countries by U.S.
residents. W ith publication of an all-im port index in F ebruary 1983 and
an all-export index in F ebruary 1984, all U.S. m erchandise im ports and
exports now are represented in these indexes. T he reference period for
the indexes is 1985= 100, unless otherw ise indicated.
T he p roduct universe for both the im port and export indexes includes
raw m aterials, agricultural products, sem ifinished m anufactures, and
finished m anufactures, including both capital and consum er goods.
Price d ata for these item s are collected quarterly by m ail questionnaire.
In nearly all cases, the d ata are collected directly from the exporter or
im porter, although in a few cases, prices are obtained from o ther
sources.
To the extent possible, the d ata gathered refer to prices at the U.S.
b o rd er for exports and at either the foreign border o r the U.S. border
for im ports. F o r nearly all products, the prices refer to transactions
com pleted d uring the first 2 weeks o f the th ird m onth o f each calendar
q u arter— M arch, June, Septem ber, and Decem ber. Survey respondents
are asked to indicate all discounts, allowances, and rebates applicable to
th e reported prices, so th at the price used in the calculation o f the
indexes is the actual price for which the p roduct was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes o f prices for U.S. exports and im ports,
indexes are also published for detailed product categories o f exports and
im ports. These categories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit level of detail
o f the Stan d ard Industrial T rade C lassification System (sitc). The
calculation o f indexes by sitc category facilitates the com parison of
U.S. price trends and sector production w ith sim ilar d ata for other
countries. D etailed indexes are also com puted and published on a
Stan d ard In d u strial Classification (sic-based) basis, as well as by enduse class.
Notes on the data
T he export and im port price indexes are weighted indexes o f the
Laspeyres type. Price relatives are assigned equal im portance w ithin
Because a price index depends on the sam e item s being priced from
period to period, it is necessary to recognize when a p ro d u c t’s
specifications or term s of transaction have been modified. F o r this
reason, the B ureau’s quarterly questionnaire requests detailed descrip
tions o f the physical and functional characteristics o f the p roducts being
priced, as well as inform ation on the num ber of units bought or sold,
discounts, credit term s, packaging, class o f buyer or seller, and so forth.
W hen there are changes in either the specifications or term s of
transaction o f a product, the dollar value of each change is deleted from
the total price change to obtain the “p u re” change. O nce this value is
determ ined, a linking procedure is em ployed which allows for the
continued repricing o f the item.
F o r the export price indexes, the preferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free
alongside ship) U.S. port of exportation. W hen firm s report export
prices f.o.b. (free on board), production point inform ation is collected
which enables the B ureau to calculate a shipm ent cost to the port of
exportation. A n attem pt is m ade to collect tw o prices for im ports. The
first is the im port price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation, which is
consistent with the basis for valuation of im ports in the national
accounts. The second is the im port price c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and
freight) at the U.S. port o f im portation, which also includes the other
costs associated with bringing the product to the U.S. border. It does
not, however, include duty charges. F or a given product, only one price
basis series is used in the construction o f an index.
Beginning in 1988, the B ureau has also been publishing a series of
indexes w hich represent the price of U.S. exports and im ports in foreign
currency term s.
Additional sources of information
F o r a discussion of the general m ethod o f com puting International
Price Indexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2285 (B ureau of
L abor Statistics, 1988).
A dditional detailed d ata and analyses of international price develop
m ents are presented in the B ureau’s quarterly publication U.S. Import
and Export Price Indexes and in occasional Monthly Labor Review
articles prepared by bls analysts. Selected historical d ata m ay be found
in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (B ureau o f L abor
Statistics, 1985). F o r fu rth er inform ation on the foreign currency
indexes, see “ bls publishes average exchange rate and foreign currency
price indexes,” Monthly Labor Review, D ecem ber 1987, pp. 4 7 -4 9 .
PRODUCTIVITY DATA
(Tables 2; 42-44)
U.S. productivity and related data
Description of the series
T he productivity m easures relate real physical o u tput to real input.
As such, they encom pass a fam ily of m easures w hich include single
factor productivity m easures, such as o u tput per unit of labor input
(o u tp u t per h our) or o u tput per unit of capital input, as well as
m easures o f m ultifactor productivity (output per unit of com bined labor
and capital inputs). T he B ureau indexes show the change in output
relative to changes in the various inputs. T he m easures cover the
business, nonfarm business, m anufacturing, and nonfinancial corporate
sectors.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C orresponding indexes of hourly com pensation, unit labor costs, unit
nonlabor paym ents, and prices are also provided.
Definitions
O u t p u t p e r h o u r o f a l l p e r s o n s (labor productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant prices produced per hour o f labor input.
O u t p u t p e r u n i t o f c a p i t a l s e r v i c e s (capital productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant dollars produced per unit of capital
services input.
M u l t i f a c t o r p r o d u c t i v i t y is o u tput per unit of com bined labor and
capital inputs. Changes in this m easure reflect changes in a num ber of
factors which affect the production process such as changes in
technology, shifts in the com position o f the labor force, changes in
63
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics
•
capacity utilization, research and developm ent, skill and efforts of the
work force, m anagem ent, and so forth. C hanges in the output per hour
m easures reflect the im pact o f these factors as well as the substitution of
capital for labor.
C o m p e n s a t io n p e r h o u r
is the wages and salaries o f employees plus
em ployers’ co ntributions for social insurance and private benefit plans,
and the wages, salaries, and supplem entary paym ents for the selfem ployed (except for nonfinancial corporations in w hich there are no
self-em ployed)— the sum divided by hours paid for.
per
hour
R e a l c o m p e n sa tio n
is com pensation per h our deflated by the C onsum er Price
Index for All U rb an Consum ers.
U n i t l a b o r c o s t s are the labor com pensation costs expended in the
p roduction o f a unit o f output and are derived by dividing com pensa
tion by o utput.
U n it n o n la b o r p a y m e n ts
include profits, depreciation,
interest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are com puted by
subtracting com pensation o f all persons from current dollar value o f
o u tp u t and dividing by output.
U n it
n o n la b o r
c o sts
contain all the
com ponents o f unit nonlabor paym ents e x c e p t unit profits.
U n i t p r o f i t s include corporate profits w ith inventory valuation and
capital consum ption ad justm ents per unit of output.
H o u r s o f a ll p e r s o n s
are the total hours paid of payroll w orkers, self-
em ployed persons, and unpaid fam ily w orkers.
C a p i t a l s e r v i c e s is the flow o f services from the capital stock used in
production. It is developed from m easures o f the net stock of physical
Notes on the data
C onstant-dollar output for the b u s i n e s s s e c t o r is equal to constantdollar gross national p roduct but excludes the rental value of
ow ner-occupied dwellings, the rest-of-w orld sector, the output of
nonprofit institutions, the o u tput of paid em ployees o f private house
holds, general governm ent, and the statistical discrepancy. O utp u t of
the n o n f a r m b u s i n e s s s e c t o r is equal to business sector outpu t less
farm ing. T he m easures are derived from d ata supplied by the B ureau of
E conom ic Analysis, U.S. D epartm ent of Com m erce, and the Federal
Reserve Board. Q uarterly m anufacturing o u tput indexes are adjusted
by the B ureau of L abor Statistics to annual m easures o f m anufacturing
o u tput (gross product originating) from the B ureau of Econom ic
Analysis. C om pensation and hours d ata are developed from data o f the
B ureau of L abor Statistics and the B ureau of E conom ic Analysis.
T he productivity and associated cost m easures in tables 4 2 - 4 4
describe the relationship betw een o u tput in real term s and the labor
tim e and capital services involved in its production. They show the
changes from period to period in the am ount of goods and services
produced per unit o f input. A lthough these m easures relate o u tp u t to
hours and capital services, they do not m easure the contributions of
labor, capital, or any o ther specific factor of production. R ather, they
reflect the joint effect o f m any influences, including changes in
technology; capital investm ent; level of output; utilization of capacity,
energy, and m aterials; the organization o f production; m anagerial skill;
and the characteristics and efforts of the w ork force.
assets— equipm ent, structures, land, and inventories— weighted by
rental prices for each type o f asset.
L a b o r a n d c a p i t a l i n p u t s com bined are derived by com bining changes
in labor and capital inputs w ith weights w hich represent each com po
n en t’s share o f to tal output. T he indexes for capital services and
com bined units o f labor and capital are based on changing weights
w hich are averages o f the shares in the cu rren t and preceding year (the
T orn q u ist index-num ber form ula).
Additional sources of information
D escriptions of m ethodology underlying the m easurem ent of o utput
per h o u r and m ultifactor productivity are found in the b l s H a n d b o o k o f
M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1988). H istorical
data for selected industries are provided in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r
S ta tis tic s , B ulletin 2217 (B ureau of L abor Statistics, 1985).
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
(Tables 45-47)
L abor fo rce and u nem p loym en t
Description of the series
Tables 45 and 46 present com parative m easures of the labor force,
em ploym ent, and unem ploym ent— approxim ating U.S. concepts— for
th e U nited States, C anada, A ustralia, Japan, and six E uropean
countries. T he unem ploym ent statistics (and, to a lesser extent,
em ploym ent statistics) published by oth er industrial countries are not,
in m ost cases, com parable to U.S. unem ploym ent statistics. T herefore,
th e B ureau adju sts the figures for selected countries, w here necessary,
for all know n m ajo r definitional differences. A lthough precise com para
bility m ay not be achieved, these ad justed figures provide a b etter basis
for international com parisons th an the figures regularly published by
each country.
Definitions
F o r the principal U.S. definitions o f the l a b o r f o r c e , e m p l o y m
see th e N otes section on E M P L O Y M E N T
H ousehold Survey D ata.
u n e m p lo y m e n t,
e n t,
and
DATA:
Notes on the data
T he adju sted statistics have been adapted to the age at which
com pulsory schooling ends in each country, ra th e r th an to the U.S.
64
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
stan d ard of 16 years of age and over. T herefore, the adjusted statistics
relate to the population age 16 and over in F rance, Sweden, and from
1973 onw ard, the U nited K ingdom ; 15 and over in C anada, A ustralia,
Japan, G erm any, the N etherlands, and prior to 1973, the U nited
K ingdom ; and 14 and over in Italy. T he institutional population is
included in the denom inator of the labor force participation rates and
em ploym ent-population ratios for Japan and G erm any; it is excluded
for the U nited States and the other countries.
In the U.S. labor force survey, persons on layoff who are aw aiting
recall to th eir job are classified as unem ployed. E uropean and Japanese
layoff practices are quite different in n atu re from those in the U nited
States; therefore, strict application of the U.S. definition has not been
m ade on this point. F o r fu rth er inform ation, see M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w ,
D ecem ber 1981, pp. 8 -1 1 .
T he figures for one or m ore recent years for France, G erm any, Italy,
the N etherlands, and the U nited K ingdom are calculated using
ad justm ent factors based on labor force surveys for earlier years and are
considered prelim inary. T he recent-year m easures for these countries
are, therefore, subject to revision whenever d ata from m ore cu rren t
labor force surveys becom e available.
T here are breaks in the date series for G erm any (1983), Italy (1986),
the N etherlands (1983), and Sweden (1987). F o r both G erm any and the
N etherlands, the breaks reflect the replacem ent o f labor force survey
results tabulated by the national statistical offices with those tabulated
by the E uropean C om m unity Statistical Office ( e u r o s t a t ) . T he D utch
figures for 1983 onw ard also reflect the replacem ent of m an-year
em ploym ent d ata w ith d ata from the D u tch Survey of Em ployed
Persons. T he im pact o f the changes was to lower the adjusted
unem ploym ent rate by 0.3 percentage point for G erm any and by about
2 percentage points for the N etherlands.
F o r Italy, th e break in series reflects m ore accurate enum eration of
tim e o f last jo b search. T his resulted in a significant increase in the
n um ber o f people reported as seeking w ork in the past 30 days. The
im pact was to increase the Italian unem ploym ent rates approxim ating
U.S. concepts by about 1 percentage point.
Sweden introduced a new questionnaire. Q uestions regarding current
availability were added and the period o f active workseeking was
reduced from 60 days to 4 weeks. These changes resulted in lowering
Sw eden’s unem ploym ent rate by 0.5 percentage point.
Additional sources of information
F o r fu rth er inform ation, see I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a r is o n s o f U n e m p lo y
m e n t, Bulletin 1979 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1978), A ppendix B,
and unpublished Supplem ents to A ppendix B, available on request. The
statistics are also analyzed periodically in the M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w .
T he latest article appears in the A pril 1988 R e v ie w . A dditional
historical data, generally beginning with 1959, are published in the
H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s and are available in unpublished statistical
supplem ents to B ulletin 1979.
M an u factu rin g p ro d u ctiv ity and labor c o sts
Description of the series
Table 47 presents com parative m easures o f m anufacturing labor
productivity, h ourly com pensation costs, and unit labor costs for the
U nited States, C anada, Japan, and nine E uropean countries. These
m easures are lim ited to trend com parisons— th at is, in tercountry series
o f changes over tim e— ra th e r th an level com parisons because reliable
intern atio n al com parisons o f the levels of m anufacturing o u tput are
unavailable.
Definitions
O u t p u t is constant value o u tp u t (value added), generally taken from
th e national accounts o f each country. W hile the national accounting
m ethods for m easuring real o u tp u t differ considerably am ong the 12
countries, th e use of different procedures does not, in itself, connote
lack o f com parability— rather, it reflects differences am ong countries in
the availability and reliability o f underlying d ata series.
H o u r s refer to all em ployed persons including the self-em ployed in
the U nited States and Canada; to all wage and salary em ployees in the
oth er countries. T he U.S. hours m easure is hours paid; the hours
m easures for the o ther countries are hours worked.
C o m p e n s a t i o n ( l a b o r c o s t ) includes all paym ents in cash o r kind
m ade directly to em ployees plus em ployer expenditures for legally
required insurance program s and contractual and private benefit plans.
In addition, for som e countries, com pensation is adju sted for other
significant taxes on payrolls or em ploym ent (or reduced to reflect
subsidies), even if they are not for the direct benefit of workers, because
such taxes are regarded as labor costs. How ever, com pensation does not
include all item s of labor cost. T he costs of recruitm ent, employee
training, and plant facilities and services— such as cafeterias and
m edical clinics— are not covered because d ata are not available for m ost
countries. Self-em ployed w orkers are included in the U.S. and C anadian
com pensation figures by assum ing th at their hourly com pensation is
equal to the average for wage and salary employees.
Notes on the data
F o r m ost of the countries, the m easures refer to total m anufacturing
as defined by the International S tandard Industrial Classification.
H ow ever, the m easures for F rance (beginning 1959), Italy (beginning
1970), and the U nited K ingdom (beginning 1971), refer to m an u factu r
ing and m ining less energy-related products and the figures for the
N etherlands exclude petroleum refining from 1969 to 1976. F o r all
c o u n tries, m a n u fa ctu rin g includes th e activities o f g o v ern m en t
enterprises.
T he figures for one or m ore recent years are generally based on
cu rrent indicators o f m anufacturing output, em ploym ent, hours, and
hourly com pensation and are considered prelim inary until the national
accounts and oth er statistics used for the long-term m easures becom e
available.
Additional sources of information
F o r additional inform ation, see the b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s,
Bulletin 2285 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1988), and periodic M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w articles. H istorical d ata are provided in th e H a n d b o o k o f
L a b o r S ta tis tic s , B ulletin 2217 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1985). The
statistics are issued twice per year— in a news release (generally in M ay)
and in a M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w article.
OCCUPATIONAL INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA
(Table 48)
Description of the series
represent all private industries in the States and territories. T he sam ple
T he A n n u al Survey o f O ccupational Injuries and Illnesses is designed
to collect d ata on injuries and illnesses based on records which
em ployers in th e follow ing industries m aintain u n der the O ccupational
Safety and H ealth A ct o f 1970: agriculture, forestry, and fishing; oil and
gas extraction; construction; m anufacturing; tran sp o rtatio n and public
utilities; w holesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate;
and services. E xcluded from the survey are self-em ployed individuals,
farm ers w ith fewer th an 11 employees, em ployers regulated by o ther
Federal safety and health laws, and Federal, State, and local govern
m en t agencies.
B ecause the survey is a Federal-State cooperative program and the
d ata m ust m eet the needs of participating State agencies, an indepen
dent sam ple is selected for each State. T he sam ple is selected to
size for the survey is dependent upon (1) the characteristics for which
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
estim ates are needed; (2) the industries for which estim ates are desired;
(3) the characteristics o f the population being sam pled; (4) th e target
reliability of the estim ates; and (5) the survey design employed.
W hile there are m any characteristics upon w hich the sam ple design
could be based, the total recorded case incidence rate is used because it
is one o f the m ost im p o rtan t characteristics and the least variable;
therefore, it requires the sm allest sam ple size.
T he survey is based on stratified random sam pling w ith a N eym an
allocation and a ratio estim ator. T he characteristics used to stratify the
establishm ents are the S tandard Industrial Classification (sic ) code and
size o f em ploym ent.
65
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Definitions
R e c o r d a b l e o c c u p a t i o n a l i n j u r i e s a n d i l l n e s s e s are: ( 1 ) occupational
deaths, regardless o f the tim e between in jury and death, o r the length o f
th e illness; o r (2) nonfatal occupational illnesses; o r (3) nonfatal
occupational injuries w hich involve one or m ore o f the following: loss
o f consciousness, restriction of w ork or m otion, transfer to an o th er job,
o r m edical treatm en t (o ther th an first aid).
O c c u p a t i o n a l i n j u r y is any in ju ry such as a cut, fracture, sprain,
am putation, and so forth, which results from a w ork accident or from
exposure involving a single incident in the w ork environm ent.
O c c u p a t i o n a l i l l n e s s is an abnorm al condition o r disorder, oth er than
one resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to
environm ental factors associated w ith em ploym ent. It includes acute
and chronic illnesses o r disease w hich m ay be caused by inhalation,
absorption, ingestion, o r direct contact.
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s are cases w hich involve days away from w ork, or
days o f restricted w ork activity, or both.
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s i n v o l v i n g r e s t r i c t e d w o r k a c t i v i t y are those cases
w hich result in restricted w ork activity only.
L o s t w o r k d a y s a w a y fro m
w o r k are the num ber o f w orkdays
(consecutive or not) on which the em ployee would have w orked but
could not because o f occupational in jury or illness.
L o s t w o r k d a y s — r e s t r i c t e d w o r k a c t i v i t y are the num ber o f w orkdays
(consecutive o r not) on which, because o f in jury o r illness: (1) the
em ployee was assigned to an o th er job on a tem porary basis; or (2) the
em ployee w orked at a p erm anent job less than full tim e; o r (3) the
em ployee w orked at a p erm anently assigned job but could not perform
all duties norm ally connected w ith it.
The
num ber
of days
aw ay
fro m
w ork
or
days
o f r e s t r ic t e d
w ork
does not include the day o f in ju ry o r onset o f illness or any days
on which the em ployee w ould not have w orked even though able to
work.
I n c i d e n c e r a t e s represent the num ber of injuries a n d /o r illnesses or
lost w orkdays per 100 full-tim e workers.
a c tiv ity
Current Labor Statistics
those w here the em ployee would have w orked but could not and those
in which work activity was restricted. E stim ates of the num ber o f cases
and the num ber o f days lost are m ade for both categories.
M ost o f the estim ates are in the form o f incidence rates, defined as
the num ber of injuries and illnesses, or lost w orkdays, per 100 full-tim e
employees. F o r this purpose, 200,000 em ployee hours represent 100
em ployee years (2,000 hours per em ployee). O nly a few of the available
m easures are included in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s . Full detail is
presented in the annual bulletin, O c c u p a tio n a l I n ju r ie s a n d I lln e ss e s in
th e U n ite d S ta te s , b y I n d u s tr y .
C om parable d ata for individual States are available from the b l s
Office of Safety, H ealth, and W orking C onditions.
M ining and railroad d ata are furnished to b l s by the M ine Safety and
H ealth A dm inistration and the F ederal R ailroad A dm inistration,
respectively. D ata from these organizations are included in b l s and
State publications. F ederal em ployee experience is com piled and
published by the O ccupational Safety and H ealth A dm inistration. D ata
on State and local governm ent employees are collected by about h alf of
the States and territories; these data are not com piled nationally.
Additional sources of information
T he Supplem entary D ata System provides detailed inform ation
describing various factors associated w ith w ork-related injuries and
illnesses. These d ata are obtained from inform ation reported by
e m p lo y e r s to State w orkers’ com pensation agencies. T he W ork In ju ry
R eport program exam ines selected types o f accidents throu g h an
em ployee survey w hich focuses on the circum stances surrounding the
injury. These d ata are not included in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s
but are available from the b l s Office o f Safety, H ealth, and W orking
C onditions.
T he definitions o f occupational injuries and illnesses an d lost
w orkdays are from R e c o r d k e e p in g R e q u ir e m e n ts u n d e r th e O c c u p a
tio n a l S a f e ty a n d H e a lth A c t o f 1 9 7 0 . F o r additional data, see
O c c u p a tio n a l I n ju r ie s a n d I lln e s s e s in th e U n ite d S ta te s , b y I n d u s tr y ,
Notes on the data
E stim ates are m ade for industries and em ploym ent-size classes and
for severity classification: fatalities, lost w orkday cases, and nonfatal
cases w ithout lost w orkdays. Lost w orkday cases are separated into
66
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
annual B ureau o f L abor Statistics bulletin; b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s,
Bulletin 2285 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1988); H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r
S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (B ureau o f L abor Statistics, 1985), pp. 4 1 1 -1 4 ;
annual reports in the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ; and annual U.S.
D epartm ent o f L abor press releases.
1.
Labor market indicators
1988
1987
1986
Selected indicators
1987
1986
IV
III
II
I
IV
II
I
III
Employment data
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey)'
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.................................
65.3
60.7
7.0
6.9
13.7
5.4
7.1
12.8
5.5
1.9
65.6
61.5
6.2
6.2
12.6
4.8
6.2
11.7
4.8
1.7
65.4
60.9
6.8
6.9
13.3
5.4
6.8
12.6
5.3
1.9
65.4
61.1
6.6
6.6
13.3
5.1
6.6
12.5
5.0
1.8
65.6
61.5
6.3
6.4
13.1
4.9
6.2
11.7
4.7
1.7
65.6
61.7
6.0
6.0
12.2
4.6
6.0
11.4
4.7
1.6
65.7
61.9
5.9
5.8
11.9
4.4
6.0
11.2
4.6
1.5
65.8
62.1
5.7
5.6
11.8
4.3
5.8
11.0
4.5
1.4
65.8
62.2
5.5
5.4
11.2
4.2
5.6
10.7
4.3
1.3
65.9
62.3
5.5
5.4
11.4
4.1
5.6
10.5
4.4
1.3
Total .........................................................................................
Private sector ..........................................................................
Goods-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing .......................................................................
Service-producing ....................................................................
99,525
82,832
24,558
18,965
74,967
102,310
85,295
24,784
19,065
77,525
100,347
83,496
24,443
18,885
75,904
101,024
84,130
24,523
18,895
76,500
101,841
84,869
24,644
18,965
77,196
102,669
85,643
24,847
19,112
77,782
103,683
86,518
25,116
19,290
78,567
104,670
87,406
25,260
19,388
79,410
105,609
88,263
25,498
19,498
80,111
106,478
89,063
25,648
19,567
80,830
Average hours:
Private sector ..........................................................................
Manufacturing .....................................................................
Overtime............................................................................
34.8
40.7
3.4
34.8
41.0
3.7
34.7
40.8
3.5
34.8
41.0
3.6
34.7
40.9
3.7
34.7
40.9
3.8
34.8
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.0
3.8
34.8
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.1
3.9
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal workers) .....
Private industry workers ..........................................................
Goods-producing2 ................................................................
Service-producing2 ..............................................................
State and local government workers........................................
3.6
3.2
3.1
3.2
5.2
3.6
3.3
3.1
3.7
4.4
.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.9
1.0
.5
1.3
.8
.7
.7
.7
.7
.3
1.2
1.0
.8
1.0
2.3
.8
.7
1.0
.5
.9
1.4
1.5
1.8
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.4
.3
1.3
1.0
.6
1.2
2.7
Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
Union.....................................................................................
Nonunion ....................... .......................................................
2.1
3.6
2.8
3.6
.3
.7
.5
1.1
.5
.7
.6
1.1
1.1
.6
1.6
1.5
1.0
1.3
.7
1.1
Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data), in thousands:'
Employment Cost Index
' Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
producing industries include all other private sector industries.
67
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
2.
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics:
•
Comparative Indicators
Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
Compensation data
1986
1988
1987
1986
Selected measures
1987
I
IV
III
II
I
IV
III
II
2
Employment Cost Index-compensation (wages, salaries,
benefits):
Civilian nonfarm ..............................................................
Private nonfarm .............................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries
Civilian nonfarm ..............................................................
Private nonfarm .............................................................
3.6
3.2
3.6
3.3
0.6
.6
0.9
1.0
0.7
.7
1.2
1.0
0.8
.7
1.4
1.5
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.0
3.5
3.1
3.5
3.3
.6
.5
1.0
1.0
.5
.7
1.3
1.0
.7
.6
1.0
1.0
.9
1.1
1.3
1.0
Price data1
Consumer Price Index (All urban consumers): All items.....
1.1
4.4
.3
1.4
1.2
1.3
.3
1.0
1.3
1.5
Producer Price Index:
Finished goods...............................................................
Finished consumer goods..............................................
Capital equipment ..........................................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ..................
Crude materials...............................................................
-2.3
-3.5
2.1
-4.4
-8.9
2.2
2.6
1.3
5.4
8.9
1.1
.8
2.1
-.3
.6
.8
.9
.1
1.3
4.2
1.2
1.6
.3
1.9
5.3
.2
.3
-.2
1.2
.6
.1
-.2
1.1
.9
-1.4
.5
.4
.7
1.1
-.3
1.3
1.4
.6
2.6
4.0
.8
1.0
.4
1.2
-1.3
Productivity data3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business sector.............................................................
Nonfarm business sector ...............................................
Nonfinancial corporations 4 .............................................
.3
.0
-1.0
-.8
-.9
2.6
.8
.8
1.5
2.2
2.0
1.8
3.5
3.4
4.3
.6
.9
-.1
3.9
3.7
4.7
2.7
3.2
3.1
-3.4
-2.4
-1.6
1.5
1.9
-1.1
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.
Quarterly percent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly in
dexes. The data are seasonally adjusted.
4 Output per hour of all employees.
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. Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ended-
Quarterly average
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector............................................................
All employees, nonfarm business sector..........................................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 2 ............................................................................
Private nonfarm ...........................................................................
Union ........................................................................................
State and local governments.........................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2 ............................................................................
Private nonfarm ............................................................................
Union ........................................................................................
State and local governments .........................................................
Total effective wage adjustments3..........................................................
From current settlements................................................................
From prior settlements ....................................................................
From cost-of-living provision............................................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements:3
First-year adjustments .....................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract......................................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:4
First-year adjustment .............................................- ........................
Annual rate over life of contract......................................................
III
II
I
1988
IV
III
II
III
II
I
3.6
3.4
4.6
4.5
6.2
6.4
3.7
3.5
4.8
4.2
6.1
5.6
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.7
4.2
4.1
4.5
4.4
4.8
4.6
5.2
4.9
.7
.7
.5
.7
.3
1.2
1.0
.6
1.1
2.3
.8
.7
1.1
.6
.9
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.3
.3
1.3
1.0
.7
1.1
2.7
3.3
3.0
1.9
3.4
4.7
3.4
3.3
2.0
3.7
4.2
3.6
3.3
2.8
3.6
4.4
4.1
3.9
3.9
4.0
4.9
4.6
4.5
4.3
4.5
5.0
4.7
4.5
4.b
4.5
5.4
.5
.7
.5
.8
.2
1.0
.2
.7
.2
1.3
1.0
.6
1.1
2.3
.9
.2
.6
.1
.7
.6
1.1
.5
.9
.8
.3
.3
.2
1.0
1.0
.4
1.0
.9
.4
.1
.3
.1
.9
1.1
.8
1.2
.3
.9
.3
.5
.1
1.3
1.0
.7
1.0
2.6
.8
.2
.4
.2
3.2
3.0
1.7
3.3
5.0
2.2
.3
1.6
.3
3.4
3.3
1.7
3.8
4.1
2.6
.4
1.7
.4
3.5
3.3
2.6
3.6
4.2
3.1
.7
1.8
.5
3.5
3.3
2.6
3.5
4.4
3.2
.8
1.8
.5
3.9
3.7
2.9
4.0
4.4
3.0
1.0
1.6
.5
3.9
3.7
2.9
3.9
4.7
2.8
.9
1.4
.5
2.6
2.9
2.1
2.0
2.4
1.8
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7
2.9
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.4
2.2
2.4
2.0
2.5
2.2
4.1
3.9
2.5
2.1
3.4
2.4
1.8
1.8
3.3
2.4
3.4
3.3
1.8
2.1
2.7
2.6
3.0
2.6
3.1
2.5
3.0
2.3
3.2
2.5
’ Seasonally adjusted.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.
3 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 1,000 workers or more. The
Digitized for68
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
IV
III
II
1987
1988
1987
Components
most recent data are preliminary.
4 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
4. Employment status of the total population, by sex, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1987
1988
Dec.
Employment status
1987
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
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 ................
84,490 186,322 185,370 185,571 185,705 185,847 185,964 186,088 186,247 186,402 186,522 186,666 186,801 186,949 187,098
124,259
121,602 123,378 122,451 122,784 122,901 122,672 123,060 122,917 123,209 123,331 123,692 123,688 123,778 124,215
66.4
66.4
66.3
66.3
66.3
66.2
66.2
66.1
66.2
66.0
66.2
66.2
66.1
66.2
65.9
117,705
114,177 116,677 115,490 115,804 116,009 115,865 116,392 116,117 116,686 116,707 116,895 117,074 117,260 117,652
62.9
62.9
62.8
62.7
62.7
62.6
62.7
62.4
62.6
62.3
62.5
62.4
62.3
62.6
61.9
1,696
1,705
1,687
1,704
1,692
1,673
1,714
1,685
1,732
1,736
1,736
1,749
1,750
1,709
1,737
116,009
112,440 114,968 113,740 114,055 114,273 114,129 114,660 114,403 115,001 115,034 115,203 115,370 115,573 115,947
3,193
3,238
3,238
3,176
3,142
3,060
3,121
3,110
3,187
3,181
3,200
3,256
3,212
3,169
3,208
112,816
112,709
109,232 111,800 110,528 110,799 111,073 110,948 111,473 111,293 111,880 111,974 112,061 112,194 112,335
6,554
6,563
6,518
6,614
6,797
6,624
6,523
6,800
6,668
6,807
6,892
6,980
6,961
6,701
7,425
6.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.3
5.5
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.7
5.4
6.1
62,830 62,978 63,023 62,734 62,839
63,071
63,038
63,171
62,904
63,175
62,804
62,787
62,919
62,944
62,888
Men, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population \ 2
Labor force2.......................
Participation rate 3......
Total employed 2.............
Employment-population
ratio 4 .......................
Resident Armed Forces '
Civilian employed .........
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate 5 ...
88,476
67,784
76.6
63,684
89,404
68,474
76.6
64,820
88,924
68,058
76.5
64,281
89,033
68,219
76.6
64,420
89,099
68,289
76.6
64,587
89,168
68,194
76.5
64,417
89,225
68,462
76.7
64,866
89,287
68,409
76.6
64,672
89,367
68,436
76.6
64,894
89,445
68,461
76.5
64,941
89,504
68,685
76.7
64,931
89,577
68,604
76.6
65,015
89,637
68,569
76.5
64,976
89,716
68,686
76.6
65,074
89,792
68,638
76.4
65,055
72.0
1,577
62,107
4,101
6.1
72.5
1,547
63,273
3,655
5.3
72.3
1,589
62,692
3,777
5.5
72.4
1,588
62,832
3,799
5.6
72.5
1,577
63,010
3,702
5.4
72.2
1,573
62,844
3,777
5.5
72.7
1,569
63,297
3,596
5.3
72.4
1,553
63,119
3,737
5.5
72.6
1,523
63,371
3,542
5.2
72.6
1,512
63,429
3,520
5.1
72.5
1,529
63,402
3,754
5.5
72.6
1,540
63,475
3,589
5.2
72.5
1,526
63,450
3,593
5.2
72.5
1,542
63,532
3,612
5.3
72.5
1,534
63,521
3,583
5.2
96,013
53,818
56.1
50,494
96,918
54,904
56.6
51,858
96,446
54,393
56.4
51,209
96,538
54,565
56.5
51,384
96,606
54,612
56.5
51,422
96,679
54,478
56.3
51,448
96,739
54,598
56.4
51,526
96,801
54,508
56.3
51,445
96,880
54,773
56.5
51,792
96,957
54,870
56.6
51,766
97,018
55,007
56.7
51,964
97,089
55,084
56.7
52,059
97,164
55,209
56.8
52,284
97,234
55,529
57.1
52,578
97,306
55,621
57.2
52,650
\ 52.6
160
50,334
3,324
6.2
53.5
162
51,696
3,046
5.5
53.1
161
51,048
3,184
5.9
53.2
161
51,223
3,181
5.8
53.2
159
51,263
3,190
5.8
53.3
53.2
163
1£3
51,285 51,363
%
3,072
3,030
5.6
5.6
53.1
161
51,284
3,063
5.6
53.5
162
51,630
2,981
5.4
53.4
161
51,605
3,104
5.7
53.6
163
51,801
3,043
5.5
53.6
164
51,895
3,025
5.5
53.8
161
52,123
2,925
5.3
54.1
163
52,415
2,951
5.3
54.1
162
52,488
2,971
5.3
Women, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population 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.
Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces).
69
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1987
1987
Dec.
1988
Employment status
1988
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
184,111
120,936
65.7
114,129
184,232
121,328
65.9
114,660
184,374
121,203
65.7
114,403
184,562
121,524
65.8
115,001
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
population'................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ...............
Employed .............................
Employment-population
ratio2 ................................
Unemployed...........................
Unemployment rate............
Not in labor force ....................
182,753 184,613 183,620
119,865 121,669 120,701
65.6
65.9
65.7
112,440 114,968 113,740
183,822 183,962
121,035 121,168
65.8
65.2
114,055 114,273
184,729 184,830 184,962 185,114 185,244 185,402
121,658 122,000 121,984 122,091 122,51C 122,563
65.9
66.C
66.C
66.C
66.1
66.1
115,034 115,203 115,370 115,573 115,947 116,009
61.5
7,425
6.2
62,888
62.3
6,701
5.5
62,944
61.9
6,961
5.8
62,919
62.0
6,980
5.8
62,787
62.1
6,892
5.7
62,804
62.0
6,807
5.6
63,175
62.2
6,668
5.5
62,904
62.0
6,800
5.6
63,171
62.3
6,523
5.4
63,038
62.3
6,624
5.4
63,071
62.3
6,797
5.6
62,830
62.4
6,614
5.4
62,978
62.4
6,518
5.3
63,023
62.6
6,563
5.4
62,734
5.3
62,839
79,565
62,095
78.0
58,726
80,553
62,768
77.9
59,781
80,002
62,281
77.8
59,220
80,120
62,421
77.9
59,315
80,203
62,614
78.1
59,561
80,260
62,532
77.9
59,468
80,326
62,774
78.1
59,833
80,402
62,721
78.0
59,656
80,526
62,669
77.8
59,780
80,608
62,729
77.8
59,897
80,669
62,916
78.0
59,839
80,751
62,884
77.9
59,979
80,851
62,915
77.8
60,004
80,924
62,995
77.8
59,999
81,001
63,002
77.8
60,049
73.8
2,329
56,397
3,369
5.4
74.2
2,271
57,510
2,987
4.8
74.0
2,290
56,930
3,061
4.9
74.0
2,302
57,013
3,106
5.0
74.3
2,279
57,282
3,053
4.9
74.1
2,258
57,210
3,064
4.9
74.5
2,259
57,574
2,941
4.7
74.2
2,238
57,418
3,065
4.9
74.2
2,231
57,549
2,889
4.6
74.3
2,252
57,645
2,832
4.5
74.2
2,273
57,566
3,077
4.9
74.3
2,249
57,730
2,905
4.6
74.2
2,315
57,689
2,911
4.6
74.1
2,313
57,686
2,996
4.8
74.1
2,292
57,757
2,953
4.7
88,583
49,783
56.2
47,074
89,532
50,870
56.8
48,383
89,010
50,327
56.5
47,722
89,110
50,462
56.6
47,894
89,178
50,530
56.7
47,934
89,261
50,510
56.6
48,060
89,307
50,591
56.6
48,120
89,382
50,532
56.5
48,040
89,502
50,690
56.6
48,205
89,588
50,807
56.7
48,242
89,670
50,959
56.8
48,492
89,735
50,991
56.8
48,535
89,807
51,201
57.0
48,788
89,887
51,558
57.4
49,113
89,954
51,587
57.3
49,165
53.1
622
46,453
2,709
5.4
54.0
625
47,757
2,487
4.9
53.6
640
47,082
2,605
5.2
53.7
639
47,255
2,568
5.1
53.8
638
47,296
2,596
5.1
53.8
641
47,419
2,450
4.9
53.9
653
47,467
2,471
4.9
53.7
604
47,436
2,492
4.9
53.9
626
47,579
2,485
4.9
53.8
549
47,693
2,565
5.0
54.1
609
47,883
2,467
4.8
54.1
638
47,897
2,456
4.8
54.3
640
48,148
2,413
4.7
54.6
640
48,473
2,445
4.7
54.7
646
48,519
2,422
4.7
14,606
7,988
54.7
6,640
14,527
8,031
55.3
6,805
14,609
8,093
55.4
6,798
14,592
8,152
55.9
6,846
14,588
8,021
55.0
6,778
14,591
7,894
54.1
6,601
14,598
7,963
54.5
6,707
14,590
7,950
54.5
6,707
14,534
8,165
56.2
7,016
14,533
8,122
55.9
6,895
14,491
8,125
56.1
6,872
14,477
8,109
56.0
6,856
14,456
7,975
55.2
6,781
14,433
7,957
55.1
6,835
14,447
7,974
55.2
6,795
45.5
258
6,382
1,347
16.9
46.8
273
6,532
1,226
15.3
46.5
282
6,516
1,295
16.0
46.9
315
6,531
1,306
16.0
46.5
283
6,495
1,243
15.5
45.2
282
6,319
1,293
16.4
45.9
275
6,432
1,256
15.8
46.0
268
6,439
1,243
15.6
48.3
264
6,752
1,149
14.1
47.4
259
6,636
1,227
15.1
47.4
260
6,612
1,253
15.4
47.4
289
6,567
1,253
15.5
46.9
283
6,498
1,194
15.0
47.4
285
6,550
1,122
14.1
47.0
255
6,540
1,179
14.8
62.6
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ................
Employed ................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ................................
Agriculture ............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed............................
Unemployment rate.............
Women, 20 years ond over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1.................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ................
Employed ................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .................................
Agriculture............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...........................
Unemployment rate.............
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian noninstitutional
population1................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ................
Employed ................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .................................
Agriculture ............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...........................
Unemployment rate.............
White
Civilian noninstitutional
population1.................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ................
Employed ...............................
Employment-population
ratio2 ................................
Unemployed.........................
Unemployment rate.............
156,958 158,194 157,552 157,676 157,773 157,868 157,943 158,034 158,166 158,279 158,340 158,422 158,524 158,603 158,705
103,290 104,756 103,907 104,188 104,404 104,172 104,517 104,433 104,716 104,651 105,013 105,036 105,051 105,395 105,411
65.8
66.2
66.0
66.1
66.2
66.0
66.2
66.1
66.2
66.1
66.3
66.3
66.3
66.5
66.4
97,789 99,812 98,787 99,011
99,350 99,252 99,663 99,508 99,902 99,761
99,907 100,058 100,199 100,543 100,567
62.3
5,501
5.3
63.1
4,944
4.7
62.7
5,120
4.9
62.8
5,177
5.0
63.0
5,054
4.8
62.9
4,920
4.7
63.1
4,854
4.6
63.0
4,925
4.7
63.2
4,814
4.6
63.0
4,890
4.7
63.1
5,106
4.9
63.2
4,978
4.7
63.2
4,852
4.6
63.4
4,852
4.6
63.4
4,844
4.6
20,352
12,993
63.8
11,309
20,692
13,205
63.8
11,658
20,508
13,181
64.3
11,560
20,539
13,174
64.1
11,570
20,569
13,138
63.9
11,504
20,596
13,100
63.6
11,461
20,622
13,101
63.5
11,534
20,650
13,102
63.4
11,514
20,683
13,066
63.2
11,543
20,715
13,283
64.1
11,761
20,736
13,236
63.8
11,733
20,762
13,201
63.6
11,758
20,786
13,290
63.9
11,807
20,811
13,330
64.1
11,831
20,842
13,405
64.3
11,856
55.6
1,684
13.0
56.3
1,547
11.7
56.4
1,621
12.3
56.3
1,604
12.2
55.9
1,634
12.4
55.6
1,639
12.5
55.9
1,567
12.0
55.8
1,588
12.1
55.8
1,523
11.7
56.8
1,522
11.5
56.6
1,503
11.4
56.6
1,443
10.9
56.8
1,483
11.2
56.8
1,499
11.2
56.9
1,549
11.6
Black
Civilian noninstitutional
population1.................................
Civilian labor force.....................
Participation rate ................
Employed ..............................
Employment-population
ratio2 .................................
Unemployed...........................
Unemployment rate.............
See footnotes at end of table.
Digitized for70
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5. Continued— Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1988
Annual average
1987
1987
1988
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
12,867
8,541
66.4
7,790
13,325
8,982
67.4
8,250
13,082
8,770
67.0
8,045
13,115
8,862
67.6
8,199
13,153
8,987
68.3
8,241
13,192
8,818
66.8
8,088
13,230
8,823
66.7
8,030
13,268
8,910
67.2
8,128
13,306
9,009
67.7
8,222
13,344
8,997
67.4
8,265
13,381
8,963
67.0
8,214
13,419
9,061
67.5
8,378
13,458
9,075
67.4
8,368
13,495
9,148
67.8
8,419
13,533
9,133
67.5
8,441
60.5
751
8.8
61.9
732
8.2
61.5
725
8.3
62.5
663
7.5
62.7
746
8.3
61.3
730
8.3
60.7
793
9.0
61.3
782
8.8
61.8
787
8.7
61.9
732
8.1
61.4
749
8.4
62.4
683
7.5
62.2
707
7.8
62.4
729
8.0
62.4
692
7.6
Employment status
Hispanic origin
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)
Annual average
1987
1987
1988
Dec.
114,968
63,273
51,696
40,472
113,740
62,692
51,048
40,616
28,756
6,211
28,299
6,181
28,435
6,153
1,632
1,423
153
1,621
1,398
150
1,589
1,461
155
1,629
1,427
143
100,771
16,800
83,970
1,208
82,762
8,201
260
103,021
17,114
85,907
1,153
84,754
8,519
260
5,401
2,385
2,672
14,395
5,206
2,350
2,487
14,963
5,246
2,265
2,617
14,690
5,355
2,351
2,630
14,580
5,369
2,408
2,591
14,619
5,331
2,448
2,548
14,654
5,212
2,264
2,519
14,949
4,878
2,267
2,353
14,813
5,302
2,346
2,586
14,612
5,341
2,471
2,538
15,026
5,192
2,315
2,473
14,999
5,097
2,266
2,389
15,270
4,963
2,220
2,399
15,161
5,061
2,279
2,375
15,446
5,321
2,549
2,410
15,363
5,122
2,201
2,587
13,928
4,965
2,199
2,408
14,509
4,979
2,099
2,518
14,205
5,113
2,212
2,554
14,115
5,101
2,258
2,477
14,172
5,087
2,265
2,482
14,203
4,953
2,131
2,426
14,441
4,676
2,136
2,276
14,376
5,073
2,183
2,504
14,180
5,102
2,334
2,493
14,606
4,972
2,171
2,408
14,564
4,862
2,102
2,317
14,819
4,727
2,095
2,319
14,679
4,819
2,116
2,288
14,986
5,033
2,377
2,307
14,928
1988
Selected categories
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
114,129
62,844
51,285
40,486
114,660
63,297
51,363
40,494
114,403
63,119
51,284
40,317
115,001
63,371
51,630
40,493
115,034
63,429
51,605
40,518
115,203
63,402
51,801
40,511
28,620
6,151
28,713
6,158
28,772
6,091
28,632
6,000
28,678
6,130
28,669
6,170
28,809
6,280
28,836
6,253
28,890
6,344
28,995
6,375
29,053
6,399
1,640
1,410
123
1,610
1,416
146
1,632
1,390
152
1,574
1,365
155
1,583
1,375
161
1,572
1,362
149
1,607
1,411
158
1,612
1,421
137
1,661
1,405
177
1,672
1,450
125
1,698
1,349
149
102,339 102,562 102,145
16,952 17,012
16,946
85,387 85,550 85,199
1,167
1,114
1,152
84,220 84,436 84,047
8,395
8,567
8,816
250
272
301
102,953
17,049
85,904
1,146
84,758
8,536
297
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
CHARACTERISTIC
Civilian employed, 16 years and
over......................................... 112,440
Men .......................................
62,107
Women .................................
50,334
Married men, spouse present .. 40,265
Married women, spouse
present................................
28,107
Women who maintain families .
6,060
114,055 114,273
62,832 63,010
51,223 51,263
40,438 40,488
115,370 115,573 115,947
63,475 63,450 63,532
51,895 52,123 52,415
40,513 40,504 40,407
116,009
63,521
52,488
40,483
MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS
OF WORKER
Agriculture:
Wage and salary workers .......
Self-employed workers...........
Unpaid family workers ............
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary workers .......
Government ........................
Private industries.................
Private households............
Other ................................
Self-employed workers...........
Unpaid family workers............
101,922 102,413 102,498
17,021
17,080
16,961
84,901
85,333 85,537
1,172
1,146
1,167
83,729 84,187 84,370
8,306
8,246
8,338
250
241
232
103,189 103,207 103,501 103,733 103,770 103,904
17,031
17,111
17,145
17,240
17,387
17,423
86,158 86,096 86,356 86,493 86,383 86,481
1,132
1,128
1,119
1,152
1,209
1,210
85,026 84,968 85,237 85,341
85,174 85,271
8,531
8,508
8,570
8,479
8,619
8,602
251
241
230
232
300
266
PERSONS AT WORK
PART TIME1
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 .
Slack work ............................
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 reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
71
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
7.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Unemployment rates)
Annual average
1987
1988
Selected categories
1987
1988
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Total, all civilian workers......................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............................
Men, 20 years and over .................................
Women, 20 years and over.............................
6.2
16.9
5.4
5.4
5.5
15.3
4.8
4.9
5.8
16.0
4.9
5.2
5.8
16.0
5.0
5.1
5.7
15.5
4.9
5.1
5.6
16.4
4.9
4.9
5.5
15.8
4.7
4.9
5.6
15.6
4.9
4.9
5.4
14.1
4.6
4.9
5.4
15.1
4.5
5.0
5.6
15.4
4.9
4.8
5.4
15.5
4.6
4.8
5.3
15.0
4.6
4.7
5.4
14.1
4.8
4.7
5.3
14.8
4.7
4.7
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...........................
5.3
14.4
15.5
13.4
4.8
4.6
4.7
13.1
13.9
12.3
4.1
4.1
4.9
13.5
14.8
12.0
4.3
4.4
5.0
13.9
14.5
13.3
4.4
4.2
4.8
12.5
12.5
12.6
4.2
4.4
4.7
14.1
15.5
12.6
4.2
3.9
4.6
13.9
14.4
13.3
4.0
4.0
4.7
13.2
14.0
12.3
4.2
4.1
4.6
12.3
13.2
11.4
4.0
4.1
4.7
12.9
14.3
11.4
3.9
4.3
4.9
13.7
13.9
13.5
4.3
4.1
4.7
13.4
14.5
12.3
4.1
4.1
4.6
12.9
14.4
11.3
4.1
4.0
4.6
11.9
12.6
11.3
4.2
4.0
4.6
12.6
13.4
11.8
4.1
3.9
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...........................
13.0
34.7
34.4
34.9
11.1
11.6
11.7
32.4
32.7
32.0
10.1
10.4
12.3
33.9
34.3
33.6
10.4
10.9
12.2
34.2
34.6
33.7
10.2
11.0
12.4
36.8
39.9
33.8
10.9
10.5
12.5
35.8
37.8
33.9
11.0
10.8
12.0
30.8
27.9
33.9
10.4
10.9
12.1
33.9
33.2
34.8
10.4
10.6
11.7
30.6
31.5
29.6
9.9
10.6
11.5
31.7
31.2
32.4
9.6
10.3
11.4
32.1
32.1
32.0
9.7
10.0
10.9
31.9
31.9
31.9
9.1
9.7
11.2
30.9
32.8
28.6
9.6
9.8
11.2
31.1
32.1
29.9
9.8
9.8
11.6
29.6
29.8
29.3
10.0
10.5
Hispanic origin, total.......................................
8.8
8.2
8.3
7.5
8.3
8.3
9.0
8.8
8.7
8.1
8.4
7.5
7.8
8.0
7.6
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 lost' .....................................
3.9
4.3
9.2
5.8
8.4
1.7
7.1
3.3
3.9
8.1
5.2
7.6
1.3
6.3
3.4
4.4
8.3
5.4
8.1
1.5
6.6
3.5
4.1
8.8
5.4
8.3
1.4
6.6
3.4
4.0
8.3
5.3
7.9
1.4
6.6
3.4
4.0
7.5
5.3
7.8
1.4
6.5
3.1
3.8
8.5
5.1
7.5
1.3
6.2
3.3
3.9
8.4
5.2
7.7
1.3
6.4
3.2
3.9
7.9
5.0
7.7
1.3
6.3
3.1
4.0
8.5
5.0
8.0
1.3
6.4
3.4
4.0
7.5
5.3
7.4
1.3
6.4
3.1
3.8
8.1
5.1
7.4
1.3
6.3
3.1
3.7
7.9
5.0
7.4
1.3
6.1
3.3
3.8
7.7
5.0
7.1
1.2
6.2
3.1
3.7
8.2
5.1
7.0
1.2
6.3
6.2
10.0
11.6
6.0
5.8
6.3
4.5
6.9
4.9
3.5
10.5
5.5
7.9
10.6
5.3
5.0
5.7
3.9
6.2
4.5
2.8
10.6
5.7
8.2
10.7
5.2
4.8
5.6
4.6
6.2
4.8
3.0
11.5
5.8
7.5
11.9
5.5
5.3
5.8
3.7
6.2
4.9
3.0
11.4
5.7
7.8
10.9
5.6
5.7
5.4
3.8
6.3
4.6
2.9
10.5
5.6
8.2
10.6
5.2
5.1
5.4
4.1
6.7
4.3
2.9
11.0
5.4
8.1
10.6
5.3
4.8
5.9
3.8
5.9
4.3
3.0
11.0
5.6
9.4
10.5
5.3
4.9
5.9
4.2
6.3
4.6
2.9
12.4
5.4
6.8
10.3
4.9
4.5
5.5
4.1
6.0
4.6
2.9
10.0
5.4
5.4
10.4
5.2
4.9
5.6
3.6
6.2
4.5
3.0
11.0
5.6
7.0
10.7
5.5
5.0
6.3
3.8
6.4
4.4
2.9
11.0
5.4
8.6
9.6
5.4
5.2
5.8
3.8
6.2
4.4
2.7
10.8
5.4
8.8
10.0
5.3
5.0
5.7
3.5
6.0
4.5
2.6
10.2
5.5
8.9
10.6
5.1
4.9
5.3
4.0
6.2
4.6
2.5
9.3
5.4
7.7
10.4
5.2
5.0
5.5
3.8
6.3
4.1
2.7
8.8
CHARACTERISTIC
INDUSTRY
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 reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8.
Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Civilian workers)
Annual
average
Sex and age
1987
1988
1987
1988
Jan.
Dec.
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
June
May
Aug.
July
Oct.
Sept.
Nov.
Dec.
5.4
10.9
15.1
17.5
13.1
8.5
4.2
4.4
3.1
5.6
11.0
15.4
18.5
13.7
8.4
4.4
4.5
3.2
5.4
10.9
15.5
19.6
12.8
8.4
4.2
4.4
2.9
5.3
10.9
15.0
17.2
13.3
8.6
4.1
4.3
2.8
5.4
10.6
14.1
15.8
12.9
8.7
4.2
4.4
2.8
5.3
10.9
14.8
16.6
13.3
8.7
4.1
4.3
3.0
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...............................................................
6.2
12.2
16.9
19.1
15.2
9.7
4.8
5.0
3.3
5.5
11.0
15.3
17.4
13.8
8.7
4.3
4.5
3.1
5.8
11.2
16.0
17.6
14.6
8.6
4.5
4.8
3.1
5.8
11.6
16.0
18.5
14.5
9.1
4.5
4.6
3.4
5.7
11.1
15.5
17.7
14.1
8.7
4.4
4.7
3.2
5.6
11.6
16.4
17.7
15.3
9.0
4.2
4.5
2.9
5.5
11.2
15.8
17.7
14.1
8.7
4.2
4.4
3.0
5.6
11.2
15.6
16.7
14.8
8.8
4.3
4.5
3.3
5.4
10.5
14.1
15.9
13.3
8.5
4.2
4.4
3.0
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..........................................................
6.2
12.6
17.8
20.2
16.0
9.9
4.8
5.0
3.5
5.5
11.4
16.0
18.2
14.6
8.9
4.2
4.4
3.3
5.7
11.7
17.1
18.7
15.4
8.8
4.4
4.6
3.1
5.7
12.2
16.5
19.2
15.1
9.8
4.3
4.5
3.8
5.5
11.4
15.8
17.6
14.9
9.0
4.3
4.5
3.4
5.7
11.9
17.4
18.6
16.6
9.0
4.3
4.5
3.4
5.4
11.2
15.9
17.6
14.7
8.7
4.1
4.3
3.2
5.6
11.5
16.3
17.4
15.3
8.9
4.3
4.4
3.5
5.3
11.0
15.4
17.5
14.3
8.5
4.1
4.2
3.2
5.3
11.3
16.3
18.1
14.4
8.5
4.0
4.2
3.2
5.6
11.4
16.0
17.7
14.5
8.9
4.4
4.5
3.4
5.4
11.3
16.4
20.8
13.5
8.5
4.1
4.3
2.9
5.4
11.8
16.5
18.5
15.0
9.2
4.0
4.2
3.0
5.4
10.9
14.8
17.3
13.0
8.8
4.2
4.4
3.2
5.3
11.1
15.4
17.3
13.5
8.7
4.1
4.3
3.3
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.........................................................
6.2
11.7
15.9
18.0
14.3
9.4
4.8
5.1
3.0
5.6
10.6
14.4
16.6
12.9
8.5
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.9
10.7
14.8
16.3
13.8
8.4
4.6
5.0
3.1
5.8
11.0
15.6
17.7
13.9
8.4
4.6
4.9
2.9
5.9
10.9
15.1
17.7
13.3
8.5
4.6
4.9
3.0
5.6
11.2
15.2
16.7
14.0
9.0
4.1
4.5
2.4
5.6
11.1
15.6
17.7
13.5
8.6
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.6
10.9
15.0
16.0
14.2
8.6
4.4
4.6
3.1
5.5
10.0
12.6
14.1
12.1
8.6
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.7
10.5
13.8
16.8
11.6
8.6
4.4
4.7
2.9
5.5
10.4
14.8
19.2
12.8
8.0
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.5
10.5
14.5
18.2
12.0
8.2
4.3
4.5
2.9
5.3
9.9
13.3
15.8
11.6
,7.9
4.2
4.5
2.4
5.3
10.3
13.3
14.1
12.8
8.6
4.2
4.4
2.4
5.4
10.7
14.2
15.8
13.1
8.7
4.1
4.4
2.6
9.
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1988
1987
Annual average
Reason for unemployment
1987
Job losers ..........................................................
On layoff..........................................................
Other job losers................................................
Job leavers .........................................................
Reentrants .........................................................
New entrants ......................................................
1988
Jan.
Dec.
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
June
May
July
Sept.
Aug.
Nov.
Oct.
Dec.
3,085
853
2,232
923
1,883
799
3,112
880
2,232
986
1,843
800
3,079
833
2,246
985
1,767
761
2,951
844
2,107
984
1,747
747
3,031
814
2,217
963
1,766
799
3,066
819
2,247
998
1,725
799
3,566
943
2,623
965
1,974
920
3,092
851
2,241
983
1,809
816
3,192
863
2,329
946
1,963
900
3,181
872
2,309
1,046
1,907
870
3,182
877
2,305
969
1,916
855
3,131
882
2,249
1,059
1,792
871
2,968
844
2,124
985
1,804
886
3,201
806
2,395
942
1,804
811
3,070
861
2,209
953
1,747
800
48.0
12.7
35.3
13.0
26.6
12.4
46.1
12.7
33.4
14.7
27.0
12.2
45.6
12.3
33.3
13.5
28.0
12.9
45.4
12.5
33.0
14.9
27.2
12.4
46.0
12.7
33.3
14.0
27.7
12.4
45.7
12.9
32.8
15.5
26.1
12.7
44.7
12.7
32.0
14.8
27.2
13.3
47.4
11.9
35.4
13.9
26.7
12.0
46.7
13.1
33.6
14.5
26.6
12.2
46.1
12.8
33.4
13.8
28.1
11.9
46.2
13.1
33.1
14.6
27.3
11.9
46.7
12.6
34.1
14.9
26.8
11.5
45.9
13.1
32.8
15.3
27.2
11.6
46.2
12.4
33.8
14.7
26.9
12.2
46.5
12.4
34.1
15.1
26.2
12.1
3.0
.8
1.6
.8
2.5
.8
1.5
.7
2.6
.8
1.6
.7
2.6
.9
1.6
.7
2.6
.8
1.6
.7
2.6
.9
1.5
.7
2.4
.8
1.5
.7
2.6
.8
1.5
.7
2.5
.8
1.4
.7
2.5
.8
1.5
.7
2.6
.8
1.5
.7
2.5
.8
1.4
.6
2.4
.8
1.4
.6
2.5
.8
1.4
.7
2.5
.8
1.4
.7
PERCENT OF UNEMPLOYED
Job losers.........................................................
On layoff........................................................
Other job losers.............................................
Job leavers.......................................................
Reentrants........................................................
New entrants ...................................................
PERCENT OF
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
Job losers ..........................................................
Job leavers .........................................................
Reentrants .........................................................
New entrants ......................................................
10.
Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1988
1987
Weeks of unemployment
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1987
1988
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
3,246
2,196
1,983
943
27 weeks and over ..................................... 1,040
3,084
2,007
1,610
801
809
3,225
1,981
1,781
881
900
3,118
2,214
1,728
838
890
3,097
2,093
1,732
842
890
3,057
2,060
1,693
851
842
3,093
1,969
1,582
756
826
3,072
2,068
1,614
789
825
3,093
1,910
1,543
749
794
2,985
2,041
1,619
826
793
3,158
1,956
1,636
831
805
3,116
1,896
1,568
775
793
3,059
1,835
1,554
788
766
3,117
1,935
1,502
787
715
3,029
2,039
1,495
758
737
14.5
6.5
13.5
5.9
14.2
5.9
14.2
6.3
14.1
6.3
13.8
6.4
13.5
5.8
13.8
5.9
13.2
5.9
13.5
6.2
13.5
5.9
13.5
5.7
13.4
5.7
12.6
5.6
12.8
5.8
Less than 5 weeks .......................................
Mean duration in weeks................................
Median duration in weeks..............................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
73
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
11.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
Nov.
1987
Nov.
1988
California..................................................
7.0
9.8
5.7
7.5
5.1
7.0
9.0
6.5
6.8
5.1
Florida .....................................................
73
2.9
2.8
5.8
5.1
6.3
3.0
3.4
4.5
5.2
Indiana ....................................................
50
3.6
6.8
6.3
5.7
5.0
3.0
5.1
6.5
5.4
4.4
4.3
7.7
9.7
3.4
3.8
4.6
6.8
9.6
2.9
4.0
2.3
7.4
5.2
8.4
5.9
4.4
3.5
6.8
4.5
8.6
5.7
State
Iowa........................................................
Kansas ....................................................
Maine.......................................................
Massachusetts .........................................
Michigan...................................................
Minnesota ................................................
Mississippi................................................
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data
published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the
12.
Employment Data
Nov.
1987
Nov.
1988
6.7
4.5
5.7
2.2
6.0
3.6
4.3
2.5
New Jersey .............................................
3.2
8.2
4.9
4.0
4.5
3.5
6.4
4.3
3.6
5.2
Ohio .......................................................
5.8
6.3
5.4
5.2
3.1
5.3
6.1
5.5
4.3
2.7
South Carolina........................................
South Dakota..........................................
Tennessee .............................................
5.1
5.1
5.9
7.9
5.6
4.4
4.3
5.8
6.6
4.9
Vermont..................................................
3.3
4.0
7.4
9.2
5.5
2.9
4.1
6.0
9.0
3.8
7.2
7.1
State
Washington .............................................
West Virginia...........................................
Wisconsin ...............................................
database,
Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
State
Arkansas ..................................................
Delaware..................................................
District of Columbia..................................
Georgia ...................................................
Illinois ......................................................
j.
Louisiana..................................................
Minnesota................................................
Nov. 1987
Oct. 1988
1,524.0
206.5
1,417.2
851.4
11,906.4
1,538.6
212.3
1,421.7
872.0
12,264.1
1,407.4
1,665.3
327.9
659.4
4,980.7
1,404.3
1,681.8
336.0
676.4
5,113.8
2,803.0
468.1
341.9
4,965.1
2,361.3
2,813.8
469.8
357.0
5,077.1
2,445.6
1 137 5
1 020 4
1 341 6
1,503.6
515 1
1,163.6
1.031.4
1.372.4
1'513.3
533.1
2,045.9
3,092.2
3 777 5
2|004.6
883.9
2 219 3
277.1
2,072.4
3,152.0
3,809.0
2|067.6
895.7
2,242.6
280.3
Nov. 1988p
Digitized for 74
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nov. 1987
Oct. 1988
Nov. 1988p
Nebraska ................................................
Nevada ...................................................
New Hampshire.......................................
670.3
512.1
522.6
675.9
544.0
547.6
681.2
546.5
547.3
New Jersey .............................................
New Mexico ............................................
1,410.8 New York................................................
1,696.0 North Carolina ........................................
336.8 North Dakota ..........................................
679.3
5,174.4 Ohio .......................................................
Oklahoma...............................................
2,822.0 Oregon...................................................
474.0 Pennsylvania...........................................
355.3 Rhode Island...........................................
5,117.0
2,449.8] South Carolina........................................
South Dakota..........................................
1,166.7 Tennessee .............................................
1,040.1 Texas .....................................................
1,373.0 Utah .......................................................
1,514.8
533.8 Vermont..................................................
Virginia....................................................
2,079.9 Washington .............................................
3,165.8 West Virginia...........................................
3,848.3 Wisconsin...............................................
2,066.8
897.3 Wyoming.................................................
2,246.d Puerto Rico .............................................
277.9 Virgin Islands ..........................................
3,649.6
537.0
8,200.3
2,924.7
255.6
3,718.0
550.4
8,306.6
2,996.3
262.0
3,726.8
554.1
8,351.3
3,010.2
259.7
4,674.2
1,108.7
1,121.4
5,016.3
460.0
4,770.6
1,110.8
1,175.2
5,115.1
463.2
4,845.1
1,107.1
1,176.8
5,123.1
463.5
1,418.0
257.3
2,058.7
6,575.2
650.7
1,458.3
263.2
2,078.5
6,658.6
670.6
1,460.0
261.1
2,076.8
6,676.7
675.6
249.5
2,733.7
1,883.0
608.4
2,126.2
257.9
2,841.2
1,974.6
612.3
2,192.1
258.0
2,857.1
1,973.0
622.9
2,192.7
178.4
777.5
39.8
179.7
805.9
39.2
178.5
809.3
39.9
1,545.7
207.4
1,429.0
872.1
12,327.2
= preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere
p
State
because of the continual updating of the database.
13.
Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
Annual average
1988
1987
Industry
1987
TOTAL ...................................... 102,310
PRIVATE SECTOR ..................... 85,295
GOODS-PRODUCING ...................
Mining ...........................................
Oil and gas extraction ...............
Construction ................................
General building contractors......
Manufacturing..............................
Production workers ...................
Durable goods............................
Production workers ...................
Lumber and wood products ........
Furniture and fixtures.................
Stone, clay, and glass products ...
Primary metal industries .............
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products...................................
Fabricated metal products..........
1988P
Dec.
Jan.
106,037 104,001 104,262
88,648 86,794 87,044
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
104,729 105,020 105,281 105,489 106,057 106,271
87,475 87,700 87,973 88,139 88,678 88,941
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.p
Dec.p
106,425 106,737 106,973 107,377 107,656
89,817 90,082
89,066 89,205 89,481
24,784
721
405
25,564
733
417
25,201
735
417
25,180
728
414
25,271
731
415
25,330
733
419
25,435
737
421
25,466
739
425
25,592
740
425
25,663
740
424
25,639
739
423
25,648
734
419
25,743
729
413
25,844
721
405
25,893
723
402
4,998
1,326
5,292
1,396
5,118
1,352
5,083
1,365
5,150
1,377
5,192
1,383
5,238
1,400
5,237
1,394
5,308
1,412
5,330
1,400
5,340
1,401
5,365
1,404
5,366
1,393
5,405
1,404
5,418
1,414
19,065
12,995
19,540
13,339
19,348
13,215
19,369
13,225
19,390
13,249
19,405
13,251
19,460
13,280
19,490
13,302
19,544
13,341
19,593
13,382
19,560
13,352
19,549
13,332
19,648
13,412
19,718
13,467
19,752
13,489
11,218
7,453
11,518
7,678
11,390
7,590
11,393
7,582
11,404
7,599
11,411
7,598
11,459
7,632
11,477
7,649
11,515
7,676
11,566
7,720
11,547
7,705
11,537
7,689
11,595
7,733
11,638
7,768
11,668
7,792
740
518
582
749
758
538
587
782
754
533
588
769
754
536
583
768
756
535
584
770
755
534
585
772
758
535
587
773
757
537
585
776
757
537
587
781
756
541
589
789
753
537
586
785
753
538
585
787
760
540
588
794
768
540
591
796
772
542
594
796
269
1,407
281
1,455
279
1,433
279
1,435
280
1,438
281
1,439
281
1,444
281
1,448
281
1,457
282
1,464
281
1,458
280
1,460
282
1,469
283
1,473
281
1,479
Machinery, except electrical........
Electrical and electronic
equipment.................................
Transportation equipment...........
Motor vehicles and equipment ....
Instruments and related products
Miscellaneous manufacturing
industries.................................
2,023
2,138
2,074
2,085
2,091
2,099
2,111
2,121
2,134
2,151
2,156
2,159
2,173
2,186
2,193
2,084
2,048
865
696
2,121
2,042
850
713
2,110
2,046
851
704
2,112
2,036
839
704
2,112
2,031
837
705
2,115
2,025
835
705
2,117
2,045
848
706
2,115
2,048
851
709
2,120
2,047
850
713
2,122
2,052
857
715
2,126
2,044
855
718
2,124
2,032
849
716
2,126
2,045
859
719
2,131
2,050
860
720
2,130
2,053
861
723
370
383
379
380
382
382
383
381
382
387
384
383
381
383
386
Nondurable goods......................
7,847
5,543
8,022
5,661
7,958
5,625
7,976
5,643
7,986
5,650
7,994
5,653
8,001
5,648
8,013
5,653
8,029
5,665
8,027
5,662
8,013
5,647
8,012
5,643
8,053
5,679
8,080
5,699
8,084
5,697
Food and kindred products.........
Tobacco manufactures...............
Textile mill products...................
Apparel and other textile
products...................................
Paper and allied products ..........
1,624
54
725
1,646
53
726
1,638
54
733
1,647
55
732
1,649
54
732
1,647
54
729
1,648
54
727
1,643
52
728
1,645
53
727
1,631
52
726
1,630
52
719
1,632
51
722
1,654
52
722
1,662
53
723
1,659
52
723
1,100
679
1,097
689
1,106
684
1,105
685
1,104
686
1,106
687
1,100
687
1,100
689
1,097
691
1,096
692
1,089
691
1,087
688
1,086
691
1,093
692
1,094
689
Printing and publishing...............
Chemicals and allied products....
Petroleum and coal products......
Rubber and misc. plastics
products...................................
Leather and leather products .....
1,507
1,026
165
1,565
1,063
167
1,532
1,047
167
1,538
1,047
166
1,544
1,049
165
1,548
1,052
164
1,554
1,056
165
1,559
1,060
166
1,565
1,065
167
1,567
1,067
167
1,572
1,070
167
1,575
1,069
168
1,581
1,071
169
1,583
1,073
169
1,590
1,075
167
823
144
872
146
851
146
854
147
856
147
860
147
864
146
870
146
873
146
882
147
878
145
874
146
882
145
887
145
889
146
SERVICE-PRODUCING .................
Transportation and public
utilities.........................................
77,525
80,473
78,800
79,082
79,458
79,690
79,846
80,023
80,465
80,608
80,786
81,089
81,230
81,533
81,763
5,385
3,166
5,581
3,334
5,481
3,244
5,499
3,261
5,513
3,272
5,530
3,285
5,543
3,298
5,556
3,308
5,582
3,332
5,598
3,345
5,605
3,351
5,618
3,366
5,631
3,380
5,648
3,397
5,650
3,403
2,218
2,248
2,237
2,238
2,241
2,245
2,245
2,248
2,250
2,253
2,254
2,252
2,251
2,251
2,247
5,872
3,449
2,423
6,156
3,667
2,489
5,984
3,536
2,448
6,010
3,555
2,455
6,035
3,573
2,462
6,061
3,591
2,470
6,089
3,610
2,479
6,115
3,635
2,480
6,148
3,660
2,488
6,174
3,681
2,493
6,192
3,696
2,496
6,219
3,714
2,505
6,246
3,736
2,510
6,276
3,761
2,515
6,303
3,785
2,518
18,509
2,432
2,957
19,205
2,540
3,088
18,784
2,494
2,988
18,927
2,526
3,014
19,045
2,561
3,029
19,050
2,543
3,044
19,093
2,546
3,049
19,130
2,541
3,053
19,205
2,549
3,080
19,261
2,545
3,097
19,279
2,539
3,106
19,291
2,533
3,110
19,327
2,520
3,143
19,387
2,518
3,157
19,439
2,565
3,173
2,004
6,127
2,079
6,360
2,033
6,232
2,038
6,260
2,047
6,291
2,055
6,319
2,064
6,326
2,070
6,336
2,076
6,352
2,088
6,369
2,095
6,377
2,095
6,384
2,103
6,415
2,106
6,440
2,108
6,449
6,549
3,275
2,022
1,252
6,678
3,305
2,074
1,299
6,619
3,301
2,049
1,269
6,633
3,308
2,052
1,273
6,636
3,305
2,053
1,278
6,651
3,306
2,060
1,285
6,650
3,302
2,065
1,283
6,656
3,299
2,067
1,290
6,679
3,304
2,074
1,301
6,684
3,300
2,077
1,307
6,689
3,298
2,081
1,310
6,692
3,300
2,083
1,309
6,708
3,308
2,089
1,311
6,724
3,314
2,092
1,318
6,733
3,324
2,096
1,313
24,196
5,172
6,828
25,463
5,477
7,228
24,725
5,306
6,995
24,795
5,321
7,019
24,975
5,385
7,056
25,078
5,405
7,088
25,163
5,420
7,126
25,216
5,443
7,153
25,472
5,480
7,203
25,561
5,500
7,238
25,662
5,512
7,271
25,737
5,538
7,323
25,826
5,553
7,365
25,938
5,560
7,413
26,064
5,606
7,474
17,015
2,943
3,963
10,109
17,389
2,971
4,052
10,366
17,207
2,980
4,001
10,226
17,218
2,973
4,006
10,239
17,254
2,972
4,014
10,268
17,320
2,970
4,031
10,319
17,308
2,963
4,041
10,304
17,350
2,957
4,050
10,343
17,379
2,951
4,049
10,379
17,330
2,951
4,059
10,320
17,359
2,956
4,070
10,333
17,532
2,989
4,086
10,457
17,492
2,989
4,070
10,433
17,560
2,988
4,071
10,501
17,574
2,993
4,084
10,497
Production workers....................
Transportation...........................
Communication and public
utilities......................................
Wholesale trade ..........................
Durable goods...........................
Nondurable goods.....................
Retail trad e...................................
General merchandise stores.......
Food stores ...............................
Automotive dealers and service
stations ....................................
Eating and drinking places.........
Finance, insurance, and real
estate ...........................................
Finance .....................................
Insurance ..................................
Real estate................................
Services........................................
Business services......................
Health services ..........................
Government .................................
Federal......................................
State.........................................
Local.........................................
= preliminary
NOTE: See notes on the data for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
p
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
75
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted
Industry
Annual
average
1987
1988
1987
1988p Dec.
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.e Dec.p
34.8
34.6
34.9
34.7
34.7
34.9
34.6
34.7
34.9
34.8
34.7
PRIVATE SECTOR ..........................................
34.8
34.8
34.6
34.7
MANUFACTURING................................................
41.0
3.7
41.1
3.9
41.0
3.8
41.1
3.9
41.0
3.7
40.9
3.7
41.2
3.9
41.0
3.9
41.1
3.9
41.1
3.9
41.0
3.9
41.2
3.9
41.2
4.0
41.2
3.9
41.0
3.9
Overtime hours...........................................
Lumber and wood products.............................
Furniture and fixtures......................................
Stone, clay, and glass products.......................
Primary metal industries ..................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products.........
Fabricated metal products ...............................
41.5
3.8
40.6
40.0
42.3
43.1
43.4
41.5
41.8
4.1
40.3
39.4
42.3
43.6
44.0
41.8
41.5
3.9
40.4
39.8
42.5
43.4
44.0
41.7
41.6
4.0
40.2
39.6
42.0
43.4
44.0
41.8
41.5
3.8
40.3
39.5
42.3
43.1
43.8
41.6
41.5
3.8
40.1
39.3
42.3
43.3
43.7
41.6
42.0
4.2
40.6
39.5
42.5
43.5
43.8
42.0
41.8
4.2
40.1
39.5
42.3
43.6
43.9
41.9
41.8
4.1
40.2
39.4
42.4
43.6
44.3
42.0
41.8
4.0
40.5
39.7
42.1
43.4
44.0
41.7
41.6
4.1
40.0
39.0
42.1
43.5
44.0
41.8
41.9
4.0
39.9
39.6
42.3
44.0
44.6
42.0
41.9
4.2
40.7
39.4
42.5
43.8
44.3
41.9
41.9
4.1
40.3
39.5
42.6
43.7
44.0
42.1
41.7
4.1
40.6
39.3
42.1
43.4
43.8
41.9
Machinery except electrical .............................
Electrical and electronic equipment..................
Transportation equipment.................................
Motor vehicles and equipment.......................
Instruments and related products ....................
Miscellaneous manufacturing...........................
42.2
40.9
42.0
42.2
41.4
39.4
42.6
41.0
42.8
43.6
41.6
39.2
42.6
40.9
41.5
41.4
41.2
39.2
42.7
41.1
42.0
42.1
41.8
39.1
42.6
40.9
42.0
42.3
41.3
39.3
42.5
40.9
42.1
42.3
41.4
39.2
42.8
41.2
43.0
44.1
41.8
39.4
42.6
41.0
43.0
44.0
41.4
39.2
42.5
41.1
43.0
44.2
41.3
39.3
43.0
41.0
42.6
42.5
41.8
39.2
42.4
40.8
42.7
43.6
41.5
39.2
42.7
41.0
43.3
44.5
41.6
39.2
42.6
41.0
43.3
44.2
41.9
39.1
42.4
41.0
43.4
44.8
41.5
39.3
42.4
40.7
43.0
43.9
41.4
39.0
Nondurable goods..............................................
Overtime hours...........................................
Food and kindred products..............................
Textile mill products........................................
Apparel and other textile products....................
Paper and allied products ................................
40.2
3.6
40.2
41.8
37.0
43.4
40.2
3.7
40.4
41.1
36.9
43.2
40.3
3.7
40.5
41.5
37.1
43.3
40.3
3.8
40.6
41.5
36.8
43.4
40.2
3.6
40.3
41.6
37.0
43.3
40.1
3.6
40.1
41.2
37.0
43.2
40.3
3.6
40.1
41.6
37.4
43.3
40.0
3.6
40.1
40.8
36.8
43.3
40.1
3.6
40.3
40.7
36.9
43.2
40.2
3.7
40.5
41.1
36.9
43.2
40.1
3.6
40.4
41.1
36.8
43.2
40.2
3.7
40.3
41.1
37.1
43.3
40.2
3.8
40.6
41.0
36.8
43.2
40.2
3.7
40.6
41.0
37.0
43.0
40.0
3.7
40.5
41.0
36.8
42.9
Printing and publishing.....................................
Chemicals and allied products..........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products....
Leather and leather products ...........................
38.0
42.3
41.6
38.2
38.0
42.3
41.6
37.5
38.0
42.5
41.6
38.0
38.1
42.5
41.7
38.0
38.1
42.4
41.6
37.8
38.1
42.5
41.7
37.9
38.2
42.1
42.0
37.3
37.7
42.0
41.7
37.3
38.0
42.4
41.6
36.9
38.0
42.3
41.6
37.0
38.0
42.1
41.5
37.6
38.1
42.1
41.6
37.5
38.0
42.5
41.5
37.9
37.8
42.4
41.7
37.5
37.7
42.3
41.4
37.1
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES....
39.2
39.3
39.1
39.5
39.1
38.8
39.5
39.4
39.3
39.5
39.3
39.4
39.4
39.3
39.5
37.8
38.1
38.1
38.0
38.0
Overtime hours...........................................
Durable goods ...................................................
WHOLESALE TRADE...........................................
37.5
-
38.0
38.1
38.2
38.1
38.3
38.0
37.9
38.2
RETAIL TRADE ....................................................
29.2
29.1
28.8
29.0
29.1
29.0
29.2
29.0
29.1
29.3
29.0
28.9
29.2
29.0
28.9
32.7
32.4
32.6
32.8
32.6
32.7
SERVICES .............................................................
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
Digitized for 76
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32.5
32.6
32.5
32.6
32.7
32.4
32.7
32.5
32.5
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark adjustment.
15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry
________________________________ _
Industry
Annual
average
1987
PRIVATE SECTOR................................................ $8.98
Seasonally adjusted ......................................
MINING..................................................................
12.52
1988
1987
1988P Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
$9.24
9.32
Nov,p Dec.p
Sept.
Oct.
$9.40
9.37
$9.45
9.43
$9.45
9.42
$9.45
9.44
$9.29
-
$9.13
9.11
$9.18
9.14
$9.17
9.13
$9.18
9.16
$9.23
9.23
$9.26
9.27
$9.23
9.27
$9.25
9.32
12.68
12.60
12.77
12.71
12.59
12.60
12.54
12.55
12.66
12.62
12.75
12.72
12.80
12.84
12.95
13.13
13.13
13.04
13.15
CONSTRUCTION..................................................
12.69
12.97
12.81
12.99
12.82
12.87
12.88
12.87
12.85
12.91
MANUFACTURING................................................
9.91
10.17
10.07
10.07
10.05
10.07
10.12
10.14
10.16
10.16
10.12
10.25
10.24
10.30
10.37
10.78
8.67
8.07
10.55
12.25
14.08
10.32
10.78
8.76
8.04
10.58
12.20
14.04
10.32
10.85
8.68
8.00
10.60
12.23
13.99
10.35
10.92
8.74
8.04
10.50
12.26
13.96
10.39
10.43
8.40
7.67
Stone, clay, and glass products....................... 10.25
11.94
Blast furnaces and basic steel products........ 13.78
Fabricated metal products ............................... 10.00
10.70
8.60
7.92
10.47
12.15
13.97
10.24
10.60
8.43
7.78
10.29
12.11
13.93
10.19
10.60
8.51
7.80
10.35
12.06
13.82
10.12
10.58
8.53
7.74
10.33
12.03
13.89
10.13
10.59
8.45
7.76
10.36
12.07
13.89
10.14
10.65
8.50
7.81
10.41
12.11
13.94
10.22
10.67
8.54
7.87
10.45
12.13
13.96
10.23
10.69
8.60
7.91
10.48
12.15
13.96
10.26
10.67
8.65
7.97
10.54
12.22
14.09
10.18
10.64
8.58
8.00
10.46
12.11
13.96
10.20
Machinery, except electrical ............................ 10.70
Electrical and electronic equipment.................. 9.88
Transportation equipment................................. 12.95
Motor vehicles and equipment....................... 13.55
Instruments and related products ..................... 9.71
7.75
Miscellaneous manufacturing...........................
10.97
10.13
13.37
14.08
9.94
7.98
10.89
10.03
13.25
13.87
9.84
7.91
10.85
10.02
13.22
13.94
9.93
7.97
10.82
10.02
13.17
13.85
9.92
7.90
10.84
10.04
13.20
13.93
9.88
7.91
10.88
10.09
13.28
14.09
9.89
7.92
10.90
10.12
13.31
14.10
9.87
7.94
10.93
10.15
13.35
14.16
9.88
7.93
10.94
10.13
13.23
13.86
9.93
7.94
10.93
10.15
13.26
13.90
9.91
7.93
11.05
10.19
13.49
14.17
9.97
7.99
11.07
10.16
13.49
14.16
10.05
8.07
11.17
10.23
13.61
14.26
10.02
8.09
11.20
10.30
13.78
14.48
10.06
8.17
9.18
8.94
14.03
Textile mill products........................................ 7.17
Apparel and other textile products.................... 5.93
Paper and allied products ................................ 11.43
9.42
9.11
14.58
7.37
6.10
11.64
9.32
9.07
13.69
7.31
6.00
11.53
9.32
9.06
13.79
7.34
6.02
11.54
9.31
9.06
14.01
7.30
6.02
11.50
9.33
9.07
14.42
7.31
6.03
11.52
9.37
9.14
14.98
7.35
6.04
11.60
9.38
9.15
15.24
7.31
6.05
11.64
9.39
9.12
15.78
7.33
6.08
11.65
9.45
9.13
15.66
7.31
6.02
11.71
9.40
9.04
14.84
7.37
6.07
11.63
9.50
9.12
13.98
7.43
6.19
11.70
9.48
9.04
13.92
7.45
6.20
11.67
9.52
9.15
14.45
7.47
6.23
11.70
9.60
9.21
14.40
7.51
6.27
11.78
10.28
Chemicals and allied products.......................... 12.37
Petroleum and coal products........................... 14.59
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products.... 8.91
Leather and leather products ........................... 6.08
10.53
12.68
15.04
9.11
6.27
10.43
12.61
14.73
9.04
6.16
10.38
12.55
14.89
9.00
6.16
10.40
12.55
14.96
9.00
6.19
10.45
12.53
14.98
9.00
6.23
10.40
12.57
15.00
9.04
6.29
10.43
12.59
14.93
9.04
6.27
10.43
12.60
15.04
9.07
6.27
10.49
12.70
14.99
9.11
6.20
10.55
12.63
14.91
9.14
6.23
10.70
12.76
15.08
9.18
6.31
10.68
12.79
15.22
9.20
6.34
10.66
12.87
15.26
9.22
6.39
10.72
13.02
15.25
9.29
6.33
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES.... 12.03
12.33
12.24
12.16
12.23
12.19
12.27
12.28
12.27
12.33
12.35
12.41
12.43
12.50
12.48
9.59
9.92
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.88
9.87
9.85
9.93
9.88
10.01
10.08
10.05
10.13
6.26
6.37
6.38
6.43
6.40
Lumber and wood products .............................
Nondurable goods ...............................................
Food and kindred products..............................
WHOLESALE TRADE...........................................
9.73.
RETAIL TRADE ....................................................
6.11
6.30
6.19
6.24
6.23
6.24
6.26
6.28
6.26
6.28
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE
8.73
9.09
8.81
8.96
9.02
8.97
9.03
9.09
8.98
9.03
9.04
9.14
9.29
9.27
9.28
8.79
8.79
8.98
9.07
9.09
9.13
SERVICES .............................................................
p
Data not available.
_ preliminary
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8.48
8.90
8.73
8.81
8.81
8.80
8.82
8.84
8.78
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark revision.
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
16.
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics:
•
Employment Data
Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
Annual average
1987
1988
Industry
1987
1988P
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.p
Dec.p
PRIVATE SECTOR
Current dollars.............................................. $312.50 $323.29 $317.72 $315.79 $316.37 $315.79 $320.28 $320.40 $322.13 $324.68 $323.40 $327.12 $329.81 $327.92 $329.81
Seasonally adjusted....................................
315.21 317.16 317.72 316.94 322.13 321.67 321.67 325.27 322.47 325.14 329.11 327.82 327.57
Constant (1977) dollars ................................. 169.28
169.54 167.97 168.01 167.08 168.57 167.92 168.13 168.75 167.30 168.10 168.96 167.82
MINING..................................................................
530.85
535.10
543.06
537.62
531.28
527.52
539.28
529.19
533.38
535.52
530.04
538.05
543.14
536.32
540.56
CONSTRUCTION..................................................
479.68
491.56
481.66
466.34
462.80
481.34
488.15
491.63
497.30
497.04
499.87
504.19
512.07
491.61
489.18
Current dollars...............................................
Constant (1977) dollars..................................
406.31
220.10
417.99
-
420.93
224.62
412.87
219.61
409.04
217.23
411.86
217.92
414.92
218.38
414.73
217.36
418.59
218.47
413.51
214.92
412.90
213.61
423.33
217.54
422.91
216.66
427.45
218.76
433.47
-
Durable goods .....................................................
Lumber and wood products.............................
Furniture and fixtures.......................................
Stone, clay, and glass products.......................
Primary metal industries ..................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products.........
Fabricated metal products ...............................
432.85
341.04
306.80
433.58
514.61
598.05
415.00
447.26 449.44
346.58 341.42
312.05 319.76
442.88 435.27
529.74 534.05
614.68 618.49
428.03 435.11
440.96
336.15
303.42
423.32
524.61
606.70
423.02
436.95
339.49
301.09
426.63
519.70
609.77
418.37
440.54 444.11 444.94
337.16 345.10 345.87
302.64 305.37 307.72
435.12 442.43 447.26
523.84 526.79 527.66
606.99 613.36 612.84
421.82 426.17 426.59
448.98
351.74
311.65
448.54
530.96
621.22
431.95
439.60 439.43
348.60 345.77
310.03 314.40
446.90 444.55
525.46 521.94
619.96 608.66
417.38 423.30
452.76
348.53
323.61
451.54
539.00
629.38
433.44
452.76 457.87
358.28 347.20
322.40 319.20
454.94 451.56
531.92 536.90
616.36 615.56
433.44 438.84
465.19
355.72
326.42
439.95
540.67
618.43
445.73
Machinery, except electrical ............................
Electrical and electronic equipment..................
Transportation equipment................................
Motor vehicles and equipment.......................
Instruments and related products ....................
Miscellaneous manufacturing...........................
451.54
404.09
543.90
571.81
401.99
305.35
467.32
415.33
572.24
613.89
413.50
312.82
475.89 464.38
421.26 413.83
565.78 560.53
593.64 592.45
415.25 415.07
316.40 310.03
459.85
406.81
553.14
587.24
408.70
307.31
462.87
410.64
561.00
598.99
411.01
310.07
Nondurable goods ...............................................
369.04
359.39
547.17
299.71
219.41
496.06
378.68
368.04
578.83
302.91
225.09
502.85
381.19
372.78
554.45
307.75
225.60
509.63
MANUFACTURING
Food and kindred products..............................
Tobacco manufactures ....................................
Textile mill products........................................
Apparel and other textile products....................
Paper and allied products ................................
374.66 370.54
366.93 358.78
540.57 540.79
303.14 301.49
220.33 220.93
501.99 494.50
463.49
411.67
569.71
621.37
410.44
309.67
462.16 465.62
411.88 417.17
572.33 574.05
624.63 625.87
406.64 409.03
309.66 311.65
462.76
409.25
551.69
576.58
408.12
305.69
459.06 471.84
412.09 417.79
554.27 580.07
587.97 624.90
408.29 414.75
309.27 314.01
470.48 476.96 487.20
416.56 423.52 430.54
581.42 594.76 609.08
623.04 638.85 657.39
419.09 419.84 426.54
319.57 321.98 325.17
373.20 373.86
359.17 361.03
566.71 576.73
299.71 301.35
223.11 222.27
494.21 498.80
374.26
366.92
601.98
297.52
222.64
501.68
377.48
367.54
628.04
300.53
226.18
502.12
377.06
368.85
613.87
295.32
220.33
502.36
377.88
368.83
595.08
304.38
223.98
498.93
384.75
373.01
575.98
307.60
229.03
511.29
382.04
368.83
574.90
306.94
229.40
505.31
385.56 389.76
374.24 378.53
582.34 567.36
309.26 312.42
232.38 233.87
506.61 515.96
Printing and publishing.....................................
Chemicals and allied products..........................
Petroleum and coal products...........................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products...........................................
Leather and leather products ..........................
390.64
523.25
641.96
400.14
536.36
666.27
403.64 392.36
542.23 533.38
655.49 658.14
393.12
530.87
647.77
399.19 395.20
532.53 529.20
654.63 666.00
391.13
528.78
658.41
392.17
534.24
678.30
396.52
533.40
679.05
403.01
527.93
664.99
411.95
539.75
674.08
406.91
541.02
680.33
406.15
548.26
672.97
411.65
557.26
667.95
370.66
232.26
378.98
235.13
383.30
237.78
376.20
231.62
372.60
227.79
375.30
233.00
377.87
232.73
376.06
235.75
378.22
237.63
373.51
231.26
377.48
234.87
381.89
236.63
382.72
240.29
386.32
240.26
392.04
238.64
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
UTILITIES.............................................................
471.58
484.57
479.81
474.24
475.75
470.53
480.98
481.38
484.67
490.73
490.30
490.20
490.99
492.50
494.21
WHOLESALE TRADE...........................................
365.38
377.95
371.69
370.66
370.66
370.66
377.42
375.06
375.29
380.32
375.44
381.38
385.06
381.90
386.97
RETAIL TRADE ....................................................
178.41
183.33
181.37
176.59
177.56
178.46
180.91
181.49
184.04
188.40
186.55
184.73
185.66
185.18
187.52
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL
ESTATE ................................................................
316.90
327.24
317.16
324.35
328.33
321.13
326.89
325.42
321.48
326.89
322.73
327.21
334.44
330.94
332.22
SERVICES .............................................................
275.60
290.14
282.85
285.44
287.21
284.24
287.53
286.42
287.11
290.07
288.31
291.85
296.59
295.43
297.64
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
Digitized for78
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.
17. The Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry
__________________________
Seasonally adjusted
Not seasonally adjusted
Industry
Nov.
1988p
Dec.
1988p
Aug.
1988
179.5
180.3
_
159.3
180.0
182.0
Dec.
1987
PRIVATE SECTOR (in current dollars) .......................
176.3
181.4
181.7
182.2
175.7
183.9
155.9
177.0
179.8
179.6
162.7
189.9
186.2
186.5
160.8
179.8
183.1
186.0
168.3
200.2
193.8
187.1
159.5
180.6
184.2
185.1
168.9
199.5
194.0
187.3
160.4
181.3
184.4
186.6
168.2
200.2
194.9
_
_
Construction............................................................
Manufacturing .........................................................
Transportation and public utilities .............................
Wholesale trade1 .....................................................
Retail trade .............................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate’ .........................
Services..................................................................
155.4
176.6
178.2
162.7
185.2
158.6
179.3
181.9
166.7
190.9
PRIVATE SECTOR [in constant (1977) dollars] .........
94.1
92.9
93.0
-
93.7
92.9
181.5
Nov.
1988p
Dec.
1988p
181.7
181.4
-
-
-
191.9
159.2
180.5
183.1
“
168.4
"
194.0
159.3
180.7
182.9
”
168.9
193.3
159.9
180.9
182.8
“
168.2
“
193.9
93.0
93.1
92.9
-
167.1
p = preliminary.
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark re
vision. Publication of the Hourly Earnings Index series will be discontinued with the ini
tial publicatgion of the December 1988 data.
1 This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small
relative to the trend-cycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot
be separated with sufficient precision.
- Data not available.
18.
Oct.
1988
Sept.
1988
Dec.
1987
Oct.
1988
Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, data seasonally adjusted
(In percent)
Time span and year
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
May
Apr.
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Over 1-month span:
1986 .................................................................
1987 .................................................................
1988 .................................................................
57.0
50.8
61.6
47.3
59.2
61.6
49.5
61.1
62.2
50.8
62.4
63.8
51.9
62.4
58.1
46.8
61.6
68.9
51.9
70.8
61.4
54.1
62.2
51.9
51.4
68.1
49.5
53.0
67.3
62.4
58.9
67.8
71.1
58.9
68.4
63.2
Over 3-month span:
1986 .................................................................
1987 .................................................................
1988 .................................................................
50.0
57.6
71.6
47.6
57.0
66.8
45.7
65.1
67.0
46.2
69.2
66.8
46.2
68.1
71.4
46.2
71.9
69.7
48.1
73.8
68.4
51.9
76.8
57.3
50.5
74.1
57.0
55.9
76.5
66.2
59.7
78.1
74.2
59.2
73.0
1987 .................................................................
1988 .................................................................
48.1
64.6
73.5
47.3
64.3
70.3
43.8
63.0
70.3
42.7
70.3
73.8
43.2
72.4
70.5
47.0
77.3
68.4
46.5
78.4
64.9
50.0
79.7
72.4
55.9
82.7
71.1
53.2
77.8
55.9
77.0
58.4
76.5
Over 12-month span:
1986 .................................................................
1987
......................................................
1988 .................................................................
42.2
63.8
77.6
41.6
67.3
77.6
43.8
69.5
74.3
44.9
73.5
76.2
45.7
76.8
73.5
48.6
76.8
46.8
78.9
48.6
78.9
51.6
79.7
53.8
78.4
56.5
77.8
57.8
81.9
Over 6-month span:
Data not available
NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment rising. (Half of
the unchanged components are counted as rising.) Data are centered within the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
spans. Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each span are preliminary.
See the "Definitions” in this section. See “ Notes on the data” for a description of
the most recent benchmark revision.
79
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
19. Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988'=
Noninstitutional population.................................
169,349
171,775
173,939
175,891
' 178,080
179,912
182,293
184,490
186,322
Labor force:
Total (number)..............................
Percent of population....................................
108,544
64.1
110,315
64.2
111,872
64.3
113,226
64.4
115,241
64.7
117,167
65.1
119,540
65.6
121,602
65.9
123,378
66.2
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
111,303
61.1
1,706
114,177
61.9
1,737
116,677
62.6
1,709
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
109,597
3,163
106,434
112,440
3,208
109,232
114,968
3,169
111,800
Unemployed:
Total (number)................................
Percent of labor force.........................
7,637
7.0
8,273
7.5
10,678
9.5
10,717
9.5
8,539
7.4
8,312
7.1
8,237
6.9
7,425
6.1
6,701
5.4
Not in labor force (number) .............................
60,806
61,460
62,067
62,665
62,839
62,744
62,752
62,888
62,944
Employed:
Total (number) .................................
Percent of population ...............................
Resident Armed Forces.......................
Civilian
Total .............................................
Agriculture.....................................
Nonagricultural industries...................
p =
p relim inary
20. Annual data: Employment levels by industry
(Numbers in thousands)
Industry
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
Total employment ................................
Private sector........................
Goods-producing ...........................................................
Mining .................................
Construction .............................................................
Manufacturing...........................................................
90,406
74,166
25,658
1,027
4,346
20,285
91,156
75,126
25,497
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
97,519
81,125
24,859
927
4,673
19,260
99,525
82,832
24,558
777
4,816
18,965
Service-producing.........................
Transportation and public utilities ................................
Wholesale trade ..........................................
Retail trade ......................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate .................
Services.....................................
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
20,797
72,660
5,238
5,717
17,356
5,955
22,000
74,967
5,255
5,753
17,930
6,283
23,053
77,525
5,385
5,872
18,509
6,549
24,196
80,473
5,581
6,156
19,205
6,678
25,463
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
16,394
2,875
3,832
9,687
16,693
2,899
3,893
9,901
17,015
2,943
3,963
10,109
17,389
2,971
4,052
10,366
Government................................
Federal...........................................
State...............................................
Local ..............................................
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data" for a description of the most
recent benchmark revision.
Digitized for80
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p
=
p relim inary
1987
1988°
102,310 106,037
85,295 88,648
24,784 25,564
721
733
4,998
5,292
19,065
19,540
21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural
payrolls, by industry
______________________________________
Industry
Private sector
Average weekly hours......................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)..................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars) .................................
Mining
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Construction
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988p
35.3
6.66
235.10
35.2
7.25
255.20
34.8
7.68
267.26
35.0
8.02
280.70
35.2
8.32
292.86
34.9
8.57
299.09
34.8
8.76
304.85
34.8
8.98
312.50
34.8
9.29
323.29
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
42.2
12.46
625.81
42.4
12.52
530.85
42.2
12.68
535.10
37.0
9.94
367.78
36.9
10.82
399.26
36.7
11.63
426.82
37.1
11.94
442.97
37.8
12.13
458.51
37.7
12.32
464.46
37.4
12.48
466.75
37.8
12.69
479.68
37.9
12.97
491.56
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
9.54
386.37
40.7
9.73
396.01
41.0
9.91
406.31
41.1
10.17
417.99
39.6
8.87
351.25
39.4
9.70
382.18
39.0
10.32
402.48
39.0
10.79
420.81
39.4
11.12
438.13
39.5
11.40
450.30
39.2
11.70
458.64
39.2
12.03
471.58
39.3
12.33
484.57
38.5
6.96
267.96
38.5
7.56
291.06
38.3
8.09
309.85
38.5
8.55
329.18
38.5
8.89
342.27
38.4
9.16
351.74
38.3
9.35
358.11
38.1
9.59
365.38
38.1
9.92
3/7.95
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
29.2
6.03
176.08
29.2
6.11
178.41
29.1
6.30
183.33
36.2
5.79
209.60
36.3
6.31
229.05
36.2
6.78
245.44
36.2
7.29
263.90
36.5
7.63
278.50
36.4
7.94
289.02
36.4
8.36
304.30
36.3
8.73
316.90
36.0
9.09
327.24
32.6
5.85
190.71
32.6
6.41
208.97
32.6
6.92
225.59
32.7
7.31
239.04
32.6
7.59
247.43
32.5
7.90
256.75
32.5
8.18
265.85
32.5
8.48
275.60
32.6
8.90
290.14
Manufacturing
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Transportation and public utilities
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Wholesale trade
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Retail trade
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) .............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
Services
Average weekly hours .................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars).............................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)............................
=
p relim inary
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
22. Employment Cost Index, compensation,' by occupation and industry group
(June 1981 = 100)
1986
1987
1988
Percent change
Series
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
133.0
133.8
135.0
135.9
136.0
127.8
135.4
136.9
128.4
136.6
138.5
129.1
138.0
128.8
129.3
135.6
142.4
129.5
130.1
136.5
143.6
130.2
130.7
138.1
145.2
Sept.
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
Dec.
Mar.
June
137.5
138.6
140.6
142.1
144.0
1.3
4.7
139.3
130.1
138.5
141.2
131.3
139.9
142.2
132.5
140.8
144.2
134.7
142.9
145.7
136.2
144.3
147.9
137.2
147.2
1.5
.7
2.0
4.7
4.5
5.2
131.1
131.5
138.9
145.8
133.5
134.1
141.7
150.6
_
148.1
140.5
135.8
136.8
143.6
152.8
_
150.3
142.3
137.3
138.1
145.1
153.8
_
_
151.2
143.9
138.2
139.0
147.6
157.7
_
154.0
146.1
.7
.7
1.7
2.5
1.7
1.8
1,9
1.5
4.5
4.7
4.8
5.7
5.6
5.8
5.2
4.7
Sept.
Sept. 1988
Civilian workers 2..............................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ......................................................
Blue-collar workers.........................................................
Service occupations.......................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing.............................................................
Manufacturing ...............................................................
Service-producing ...........................................................
Services.......................................................................
Health services..........................................................
Hospitals....................................................................
Public administration 3 ...................................................
Nonmanufacturing...........................................................
Private industry workers................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers....................................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations........
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations
Sales occupations......................................................
Administrative support occupations, Including
clerical .....................................................................
Blue-collar workers......................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair occupation........
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors..........
Transportation and material moving occupations.........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers ....
Service occupations....................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing..........................................................
Construction ...............................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................
Durables ....................................................................
Nondurables..............................................................
Service-producing .........................................................
Transportation and public utilities.................................
Transportation............................................................
Public utilities.............................................................
Wholesale and retail trade...........................................
Wholesale trade ...................................................
Retail trade .................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate........
Service ............................................
Health services.......................................
Hospitals ........................................................
Nonmanufacturing ............................................
State and local government workers .....................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.................................................
Blue-collar workers.....................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Services ...........................................
Hospitals and other services4 ....................................
Health services..................................
Schools ..............................................
Elementary and secondary......................................
Public administration3 ............................................
-
-
-
-
140.6
134.6
141.6
135.4
-
144.1
136.9
144.7
137.8
132.2
132.7
140.8
149.2
146.4
139.6
130.8
131.6
132.9
133.8
135.1
136.0
138.1
139.8
141.2
1.0
4.5
133.5
-
134.3
-
136.1
-
137.0
-
138.5
-
139.3
_
141.2
_
143.0
_
_
144.6
_
_
1.1
1.6
.8
.5
4.4
5.2
3.3
4.0
127.2
128.4
-
129.5
130.6
-
-
131.8
_
_
_
135.6
_
136.7
134.1
_
_
_
138.6
_
136.5
-
127.8
-
1.4
.7
.6
.7
1.0
.8
1.5
5.2
4.5
3.8
5.4
5.0
4.8
4.6
133.2
_
134.1
_
138.4
_
_
135.6
_
136.8
_
_
140.2
_
_
4.5
4.1
4.7
4.8
4.5
4.4
3.2
4.0
2.2
4.6
4.4
4.7
3.0
5.6
5.8
5.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
132.3
133.5
134.7
135.2
135.9
128.6
129.3
132.7
-
129.2
130.1
133.5
-
129.9
130.7
135.3
-
130.8
131.5
136.3
-
131.9
_
132.7
137.7
_
-
-
_
_
_
_
140.1
137.1
_
_
_
_
_
142.2
137.9
_
139.0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.6
.8
.7
.5
.9
1.2
.7
.7
.6
1.1
1.0
1.1
.1
2.0
1.6
1.7
131.7
132.4
134.1
135.1
136.4
137.1
138.9
140.8
142.4
1.1
4.4
143.6
144.7
145.9
146.3
149.7
151.1
153.1
153.6
157.8
2.7
5.4
145.0
138.5
146.0
139.5
147.2
140.8
147.5
141.3
151.2
143.3
152.7
144.3
154.8
145.9
155.2
145.9
159.6
148.4
2.8
1.7
5.6
3.6
145.5
139.4
146.6
141.1
147.3
142.5
147.6
143.3
151.8
145.1
153.1
146.3
155.2
150.3
155.6
150.4
160.5
153.2
-
-
-
-
-
_
147.6
149.4
140.6
148.4
150.3
141.6
148.9
150.5
144.1
149.1
150.7
144.7
154.1
156.5
146.4
155.5
157.8
148.1
156.8
158.9
150.3
157.3
159.4
151.2
163.1
165.4
154.0
3.1
1.9
2.3
3.7
3.8
1.9
5.7
5.6
4.9
5.8
5.7
5.2
-
-
_
_
_
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
_
1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index
consists of wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consist of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
Digitized for82
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
138.1
_
_
142.1
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
143.8
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
3 Consist of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
- Data not available.
23. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
(June 1981 =100)
Series
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Percent change
1988
1987
1986
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
Sept. 1988
Civilian workers 1...................................................................
130.7
131.5
132.8
133.5
135.2
136.1
140.5
1.3
3.9
143.0
131.6
139.3
145.2
132.5
141.8
1.5
.7
1.8
4.2
3.3
4.3
132.2
133.3
140.5
149.5
145.5
139.0
133.4
134.4
141.9
150.4
146.4
140.5
134.1
135.1
144.2
154.0
148.9
142.7
.5
.5
1.6
2.4
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
3.3
3.3
4.1
4.9
5.3
5.6
4.4
4.1
135.1
136.6
137.9
1.0
3.7
142.4
148.1
1.1
1.6
3.9
4.9
137.4
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ......................................................
Blue-collar workers.........................................................
Service occupations.......................................................
134.1
125.0
131.7
135.0
125.6
132.8
136.6
126.2
134.2
137.3
127.1
134.7
139.4
128.3
136.0
140.2
129.4
136.6
141.5
130.4
138.0
Workers, by industry division
Goods-producing.............................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Service-producing ...........................................................
Services .....................................................................
Health services..........................................................
Hospitals................. ..................................................
Public administration 2 .................................................
Nonmanufacturing .........................................................
126.3
127.2
133.4
139.9
137.5
132.2
127.0
127.9
134.2
141.1
128.5
129.5
136.5
143.4
141.0
135.2
129.8
130.8
138.5
146.8
138.1
133.0
127.8
128.7
135.8
142.7
140.5
134.5
142.6
137.1
131.0
132.2
139.2
148.2
143.8
137.8
Private industry workers.................................................
128.8
129.5
130.8
131.7
133.0
133.8
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers..................................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations.....
Executive, administrative, and managerial
occupations..........................................................
Sales occupations...................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
clerical..................................................................
-
-
138.7
132.0
135.4
132.7
136.4
134.6
138.4
135.4
139.1
137.0
141.2
137.6
142.6
139.0
144.0
140.8
145.8
132.4
125.2
133.5
124.9
135.6
126.7
136.4
127.1
138.6
127.0
139.2
126.1
139.9
127.5
141.3
130.8
142.5
131.5
.8
.5
2.8
3.5
131.7
132.7
134.3
135.5
137.1
138.1
140.2
141.2
143.2
1.4
4.4
124.5
125.1
125.6
126.6
127.7
128.9
129.9
131.1
131.9
.6
3.3
126.7
124.1
119.8
127.4
124.9
120.1
127.9
125.5
120.5
128.8
126.7
121.5
130.2
127.5
122.3
131.1
129.2
122.9
132.1
129.9
123.7
133.4
131.2
T25.4
134.0
131.9
126.7
.4
.5
1.0
2.9
3.6
3.6
120.9
128.9
121.4
130.1
121.9
131.4
122.6
131.9
123.7
132.6
125.0
133.2
126.7
134.5
127.5
135.8
128.4
137.6
.7
1.3
3.8
3.8
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing........................................................
Construction .............................................................
Manufacturing...........................................................
Durables................................................................
Nondurables...........................................................
Service-producing.......................................................
Transportation and public utilities............................
Transportation.......................................................
Public utilities.........................................................
Wholesale and retail trade.......................................
Wholesale trade ..................................................
Retail trade..........................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.........................
Services.................................................................
Health services .....................................................
Hospitals..............................................................
126.1
120.5
127.2
126.4
128.5
130.9
127.3
126.5
131.8
124.4
129.0
138.2
-
126.8
120.8
127.9
127.2
129.3
131.6
127.5
126.9
133.1
124.5
130.0
139.5
-,
127.5
121.7
128.7
127.7
130.5
133.4
128.1
127.9
134.8
125.2
133.5
141.8
-
128.3
122.7
129.5
128.7
131.0
134.3
129.3
129.9
137.2
127.1
131.5
142.8
-
129.6
123.8
130.8
129.7
132.8
135.7
130.0
130.6
137.8
127.8
131.8
145.9
-
130.8
124.7
132.2
131.1
134.1
136.2
130.2
130.7
138.5
127.7
131.6
147.1
-
132.0
125.9
133.3
132.1
135.6
137.5
131.3
131.9
139.0
129.2
132.9
148.6
-
133.2
127.6
134.4
133.1
136.7
139.3
132.5
134.6
141.7
131.7
134.9
149.8
-
133.9
128.6
135.1
133.7
137.6
141.0
133.5
136.0
143.2
133.2
134.9
152.9
“
.5
.8
.5
.5
.7
1.2
.8
.9
.7
1.0
1.1
1.1
.0
2.1
1.7
1.7
3.3
3.9
3.3
3.1
3.6
3.9
2.7
2.6
2.7
4.1
3.9
4.2
2.4
4.8
5.5
5.7
Nonmanufacturing.....................................................
129.7
130.4
131.9
132.8
134.2
134.8
136.0
137.8
139.4
1.2
3.9
State and local government workers.............................
140.4
141.4
142.5
142.8
146.1
147.4
148.7
149.1
153.0
2.6
4.7
141.8
134.5
142.8
135.1
143.9
136.3
144.1
136.9
147.7
139.0
149.3
139.6
150.5
141.1
150.8
141.1
154.9
143.5
2.7
1.7
4.9
3.2
142.1
135.8
144.1
145.7
137.5
143.3
137.3
145.1
146.4
138.1
143.9
138.6
145.5
146.5
140.5
144.2
139.4
- '
145.6
146.6
141.0
148.2
141.2
150.3
152.0
142.6
149.5
142.2
151.8
153.4
143.8
150.7
144.5
152.6
154.0
145.5
151.1
144.7
153.0
154.3
146.4
155.6
147.4
158.0
159.7
148.9
3.0
1.9
2.4
3.3
3.5
1.7
5.0
4.4
4.8
5.1
5.1
4.4
Blue-collar workers...................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair
occupations.........................................................
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors.......
Transportation and material moving occupations......
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and
laborers................................................................
Service occupations..................................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers..................................................
Blue-collar workers...................................................
Workers, by industry division
Services ...................................................................
Hospitals and other services 3 .................................
Health services .....................................................
Schools..................................................................
Elementary and secondary ...................................
Public administration 2...............................................
1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Includes, for example, library, social and health services,
- Data not available.
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
24. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size
(June 1981=100)
1987
1986
1988
Percent change
Series
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
Sept. 1988
COMPENSATION
Workers, by bargaining status’
Union ..............................................................................
Goods-producing ...........................................................
Service-producing..........................................................
Manufacturing ...............................................................
Nonmanufacturing .........................................................
129.4
127.3
132.8
127.5
131.2
129.8
127.5
133.4
127.9
131.5
130.5
128.0
134.4
128.0
132.6
131.2
128.7
135.2
128.7
133.5
132.0
129.5
135.9
129.5
134.3
133.4
131.3
136.7
131.5
135.1
135.6
134.1
138.0
135.0
136.2
136.9
135.3
139.4
136.2
137.5
137.9
136.2
140.5
137.0
138.6
0.7
.7
.8
.6
.8
4.5
5.2
3.4
5.8
3.2
Nonunion.........................................................................
Goods-producing...........................................................
Service-producing..........................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing..........................................................
131.2
129.1
132.5
130.4
131.6
132.1
130.0
133.4
131.4
132.5
133.6
130.8
135.3
132.2
134.3
134.6
131.8
136.4
133.2
135.3
136.1
133.1
137.9
134.6
136.8
136.9
134.1
138.6
135.6
137.5
138.9
136.2
140.5
137.8
139.4
140.7
137.8
142.5
139.2
141.5
142.2
138.7
144.4
140.1
143.2
1.1
.7
1.3
.6
1.2
4.5
4.2
4.7
4.1
4.7
134.2
130.7
127.3
132.1
135.2
131.4
128.1
132.8
137.4
132.1
129.1
134.1
138.6
133.2
130.2
134.2
140.3
134.2
131.2
135.8
141.9
135.4
131.7
136.3
143.7
137.1
134.4
138.3
145.9
139.3
135.5
139.5
147.8
140.4
136.7
140.6
1.3
.8
.9
.8
5.3
4.6
4.2
3.5
131.4
127.2
132.2
127.9
133.5
129.0
134.4
130.2
135.8
131.3
136.7
132.0
138.9
133.6
140.5
135.5
142.0
136.2
1.1
.5
4.6
3.7
Union ..............................................................................
Goods-producing...........................................................
Service-producing..........................................................
Manufacturing ...............................................................
Nonmanufacturing .........................................................
126.9
124.5
130.5
125.0
128.5
127.2
124.8
130.9
125.5
128.7
127.7
125.0
131.7
125.6
129.5
128.3
125.8
132.2
126.2
130.1
129.1
126.5
132.9
127.0
130.8
130.5
128.5
133.6
129.3
131.5
131.0
128.7
134.4
129.6
132.1
132.0
129.7
135.4
130.4
133.3
132.9
130.4
136.7
131.0
134.5
.7
.5
1.0
.5
.9
2.9
3.1
2.9
3.1
2.8
Nonunion.........................................................................
Goods-producing ...........................................................
Service-producing..........................................................
Manufacturing ...............................................................
Nonmanufacturing .........................................................
129.4
127.0
130.8
128.5
129.8
130.3
127.8
131.7
129.5
130.6
131.8
128.8
133.6
130.6
132.4
132.8
129.6
134.6
131.5
133.4
134.3
131.1
136.2
133.0
134.9
135.0
132.1
136.7
133.9
135.4
136.4
133.6
138.0
135.5
136.8
138.1
135.0
140.0
136.7
138.8
139.5
135.7
141.8
137.4
140.4
1.0
.5
1.3
.5
1.2
3.9
3.5
4.1
3.3
4.1
132.3
128.8
125.3
129.3
133.1
129.4
126.2
130.1
135.4
130.1
127.4
131.2
136.6
131.1
128.5
131.1
138.3
132.1
129.6
133.1
139.7
133.0
129.9
133.5
140.9
134.0
131.3
134.9
142.9
136.1
132.1
136.0
144.6
137.1
133.3
137.4
1.2
.7
.9
1.0
4.6
3.8
2.9
3.2
129.4
125.0
130.2
125.6
131.6
126.6
132.4
127.8
133.7
129.1
134.6
129.8
135.8
130.9
137.3
133.0
138.7
133.5
1.0
.4
3.7
3.4
Workers, by region '
Northeast.........................................................................
South ..............................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central).......................................
West................................................................................
Workers, by area size 1
Metropolitan areas ...........................................................
Other areas......................................................................
WAGES AND SALARIES
Workers, by bargaining status '
Workers, by region '
Northeast.........................................................................
South ..............................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central).......................................
West................................................................................
Workers, by area size1
Metropolitan areas...........................................................
Other areas.....................................................................
1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and
industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the
Digitized for84
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M onthly Labor Review Technical
Employment Cost Index,” May 1982.
Note, “ Estimation procedures for 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)____________ _ _ ________________
Quarterly average
Annual average
Measure
IIP
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments,2 settlements
covering 5,000 workers or more:
First year of contract.....................................
Annual rate over life of contract.....................
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000
workers or more:
First year of contract..................................
Annual rate over life of contract..................
Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustment3 .................
From settlements reached in period ...........
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier
periods.....................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses......
1.1
1.6
3.0
2.6
2.7
2.4
1.1
2.1
4.1
3.9
2.5
2.1
3.4
2.4
1.8
1.8
3.3
2.4
3.4
3.3
1.2
2.2
2.1
2.0
2.1
.8
1.8
1.6
26
2.9
2.1
2.0
2.4
1.8
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7
2.9
2.3
.5
3.1
.7
1.7
.2
1.0
.2
.9
.2
-8
.3
.4
.1
.9
-3
1.8
7
.6
.3
.3
.5
.4
.5
.2
.1
-2
-1
-1
-2
1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in
.8
.2
compensation or wages.
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
4 Between -0.05 and 0.05 percent.
p = preliminary.
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)____________________
Average for four quarters endingMeasure
1988
1987
1986
IV
MF
IF
F
IV
III
II
I
Specified total compensation adjustments, settlements covering 5,000
workers or more, all industries:
1.1
1.6
1.2
1.7
1.8
2.1
2.7
2.6
3.0
2.6
3.1
2.5
3.0
2.3
3.2
2.5
1.2
1.9
.9
1.8
1.7
1.8
1.2
2.0
.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.5
1.8
1.3
2.0
1.7
2.1
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.2
1.7
2.5
2.2
2.3
2.1
2.1
1.5
2.5
2.4
2.2
2.5
2.2
1.4
2.7
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.0
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.6
2.2
1.5
2.8
-1.2
1.3
-2.8
.2
.9
-.2
-1.5
1.3
-3.5
(2)
.8
-.6
-.8
1.3
-2.7
.3
.8
-.2
1.1
2.1
-.1
1.0
1.0
1.2
2.1
2.4
1.3
1.3
1.0
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.4
1.5
1.0
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.6
1.3
2.5
2.5
2.4
3.0
1.9
1.4
3.1
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.3
2.1
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.4
2.2
2.5
2.3
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7
2.4
2.1
2.6
2.8
2.4
2.9
2.3
1.9
2.4
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.3
1.6
2.5
2.7
2.4
2.7
2.3
2.2
2.4
2.3
1.9
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.5
2.5
1.8
2.7
2.2
1.4
2.3
2.5
1.6
2.5
2.4
1.6
2.4
2.5
1.4
2.6
2.7
3.7
2.7
2.9
3.8
2.9
Specified wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or
more:
All industries
Manufacturing
Nonmanufacturing
Construction
Data do not meet publication standards.
Between -0.05 and 0.05 percent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p
= preliminary.
(')
0)
3.2
0)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
O
3.1
(1)
(1)
2.1
2.6
2.9
2.9
3.0
(1)
(’)
0
(’)
3.1
(')
0
2.7
(1)
(1)
(')
(1)
2.4
M O N T H L Y LABOR R E V IE W
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
•
27. Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
Average for four quarters endingEffective wage adjustment
1987
1988
I
II
III
IV
F
IP
IIP
2.0
.3
1.5
.1
2.2
.3
1.6
.3
2.6
.4
1.7
.4
3.1
.7
1.8
.5
3.2
.8
1.8
.5
3.0
1.0
1.6
.5
2.8
.9
1.4
.5
2.4
1.1
3.7
.6
2.8
.9
3.5
1.8
3.2
1.8
3.3
2.3
3.6
2.9
3.3
2.6
3.8
2.9
3.3
2.7
3.7
2.9
3.3
2.3
3.5
2.9
3.0
2.5
For all workers:1
Total.................................................
From settlements reached in period ........
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period .........
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses.............................
For workers receiving changes:
Total.........................................................
From settlements reached in period ..........................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period ................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses...................................
1 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
p
= preliminary.
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)
Annual average
1986
1987
First 6 months
1988
62
6.0
49
4.8
5.5
57
5.7
49
5.1
54
5.1
5.5
2.4
3.0
(4)
4.9
2.7
2.2
(4)
.9
.4
.5
(4)
Measure
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments, 2 settlements covering 5,000 workers or more:
First year of contract .............................................................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract ...........................................................................................................
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or more:
First year of contract ...................................................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract..................................................................................................................
Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustment 3 .......................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period........................................................................................................
Deferred from settlements reached In earlier periods .......................................................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustment clauses..............................................................................................................
1 Compensation In' des wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes In
compensation or wages.
Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
Less than 0.05 percent.
29. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
Annua totals
1987
Measure
1986
1987
Nov.
Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period...................
In effect during period...............
69
72
Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in
thousands)..............................
In effect during period (in
thousands)..............................
533.0
174.4
11.8
899.5
377.7
22.2
Days idle:
Number (In thousands).............. 11,861.0
Percent of estimated working
time1 .................................
.05
4,455.6
222.9
.02
.01
46
51
1988P
Dec.
6
11
Jan.
0
5
Feb.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
3
6
5
8
1
6
0
6
3
8
3
10
12
16
12
.0
7.2
17.5
6.7
.0
10.3
7.8
24.6
11.6
1.4
8.6
2.3
8.9
10.8
21.1
24.2
14.9
18.2
20.0
36.4
35.8
27.9
21.4
10.6
159.4
36.6
337.0
203.6
207.9
271.4
264.5
605.0
656.3
411.9
240.0
77.9
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.03
.02
.01
(2)
................ .......... ........................ " v^i..K . w j r w o a i c II i u i u u u u 111 u 1C l U ld l tJ M ip iu y tJ U clIIU lU ia i
working time: private household, forestry, and fishery employees are excluded. An expla
nation of the measurement of idleness as a percentage of the total time worked is found
In “ Total economy’ measure of strike idleness,” Monthly Labor Review, October 1968,
Digitized for86
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Mar.
pp. 54-56.
2 Less than .005 percent.
p = preliminary
8
5
30. Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise Indicated)
Series
Annual
average
1988
1987
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
118.3
354.3
115.4
345.7
115.7
346.7
116.0
347.4
116.5
349.0
117.1
350.8
117.5
352.0
118.0
353.5
118.5
354.9
119.0
356.6
119.8
358.9
120.2
360.1
120.3
360.5
120.5
360.9
113.5
113.5
111.9
114.8
110.5
105.9
119.1
110.5
111.0
108.1
107.5
113.8
117.0
114.1
118.2
118.2
116.6
122.1
114.3
108.4
128.1
113.1
114.0
113.1
107.5
118.0
121.8
118.6
114.8
114.7
112.8
116.8
110.3
106.7
123.4
110.0
111.0
107.7
104.8
115.0
118.9
115.4
115.7
115.7
114.1
118.1
111.0
107.4
126.4
111.3
112.2
108.5
106.9
115.9
119.3
115.8
115.8
115.7
113.9
118.7
110.6
107.3
124.7
111.8
112.2
109.5
107.7
116.1
119.7
116.8
116.0
115.9
113.9
118.9
111.2
107.2
123.0
112.0
112.6
110.3
107.7
116.3
120.2
117.4
116.7
116.6
114.6
119.8
111.5
107.1
126.0
112.1
112.3
110.3
107.8
116.6
120.7
118.0
117.1
117.0
115.1
120.3
112.1
107.4
127.1
112.3
112.5
111.2
107.5
117.0
121.0
118.2
117.6
117.6
115.8
120.8
114.6
107.2
126.1
112.4
113.3
111.5
107.1
117.1
121.5
118.7
118.8
118.8
117.3
122.1
116.5
107.6
129.0
113.1
114.0
112.6
107.2
118.3
122.1
119.2
119.4
119.4
118.1
124.0
117.3
108.2
129.9
113.6
114.8
114.9
107.0
118.7
122.5
119.3
120.1
120.2
119.0
124.7
117.4
108.9
133.2
114.0
115.6
115.9
107.4
119.1
123.0
119.6
120.3
120.3
119.0
125.6
116.8
109.9
131.7
114.8
116.0
117.1
108.1
119.9
123.4
119.8
120.2
120.2
118.7
125.9
116.4
110.6
129.5
114.9
115.9
117.1
108.2
120.1
123.7
119.9
120.6
120.7
119.1
126.6
116.1
111.4
131.0
115.3
116.7
118.5
107.8
120.7
124.1
119.9
114.2
121.3
128.1
123.1
127.4
124.8
124.8
124.0
111.8
114.8
107.8
103.0
97.3
77.9
103.8
120.1
107.1
103.6
111.5
110.6
118.5
127.1
133.6
127.8
134.8
131.1
131.1
129.0
114.7
117.9
110.4
104.4
98.0
78.1
104.6
122.9
109.4
105.1
114.7
114.3
115.6
123.7
129.1
125.6
124.1
128.0
128.0
126.2
113.3
116.6
109.1
102.0
95.1
80.5
100.9
120.9
107.3
103.3
112.5
111.4
116.2
124.6
130.8
126.0
129.4
128.5
128.6
126.9
113.7
117.4
108.7
102.4
95.6
80.8
101.5
121.3
107.5
103.5
113.1
111.5
116.6
125.0
131.3
126.3
130.4
129.0
129.0
127.1
114.3
117.9
109.5
102.8
96.0
80.9
101.9
121.8
107.7
103.7
113.2
111.6
117.0
125.6
132.9
126.4
136.6
129.2
129.2
127.8
113.3
116.4
109.2
102.7
95.8
80.5
101.7
121.7
108.3
104.7
112.9
111.7
117.3
125.8
132.9
126.6
136.0
129.4
129.5
128.2
115.3
119.4
109.7
102.8
95.7
80.2
101.6
122.3
109.1
104.9
113.8
114.7
117.7
126.2
133.1
126.9
135.7
129.9
130.0
128.2
114.3
117.8
109.8
103.5
96.5
80.0
102.6
122.6
109.3
104.9
114.1
114.8
118.6
126.6
133.7
127.3
137.0
130.4
130.4
128.9
114.7
118.1
110.1
105.9
100.8
79.1
107.8
122.3
109.6
105.3
114.7
114.8
119.1
127.4
134.7
127.8
139.2
131.0
131.1
129.7
114.5
117.9
110.1
106.0
100.8
76.9
108.1
122.4
109.8
105.5
115.2
115.0
119.5
128.2
135.6
128.4
141.3
131.8
131.9
130.1
115.0
118.1
110.8
106.1
100.9
76.3
108.3
122.6
109.7
105.3
114.8
115.1
119.9
128.4
134.7
129.1
135.5
132.6
132.7
130.2
115.3
118.1
111.7
106.4
101.0
75.9
108.5
123.3
110.1
105.7
115.5
115.5
119.9
128.8
134.8
129.4
134.8
133.1
133.1
130.4
115.0
117.6
111.6
105.4
98.6
74.6
105.8
124.5
110.3
105.9
115.6
115.5
119.9
129.1
134.2
129.8
131.1
133.8
133.9
130.2
115.4
118.2
111.7
104.3
96.8
75.0
103.7
124.4
110.6
106.1
116.5
115.7
120.2
129.3
134.1
130.1
130.0
134.0
134.1
130.6
115.8
118.4
112.4
105.0
97.4
76.8
104.1
125.5
110.6
105.9
117.0
115.9
Other apparel commodities......................................................
Apparel services..........................................................................
110.6
108.9
109.1
110.4
112.1
105.1
108.0
119.6
115.4
113.7
113.4
114.9
116.4
109.9
116.0
123.7
112.7
111.0
110.7
112.6
114.5
107.2
111.3
121.4
110.4
108.6
109.0
108.2
113.6
106.1
112.9
121.6
110.2
108.3
109.1
107.8
111.4
105.8
113.1
122.0
114.3
112.7
111.6
115.3
114.0
107.3
113.6
122.2
117.0
115.5
112.9
119.6
117.1
109.4
114.6
122.6
116.3
114.8
113.6
117.3
117.7
109.7
114.9
122.8
114.6
112.9
112.5
114.1
116.5
109.2
114.6
123.1
112.7
110.8
111.9
109.8
116.2
108.2
116.5
123.4
112.6
110.7
111.6
109.9
118.2
107.4
116.2
124.0
117.8
116.2
115.2
118.1
119.0
112.2
117.4
124.4
120.7
119.3
117.6
121.9
118.1
115.9
119.4
125.5
119.9
118.4
118.2
120.2
117.2
114.5
119.5
126.3
118.0
116.3
117.3
116.5
117.3
113.5
119.1
126.7
Transportation ...............................................................................
Private transportation..................................................................
New vehicles.............................................................................
New ca rs................................................................................
Used c a rs .................................................................................
Motor fuel .................................................................................
Gasoline.................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services....................................
Public transportation ...................................................................
105.4
104.2
114.4
114.6
113.1
80.2
80.1
114.8
120.8
96.9
125.6
121.1
108.7
107.6
116.5
116.9
118.0
80.9
80.8
119.7
127.9
98.9
133.9
123.3
107.6
106.5
116.4
116.6
116.3
82.0
81.8
116.9
123.8
97.5
129.2
122.1
107.1
106.0
116.1
116.2
116.0
79.7
79.5
117.2
124.7
98.2
130.1
121.8
106.8
105.7
116.0
116.2
116.0
78.3
78.1
117.7
125.0
98.1
130.6
120.8
106.5
105.4
115.7
116.0
116.1
77.5
77.3
118.5
124.9
98.3
130.3
121.4
107.2
106.0
115.6
115.9
116.6
79.4
79.2
118.8
125.0
98.2
130.5
122.4
108.1
107.0
115.9
116.3
117.0
81.4
81.3
119.3
126.3
98.9
132.0
122.4
108.5
107.4
116.1
116.5
117.6
81.4
81.3
119.7
127.2
98.8
133.1
123.2
108.9
107.8
116.1
116.5
117.9
82.3
82.3
120.0
127.5
98.2
133.7
123.7
109.6
108.6
115.9
116.3
119.2
84.1
84.2
120.3
128.7
99.2
134.8
123.7
109.7
108.6
116.2
116.8
119.4
83.1
83.1
120.9
129.3
99.7
135.5
124.0
110.0
109.0
117.2
117.7
119.9
81.6
81.6
121.1
131.0
99.3
137.7
124.2
110.7
109.6
118.4
118.7
119.7
81.5
81.4
121.5
132.1
99.4
139.1
125.3
110.8
109.6
119.0
119.1
120.2
80.3
80.3
121.5
132.5
100.3
139.3
126.5
Medical ca re ..................................................................................
Medical care commodities ..........................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Professional services................................................................
Hospital and related services ..................................................
130.1
131.0
130.0
128.8
131.6
138.6
139.9
138.3
137.5
143.9
133.1
134.9
132.7
131.8
135.9
134.4
135.4
134.1
133.2
137.6
135.5
136.1
135.3
134.5
139.0
136.3
137.0
136.1
135.4
140.0
136.9
138.1
136.6
136.0
140.7
137.5
139.0
137.2
136.4
141.8
138.2
139.4
137.9
137.5
142.1
139.3
140.5
139.0
138.4
144.3
139.9
141.1
139.6
138.7
145.9
140.4
142.0
140.1
139.2
146.9
141.2
143.2
140.8
139.8
148.5
141.8
143.3
141.5
140.4
149.7
142.3
144.2
141.9
140.8
150.8
Entertainment ................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services ,...............................................................
115.3
110.5
122.0
120.3
115.0
127.7
117.4
112.6
124.3
118.1
112.9
125.4
118.3
112.9
125.7
119.0
113.4
126.5
119.6
114.2
127.0
119.7
114.5
126.9
120.1
114.8
127.3
120.5
115.3
127.7
120.7
115.4
128.1
121.3
116.0
128.6
121.8
116.3
129.4
122.2
117.2
129.3
122.8
117.5
130.0
Other goods and services .............................................................
Tobacco products .......................................................................
Personal care..............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances............................
Personal care services ............................................................
Personal and educational expenses..........................................
School books and supplies.....................................................
Personal and educational services.........................................
128.5
133.6
115.1
113.9
116.2
138.5
138.1
138.7
137.0
145.8
119.4
118.1
120.7
147.9
148.1
148.0
132.1
137.0
116.5
115.0
117.9
143.4
142.4
143.6
133.4
140.8
117.3
116.1
118.4
143.9
144.6
144.0
134.2
142.2
117.8
116.4
119.1
144.7
146.3
144.8
134.6
142.8
118.1
116.8
119.2
145.0
146.2
145.1
134.8
142.9
118.5
117.4
119.5
145.2
146.3
145.3
135.1
143.2
118.7
117.2
120.1
145.5
146.4
145.6
135.5
143.6
119.0
117.5
120.4
146.0
146.5
146.2
136.5
147.5
119.2
117.8
120.6
146.3
146.5
146.5
137.5
148.6
119.0
117.2
121.0
147.8
146.9
148.1
140.0
148.9
120.3
118.7
121.9
151.8
151.1
152.1
140.6
149.3
121.0
119.8
122.0
152.4
152.0
152.7
141.0
149.7
121.8
120.7
122.7
152.7
152.1
152.9
141.3
149.9
122.4
121.6
123.1
153.0
152.2
153.2
1987
1988
113,6
340.4
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS:
All Items (1967-100) ......................................................................
Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food at home ...........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs................................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at home..............................................................
Sugar and sweets................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared foods..........................................................
Food away from home .............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................
Housing ..........................................................................................
Renters’ costs (12/82 = 100)..................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters’ c o s ts ...............................................................
Homeowners’ costs (12/82 = 100)...........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (1 2 /8 2 -1 0 0 )..................................
Household Insurance (12/82 = 100)......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities...................................
Fuel and other utilities................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ....................................................
Other utilities and public services ............................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings ......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies.............................................................
Housekeeping services.............................................................
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Apparel commodities ..................................................................
Men's and boys' apparel..........................................................
Women’s and girls' apparel .....................................................
Infants' and toddlers' apparel..................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
87
M O N T H L Y LABOR R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Price Data
30. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
Annual
average
1987
1988
1987
1988
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Apparel commodities..................................................................
Men’s and boys’ apparel..........................................................
Women’s and girls’ apparel .....................................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ apparel..................................................
Footwear..................................................................................
Other apparel commodities......................................................
Apparel services..........................................................................
108.8
108.5
110.3
114.0
105.5
107.4
119.2
113.4
112.8
114.5
118.6
110.4
114.9
123.0
111.1
110.4
112.6
116.4
108.0
110.6
120.9
108.6
108.6
108.2
115.2
106.8
112.2
121.1
108.3
108.7
107.9
113.3
106.4
112.0
121.5
112.4
111.1
114.9
116.0
107.7
112.8
121.6
114.9
112.2
118.8
119.1
109.6
113.9
122.0
114.3
113.0
116.7
119.7
109.9
114.0
122.2
112.6
112.1
113.5
118.8
109.6
113.5
122.4
110.6
111.5
109.5
118.6
108.7
115.2
122.7
110.5
111.0
109.5
120.4
108.0
114.9
123.3
Transportation ................................................................................
Private transportation..................................................................
New vehicles.............................................................................
New ca rs................................................................................
Used cars .................................................................................
Motor fuel .................................................................................
Gasoline.................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services....................................
Public transportation...................................................................
105.1
104.1
114.0
114.3
113.1
80.3
80.2
115.1
119.0
96.7
123.4
120.4
108.3
107.5
116.2
116.6
117.9
80.9
80.8
119.8
125.8
98.6
131.7
122.5
107.3
106.4
116.1
116.3
116.2
82.0
81.9
117.0
122.0
97.4
127.1
121.3
106.8
105.9
115.8
115.9
115.9
79.7
79.5
117.4
122.9
98.1
128.0
121.2
106.4
105.6
115.7
116.0
116.0
78.3
78.1
117.8
123.2
98.0
128.5
120.4
106.2
105.3
115.3
115.7
116.1
77.5
77.3
118.6
123.1
98.1
128.2
120.8
106.8
105.9
115.3
115.7
116.6
79.4
79.2
118.9
123.0
97.9
128.3
121.7
107.8
107.0
115.6
116.0
116.9
81.4
81.3
119.4
124.3
98.6
129.7
121.8
108.2
107.3
115.8
116.2
117.5
81.4
81.3
119.8
125.2
98.5
130.8
122.3
108.6
107.7
115.8
116.2
117.8
82.3
82.3
120.1
125.4
97.9
131.3
123.0
Medical c a re ..................................................................................
Medical care commodities ..........................................................
Medical care services..................................................................
Professional services ................................................................
Hospital and related services...................................................
130.2
130.2
130.3
129.0
131.1
139.0
139.0
139.0
137.7
143.3
133.4
134.1
133.2
132.0
135.4
134.6
134.7
134.6
133.4
136.9
135.8
135.4
135.8
134.7
138.4
136.5
136.1
136.6
135.5
139.3
137.1
137.2
137.1
136.1
140.1
137.8
138.0
137.7
136.6
141.2
138.5
138.3
138.5
137.7
141.5
Entertainment .................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services................................................................
114.8
110.6
121.8
119.7
115.1
127.2
116.9
112.6
124.0
117.4
112.8
124.9
117.6
112.9
125.2
118.2
113.5
126.0
118.9
114.2
126.5
119.0
114.6
126.3
Other goods and services .............................................................
Tobacco products .......................................................................
Personal care...............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances.............................
Personal care services .............................................................
Personal and educational expenses...........................................
School books and supplies......................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................
127.8
133.7
115.0
113.9
116.1
138.2
137.9
138.4
136.5
146.0
119.3
118.0
120.5
147.4
147.1
147.7
131.3
137.2
116.4
115.1
117.8
143.0
141.9
143.3
132.7
141.0
117.1
116.0
118.3
143.4
143.9
143.6
133.6
142.3
117.5
116.2
118.9
144.3
145.3
144.5
134.0
143.0
117.7
116.5
119.0
144.6
145.2
144.8
134.2
143.1
118.1
117.0
119.3
144.7
145.4
144.9
All items ................................................................................
Commodities.....................................................................
Food and beverages...................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ....................................
Apparel commodities..............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ..................
Durables........................................................................
112.5
107.3
113.3
103.6
100.8
108.8
99.2
106.6
117.0
111.0
117.9
106.8
104.6
113.4
102.9
108.9
114.2
108.9
114.5
105.4
102.8
111.1
101.2
108.0
114.5
108.8
115.4
104.7
101.7
108.6
100.8
107.9
114.7
108.7
115.5
104.5
101.4
108.3
100.5
107.9
115.1
109.3
115.7
105.3
102.7
112.4
100.4
108.0
Services....................................................................
Rent of shelter (12/84 —100)...........................................
Household services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 100)..............
Transportation services.................................................
Medical care services..................................................................
Other services ..................................................................
119.4
114.0
104.0
120.8
130.3
124.7
124.7
119.4
105.9
127.1
139.0
131.4
121.3
116.4
103.1
123.6
133.2
127.9
122.0
117.1
103.5
124.1
134.6
128.5
122.5
117.5
103.9
124.4
135.8
129.0
Special indexes:
All items less food ......................................
All items less shelter........................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/84 = 100).......................
All items less medical care.....................................
Commodities less fo o d .........................................................
Nondurables less food ....................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables..............................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 100)...........................
Services less medical c a re ........................................................
Energy......................................................................
All items less energy .................................................................
All items less food and energy ..................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ..........................................................
Services less energy.................................................................
112.2
111.0
106.4
111.5
103.9
101.4
100.0
107.2
110.8
118.2
88.0
116.0
116.8
110.8
80.3
121.2
116.7
115.2
110.4
115.8
107.2
105.3
103.7
111.5
115.6
123.3
88.6
121.0
121.9
114.7
80.9
127.0
114.1
112.5
107.8
113.2
105.6
103.3
101.8
108.8
112.2
120.1
87.8
118.0
119.0
112.6
82.1
123.7
114.2
112.7
108.0
113.4
105.0
102.4
101.5
108.8
112.8
120.7
86.8
118.5
119.3
112.3
80.0
124.3
89.0
29.9
85.5
28.7
87.5
29.4
87.3
29.3
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1982-84 = $1.00.........................................................
1967 = $1.00..................................................................
Digitized for88
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
115.8
114.4
117.6
121.5
112.7
116.2
123.7
118.9
116.9
121.5
120.6
116.3
117.9
124.7
118.1
117.5
119.9
120.1
115.0
118.2
125.4
116.0
116.5
116.2
120.3
114.0
117.8
125.8
109.4
108.6
115.5
116.0
119.0
84.3
84.3
120.5
126.5
98.8
132.5
123.0
109.4
108.6
115.8
116.4
119.2
83.1
83.2
121.0
127.2
99.3
133.2
123.1
109.8
109.0
116.9
117.5
119.8
81.6
81.6
121.3
128.9
98.8
135.5
123.5
110.3
109.5
118.1
118.5
119.5
81.5
81.5
121.5
130.0
99.0
136.8
124.3
110.4
109.5
118.8
118.9
120.1
80.4
80.4
121.5
130.4
99.9
137.1
125.4
139.6
139.4
139.6
138.5
143.8
140.3
140.0
140.3
138.9
145.4
140.8
141.0
140.8
139.3
146.3
141.7
142.1
141.6
139.9
147.8
142.2
142.2
142.2
140.6
148.9
142.8
143.1
142.7
141.0
150.0
119.4
114.9
126.8
119.8
115.4
127.2
120.1
115.5
127.6
120.6
116.0
128.1
121.2
116.5
128.9
121.7
117.3
129.0
122.2
117.6
129.7
134.5
143.4
118.5
117.1
119.9
145.2
145.4
145.4
135.0
143.8
118.8
117.4
120.2
145.8
145.6
146.0
136.3
147.9
119.1
117.8
120.4
146.0
145.6
146.3
137.2
148.9
119.0
117.4
120.7
147.4
146.0
147.8
139.3
149.2
120.3
118.8
121.9
151.1
150.0
151.5
139.9
149.5
120.9
119.9
122.0
151.7
150.8
152.0
140.3
149.9
121.7
120.6
122.7
152.0
150.9
152.3
140.6
150.2
122.3
121.5
123.0
152.3
151.1
152.7
115.7
110.1
116.3
106.3
104.3
114.9
101.6
108.1
116.2
110.5
116.8
106.7
104.8
114.3
102.6
108.4
116.7
110.7
117.4
106.5
104.3
112.6
102.8
108.7
117.2
111.1
118.5
106.6
104.3
110.6
103.7
108.8
117.7
111.6
119.1
107.0
104.9
110.5
104.7
108.8
118.5
112.5
119.8
108.1
106.6
115.8
104.7
109.1
118.9
113.0
120.0
108.7
107.2
118.9
104.1
109.7
119.0
113.1
119.9
108.9
107.1
118.1
104.3
110.4
119.2
113.0
120.3
108.6
106.3
116.0
104.1
110.7
122.8
118.0
103.8
124.5
136.6
129.5
123.1
118.2
104.4
124.8
137.1
129.8
123.6
118.5
104.9
125.8
137.7
130.0
124.5
119.0
107.2
126.6
138.5
130.5
125.1
119.6
107.4
127.1
139.6
130.8
125.7
120.3
107.6
127.8
140.3
131.6
126.3
120.7
108.0
128.4
140.8
133.6
126.7
121.1
107.2
129.9
141.6
134.2
126.9
121.4
106.2
130.9
142.2
134.5
127.2
121.5
106.8
131.2
142.7
135.0
114.4
112.8
108.1
113.6
104.9
102.2
101.4
108.7
113.2
121.1
86.3
118.7
119.6
112.4
78.7
124.8
115.0
113.2
108.6
114.0
105.7
103.4
101.4
109.4
113.4
121.4
85.8
119.3
120.3
113.5
77.9
125.2
115.5
113.9
109.2
114.6
106.6
104.9
102.5
110.5
113.9
121.7
86.7
119.9
120.8
114.3
79.7
125.6
116.0
114.4
109.7
115.0
107.0
105.4
103.4
111.0
114.4
122.2
88.1
120.2
121.1
114.4
81.5
126.0
116.5
115.0
110.2
115.6
106.9
105.0
103.6
111.1
115.7
123.1
90.3
120.5
121.4
114.3
81.4
126.5
116.8
115.4
110.7
116.0
107.0
105.1
104.5
111.6
116.1
123.6
90.7
121.0
121.7
114.2
82.1
127.1
117.3
115.9
111.1
116.6
107.3
105.6
105.3
112.3
116.6
124.3
91.8
121.5
122.2
114.3
83.8
127.8
118.1
116.8
111.9
117.3
108.4
107.2
105.3
113.4
117.3
124.9
91.3
122.4
123.1
115.8
82.7
128.4
118.6
117.2
112.2
117.7
109.0
107.8
104.9
113.8
117.6
125.2
89.3
123.1
124.0
116.9
81.2
129.1
118.8
117.3
112.3
117.8
109.2
107.6
105.1
113.7
117.6
125.3
88.4
123.4
124.3
117.1
81.2
129.5
118.8
117.4
112.4
117.9
108.9
106.9
104.9
113.5
118.1
125.6
88.1
123.6
124.4
117.0
80.3
129.8
87.2
29.3
86.8
29.2
86.4
29.0
86.1
28.9
85.7
28.8
85.3
28.6
84.9
28.5
84.4
28.3
84.1
28.2
84.0
28.2
83.9
28.2
30. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
Annual
average
1988
1987
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
119.8
113.0
120.1
108.5
107.1
116.2
104.9
110.6
120.2
113.5
120.3
109.2
107.8
119.3
104.5
111.1
120.3
113.5
120.2
109.4
107.7
118.4
104.6
111.8
120.5
113.5
120.6
109.0
106.9
116.3
104.5
112.2
126.7
133.1
117.0
128.8
139.6
132.8
127.3
133.4
117.4
129.3
140.1
134.9
127.6
133.8
116.6
130.6
140.8
135.5
127.8
134.1
115.6
131.6
141.5
135.7
128.1
134.3
116.2
132.1
141.9
136.2
118.4
116.1
119.8
117.2
107.4
105.4
104.8
111.9
128.9
124.7
91.4
122.3
123.3
115.2
81.9
128.0
118.9
116.5
120.3
117.8
107.7
105.9
105.5
112.4
129.4
125.3
92.3
122.8
123.8
115.2
83.4
128.8
119.7
117.5
121.1
118.6
108.9
107.7
105.6
113.7
130.3
125.9
91.9
123.8
124.7
116.9
82.5
129.3
120.2
117.9
121.5
118.9
109.5
108.3
105.2
114.2
130.5
126.2
89.9
124.4
125.5
118.0
81.0
129.9
120.3
118.0
121.5
119.0
109.7
108.2
105.4
114.1
130.6
126.3
88.9
124.7
125.8
118.2
80.9
130.3
120.4
118.1
121.6
119.1
109.4
107.5
105.3
113.9
131.1
126.6
88.7
124.8
126.0
118.0
80.1
130.6
84.7
28.3
84.4
28.2
84.0
28.0
83.5
27.9
83.2
27.8
83.1
27.7
83.0
27.7
116.2
346.1
116.7
347.6
117.2
349.1
117.7
350.7
118.5
353.0
118.9
354.2
119.0
354.6
119.2
355.0
116.3
116.2
114.2
119.9
111.4
106.9
125.2
112.0
112.2
110.2
107.9
116.4
120.6
117.9
116.8
116.7
114.7
120.4
112.0
107.2
126.4
112.2
112.4
111.0
107.7
116.8
120.9
118.0
117.4
117.3
115.5
120.8
114.5
107.0
125.5
112.3
113.1
111.4
107.3
116.9
121.4
118.4
118.5
118.5
116.9
122.1
116.3
107.3
128.4
113.0
113.9
112.5
107.4
118.1
122.0
118.9
119.1
119.2
117.8
124.1
117.1
107.9
129.6
113.5
114.8
114.8
107.2
118.5
122.3
118.9
119.8
119.9
118.7
124.8
117.3
108.6
132.8
113.9
115.6
115.8
107.6
118.8
122.8
119.2
120.0
120.1
118.7
125.7
116.6
109.7
131.4
114.7
115.9
117.0
108.3
119.7
123.2
119.5
119.9
119.9
118.4
126.0
116.1
110.4
129.1
114.8
115.7
117.0
108.4
119.9
123.5
119.5
120.3
120.4
118.8
126.7
115.8
111.2
130.8
115.1
116.7
118.3
107.8
120.5
124.0
119.5
115.4
122.9
118.4
126.2
136.9
117.8
117.8
117.2
112.8
116.6
107.1
102.3
95.4
80.2
101.4
121.7
107.8
104.1
113.4
111.9
115.6
123.0
118.4
126.3
136.1
118.0
118.0
117.3
114.7
119.8
107.5
102.5
95.4
79.9
101.4
122.3
108.7
104.2
114.3
115.6
116.0
123.4
118.6
126.6
136.2
118.4
118.5
117.3
113.7
117.6
107.9
103.0
96.1
79.7
102.2
122.5
108.8
104.2
114.5
115.7
116.9
123.9
119.3
126.9
138.8
118.8
118.8
118.0
113.9
117.9
107.9
105.5
100.5
78.9
107.5
122.2
109.1
104.6
115.1
115.7
117.4
124.5
120.0
127.5
140.8
119.4
119.5
118.6
113.8
117.6
108.0
105.6
100.5
76.7
107.8
122.4
109.4
104.9
115.5
115.9
117.8
125.3
120.7
128.0
143.0
120.2
120.2
119.0
114.2
118.0
108.3
105.8
100.6
76.2
108.0
122.5
109.1
104.5
115.1
116.0
118.2
125.6
120.2
128.7
136.1
120.9
120.9
119.1
114.4
117.7
109.1
106.1
100.8
75.9
108.2
123.3
109.6
105.1
115.8
116.3
118.2
126.0
120.4
129.0
135.1
121.3
121.4
119.3
114.1
117.0
109.2
105.1
98.3
74.6
105.5
124.7
109.9
105.4
116.1
116.3
118.3
126.4
120.1
129.4
131.4
122.0
122.1
119.2
114.6
117.6
109.7
104.1
96.6
75.0
103.5
124.6
110.2
105.6
116.9
116.4
118.5
126.5
120.0
129.7
129.2
122.2
122.2
119.6
115.2
117.8
110.6
104.8
97.2
76.7
103.9
125.6
110.2
105.4
117.4
116.5
113.9
116.3
115.7
114.1
112.4
112.2
117.2
120.1
119.5
117.6
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
118.3
111.5
118.2
107.3
105.2
113.7
103.2
110.4
115.4
109.3
114.8
105.7
103.1
111.0
101.5
109.5
115.7
109.2
115.7
105.1
102.1
108.6
101.2
109.4
116.0
109.1
115.8
105.0
101.9
108.3
101.0
109.4
116.5
109.8
116.0
105.9
103.4
112.7
101.0
109.5
117.1
110.7
116.7
106.9
105.0
115.5
102.0
I09.7
117.5
111.1
117.1
107.2
105.4
114.8
103.0
109.9
118.0
111.1
117.6
107.1
104.9
112.9
103.2
110.2
118.5
111.5
118.8
107.0
104.7
110.8
104.0
110.3
119.0
111.9
119.4
107.3
105.2
110.7
104.8
110.3
120.2
125.9
113.1
121.9
130.0
125.7
125.7
132.0
115.3
128.0
138.3
132.6
122.2
128.5
112.3
124.6
132.7
129.0
122.9
129.4
112.7
125.1
134.1
129.6
123.4
129.8
113.1
125.2
135.3
130.2
123.8
130.4
113.0
125.4
136.1
130.7
124.1
130.6
113.7
125.8
136.6
131.0
124.6
131.0
114.3
126.7
137.2
131.1
125.5
131.5
116.6
127.6
137.9
131.6
126.1
132.3
116.9
128.1
139.0
131.9
Special indexes:
All items less food ......................................................................
All items less shelter ..................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/82 —100).......................
All items less medical care.........................................................
Commodities less fo o d ...............................................................
Nondurabies less food ................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables................................................................................
Services less rent o f shelter (12/82 —1 00)...............................
Services less medical ca re .........................................................
Energy..........................................................................................
All items less energy ..................................................................
All items less food and energy ..................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ...................................................................
Services less energy...................................................................
113.6
111.6
115.1
112.6
104.3
101.8
100.3
107.5
123.1
119.1
88.6
117.2
118.2
111.8
80.2
122.0
118.3
115.9
119.5
117.0
107.7
105.8
104.0
111.8
128.3
124.3
89.3
122.3
123.4
115.8
80.8
127.9
115.5
113.2
116.6
114.3
106.0
103.7
102.1
109.1
124.6
121.0
88.3
119.2
120.4
113.5
82.0
124.4
115.7
113.3
116.9
114.6
105.5
102.8
101.9
109.1
125.3
121.7
87.4
119.7
120.8
113.2
80.0
125.2
116.0
113.5
117.1
114.8
105.4
102.7
101.9
109.0
125.8
122.1
87.0
120.0
121.1
113.3
78.8
125.7
116.6
114.0
117.7
115.3
106.3
104.1
101.9
109.8
126.0
122.4
86.5
120.6
121.9
114.6
78.0
126.1
117.2
114.7
118.4
115.9
107.3
105.6
102.9
111.0
126.5
122.8
87.3
121.2
122.4
115.5
79.7
126.5
117.6
115.2
118.8
116.3
107.6
106.0
103.8
111.4
127.1
123.2
88.7
121.5
122.7
115.5
81.4
126.9
118.1
115.7
119.3
116.8
107.4
105.5
104.0
111.4
128.4
124.1
91.0
121.8
123.0
115.4
81.4
127.4
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1982-84-$1.00...........................................................................
1967 -$ 1.00 ................................................................................
88.0
29.4
84.6
28.2
86.6
28.9
86.4
28.8
86.2
28.8
85.8
28.7
85.4
28.5
85.1
28.4
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR URBAN WAGE EARNERS
AND CLERICAL WORKERS:
All items .........................................................................................
All items (1967-100) ......................................................................
112.5
335.0
117.0
348.4
114.2
340.2
114.5
341.0
114.7
341.6
115.1
343.0
115.7
344.7
Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food.............................................................................................
Food at home ...........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products.................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs................................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at hom e..............................................................
Sugar and sweets................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared foods..........................................................
Food away from home .............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................
113.3
113.3
111.7
114.8
110.4
105.7
118.8
110.4
110.9
107.9
107.5
113.6
116.9
113.9
117.9
117.9
116.2
122.2
114.1
108.1
127.6
113.0
113.9
113.0
107.7
117.8
121.6
118.3
114.5
114.5
112.5
116.9
110.1
106.4
123.0
109.8
110.9
107.6
104.9
114.8
118.8
115.1
115.4
115.4
113.7
118.1
110.8
107.1
125.7
111.3
112.1
108.4
107.2
115.7
119.1
115.6
115.5
115.4
113.5
118.8
110.5
107.0
124.0
111.7
112.1
109.5
107.9
115.8
119.6
116.6
115.7
115.6
113.5
118.9
111.1
106.9
122.2
111.9
112.4
110.3
108.0
116.0
120.0
117.3
Housing ..........................................................................................
Shelter .........................................................................................
Renters' costs (12/84 = 100)..................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters' costs ...............................................................
Homeowners’ costs (12/84 = 100)...........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (12/84 = 100) ..................................
Household insurance (12/84 -1 0 0 )......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities....................................
Fuel and other utilities................................................................
Fuels .........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ....................................................
Other utilities and public services............................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies.............................................................
Housekeeping services.............................................................
112.8
118.8
114.6
122.9
128.2
113.8
113.7
114.1
111.3
114.7
106.0
102.7
97.1
77.6
103.6
120.1
106.7
103.1
111.8
110.9
116.8
124.3
119.2
127.5
135.2
119.5
119.5
118.2
114.0
117.7
108.3
104.1
97.7
77.9
104.4
122.9
108.9
104.5
115.1
115.0
114.1
121.2
115.9
125.3
124.5
116.6
116.6
116.1
112.5
115.9
107.1
101.7
94.8
80.2
100.7
120.9
106.9
102.9
112.9
111.6
114.6
121.9
116.9
125.7
129.2
117.1
117.1
116.7
113.0
117.1
106.9
102.0
95.2
80.4
101.2
121.2
107.1
103.0
113.5
111.7
115.0
122.4
117.3
126.1
130.0
117.6
117.6
116.7
113.6
117.6
107.5
102.5
95.6
80.6
101.6
121.8
107.2
103.1
113.6
111.8
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
110.4
114.9
112.6
110.3
110.0
1987
1988
All items ............................................................................................
Commodities..................................................................................
Food and beverages...................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ....................................
Apparel commodities..............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ..................
Durables....................................................................................
113.6
107.7
113.5
104.0
101.1
108.9
99.5
108.2
Services..........................................................................................
Rent of shelter (12/82 —100).....................................................
Household services less rent of’ shelter (12/82 —100).............
Transportation services...............................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Other services .............................................................................
Sept.
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
89
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
31.
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics: Price Data
•
Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Urban Wage Earners
All Urban Consumers
Area'
U.S. city average.................
Region and area size3
Northeast urban....................
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ..........................
Size B - 500,000 to
1,200,000 ..........................
Size C - 50,000 to
500,000 .............................
North Central urban ..............
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ..........................
Size B - 360,000 to
1,200,000 ..........................
Size C - 50,000 to
360,000 .............................
Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less
than 50,0000 .....................
South urban..........................
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ..........................
Size B - 450,000 to
1,200,000 ..........................
Size C - 50,000 to
450,000 .............................
Size D - Nonmetropolitan (less
than 50,000) ......................
West urban..........................
Size A - More than
1,250,000 ...........................
Size B - 330,000 to
1,250,000 ...........................
Size C - 50,000 to
330,000 .............................
Size classes:
A .......................................
B .......................................
C .......................................
D ......................................
Selected local areas
Chicago, ILNorthwestern IN ..................
Los Angeles-Long
Beach, Anaheim, C A ..........
New York, NYNortheastern N J..................
Philadelphia, PA-NJ..............
San FranciscoOakland, CA........................
Pricing Other
sche index
dule2 base
1988
1987
Dec.
Jan.
Aug.
Sept.
1988
Nov.
Dec.
Dec.
Jan.
Aug.
117.7
Sept.
Nov.
Dec.
118.9
119.0
119.2
-
115.4
115.7
119.0
119.8
120.2
120.3
120.5
114.2
114.5
M
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
118.3
118.9
122.5
123.9
124.1
124.4
124.5
117.4
117.9
121.3
122.7
122.9
123.2
123.3
119.4
120.0
123.4
124.8
124.9
125.1
125.3
117.8
118.1
121.4
122.8
122.9
123.1
123.2
115.6
116.2
120.9
122.2
122.5
122.9
122.2
114.5
115.1
119.7
120.8
121.2
121.6
121.0
116.2
113.3
117.1
113.4
120.5
117.2
121.3
117.7
121.7
118.1
122.7
118.1
123.3
118.2
118.8
111.4
119.6
111.5
122.9
115.3
123.7
115.8
124.2
116.1
125.1
116.2
125.7
116.3
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
_
_
_
_
_
118.5
Oct.
M
113.9
114.1
118.3
119.0
119.1
119.1
119.2
111.4
111.6
115.7
116.3
116.4
116.5
116.6
113.0
113.3
116.5
117.0
118.2
118.0
118.2
110.7
110.9
114.2
114.6
115.7
115.7
115.8
113.6
113.4
117.2
117.4
117.7
118.4
118.2
112.6
112.4
116.1
116.3
116.5
117.3
117.1
110.9
114.0
110.6
114.1
113.9
117.0
114.2
117.7
114.2
118.2
114.1
118.3
114.0
118.5
110.7
113.5
110.4
113.6
113.7
116.5
113.9
117.2
113.9
117.7
113.9
117.8
113.8
118.0
114.9
114.9
118.0
118.7
118.9
118.9
119.2
114.2
114.1
117.2
117.9
118.1
118.0
118.4
114.5
114.8
117.6
118.6
119.5
119.6
119.7
112.7
112.9
115.8
116.6
117.5
117.7
117.8
112.8
113.3
115.9
116.4
117.1
117.4
117.6
113.3
113.6
116.4
117.0
117.7
117.9
118.1
112.6
116.2
112.8
116.7
115.3
119.6
116.0
120.2
116.0
120.7
116.3
120.7
116.3
120.9
113.3
115.0
113.5
115.5
116.2
118.3
116.8
118.9
116.8
119.4
117.0
119.4
117.0
119.6
_
_
_
_
_
_
117.2
117.9
121.1
121.7
122.2
122.3
122.5
114.8
115.3
118.4
119.0
119.6
119.6
119.7
115.0
115.8
-
-
-
-
119.3
115.2
116.0
-
-
-
-
119.4
-
116.0
116.0
118.1
118.5
119.4
119.0
119.0
115.4
115.3
117.5
117.8
118.7
118.4
118.4
104.7
114.5
114.2
112.7
105.0
115.0
114.5
112.9
108.2
118.0
117.5
115.8
109.0
118.9
117.9
116.6
109.2
119.7
118.5
116.8
109.2
119.7
118.9
117.0
109.4
119.8
119.1
116.8
104.7
113.2
114.6
113.1
105.0
113.6
114.8
113.2
108.1
116.7
117.8
116.2
108.9
117.6
118.3
116.9
109.1
118.3
118.9
117.1
109.1
118.4
119.3
117.3
109.3
118.5
119.4
117.1
122.0
121.6
121.0
121.3
112.2
111.9
116.4
118.2
117.8
117.4
117.7
12/86
_
_
-
M
-
115.7
115.3
120.1
M
-
118.5
118.9
122.6
123.4
124.0
124.1
124.2
115.7
115.9
119.5
120.3
121.0
120.9
121.1
M
M
-
120.6
118.9
121.3
119.3
124.2
123.9
126.0
125.2
126.2
124.6
125.9
125.3
126.0
125.6
119.1
119.0
119.6
119.3
122.2
123.6
124.1
124.9
124.3
124.4
124.1
125.0
124.1
125.2
M
-
117.4
118.4
122.0
122.1
122.3
122.2
122.6
116.4
117.5
120.5
121.1
121.3
121.1
121.5
Baltimore, MD ......................
Boston, MA ..........................
Cleveland, OH......................
Miami, F L .............................
St. Louis, MO-IL....................
Washington, DC-MD-VA ........
1
1
1
1
1
1
_
-
116.8
120.1
113.9
114.5
113.4
118.3
_
-
121.3
126.2
117.6
118.8
117.3
122.8
_
-
121.2
127.4
118.0
118.3
118.3
123.2
_
_
-
_
-
-
-
-
120.8
127.4
113.0
117.2
117.8
122.6
-
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX..............
Detroit, M l............................
Houston, TX .........................
Pittsburgh, PA ......................
2
2
2
2
_
“
113.9
112.6
107.3
113.0
-
117.2
117.6
110.3
115.3
_
"
117.9
118.6
111.1
116.3
“
117.2
118.3
111.3
116.7
113.8
109.8
107.4
108.6
117.7
115.6
111.4
111.7
-
_
1 Area is the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA), exclu
sive of farms and military. Area definitions are those established by the Of
fice of Management and Budget in 1983, except for Boston-Lawrence-Salem, MA-NH Area (excludes Monroe County); and Milwaukee, Wl Area (in
cludes only the Milwaukee MSA). Definitions do not include revisions made
since 1983.
2 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas;
most other goods and services priced as indicated:.
M - Every month.
1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December.
90
1987
Oct.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
_
_
116.2
120.2
109.3
113.8
113.0
117.6
_
-
_
-
121.0
126.1
112.7
117.8
117.1
122.3
117.0
114.6
110.6
110.7
-
_
_
_
_
117.0
115.7
111.4
112.2
3 Regions are defined as the four Census regions.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Local area CPI Indexes are byproducts of the national CPI pro
gram. Because each local index is a small subset of the national index, it
has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more
sampling and other measurement error than the national index. As a result,
local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although
their long-term trends are quite similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI
for use in escalator clauses.
32.
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups
(1982-84 = 100)
Series
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
Food and beverages:
Housing:
Apparel and upkeep:
Transportation:
Medical care:
Entertainment:
Other goods and services:
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers:
All items:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
82.4
13.5
90.9
10.3
96.5
6.2
99.6
3.2
103.9
4.3
107.6
3.6
109.6
1.9
113.6
3.6
118.3
4.1
86.7
8.5
93.5
7.8
97.3
4.1
99.5
2.3
103.2
3.7
105.6
2.3
109.1
3.3
113.5
4.0
118.2
4.1
81.1
15.7
90.4
11.5
96.9
7.2
99.5
2.7
103.6
4.1
107.7
4.0
110.9
3.0
114.2
3.0
118.5
3.8
90.9
7.1
95.3
4.8
97.8
2.6
100.2
2.5
102.1
1.9
105.0
2.8
105.9
.9
110.6
4.4
115.4
4.3
83.1
17.9
93.2
12.2
97.0
4.1
99.3
2.4
103.7
4.4
106.4
2.6
102.3
-3.9
105.4
3.0
108.7
3.1
74.9
11.0
82.9
10.7
92.5
11.6
100.6
8.8
106.8
6.2
113.5
6.3
122.0
7.5
130.1
6.6
138.6
6.5
83.6
9.0
90.1
7.8
96.0
6.5
100.1
4.3
103.8
3.7
107.9
3.9
111.6
3.4
115.3
3.3
120.3
4.3
75.2
9.1
82.6
9.8
91.1
10.3
101.1
11.0
107.9
6.7
114.5
6.1
121.4
6.0
128.5
5.8
137.0
6.6
82.9
13.4
91.4
10.3
96.9
6.0
99.8
3.0
103.3
3.5
106.9
3.5
108.6
1.6
112.5
3.6
117.0
4.0
91
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Price Data
33. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1982 = 100)
1988
Annual average
Grouping
Finished goods ......................................
Finished consumer goods ........................
Finished consumer foods.......................
Finished consumer goods excluding
foods .....................................................
Nondurable goods less food ...............
Durable goods .....................................
Capital equipment.....................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components...........................................
Materials and components for
manufacturing ..........................................
Materials for food manufacturing...........
Materials for nondurable manufacturing .
Materials for durable manufacturing......
Components for manufacturing..............
Materials and components for
construction..............................................
Processed fuels and lubricants.................
Containers.................................................
Supplies.....................................................
Crude materials for further processing ...
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs .......................
Crude nonfood materials.........................
1987
1988
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
105.4
103.6
109.5
108.0
106.2
112.6
106.3
104.5
110.5
106.1
104.1
109.4
106.3
104.4
110.1
107.0
105.1
110.3
107.5
105.7
111.2
107.7
105.9
112.3
108.6
107.0
113.6
108.7
107.1
113.6
108.6
107.0
115.2
109.3
107.5
114.6
109.7
107.9
114.9
110.0
108.2
115.1
100.7
94.9
111.5
111.7
103.1
97.3
113.7
114.3
101.5
95.5
112.6
112.9
101.5
95.5
112.8
113.2
101.5
95.6
112.6
113.2
102.6
97.0
112.8
113.6
103.0
97.4
113.1
113.8
102.8
97.1
113.2
113.9
103.8
98.3
113.6
114.2
103.9
98.4
113.8
114.5
103.0
97.6
112.8
114.3
104.0
97.7
115.8
115.8
104.5
98.4
115.8
116.0
104.8
98.8
116.0
116.3
Sept.
101.5
107.1
104.2
104.3
104.7
105.6
106.3
107.4
108.2
108.4
108.7
108.6
109.0
109.5
105.3
100.8
102.2
106.2
108.8
113.2
105.9
112.9
118.8
112.3
109.5
101.9
107.5
114.5
110.5
109.9
102.0
108.5
113.9
110.8
110.5
101.6
109.6
114.7
111.1
111.6
102.6
110.9
116.8
111.5
112.3
104.0
111.7
117.7
111.9
112.9
106.9
112.2
118.5
112.1
114.0
109.9
113.8
119.3
112.4
114.3
108.9
114.5
119.7
112.8
114.9
109.6
115.2
120.4
113.1
115.5
108.2
116.2
121.7
113.5
116.2
107.4
116.8
123.5
113.8
116.8
108.3
117.5
124.4
114.1
109.8
73.3
114.5
107.7
116.1
71.3
120.1
113.7
113.6
70.7
116.6
110.5
113.8
70.2
116.9
110.6
114.4
69.6
117.4
111.1
115.0
70.5
118.4
111.7
115.4
71.5
119.5
112.3
115.8
73.9
120.0
113.8
116.5
73.6
120.5
115.2
116.7
73.5
121.3
115.1
117.2
72.5
122.4
115.7
117.7
69.7
122.5
116.1
118.2
69.5
122.7
116.2
118.8
70.3
122.7
116.1
93.7
96.2
87.9
95.9
106.0
85.5
93.7
97.2
87.3
94.7
99.7
87.4
94.1
99.8
86.4
95.6
101.1
88.0
97.2
104.7
88.2
97.9
108.6
87.0
97.3
110.1
85.1
96.9
110.4
84.4
96.6
111.5
83.2
95.8
111.4
82.0
94.0
107.7
81.4
97.0
109.5
85.1
104.0
61.8
112.3
112.5
113.3
106.5
59.8
115.8
116.3
117.0
104.9
59.2
113.9
114.3
115.2
105.0
58.5
113.8
114.0
115.5
105.1
58.2
114.1
114.4
115.7
105.9
60.9
114.3
114.6
115.9
106.2
61.6
114.8
115.2
116.2
106.1
60.3
115.3
115.8
116.4
106.9
61.3
116.2
116.9
117.1
107.1
61.1
116.4
117.0
117.4
106.4
58.8
116.7
117.6
117.2
107.6
58.7
117.6
118.2
118.7
108.0
59.8
117.8
118.4
118.9
108.3
59.3
118.2
118.9
119.4
114.2
118.5
116.5
116.8
117.1
117.3
117.6
117.9
118.8
119.1
118.9
120.3
120.5
121.2
116.3
122.0
119.5
119.9
120.4
120.6
120.9
121.3
122.7
123.0
123.4
123.7
124.0
125.0
101.7
99.2
73.0
107.3
107.0
109.5
71.0
114.6
104.2
102.9
70.5
111.2
104.4
101.9
70.0
111.4
104.8
102.0
69.3
112.1
105.7
103.4
70.2
113.0
106.4
104.8
71.2
113.6
107.2
111.8
73.5
114.4
107.8
116.6
73.3
115.5
108.1
114.5
73.1
115.7
108.4
115.7
72.2
116.3
108.3
114.7
69.4
116.9
108.8
113.3
69.2
117.4
109.3
112.8
70.0
117.8
107.8
115.2
111.8
112.2
112.9
113.8
114.4
114.9
115.7
116.1
116.7
117.4
118.0
118.6
75.0
100.9
115.7
67.8
112.5
132.7
70.8
105.1
129.2
70.4
107.6
131.6
68.7
108.1
133.4
70.6
109.0
133.1
71.4
111.1
131.3
70.0
114.0
131.2
67.3
115.5
132.9
66.1
116.0
133.9
64.9
116.7
133.4
63.5
116.6
133.3
62.6
114.1
134.0
66.7
115.6
134.9
Special groupings
Finished goods, excluding fo o d s.................
Finished energy goods ................................
Finished goods less energy........................
Finished consumer goods less energy.......
Finished goods less food and energy ........
Finished consumer goods less food and
energy.........................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and
energy.........................................................
Intermediate materials less foods and
fe e d s...........................................................
Intermediate foods and feeds.....................
Intermediate energy goods .........................
Intermediate goods less energy ..................
Intermediate materials less foods and
energy.........................................................
Crude energy materials................................
Crude materials less energy .......................
Crude nonfood materials less energy.........
Digitized for
92FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
34.
Producer Price indexes, by durability of product
(1982 = 100)
1988
Annual average
Grouping
1987
1988
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
115.1
102.6
115.2
102.7
116.2
102.2
116.7
102.1
117.1
102.9
Sept.
Total durable goods.................................
Total nondurable goods............................
109.9
97.5
114.7
101.1
112.8
98.5
113.0
98.6
113.3
98.8
113.8
99.8
114.1
100.8
114.4
101.8
114.8
102.6
Total manufactures...................................
Durable..................................................
Nondurable ............................................
104.4
109.6
99.2
109.1
114.0
104.1
106.6
112.2
101.1
106.8
112.4
101.3
107.1
112.6
101.7
107.9
113.2
102.7
108.6
113.5
103.7
109.0
113.7
104.3
109.8
114.1
105.4
110.0
114.4
105.6
110.1
114.5
105.7
110.5
115.5
105.5
111.0
116.0
106.0
111.3
116.3
106.3
Total raw or slightly processed goods .......
Durable..................................................
Nondurable ............................................
94.2
122.6
92.9
95.9
147.4
93.5
94.0
139.9
91.9
94.1
144.6
91.8
93.8
146.2
91.4
94.9
146.1
92.5
95.6
143.1
93.3
97.5
144.2
95.3
97.8
149.3
95.3
97.2
150.6
94.7
97.5
149.4
95.0
96.4
149.9
93.9
94.7
151.8
92.1
96.9
153.8
94.2
35.
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1982 = 100)
Index
Finished goods:
Consumer goods .........................................
Capital equipment .......................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components:
Total ...............................................................
Materials and components for
manufacturing.............................................
Materials and components for construction ....
Processed fuels and lubricants ....................
Supplies ......................................................
1979
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
77.6
77.5
77.5
88.0
88.6
85.8
96.1
96.6
94.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.6
101.3
102.8
103.7
103.3
105.2
104.7
103.8
107.5
103.2
101.4
109.7
105.4
103.6
111.7
78.4
90.3
98.6
100.0
100.6
103.1
102.7
99.1
101.5
80.9
84.2
61.6
79.4
80.2
91.7
91.3
85.0
89.1
89.9
98.7
97.9
100.6
96.7
96.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.2
102.8
95.4
100.4
101.8
104.1
105.6
95.7
105.9
104.1
103.3
107.3
92.8
109.0
104.4
102.2
108.1
72.7
110.3
105.6
105.3
109.8
85.9
100.0
69.6
57.3
95.3
104.6
84.6
69.4
103.0
103.9
101.8
84.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.3
101.8
100.7
105.1
103.5
104.7
102.2
105.1
95.8
94.8
96.9
102.7
87.7
93.2
81.6
92.2
93.7
96.2
87.9
84.1
Crude materials for further processing:
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs ............................
Nonfood materials except fuel .....................
Fuel ............................................................
1980
114.5
107.7
93
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R E V IE W
36.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Price Data
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(1985 = 100 , unless otherwise indicated)
Category
1974
SITO
1987
1986
1988
June
Sept.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
99.4
99.1
97.9
99.0
99.9
102.2
102.8
104.9
106.5
109.5
111.7
0
01
03
04
05
08
09
97.2
102.5
100.2
91.7
98.6
120.0
98.0
97.1
105.2
108.6
89.0
108.6
114.8
97.0
86.0
111.3
111.9
66.3
114.6
123.9
98.7
90.1
114.5
115.9
72.5
117.5
119.7
99.9
87.3
115.0
117.1
68.3
115.3
117.0
100.1
89.9
121.2
125.8
71.0
112.4
123.8
100.6
86.7
118.8
131.1
67.8
101.1
123.1
100.3
94.6
116.8
138.5
77.4
100.5
145.2
100.3
95.2
122.8
140.9
79.8
97.5
134.6
102.3
103.4
131.0
145.0
87.2
104.3
158.1
102.8
118.7
137.5
176.0
108.3
109.9
160.9
105.2
1
11
12
96.6
97.4
97.3
102.6
102.6
107.0
97.0
102.6
102.6
105.5
107.0
109.6
“
109.8
110.6
97.1
105.0
“
105.0
105.5
96.3
110.7
112.0
“
112.1
Pulp and waste paper..........................................................................
Textile fibers.......................................................................................
Crude fertilizers and minerals..............................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap .....................................................
2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
101.4
108.7
99.1
99.7
101.5
104.2
100.2
100.0
100.3
102.2
117.1
98.1
99.9
101.2
116.4
98.0
98.4
98.0
99.6
108.3
97.5
99.6
102.9
129.0
73.0
98.0
100.4
102.4
115.9
95.2
98.9
107.9
129.4
90.9
96.8
96.8
105.7
131.9
90.4
99.9
111.2
144.2
97.8
94.4
98.8
114.5
149.6
101.6
101.0
116.2
149.9
112.4
94.0
107.0
118.7
147.7
95.1
102.8
141.7
153.0
116.5
91.6
117.4
125.2
157.1
109.6
105.3
146.0
160.4
111.6
91.6
125.9
130.0
171.4
115.6
104.5
150.2
171.2
107.5
92.8
131.8
139.9
166.8
143.0
106.1
149.6
179.5
109.9
94.2
146.0
140.7
156.3
154.7
109.1
150.0
180.8
100.8
94.8
145.0
Mineral fuels...............................................................................................
3
83.6
76.8
77.4
77.8
81.3
82.8
84.6
82.5
79.3
82.0
79.5
Animal and vegetables oils, fats, and waxes.........................................
4
42
74.3
71.3
67.7
70.6
62.1
60.2
71.8
64.6
73.9
67.3
78.8
71.9
78.5
71.2
81.6
75.4
92.7
85.7
97.3
93.7
102.0
99.1
5
51
56
99.8
98.5
98.9
98.0
93.1
93.0
95.7
91.6
85.1
95.2
92.4
77.4
99.6
101.9
85.6
106.7
118.4
91.6
107.7
116.1
100.9
112.9
123.5
106.5
117.9
135.1
110.6
121.6
144.6
109.8
124.9
153.5
116.2
6
61
62
64
67
68
69
101.3
97.3
100.7
100.5
100.3
104.2
100.4
102.5
103.8
100.1
104.7
100.2
103.1
100.8
103.8
104.2
100.5
109.1
102.3
105.3
100.8
104.2
107.8
100.9
110.8
101.9
102.6
100.8
106.4
123.6
102.0
114.7
102.9
106.6
101.5
107.9
126.9
102.5
117.0
102.9
113.0
101.3
110.3
128.7
103.9
120.1
100.7
123.0
102.3
111.2
118.0
104.1
122.4
102.9
124.4
103.4
114.4
125.7
105.2
126.2
106.1
134.0
104.5
117.7
125.1
108.8
129.0
110.8
143.5
107.6
119.6
128.6
109.2
130.2
111.1
148.9
109.9
7
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
100.7
102.3
100.6
101.9
100.9
99.9
99.2
99.5
101.0
102.1
100.8
102.4
100.3
102.0
101.6
99.0
98.9
99.2
101.7
103.1
101.0
102.5
100.4
103.0
102.5
98.8
99.7
99.7
101.9
102.8
101.6
103.7
100.6
104.2
103.3
98.2
101.3
100.3
103.3
103.5
101.7
104.6
100.0
105.8
104.2
96.0
101.9
101.7
103.1
104.5
101.8
103.7
100.1
106.7
104.5
96.1
101.4
102.1
103.5
105.5
102.1
104.8
100.5
107.8
104.6
95.7
101.4
102.5
103.8
105.8
102.4
105.2
100.9
108.2
105.4
95.5
101.9
101.8
104.6
106.6
103.2
107.0
102.1
109.3
106.7
95.8
102.8
103.1
104.5
107.4
104.0
108.4
103.6
110.8
108.1
95.7
104.6
103.4
104.9
109.6
104.5
108.5
104.7
111.0
109.3
96.7
104.1
103.1
105.4
109.7
8
84
87
102.3
103.5
103.1
103.4
103.0
103.8
103.5
104.6
104.4
105.2
105.5
105.4
106.3
105.6
107.1
106.9
102.0
110.0
108.1
111.1
108.9
112.5
88
101.9
102.6
102.4
102.1
102.7
102.5
99.0
97.9
97.6
100.1
99.3
Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s....................................... ,....
89
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Gold, non-monetary ...........................................................................
971
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ALL COMMODITIES...................................................................................
Food ............................................................................................................
Grain and grain preparations ..............................................................
Vegetables and fruit ...........................................................................
Feedstuffs for animals.................. ......................................................
Misc. food products ...........................................................................
Beverages and tobacco............................................................................
Beverages.........................................................................................
Tobacco and tobacco products............................................... ............
Crude materials..........................................................................................
Raw hides and skins.................................................................... .........
Oilseeds and oleaginous fruit........................................................ ......
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaimed)..................................
Fixed vegetable oils and fats .............................................................
Chemicals ................... ...............................................................................
Organic cnemicals..............................................................................
Fertilizers, manufactured ....................................................................
Intermediate manufactured products ....................................................
Leather and fursklns...........................................................................
Rubber manufactures ................................................ .........................
Paper and paperboard products .........................................................
Nonferrous metals .............................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s....................................................................
Machinery and transport equipment, excluding military
and commercial aircraft...........................................................................
Power generating machinery and equipment................................... .
Machinery specialized for particular industries................... ...................
Metalworking machinery.................................. ...................................
General Industrial machines and parts n.e.s...... ...................................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment .................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing equipment.......
Electrical machinery and equipment....................................................
Road vehicles and parts.....................................................................
Other transport equipment, excl. military and commercial aviation .......
Other manufactured articles ....................................................................
Apparel .............................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and apparatus........
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches and
clocks ..............................................................................................
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Mar.
Dec.
Mar.
; _ ,
37.
. '" i
ty -:;
U.S. Import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(1985 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Category
1974
SITC
Meat..................................................................................................
Dairy products and eggs ....................................................................
Fish...................................................................................................
Bakery goods, pasta products, grain and grain preparations
Fruits and vegetables .......... ..............................................................
Sugar, sugar preparations, and honey.................................................
Coffee, tea, cocoa..............................................................................
Beverages and tobacco ............................................................................
Beverages .........................................................................................
Crude materials..........................................................................................
Crude rubber (inc. synthetic & reclaimed) ...........................................
Wood ................... .............................................................................
Pulp and waste paper ........................................................................
Crude fertilizers and crude minerals ....................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap .....................................................
Crude vegetable and animal materials, n.e.s.........................................
Fuels and related products......................................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products .....................................................
Fats and oils ...............................................................................................
Vegetable oils ...................................................................................
Chemicals ...................................................................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products...............................................
Manufactured fertilizers ......................................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s, ...............................................
Intermediate manufactured products.....................................................
Leather and furskins...........................................................................
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s.................................................................
Cork and wood manufactures .............................................................
Paper and paperboard products .........................................................
Textiles..............................................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s...............................................
Iron and steel ....................................................................................
Nonferrous metals...............................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s....................................................................
Machinery and transport equipment .....................................................
Machinery specialized for particular industries.....................................
Metalworking machinery ....................................................................
General industrial machinery and parts, n.e.s........................................
Office machines and automatic data orocessina equipment
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing apparatus
Electrical machinery and equipment....................................................
Road vehicles and parts ....................................................................
Mise, manufactured articles ................... .................................................
Plumbing, heating, and lighting fixtures................................................
Furniture and parts ............................................................................
Clothing .............................................................................................
Footwear............................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
apparatus................................ .........................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
clocks ..............................................................................................
Mlsc. manufactured articles, n.e.s.........................................................
Gold, non-monetary (6/82—100)..............................................................
1988
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
101.1
102.3
106.5
110.0
110.9
112.5
113.8
116.8
115.5
0
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
112.0
104.3
111.3
114.1
117.8
106.0
106.2
121.5
109.1
109.2
113.8
119.1
118.8
104.3
106.5
104.9
105.2
105.0
119.3
121.8
122.3
101.9
107.4
89.9
108.3
108.0
122.3
126.0
126.2
110.1
109.6
87.0
109.1
114.4
121.7
130.4
124.8
110.0
109.0
85.1
112.5
113.4
125.1
131.0
130.7
116.2
107.0
90.6
114.1
111.5
125.6
132.5
135.8
115.4
109.6
94.3
114.0
107.0
125.0
129.3
139.8
120.3
110.0
93.3
112.8
111.2
122.2
125.9
137.4
124.0
113.6
87.2
1
11
103.9
107.5
106.8
109.5
107.8
112.1
112.8
114.2
112.2
114.8
113.5
116.2
116.0
118.7
116.2
120.0
115.3
118.9
2
23
24
25
27
28
29
109.5
97.7
107.6
108.0
98.4
124.8
112.4
109.1
98.4
104.8
116.9
98.6
118.3
111.9
115.1
98.4
113.5
127.0
98.2
122.8
113.0
116.2
103.7
110.2
132.0
99.6
124.5
109.0
120.3
110.7
117.4
133.4
99.2
128.7
107.6
122.1
120.1
108.8
141.0
99.9
137.9
118.3
129.2
121.7
112.4
151.0
100.4
151.2
135.8
137.8
151.1
111.4
160.5
101.0
167.6
148.2
135.3
133.3
109.7
169.6
97.2
172.2
121.8
3
33
52.2
50.0
55.9
55.0
67.4
67.4
74.1
74.4
74.3
75.2
67.2
67.8
60.6
60.4
63.4
63.6
58.9
58.9
4
42
61.2
-
83.4
-
82.9
-
87.9
-
96.4
100.0
102.1
105.7
106.4
111.1
111.2
116.1
113.6
118.7
5
54
56
59
99.8
115.9
89.8
111.3
99.0
113.6
89.9
112.7
102.6
120.1
92.9
115.1
104.8
123.4
94.6
117.7
105.6
124.3
109.3
120.6
110.1
126.3
133.6
124.8
114.2
135.3
133.7
138.7
116.4
140.3
136.3
148.5
119.6
147.4
136.5
155.4
6
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
105.8
108.8
102.0
112.7
101.0
107.4
116.6
100.0
103.3
107.7
106.7
107.2
101.8
117.4
104.9
107.9
117.9
100.9
101.5
108.3
108.6
110.9
104.3
118.0
104.8
110.4
120.5
102.7
102.5
112.1
112.5
116.6
104.6
124.3
104.9
111.8
126.7
106.6
112.4
112.7
116.3
117.8
103.2
128.3
110.3
114.6
130.4
109.4
120.9
114.6
119.8
124.4
104.6
128.2
112.3
118.6
133.4
114.0
125.8
117.8
124.4
131.8
106.0
133.8
117.2
120.0
137.4
120.0
132.7
121.1
132.2
137.0
107.7
138.2
118.3
120.6
142.5
127.2
159.7
126.9
132.1
136.6
109.1
136.2
119.5
118.9
139.6
129.7
158.3
127.4
7
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
113.0
122.7
117.7
119.9
109.9
109.2
108.8
112.9
114.4
123.0
120.9
120.9
108.9
108.9
109.8
116.1
117.5
130.4
126.4
127.9
110.0
110.5
112.4
118.6
119.9
136.1
128.1
130.8
114.0
110.3
115.8
120.5
119.9
134.3
130.2
130.1
114.8
110.2
115.1
120.6
123.1
142.1
135.5
137.0
118.3
112.1
118.2
122.6
125.4
146.8
139.9
140.4
118.1
112.8
122.2
125.5
127.3
149.8
142.4
143.6
119.5
113.8
124.2
127.6
126.6
143.6
139.4
139.7
118.4
113.8
125.7
127.1
8
81
82
84
85
109.7
111.1
110.7
101.7
110.7
110.3
110.8
112.3
102.6
112.3
114.5
111.6
114.8
106.4
114.8
117.8
117.0
119.8
109.2
119.8
118.5
116.2
119.0
111.9
119.0
121.8
121.0
124.3
112.3
124.3
124.2
123.4
125.4
115.6
125.4
125.7
126.9
129.6
114.9
129.6
124.3
124.5
128.0
116.8
128.0
87
122.6
122.5
131.3
135.9
132.7
138.7
140.0
142.5
135.8
88
89
118.0
"
119.0
123.7
”
126.0
“
122.1
127.3
“
129.2
“
129.3
“
125.5
“
971
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ALL COMMODITIES ...................................................................................
Food ...........................................................................................................
1987
1986
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
95
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
February 1989
Current Labor Statistics: Price Data
•
38. U.S. export price indexes by end-use category
(1985 = 100 unless otherwise Indicatevi)
1988
1987
1986
Category
Sept.
Foods, feeds, and beverages ...................................................
Raw materials..........................................................................
Capital goods .........................................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines....................................
Consumer goods.....................................................................
Nondurables..........................................................................
Durables ...............................................................................
Mar.
Dec.
87.2
95.1
100.7
102.3
103.6
102.9
103.8
June
87.4
100.8
101.4
103.4
105.9
105.5
105.4
90.2
96.3
101.1
103.5
105.2
104.9
104.3
Sept.
88.0
109.1
101.8
104.0
106.9
107.3
104.6
91.5
106.1
101.6
103.6
106.3
106.6
104.3
Mar.
Dec.
98.5
114.2
103.4
104.3
110.1
110.4
107.4
96.6
111.8
102.1
104.5
108.0
107.9
106.3
Sept.
June
124.5
118.7
104.9
105.3
111.3
110.8
109.4
110.1
118.3
104.3
104.8
110.6
110.4
108.7
39. U.S. import price indexes by end-use category
(1985 = 100)
1986
1987
1988
Category
Sept.
Foods, feeds, and beverages ...................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products, excl. natural gas................
Raw materials, excluding petroleum .....................................
Raw materials, nondurable ............
Raw materials, durable..........................................................
Capital goods...........................................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines....................................
Consumer goods........................................................
Nondurable................................................
Durable ................................................................................
Mar.
Dec.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
109.8
50.0
108.4
54.7
105.2
67.2
107.8
74.1
109.0
74.7
112.1
67.6
113.7
60.3
113.7
63.5
112.8
58.7
-
-
_
_
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
113.5
112.7
110.1
114.2
114.6
110.5
118.7
116.5
114.2
122.2
118.4
116.9
121.9
118.4
118.2
126.6
120.6
121.4
128.6
123.7
124.2
131.0
125.8
126.3
128.8
125.9
124.8
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Data not available.
40. U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
(1985 = 100)
1988
1987
1986
Industry group
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Manufacturing:
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks...................
1 SIC - based classification.
Digitized for96
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
97.4
104 8
104.0
102.3
95.8
65.1
109.3
100.1
99.9
104.8
104.7
100.2
108 8
104.1
104.9
95.8
67.6
106.9
100.1
100.8
106.0
105.3
102.0
112.8
108.0
109.3
100.5
73.5
110.6
99.6
101.9
106.2
105.8
107.4
116.2
108.6
112.3
107.6
80.5
117.2
99.4
102.1
106.7
106.8
107.1
138.9
108.7
115.5
108.7
81.4
122.3
99.4
102.5
106.9
106.6
Dec.
116.3
142.5
111.2
119.3
113.8
78.8
126.6
99.7
102.2
107.8
107.1
Mar.
120.8
146.1
112.5
124.6
118.4
73.0
126.9
100.6
102.9
108.1
109.2
June
125.1
145.4
112.9
129.8
122.3
77.8
133.8
101.3
103.7
109.1
110.8
Sept.
128.9
146.1
112.9
132.7
125.5
73.5
133.3
102.2
103.5
109.4
112.1
41.
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification
(1985 = 100)
1986
1987
1988
Industry group
Sept.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products..................................................
Textile mill products ..........................................................
Apparel and related products ..............................................
Lumber and wood products, except furniture .......................
Furniture and fixtures ........................................................
Paper and allied products.....................................................
Chemicals and allied products .............................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products ........................
Leather and leather products ..............................................
Primary metal products .........................................
Fabricated metal products................. ..............................
Machinery, except electrical.................................................
Electrical machinery...........................................
................................
Transportation equipment
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks........................
Miscellaneous manufactured commodities ..........................
Dec.
99.7
109.2
102.4
109.0
111.4
98.6
104.3
106.6
105.3
102.3
111.1
118.2
106.9
114.7
122.6
110.7
Mar.
103.0
110.6
103.0
109.0
111.6
103.3
102.6
107.9
106.4
101.3
111.7
118.9
107.0
117.3
122.4
112.2
June
103.8
114.1
107.0
114.8
116.1
105.1
105.7
110.6
108.3
102.7
116.7
123.4
109.4
119.9
128.8
115.1
Sept.
106.3
116.1
109.4
115.0
117.0
105.9
106.2
113.6
113.3
110.4
117.5
127.4
110.7
122.1
132.5
118.1
Dec.
108.4
119.4
112.3
120.3
118.3
110.9
107.2
112.3
113.3
115.2
119.8
127.8
110.2
122.5
128.8
121.4
Mar.
110.6
124.3
113.4
115.4
118.9
113.6
112.2
115.7
118.4
120.0
123.2
133.9
112.5
124.6
134.0
123.8
June
114.0
127.4
116.6
119.5
122.2
119.1
116.8
117.2
120.8
122.6
127.3
135.9
114.7
127.3
135.8
127.7
Sept.
114.4
128.9
115.8
120.3
124.0
121.3
121.3
119.0
124.6
137.0
133.3
138.2
116.1
129 5
137 0
133.1
1 SIC - based classification.
42.
Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
(1977=100)
Quarterly Indexes
Item
1986
I
II
1987
III
IV
I
II
1988
III
IV
I
II
III
Business:
Output per hour of all persons...................
Compensation per hour.....................
Real compensation per hour.................
Unit labor costs .................
Unit nonlabor payments ......................
Implicit price deflator ......................
110.5
180.4
100.0
163.3
164.5
163.7
110.4
182.0
101.2
164.9
165.2
165.0
110.0
184.0
101.7
167.3
166.6
167.0
109.8
186.2
102.2
169.6
163.7
167.5
109.9
187.3
101.5
170.5
165.6
168.7
110.6
189.0
101.2
170.8
168.7
170.1
111.7
191.1
101.4
171.1
171.5
171.2
111.8
194.0
102.0
173.5
168.9
171.9
112.8
195.8
102.1
173.5
170.0
172.3
111.8
198.1
102.1
177.1
170.4
174.7
112 2
201.0
102.4
179.1
172.4
176.7
108.6
179.8
99.6
165.5
166.1
165.7
108.4
181.2
100.7
167.1
166.6
167.0
108.0
183.1
101.2
169.5
168.1
169.0
107.8
185.4
101.8
172.1
164.9
169.5
107.8
186.4
101.0
172.9
167.2
170.9
108.6
187.9
100.6
173.0
169.8
171.9
109.6
190.0
100.8
173.3
173.0
173.2
109.9
192.9
101.4
175.6
170.9
174.0
110.8
194.6
101.5
175.7
171.6
174.2
110.1
196.6
101.3
178.6
171.8
176.2
110 6
199.4
101.5
180.2
173.6
177.9
109.5
177.1
98.1
165.5
161.7
176.7
133.7
161.7
161.7
109.3
178.5
99.2
166.7
163.3
176.9
132.7
161.4
162.6
109.6
180.2
99.6
168.4
164.3
180.3
133.6
164.0
164.2
110.3
182.2
100.1
168.8
165.1
179.6
129.7
162.1
164.1
110.1
182.9
99.1
169.9
166.2
180.8
128.5
162.5
164.9
110.9
184.3
98.7
170.3
166.1
182.6
129.8
164.1
165.4
112.2
186.1
98.7
170.2
165.9
183.0
136.4
166.6
166.1
112.2
188.5
99.1
172.0
168.1
183.6
128.3
164.2
166.7
113.3
189.9
99.0
171.5
167.5
183.4
132.5
165.6
166.9
112.9
191.9
98.9
173.8
170.0
185.1
132.6
166.7
168.8
112 6
194 4
99.0
176 4
172.7
187.6
129 5
167.2
170.8
126.6
181.1
100.3
143.0
127.2
182.0
101.2
143.2
128.0
183.6
101.5
143.4
128.8
185.3
101.7
143.8
130.0
185.9
100.8
143.1
131.7
186.3
99.7
141.4
132.8
187.2
99.3
141.0
133.2
188.2
99.0
141.3
134.3
190.7
99.4
142.1
135.5
192.1
99.0
141.8
137 2
194 4
99 0
141.6
Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all persons....................
Compensation per hour.....................
Real compensation per hour.............................
Unit labor costs .......................
Unit nonlabor payments ....................................
Implicit price deflator ........................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees........
Compensation per hour..................
Real compensation per hour..................
Total unit costs....................
Unit labor costs ......................
Unit nonlabor costs......................
Unit profits.......................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................
Implicit price deflator ....................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons..............
Compensation per hour....................
Real compensation per hour.......
Unit labor costs .......................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
115.2
126.5
117.2
118.6
124.8
123.8
123.8
117 8
123 7
132 3
134 9
129 2
130.7
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R EV IEW
43.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics: Productivity Data
Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1973
1977
1979
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
Private business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons ........................
Output per unit of capital services...................
Multifactor productivity....................................
Output..............................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons.......................................
Capital services .............................................
Combined units of labor and capital input........
Capital per hour of all persons...........................
67.3
103.7
78.5
55.3
88.4
102.7
93.1
80.2
95.9
105.6
99.2
93.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.5
99.7
99.6
107.9
100.6
92.3
97.6
108.9
100.3
86.6
95.2
105.4
103.0
88.3
97.6
109.9
105.6
92.7
100.9
119.2
107.9
92.9
102.4
124.3
110.3
93.0
103.9
128.7
111.2
93.7
104.7
133.4
82.2
53.3
70.5
64.9
90.8
78.1
86.1
86.1
96.9
88.0
93.7
90.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.4
108.2
108.3
99.8
108.2
117.9
111.5
108.9
105.2
121.8
110.7
115.8
106.7
124.4
112.6
116.6
112.9
128.6
118.1
113.9
115.2
133.8
121.4
116.1
116.7
138.5
123.9
118.7
120.0
142.4
127.4
118.6
70.7
104.9
81.2
54.4
89.2
103.5
93.8
79.9
96.4
106.3
99.7
92.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.2
98.9
99.1
107.9
99.6
91.0
96.7
108.4
99.1
85.1
94.1
104.8
102.5
87.3
97.0
110.1
104.7
91.3
99.9
119.3
106.2
91.0
100.7
124.0
108.3
90.8
102.0
128.3
109.1
91.5
102.7
133.2
77.0
51.9
67.1
67.4
89.6
77.2
85.2
86.2
96.3
87.3
93.2
90.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.8
109.1
108.9
100.3
108.8
119.1
112.2
109.4
105.7
123.3
111.4
116.6
107.4
126.1
113.5
117.4
114.0
130.6
119.4
114.6
116.8
136.3
123.1
116.7
118.5
141.3
125.8
119.3
122.0
145.5
129.6
119.2
62.2
103.0
72.0
52.5
80.8
99.1
85.3
78.6
93.4
112.0
98.0
96.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.4
99.5
100.9
108.1
103.6
89.0
99.7
104.8
105.9
81.6
99.2
98.4
112.0
86.7
105.0
104.7
118.1
95.5
112.1
117.5
123.6
97.3
116.4
122.0
127.7
98.4
119.5
124.7
131.9
102.0
123.6
130.1
84.4
51.0
72.9
60.4
97.3
79.3
92.1
81.5
103.1
86.0
98.3
83.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.5
108.6
107.1
101.9
101.1
117.8
105.1
116.5
92.9
120.5
99.2
129.8
93.5
120.8
99.7
129.3
99.5
123.0
104.8
123.7
98.7
125.4
104.8
127.1
97.7
126.8
104.4
129.8
98.6
127.6
105.3
129.4
Private nonfarm business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................
Output per unit of capital services...................
Multifactor productivity....................................
Output..............................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons.......................................
Capital services .............................................
Combined units of labor and capital Input........
Capital per hour of all persons...........................
Manufacturing
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................
Output per unit of capital services...................
Multifactor productivity....................................
Output..............................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons.......................................
Capital services .............................................
Combined units of labor and capital inputs ......
Capital per hour of all persons..........................
98
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
44.
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1973
1976
1978
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
67.6
33.6
68.9
49.7
46.4
48.5
88.4
57.8
90.3
65.4
59.4
63.2
95.9
70.9
96.8
73.9
72.5
73.4
98.3
92.8
98.8
94.3
93.3
94.0
100.8
108.5
100.9
107.6
106.7
107.3
99.3
131.5
96.7
132.5
118.7
127.6
100.7
143.7
95.8
142.7
134.6
139.8
100.3
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.6
148.1
103.0
161.4
98.2
156.7
146.4
153.0
105.5
167.9
97.9
159.1
156.5
158.2
107.7
175.5
98.8
162.9
160.9
162.2
110.1
183.1
101.2
166.3
165.0
165.8
111.0
190.4
101.5
171.5
168.7
170.5
71.0
35.3
72.3
49.7
46.3
48.5
89.3
58.2
90.9
65.2
60.0
63.4
96.4
71.2
97.2
73.9
69.3
72.3
98.5
92.8
98.9
94.3
93.0
93.8
100.8
108.6
100.9
107.7
105.6
107.0
98.8
131.3
96.6
132.9
118.5
127.8
99.8
143.6
95.8
144.0
133.5
140.3
99.2
154.8
97.2
156.0
136.5
149.2
102.5
161.5
98.3
157.6
148.3
154.3
104.6
167.8
97.9
160.4
156.3
159.0
106.1
174.9
98.5
164.9
161.9
163.8
108.2
182.3
100.8
168.6
166.4
167.8
109.0
189.4
101.0
173.8
170.2
172.5
73.4
36.9
75.5
49.4
50.2
47.0
59.8
51.5
50.7
91.1
59.2
92.5
64.8
65.0
64.2
52.3
60.1
63.3
97.5
71.6
97.7
72.7
73.4
70.7
65.6
68.9
71.9
98.4
92.9
98.9
94.8
94.3
96.2
89.4
93.8
94.2
100.6
108.4
100.8
107.3
107.8
105.7
102.0
104.4
106.6
99.1
131.1
96.4
133.4
132.3
136.7
85.2
118.6
127.6
99.6
143.3
95.5
147.7
143.8
159.1
98.1
137.8
141.7
100.4
154.3
96.9
159.5
153.8
176.4
78.5
142.1
149.8
103.5
159.9
97.3
159.5
154.5
174.3
110.9
152.1
153.7
106.0
165.8
96.7
160.8
156.5
173.6
136.5
160.6
157.9
107.7
172.5
97.1
164.1
160.2
175.8
133.0
160.8
160.4
109.7
179.5
99.2
167.3
163.6
178.4
132.4
162.3
163.2
111.3
185.5
98.9
170.6
166.6
182.5
130.8
164.4
165.8
62.2
36.5
74.8
58.7
60.0
59.1
80.8
57.4
89.6
71.0
64.1
69.0
93.4
68.8
93.9
73.7
70.7
72.8
97.1
92.1
98.1
94.9
93.5
94.5
101.5
108.2
100.6
106.6
101.9
105.2
101.4
132.4
97.4
130.6
97.8
121.0
103.6
145.2
96.8
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
118.1
168.0
98.0
142.2
138.6
141.2
123.6
176.4
99.3
142.7
130.4
139.1
127.7
183.0
101.2
143.3
136.3
141.3
132.0
186.9
99.7
141.7
139.2
141.0
Business:
Output per hour of all persons...........................
Compensation per hour.....................................
Real compensation per hour.............................
Unit labor costs ................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ....................................
Implicit price deflator ........................................
Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all persons...........................
Compensation per hour.....................................
Real compensation per hour.............................
Unit labor costs ................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ....................................
Implicit price deflator ........................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees......................
Compensation per hour.....................................
Real compensation per hour.............................
Total unit costs.................................................
Unit labor costs .............................................
Unit nonlabor costs........................................
Unit profits........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ....................................
Implicit price deflator ........................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons..........................
Compensation per hour.....................................
Real compensation per hour.............................
Unit labor costs ................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ....................................
Implicit price deflator ........................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
100
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
45.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
U n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e s , a p p r o x i m a t i n g U .S .
International Comparisons Data
c o n c e p t s , in n i n e c o u n t r i e s , q u a r t e r l y d a t a
s e a s o n a lly a d ju s te d
Annual average
Country
1986
1988
1987
Total labor force basis
United States.................
Canada ..........................
Australia ........................
Japan ............................
6.9
9.5
8.0
2.8
6.1
8.8
8.1
2.9
France ...........................
Germany........................
Italy 2..........................
Sweden3 ........................
United Kingdom..............
10.4
6.8
7.4
2.6
11.2
10.6
6.8
7.7
1.9
10.2
United States.................
Canada .........................
Australia .......................
Japan ...........................
7.0
9.6
8.1
2.8
6.2
8.9
8.1
2.9
France ..........................
Germany.......................
Italy1, 2 ..........................
Sweden3 .......................
United Kingdom.............
10.6
7.0
7.5
2.6
11.2
10.8
6.9
7.9
1.9
10.3
Civilian labor force basis
1 Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
2 Many Italians reported as unemployed did not actively
seek work in the past 30 days, and they have been ex
cluded for comparability with U.S. concepts. Inclusion of
such persons would about double the Italian unemployment
rate in 1985 and earlier years and increase it to 11-12 per
cent for 1986 onward.
3 Break in series beginning in 1987. The 1986 rate based
on the new series was 2.2 percent.
NOTE: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, and the
United Kingdom are calculated by applying annual adjust
ment factors to current published data and therefore should
be viewed as less precise indicators of unemployment under
U.S. concepts than the annual figures.
46. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, approximating U.S. concepts,
10 countries
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status and country
1978
1979
102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,460
26,000
20,570
5,010
4,203
26,260
104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,660
26,250
20,850
5,100
4,262
26,350
63.2
62.7
61.9
62.8
57.5
53.3
47.8
48.8
66.1
62.8
63.7
63.4
61.6
62.7
57.5
53.3
48.0
49.0
66.6
62.6
63.8
64.1
62.1
62.6
57.2
53.2
48.2
50.2
66.9
62.5
63.9
64.8
61.9
62.6
57.1
52.9
48.3
51.4
66.8
62.2
96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
21,260
25,130
19,720
4,750
4,109
24,610
98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
19,930
4,830
4,174
24,940
99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,330
25,750
20,200
4,980
4,226
24,670
100,397
11,006
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,560
20,280
5,010
4,219
23,800
59.3
57.5
58.0
61.3
54.4
51.5
45.9
46.3
64.6
58.8
59.9
58.7
57.8
61.4
54.0
51.7
45.9
46.4
65.3
59.2
59.2
59.3
58.3
61.3
53.5
51.7
46.1
47.0
65.6
58.1
59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
45.9
46.6
65.1
55.7
57.8
57.0
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
45.2
45.8
64.7
55.3
57.9
56.7
55.3
61.4
51.8
48.6
44.7
44.5
64.4
54.7
59.5
57.4
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
44.5
44.3
64.5
55.3
60.1
58.4
56.6
60.6
50.4
48.7
44.4
45.3
65.0
55.7
60.7
59.4
57.9
60.4
50.2
49.2
44.6
45.6
65.4
55.7
61.5
60.3
57.9
60.1
49.7
49.4
44.4
45.6
66.2
56.6
6,202
908
405
1,240
1,200
870
850
260
94
1,650
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,360
780
920
270
88
1,420
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
920
330
86
1,850
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,750
1,090
1,040
510
108
2,790
10,678
1,314
495
1,360
1,920
1,560
1,160
590
137
3,030
10,717
1,448
697
1,560
1,970
1,900
1,270
710
151
3,190
8,539
1,399
642
1,610
2,320
1,970
1,280
690
136
3,180
8,312
1,328
602
1,560
2,440
2,010
1,310
600
125
3,060
8,237
1,236
610
1,670
2,490
1,890
1,680
560
117
3,090
7,425
1,167
629
1,730
2,550
1,890
1,760
540
84
2,850
6.1
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.3
3.3
4.1
5.2
2.2
6.3
5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
4.4
5.3
2.1
5.4
7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
4.4
6.2
2.0
7.0
7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.6
4.1
4.9
9.2
2.5
10.5
9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.8
5.4
10.6
3.1
11.3
9.6
11.9
10.0
2.7
8.5
7.1
5.9
12.7
7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8
10.0
7.4
5.9
12.3
3.1
11.7
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.5
6.0
10.5
2.8
11.2
7.0
9.6
8.1
2.8
10.6
7.0
7.5
9.7
2.6
11.2
6.2
8.9
8.1
2.9
10.8
6.9
7.9
9.3
1.9
10.3
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
Labor force
United States ...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands......................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
106,940 108,670
11,573 11,904
6,693
6,810
55,740 56,320
22,800 22,950
26,520 26,650
21,120 21,320
5,310
5,520
4,312
4,327
26,520 26,590
110,204
11,958
6,910
56,980
23,160
26,700
21,410
5,570
4,350
26,740
111,550 113,544 115,461
12,183
12,399 12,639
6,997
7,133
7,272
58,110 58,480 58,820
23,140 23,300 23,360
26,650 26,770 26,970
21,590 21,670 21,800
5,600
5,620
5,710
4,369
4,385
4,418
26,790 27,180 27,370
117,834 119,865
12,870 13,121
7,562
7,736
59,410 60,050
23,450 23,520
27,110 27,290
22,280 22,340
5,760
5,810
4,443
4,480
27,540 27,760
Participation rate1
United States...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands......................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
64.0
64.1
61.7
62.7
57.1
52.6
47.7
51.2
66.8
62.3
64.0
64.4
61.4
63.1
56.6
52.3
47.5
50.9
66.7
62.1
64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.4
47.3
50.5
66.6
62.6
64.8
65.2
61.8
62.3
56.3
52.6
47.2
50.7
66.9
62.7
99,526 100,834 105,005
10,644
10,734
11,000
6,415
6,300
6,490
55,620 56,550 56,870
21,240 21,170 20,980
25,140 24,750 24,800
20,250 20,320 20,390
4,980
4,890
4,930
4,213
4,218
4,249
23,710 23,600 24,000
107,150
11,311
6,670
57,260
20,920
24,960
20,490
5,110
4,293
24,310
65.3
65.7
63.0
62.1
56.1
52.8
48.2
50.5
67.1
62.7
65.6
66.2
63.0
61.9
55.8
53.1
48.2
50.3
67.4
63.0
Employed
United States ...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France ..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands......................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
109,597 112,440
11,634 11,955
6,952
7,107
57,740 58,320
20,960 20,970
25,220 25,400
20,610 20,590
5,200
5,270
4,326
4,396
24,450 24,910
Employment-population ratio2
United States ...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands......................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Unemployed
United States...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France ..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands......................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Unemployment rate
United States ...................................................
Canada ............................................................
Australia...........................................................
Japan ...............................................................
France ..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Netherlands...................................................
Sweden............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Labor force as a percent of the civilian working-age population.
Employment as a percent of the civilian working-age population.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Data not available.
-
11.9
M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW
47.
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
Annual indexes of manufacturing productivity and related measures, 12 countries
(1977 = 100)
Item and country
Output per hour
Japan ..............................................................
Belgium............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Nonway.............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Output
Japan ...............................................................
Belgium............................................................
France..............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Norway.............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Total hours
Japan ...............................................................
Belgium............................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Nonway.............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
1960
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Norway.............................................................
United Kingdom................................................
Germany..........................................................
Italy..................................................................
Norway............................................................
United Kingdom...............................................
United Kingdom...............................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1976
1977
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
93.4
90.3
83.1
78.8
83.3
83.8
84.0
90.9
81.5
94.4
94.8
95.5
92.9
88.6
87.7
86.5
94.6
88.7
90.1
91.1
86.2
97.7
100.2
94.9
97.1
94.8
94.3
95.3
98.2
94.4
96.4
98.9
95.8
100.4
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
102.0
114.8
111.9
106.5
109.7
108.2
110.5
112.3
107.3
110.9
102.5
101.4
98.2
122.7
119.2
112.3
110.6
108.6
116.9
113.9
107.4
112.7
101.9
103.6
102.9
127.2
127.6
114.2
113.9
111.0
124.8
116.9
108.0
113.2
107.0
105.9
98.3
135.0
135.2
114.6
122.0
112.6
129.6
119.4
109.2
116.5
113.5
112.0
105.4
142.3
148.2
120.2
125.1
119.2
138.6
127.5
117.2
125.5
123.2
118.1
114.4
152.5
154.3
119.6
127.6
123.7
147.8
140.5
124.1
131.0
130.0
123.6
117.3
161.1
159.0
117.6
131.0
128.4
151.7
145.5
126.8
136.1
134.7
127.7
117.7
163.8
165.3
113.5
134.9
128.4
152.9
144.8
125.9
136.0
138.3
132.0
120.5
170.5
170.3
114.9
139.2
130.3
157.8
145.5
134.9
141.8
147.8
52.5
41.3
19.2
41.9
49.2
36.5
50.0
36.4
44.8
54.8
52.6
71.2
78.6
73.5
69.9
78.6
82.0
75.5
86.6
78.0
84.4
86.5
92.5
95.0
96.3
93.5
91.9
96.4
95.9
90.5
96.1
90.5
95.8
99.2
100.3
104.8
84.9
89.9
86.2
92.7
95.0
90.3
91.0
86.9
92.7
101.9
106.1
96.3
93.1
96.5
94.8
99.7
99.6
95.6
98.0
97.9
99.0
102.1
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
108.5
113.9
104.1
105.4
105.3
106.6
108.6
106.1
100.5
103.6
100.5
103.2
103.6
124.1
106.8
110.1
104.6
106.6
115.4
106.6
99.5
104.0
91.7
104.8
107.4
129.8
105.7
106.6
102.9
104.9
115.1
106.7
98.6
100.6
86.2
98.4
93.6
137.3
110.1
108.3
104.0
102.4
113.4
105.0
96.8
100.1
86.4
104.7
99.6
148.2
114.8
115.6
103.8
103.6
114.3
107.0
97.2
105.2
88.9
117.5
112.5
165.4
117.5
121.0
102.6
106.4
119.0
113.3
102.7
111.5
92.6
122.0
118.8
177.0
119.9
123.0
101.5
110.0
121.8
116.7
106.5
115.3
95.2
124.7
121.9
178.0
122.0
123.9
102.1
110.8
125.8
118.1
106.9
114.7
95.4
130.1
128.5
184.1
123.1
120.5
103.3
111.6
131.2
118.7
108.3
119.2
100.6
84.4
81.4
82.7
127.1
132.4
97.6
123.8
102.8
138.4
101.0
124.4
127.3
97.3
97.2
107.9
130.2
125.1
105.7
121.7
107.4
131.2
106.4
114.6
118.1
103.1
103.6
110.7
122.3
115.2
107.9
114.4
99.6
117.6
105.1
105.7
109.8
91.4
101.5
98.2
107.1
100.4
101.8
101.0
95.4
107.6
104.3
105.9
101.5
95.9
101.8
100.6
104.6
101.4
101.3
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
106.3
99.3
93.0
99.0
95.9
98.5
98.2
94.4
93.6
93.4
98.0
101.7
105.5
101.2
89.6
98.0
94.6
98.1
98.7
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.1
101.1
104.3
102.0
82.8
93.4
90.3
94.6
92.2
91.2
91.3
88.9
80.6
92.9
95.2
101.7
81.4
94.5
85.2
91.0
87.5
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.2
93.5
94.5
104.2
77.5
96.2
83.0
86.9
82.5
83.9
82.9
83.9
72.2
99.5
98.3
108.5
76.1
101.2
80.4
86.1
80.5
80.6
82.8
85.1
71.2
98.7
101.2
109.8
75.4
104.6
77.5
85.7
80.3
80.2
84.0
84.7
70.7
97.7
103.6
108.7
73.8
109.2
75.7
86.3
82.3
81.5
84.9
84.3
69.0
98.6
106.6
108.0
72.3
104.9
74.2
85.7
83.2
81.6
80.3
84.0
68.0
36.5
27.5
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.0
18.8
8.4
12.5
15.8
14.7
15.2
57.4
47.9
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.3
48.0
26.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
31.4
68.8
60.0
55.1
53.5
56.1
51.9
67.5
43.7
60.5
54.5
54.2
47.9
85.1
78.9
84.2
79.0
81.0
76.1
84.5
70.2
82.2
77.2
77.3
76.4
92.1
90.3
90.7
89.5
90.4
87.8
91.2
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
118.6
113.4
117.4
123.1
128.4
116.1
134.7
117.0
116.0
120.1
139.0
132.4
131.3
120.7
130.3
135.9
148.5
125.6
160.2
123.6
128.0
133.6
168.6
145.2
151.1
129.8
144.5
149.7
172.0
134.5
198.4
129.1
142.8
148.1
193.4
157.5
167.0
136.6
150.7
162.9
204.0
141.0
238.3
137.5
156.0
158.9
211.7
162.4
177.2
140.7
159.8
174.2
225.1
148.3
282.9
144.0
173.5
173.3
226.6
168.0
185.6
144.9
173.1
184.1
245.0
155.5
316.5
150.0
188.3
189.7
242.3
176.4
194.4
151.4
183.6
196.2
265.4
164.6
348.0
157.4
204.3
212.4
258.8
183.0
203.5
158.8
190.8
202.7
277.2
171.7
359.4
162.2
224.2
228.7
277.9
186.9
214.0
161.1
194.5
226.3
285.7
178.6
380.5
166.5
262.6
244.8
297.6
58.7
54.2
38.4
41.7
33.8
40.2
46.6
23.7
38.5
29.2
34.8
27.2
71.0
63.4
52.3
57.8
55.4
50.8
67.4
36.0
60.7
46.6
47.7
39.1
73.7
66.5
66.4
67.9
67.4
62.0
80.3
48.1
74.3
57.8
57.2
50.2
91.7
89.1
96.0
91.2
85.6
85.8
93.8
77.1
95.4
79.0
77.1
60.5
94.9
95.3
96.2
93.9
92.1
93.0
94.6
85.1
96.0
88.5
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
116.2
98.8
104.9
115.7
117.0
107.3
121.9
104.1
108.1
108.3
135.6
130.6
133.7
98.4
109.3
121.0
134.3
115.7
137.0
108.5
119.1
118.6
165.5
140.1
146.7
102.0
113.2
131.1
151.0
121.2
158.9
110.4
132.2
130.9
180.7
148.7
170.0
101.2
111.5
142.2
167.2
125.2
184.0
115.2
142.9
136.3
186.5
145.0
168.1
98.9
107.8
144.9
179.9
124.4
204.1
113.0
148.0
138.1
184.0
142.2
162.3
95.0
112.2
153.9
192.0
125.8
214.1
106.8
151.8
144.8
186.4
142.7
165.7
94.0
115.5
166.8
202.7
128.3
229.4
108.1
161.1
156.1
192.1
143.3
172.8
97.0
115.5
178.7
205.4
133.7
235.1
112.0
178.1
168.2
200.9
141.7
177.5
94.5
114.2
197.0
205.2
137.1
241.2
114.4
194.7
172.6
201.3
58.7
59.4
28.5
30.0
29.5
40.3
25.9
33.7
25.1
21.8
30.1
43.7
71.0
64.5
39.1
41.7
44.4
45.2
42.9
50.6
41.2
34.7
41.1
53.7
73.7
70.6
65.6
62.7
67.2
68.6
70.4
73.1
65.6
53.5
58.7
70.5
91.7
93.1
86.7
89.1
89.6
98.5
88.7
104.3
92.8
80.6
83.2
102.5
94.9
102.7
86.9
87.2
91.5
95.8
87.3
90.5
89.1
86.4
92.3
92.2
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
105.4
121.3
128.2
132.0
135.2
135.9
129.5
127.4
113.6
112.9
165.0
130.6
121.5
116.8
134.2
129.0
156.4
147.9
141.4
134.1
128.4
125.3
220.6
140.1
130.0
123.8
109.6
110.3
136.4
124.9
123.2
108.9
122.5
115.4
209.6
148.7
146.3
108.8
87.2
102.3
124.9
119.7
119.9
105.8
117.8
96.9
186.9
145.0
144.9
111.5
75.6
95.1
116.1
113.1
118.6
97.1
107.9
80.4
159.8
142.2
133.2
107.2
69.6
89.3
108.1
102.6
107.6
81.6
99.0
78.2
142.8
142.7
128.9
105.6
69.7
94.5
111.0
101.2
106.1
80.0
99.8
81.1
142.9
143.3
132.1
154.2
92.6
132.5
145.8
143.0
139.2
112.2
128.1
105.4
169.0
141.7
142.3
175.0
109.6
172.7
167.8
177.0
164.2
138.6
153. /
121.5
189.2
Unit labor costs: U.S. dollar basis
Japan ..............................................................
Belgium...........................................................
1975
80.8
75.6
64.8
60.4
65.6
71.4
71.2
72.7
64.3
81.3
80.7
80.4
Unit labor costs: National currency basis
Japan ...............................................................
Belgium............................................................
1973
62.2
50.7
23.2
33.0
37.2
37.4
40.3
35.4
32.4
54.3
42.3
55.9
Compensation per hour
Japan ...............................................................
Belgium............................................................
1970
48.
Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
PRIVATE SECTOR3
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays.................................................................................
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
7.9
3.6
64.9
7.9
3.6
65.8
8.3
3.8
69.9
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
11.4
5.7
91.3
11.2
5.6
93.6
11.2
5.7
94.1
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
8.4
4.8
145.3
7.4
4.1
125.9
8.5
4.9
144.0
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
15.2
6.8
128.9
15.2
6.9
134.5
14.7
6.8
135.8
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
15.2
6.8
120.4
14.9
6.6
122.7
14.2
6.5
134.0
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
14.5
6.3
127.3
■ 14.7
6.3
132.9
14.5
6.4
139.1
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
15.4
7.0
133.3
15.6
7.2
140.4
15.0
7.1
135.7
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
10.4
4.6
80.2
10.6
4.7
85.2
11.9
5.3
95.5
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
18.5
9.3
171.4
18.9
9.7
177.2
18.9
9.6
176.5
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
15.0
6.3
100.4
15.2
6.3
103.0
15.4
6.7
103.6
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
13.9
6.7
127.8
13.6
6.5
126.0
14.9
7.1
135.8
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
12.6
5.7
113.8
13.6
6.1
125.5
17.0
7.4
145.8
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
16.3
6.9
110.1
16.0
6.8
115.5
17.0
7.2
121.9
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
10.8
4.2
69.3
10.7
4.2
72.0
11.3
4.4
72.7
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
6.4
2.7
45.7
6.4
2.7
49.8
7.2
3.1
55.9
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
9.0
3.9
71.6
9.6
4.1
79.1
13.5
5.7
105.7
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
5.2
2.2
37.9
5.3
2.3
42.2
5.8
2.4
43.9
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
4.3
70.2
9.7
4.2
73.2
10.2
4.3
70.9
10.7
4.6
81.5
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing3
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Mining
Total cases......................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Construction
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
General building contractors:
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Heavy construction contractors:
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Special trade contractors:
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Manufacturing
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................................
Durable goods
Lumber and wood products:
Total cases.......................................................................................
Lost workday cases..................................................................
Lost workdays........................................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total cases.........................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Primary metal Industries:
Total cases.....................................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................................
Lost workdays..............................................................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total cases.............................................................
Lost worxday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Machinery, except electrical:
Total cases...............................................................
Lost workday cases .........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
Electric and electronic equipment:
Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total cases......................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................................
Instruments and related products:
Total cases...................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Lost workdays........................................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
Total cases......................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...................................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M O N T H L Y LA B O R REV IEW
February 1989
•
Current Labor Statistics:
Injury and Illness Data
48. Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case'
1979
1980
1982
1981
1985
1984
1983
1986
1987
Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products:
Tobacco manufacturing:
Textile mill products:
Apparel and other textile products:
Paper and allied products:
Printing and publishing:
Chemicals and allied products:
Total cases........................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................
Petroleum and coal products:
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
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
16.7
8.1
138.0
16.5
8.0
137.8
17.7
8.6
153.7
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
7.3
3.0
51.7
6.7
2.5
45.6
8.6
2.5
46.4
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
7.5
3.0
57.4
7.8
3.1
59.3
9.0
3.6
65.9
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
6.7
2.6
44.1
6.7
2.7
49.4
7.4
3.1
59.5
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
10.2
4.7
94.6
10.5
4.7
99.5
12.8
5.8
122.3
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
6.3
2.9
49.2
6.5
2.9
50.8
6.7
3.1
55.1
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
5.1
2.3
38.8
6.3
2.7
49.4
7.0
3.1
58.8
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
5.1
2.4
49.9
7.1
3.2
67.5
7.3
3.1
65.9
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
13.4
6.3
107.4
14.0
6.6
118.2
15.9
7.6
130.8
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
10.3
4.6
88.3
10.5
4.8
83.4
12.4
5.8
114.5
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
8.6
5.0
107.1
8.2
4.8
102.1
8.4
4.9
108.1
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
7.4
3.2
50.7
7.7
3.3
54.0
7.7
3.4
56.1
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
3.5
59.8
7.2
3.6
62.5
7.4
3.7
64.0
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
7.5
3.1
47.0
7.8
3.2
50.5
7.8
3.3
52.9
2.1
.9
13.3
2.C
.8
12.2
1.9
.8
11.6
2.C
.9
13.5
2.0
.9
12.8
1.9
.9
13.6
2.C
.9
15.4
2.0
.9
17.1
2.0
.9
14.3
5.5
2.5
38.1
5.2
2.C
35.8
5.C
2.2
35.9
4.9
2.C
35.8
2A
5.2
2.6
37.C
41.1
5.4
2.8
45.4
5.3
2.5
43.C
5.5
2.7
45.8
Leather and leather products:
Transportation and public utilities
Wholesale and retail trade
Wholesale trade:
Retail trade:
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Services
! Total cases include fatalities.
2 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers and were calculated as:
(N/EH) X 200,000, where:
N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I
5.1
EH = total hours worked by all employees during calendar year.
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per
week, 50 weeks per year.)
3 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
1988U.S.
INDUSTRIAL
OUTLOOK
The U.S. Government’s Best-Selling
Business Reference Book
• Official Department of Commerce forecasts
for over 350 industries
• Y e a r-a h e a d and 5 -y e a r fo re c a s ts and
industry-by-industry reviews
• 650 pages of outlooks and historical summary
by over 100 skilled industry analysts
• Vast data base— tailored for business and
investment planning
Order the completely new
1988 edition now.
m a il t h is fo r m
TO:
Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D.C. 20402
Please send__________ copies of the
at $24 per copy to:
1988 U.S. INDUSTRIAL OUTLOOK
$_____________ Total Enclosed (Check/Money
Order)
Name
Charge my:
Company Name
City
D
□
Account Number
Street
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(SN 003-009-00522-1)
State
ZIP Code
Signature
GPO Deposit Account
MasterCard
D
VISA
Expiration Date
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
United
Y ears o f
S ta te s s'
M!
W o rkin g fo r
D e p a r tm e n tf J I ^ ^ ^ A m e r k a s
of L ab orer
F u tu re
£<J
@FedFRASER