Full text of Monthly Labor Review : July 1986, Volume 109, Number 7

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

In this issue:
U.S°DepaTtrTTCTilOT Labor
Biirpnu of I nhor Sitcitiotira


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

More on the revised CPI
Divergent trends in income
The Labor Department and Ellis Island

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
William E. Brock, Secretary

Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics

Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner

Region I— Boston: Anthony J. Ferrara
1603 John F. Kennedy Federal Building, Government Center,
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
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, D.C. 20212.
Phone: (202) 523-1327.

Region II— New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Subscription price per year—$24 domestic; $30 foreign.
Single copy $4, domestic; $5 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, D.C. 20402
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Use of funds for printing
this periodical has been approved by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget
through April 30, 1987. Second-class
postage paid at Washington, D.C. and at
additional mailing addresses.

Region III— Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia. Pa. 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region IV—Atlanta: Donald M. Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 30367
Phone: (404) 347-4418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V— Chicago: Lois L. Orr
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street,
Chicago, III. 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI—Dallas: Bryan Richey
Federal Building, Room 221
525 Griffin Street, Dallas, Texas 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII— Kansas City: Gunnar Engen
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City. Mo. 64106
Phone: (816) 374-2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming

July cover:
“ From Ellis Island, a young boy
points out the Statue of Liberty to
his parents." Photograph (circa
1930) courtesy the Library of
Congress, Washington, D.C.
(Negative #LC-USZ62-50904)
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
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017,
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington

ImF
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

JULY 1986
VOLUME 109, NUMBER 7

Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor

Philip L. Rones

3

An analysis of regional employment growth, 1973-85
While shifts in economic performance generally have been from the Snowbelt
to the Sunbelt, many factors can alter regional advantage, often suddenly

L. Marcoot, R. C. Bahr

15

The revised Consumer Price Index: changes in coverage
Beginning in January 1987, the c p i will incorporate some new series
and several series will be changed; some indexes will be dropped

Paul Ryscavage

24

Reconciling divergent trends in real income
Growth rates in real per capita income and real family income diverged
from 1970 to 1984 because of differences in series concepts and components

Henry P. Guzda

30

Ellis Island a welcome site?

Only after years of reform

The Labor Department struggled to end corruption and exploitation of aliens
after the agency took over the immigration center prior to World War I

REPORTS
Steven M. Donahue

37

Communications Workers focus on bargaining with

Richard M. Devens, Jr.

40

Displaced workers: one year later


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

DEPARTMENTS
2
37
40
45
46
50
53

Labor month in review
Conventions
Research summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics

at &t

Labor M onth
In Review
LABOR LAW STUDY. The Department
of Labor began a study of the Nation’s
labor laws and collective bargaining
practices to identify possible conflicts
between these laws and practices and the
kind of labor-management cooperation
the Department is seeking to encourage.
Stephen I. Schlossberg, Deputy Under
Secretary for L abor-M anagem ent
Cooperation, and Steven M. Fetter, his
executive assistant, discuss the project in
a background paper issued June 16.
Here are brief excerpts:
DOL’s position. The Department of
Labor has taken a strong position in
support of labor-management coopera­
tion as an important prerequisite to
America’s return to preeminence in the
world marketplace. Secretary of Labor
William E. Brock has said that our
country must develop a “ solid at­
mosphere of cooperation, based on the
concept of worker dignity and equality
and grounded in a mutual respect for
collective bargaining, [which] enables
both unions and management to main­
tain individual integrity while working
for the good of all.”
Experiments spread. A 1982 survey
found that at least one-third of the For­
tune 500 companies, with both organiz­
ed and unorganized work forces, have
some form of participative management
or quality of work life program in opera­
tion and that these efforts have, by and
large, resulted in measurably improved
employee morale and increased produc­
tivity.
While many of the more experimental
efforts may have resulted from en­
dangered corporations needing wage
concessions to give them a better chance
at economic survival, the programs’
achievements have proved to be so at­
tractive that they have captured the at­
tention of other firms not in financial
trouble. While noteworthy worker par­
ticipation plans are in place at at&t with
the C om m unications W orkers of
2


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

A m erica and the In te rn a tio n a l
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, at
Xerox with the Amalgamated Clothing
and Textile Workers Union, and in
several steel companies with the United
Steelworkers of America, two of the
most auspicious are between the uaw
and the GM-Toyota joint venture at New
United Motors Manufacturing, Inc.
(nummi) in Fremont, California, and
between Ford Motor Company and the
UAW.

W ithin many companies, a new
cooperative attitude is reordering labormanagement priorities so that unions are
more concerned about the financial
health of the business and management
seeks a relationship which enhances the
role of workers by seeking their input
and ideas. Both sides see the value of
replacing distrust and hostility with equi­
ty and sharing. While the parties
recognize that there are risks in altering
their traditional antagonistic relation­
ship, they are convinced that the risks
are even greater if they do nothing at all.
Thus, because of factors beyond their
control, but also with an interest in
achieving the differing yet complemen­
tary goals of increased productivity and
an improved quality of work life, certain
segments of the labor-management com­
munity are becoming “ partners in the
enterprise.”
Legal considerations. Unfortunately,
the mutual desires of labor and manage­
ment to cooperate have not put an end
to their problems. The new hybrids they
have created—often called quality of
work life, employee involvem ent,
worker participation, labor-management
participation teams or committees, or any
of a number of other motivational
names—do not easily fit within the
framework of our existing labor laws and
labor-management culture.
The history of labor relations in this
country has been, and to a large degree
continues to be, characterized by con­
frontation. In most cases, the relation­

ship, from initial organization through
contract negotiation and administration,
has been driven by law and legal con­
siderations; the motivation for action
has rarely been cooperation, mutuality
of interest, or principles of human rela­
tions. Rules, not goals, have set the
tone.
In the past, our labor relations have
exhibited a remarkable ability to adapt
to the changing needs of an evolving,
but flourishing, industrial .economy.
Now we must wait to see whether the
creative steps taken by labor and
management to deal with a declining in­
dustrial manufacturing base can pass
muster with the agencies and courts
charged with interpreting our labor laws.
If they cannot, then the two sides must
work together to form ulate the
legislative strategy necessary to modify
our laws to permit such innovation.
Working together. The American
economy can ill afford to continue the
escalation of confrontation that has
traditionally divided labor and manage­
ment. There will always be bargaining to
distribute gains and losses between the
parties; but in those aspects of the rela­
tionship that clearly involve shared in­
terests, we should emphasize mutuality
rather than militancy and seek to ad­
vance a new ordering of labor relations
which aligns manager and worker on the
same side—working together for the
common good. Clearly, cooperation and
problem solving offer more promise for
productive labor-management relation­
ships than the combat of the past. If our
statutes and practices are an impediment
to change, we must be willing to con­
sider reasonable alterations in that basic
framework to encourage a process that
will ultimately benefit society as a whole.
Copies of the 32-page paper are
available from Office of LaborManagement Relations and Cooperative
Programs, Room N5402, U.S. Depart­
ment of Labor, Washington, DC 20210. □

An analysis of regional
employment growth, 1973-85
Shifts in regional economic performance
and job growth generally have been
from the Snowbelt to the Sunbelt;
however, many factors can alter
regional advantage, often suddenly
Philip L. Rones
Reference to the transfer of economic power from old indus­
trial regions of the North to the South and West has become
almost a cliche. The term “Sunbelt” is generally associated
with population growth, economic prosperity, and a bright
future, while “Snowbelt” connotes economic decline. How
then do we reconcile these perceptions with the fact that
New England, which a decade ago was rapidly losing pop­
ulation and jobs, presently has the lowest unemployment
rate of any region; or that in late 1985, a considerable
majority of the States in the West and South had jobless
rates above the national average; or that, since the recession
trough in late 1982, housing costs in Boston have risen
dramatically while those in Houston, an often cited symbol
of the prosperity of the new South, have declined?1
Such recent developments have made it clear that the
situation is more complex than commonly thought. There
has been, and most likely will continue to be, a shift in
economic influence towards the South and West. Such
movements are the expected result of historic differences in
regional income, wages, and cost of living, as well as shifts
in the importance of each region’s geographic and resource
endowments. Yet within that context, long-term changes in
the structure of our economy, cyclical swings, and unantic­
ipated “shocks” all can alter regional advantage. The eco­
nomic “Power Shift,”2 as it has been called, is clearly not as
immutable as once thought.
The first section of this article describes some of the
changes in regional employment over the past decade or so,
Philip L. Rones is a senior economist in the Office o f Employment and
Unemployment Statistics, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.


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

with particular emphasis on the industrial components of
those changes. The second section examines some of the
reasons for dramatically uneven regional employment
growth, focusing on such aspects as population and business
migration, regional income inequality, and economic
shocks. Finally, because New England has done the most in
recent years to break the stereotype of the Snowbelt versus
Sunbelt economies, some of the causes of the resurgence of
that region’s economy are examined.

Shift-share analysis
The technique employed in examining trends in regional
job growth is called shift-share analysis, a statistical method
which has been commonly used in regional analysis for
several decades.3 It can be used to allocate regional growth
among three components: national share, industry mix, and
regional share. National share indicates the employment
change that would have occurred if a region’s employment
growth rate had equaled the national growth rate over the
study period. Industry mix shows the amount of regional
employment growth attributable to the region’s initial indus­
try mix; that is, it reflects a region’s mix of fast- and slowgrowth industries. Finally, regional share indicates whether
a region’s industries performed better or worse than the
national average for each industry.4 This last component is
essentially a measure of competitive advantage— the end
result of the many varied factors which can cause uneven
regional growth. For analytical purposes, the industry mix
and regional share statistics are the more interesting, be­
cause they relate regional changes to developments at the
national level.
3

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

The data. This analysis uses data from the Current Em­
ployment Statistics Survey, a nationwide survey of business
establishments which provides information by industry on
employment, hours, and earnings of workers on nonagricultural payrolls. The survey is a cooperative effort of the State
Employment Security Offices and the bls, through which
data are obtained from employer reports filed monthly with
the State agencies.
For this analysis, State data were aggregated into the nine
census divisions, shown in exhibit 1. (The terms region and
division, in reference to geography, often are used inter­
changeably in this analysis.) Industry data were treated at
the major division level, with manufacturing divided into its
durable and nondurable goods components.5 The exclusion
of agriculture from survey coverage would have only a
minor impact on most regions, but for the West North Cen­
tral area, the exclusion could be critical. Certainly, poor
agricultural performance would be felt throughout that re­
gion’s nonagricultural sector. Even so, estimates presented
here probably understate the economic difficulties in that
part of the country.
Exhibit 1.

Census regions and divisions

Northeast

New England
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Connecticut
Middle Atlantic
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Midwest

East North Central
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan
Wisconsin
West North Central
Iowa
Missouri
Nebraska
Kansas
Minnesota
North Dakota
South Dakota
South

South Atlantic
Delaware
Maryland
District of Columbia
Virginia

4


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

South— Continued

West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
East South Central
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
West South Central
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
W est

Mountain
Montana
Wyoming
Colorado
Utah
Idaho
Arizona
Nevada
New Mexico
Pacific
California

Hawaii
Washington
Oregon
Alaska

Region-by-industry employment matrices were prepared
for 1973, 1975, 1979, and 1985. All years but 1975 were
chosen because they represented relative high points in the
business cycle. Data for 1975 were included to isolate the
effects of the 1973-75 recession on regional performance.
There is often quite valid concern about the usefulness of
the regional aggregations, because regions are not homoge­
neous economic units. For instance, population and employ­
ment growth in the South Atlantic region have been well
above the national average principally because a single
State, Florida, has dominated the region in terms of both
size and relative rate of growth. California similarly domi­
nates the Pacific region. However, the argument of a lack of
homogeneity is probably no more valid in its application to
regional data than it would be to State or local data. The
local economies that make up many States are as diverse in
their industrial makeup and performance as are the State
economies that make up any region. Hence, there is enough
to gain in using any of these “aggregated” data— local,
State, or regional— to warrant their use in labor market
analysis.
The results. The first two columns in table 1 show the
actual change in each region’s total employment between
1973 and 1985 and the national share component of the
change. The national share represents the employment
growth that a region would have experienced if its number
of jobs had expanded at the national average rate over the
12-year period. Where the actual change in employment is
greater than the national share, a region’s employment grew
at a faster rate than the national average. The West South
Central region, for example, grew twice as fast as the Nation
as a whole. Conversely, where actual growth is less than
national share, a region’s jobs grew at a slower than average
rate. Employment in the East North Central region, for
example, grew only one-third as fast as the national average.
It is not surprising that the slowest employment growth
areas were generally in the Northeast and Midwest and the
fastest in the South and West. The regional variation, how­
ever, was quite dramatic. At the extremes, the East North
Central region’s nonfarm payroll jobs grew by only 8 per­
cent over the study period, while employment gains of 57
percent were registered in the Mountain States. The range of
employment growth performance is reflected in the chang­
ing regional distribution of national employment, shown in
chart 1.
As previously stated, the industry mix column of the table
reflects the advantage or disadvantage bestowed on a region
by virtue of its industrial makeup in the initial year of the
study. A region would stand to grow more slowly than the
average if it had a relatively large share of industries with
slower than average growth over the 12-year period— gov­
ernment, construction, and, more importantly, manufactur­
ing, particularly nondurable goods. A region would be fa­
vored if it began the period with a higher than average

Chart 1. Distribution of nonagricultural payroll employment by census division,
1973 and 1985

New
Mid
England Atlantic

East
North
Central

West
North
Central

South
Atlantic

employment concentration in mining and in any of the
service-producing industries other than government. Be­
cause this statistic compares a region’s industry mix to a
national average, the net impact of the industry mix (and
regional share, for that matter) across regions is by defini­
tion zero.
It should be kept in mind that the industry mix statistic has
substantial limitations. Because manufacturing showed rela­
tively slow growth over the study period, a region with little
or no manufacturing would appear to have a positive indus­
try mix. Manufacturing activity, however, is generally
viewed as a prerequisite for strong growth in the service
sector. Thus, the effect of this hypothetical industry distri­
bution would undoubtedly show up as poor regional share
performance in other industries.
As expected, the area most hurt by its poor industry mix
was the East North Central region, with its initially high
proportion of heavy manufacturing jobs. That region’s em­
ployment would have increased by an additional 420,000
over the study period if the area had had an “average”
industry mix in 1973. But in virtually all cases, the industry
mix statistic is a poor second to regional share in explaining
the gap between actual regional job growth and the national
average. The Middle Atlantic States, for instance, experi­
enced little industry mix impact and yet had very slow
growth, while the South Atlantic region, also with a neutral


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

East
South
Central

West
South
Central

Mountain

Pacific

industry distribution, experienced quite rapid growth. The
West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific regions all pros­
pered, in terms of the industry mix measure, from thenemphasis on mining (except in recent years) or servicesector jobs and their relative lack of factory employment.
However, in none of these rapid-growth regions did the
1973 industry mix explain as much as 20 percent of employ­
ment change above or below the national share.
The regional share measure explains most of the geo­
graphic differences in employment growth. The Middle At­
lantic and East North Central regions combined registered 5
million fewer jobs than their industry mix alone would have
predicted, while the Southern and Western gainers (minus
the East South Central) added 5 million jobs more than their
“fair share.” The following analysis, then, will focus on the
regional share component of change, identifying the indus­
tries in which regional growth has been particularly strong
or weak and examining the change in regional advantage
and disadvantage that occurred within three subperiods of
the 1973-85 span.
The regional share component reflects how a region’s
industries performed compared to the national average for
each industry. The interpretation of the results is simplified
by the use of the indexes shown in table 2 in place of
absolute numbers.6 If an industry within a particular region
grew at the same rate as that industry nationwide, then the
5

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

index figure would be 1. An index greater than 1 represents
better than average performance (a figure of 1.100, for
example, represents employment growth 10 percent above
average), and an index of less than 1 represents belowaverage performance.
The regional share index, rsi, is calculated as follows:

Et+1
^
^ iu s
l( ^Ell r /El
^ iu s I
where Eir is employment in each industry (*) and each re­
gion (r) (or division); Eius is employment in each industry
for the United States as a whole; and t and t +1 are the base
year and final year in any comparison— either 1973 and
1985, respectively, or some narrower time frame.
More simply, the calculation divides actual industry em­
ployment in each region in 1985 (or another target year) by
what the figure would have been had the region maintained
its base-year share of industry employment. The calculation
ignores the rate of growth of each industry nationally, a
factor that shows up in the industry mix statistic. For exam­
ple, New England had 5.47 percent of U.S. construction
industry employment in 1973. Had it maintained that pro­
portion in 1985, it would have had .0547 x 4,646,000 (total
1985 construction employment), or approximately 254,000
construction jobs. Actual employment slightly exceeded
that mark— 258,000. Thus, the regional share index is
258,000/254,000, or 1.016.
In this presentation, the mix and share components of
regional change are separated as if they were unrelated fac­
tors, but in reality, they are quite interrelated. In a study of
the effects of industry mix on State unemployment rates,
Robert McGee estimated that the indirect (or “spillover”)
effect of industry mix was, on average, about 15 percent
higher than the direct effect.7 For example, an area with an
unfavorable industry mix is likely to experience aboveaverage unemployment (or below-average employment
growth) not only in its disadvantaged industries but also in
its stronger ones. The measure used here identifies only the
Table 1. Components of change in nonagricultural payroll
employment by census division, 1973-85

direct effects of industry mix; the spillover effects are incor­
porated in the regional share component. Thus, the true
impact of a poor industry mix is understated in the results for
that component, and the dichotomy used here to some extent
oversimplifies a complex relationship.
Table 2 shows the regional share indexes for all nonfarm
payroll employees for the entire 1973-85 period and for
three subperiods. The top line indicates that, at the ex­
tremes, the West South Central and Mountain divisions had
competitive gains of about 20 percent, while the East North
Central and Middle Atlantic had losses of more than 15
percent relative to the national average.
The rsi patterns for many regions have changed markedly
over time. (For simplicity of language, rsi’s significantly
greater or less than 1 will be termed “gains” or “losses,”
although, technically, they describe movements relative to
a national average rather than absolute changes.) Among
the highlights of the rsi trend results:
•

New England, formerly one of the worst performers
in terms of employment growth, is now among the
best.

•

The Middle Atlantic States suffered their worst per­
formance in the late 1970’s; even in recent years,
Pennsylvania continued to exert a downward pull on
the 3-State totals.

•

The failure of the East North Central to recoup manu­
facturing job losses has been felt in all sectors in
recent years. The cumulative effects are the worst
suffered by any region.

•

The entire West North Central region has fared poorly
in the 1980’s, largely because of weakness in the
agricultural sector. The exclusion of agriculture from
the employment data probably serves to understate the
weakness in the region’s economy.

•

The South Atlantic and East South Central areas both
mirrored national performance through the late
1970’s. Since then, the former, paced by Florida’s
boom, has outperformed all other regions, while its
more industrialized neighbor has fared quite poorly.

•

The West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific re­
gions each experienced gains throughout the three
subperiods.

[Numbers in thousands]

Components of change
Census division

Employment
change, 1973-85

New England..............................
Middle A tlantic............................
East North C e n tra l.....................
West North Central ...................
South Atlantic ............................
East South Central.....................
West South Central ...................
M ountain....................................
P a cific.........................................

1,317
1,512
1,252
1,306
4,600
970
3,475
1,852
4,317

No te :

6

National
share

Industry Regional
mix
share

1,267
3,840
4,148
1,562
3,249
1,173
1,809
869
2,677

See text footnote 4 for description of components of change.


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

12
51
-419
68
-6 0
-146
127
150
234

62
-2,379
-2,477
-324
1,411
-5 7
1,539
833
1,406

The health of a region’s manufacturing industries is gen­
erally regarded as the most important and most visible indi­
cator of the area’s economic performance. It is in the con­
struction industry, however, that a region’s fortunes are
most dramatically reflected in the index. In all of the regions
in each of the three subperiods examined, only three times
(out of 27 chances) was the construction rsi closer to 1 than
the region’s total rsi; that is, construction almost always
showed more dramatic shifts in regional advantage than did
the all-employee totals. This is because construction is the
industry most dependent on population growth. Many urban

Table 2. Regional share index for nonagricultural payroll employment by major industry and census geographic divisions,
______________________________________________________
selected periods, 1973-85
Period and industry

New
England

Middle
Atlantic

East
North
Central

West
North
Central

South
Atlantic

East
South
Central

West
South
Central

Mountain

Pacific

1973 to 1985
.873

.853

.966

1.087

.963

1.193

1.238

1.129

1.016
1.287
.804
.962
1.001
1.018
1.006
.933

.616
.882
.808
.843
.847
.863
.865
.900
.907

.788
.790
.776
.986
.860
.877
.905
.904
.903

.750
.948
1.008
1.088
.986
.920
.963
.950
.939

.662
1.017
1.241
1.022
1.100
1.111
1.031
1.111
1.090

.949
.854
1.003
1.009
1.055
.998
.954
.941
1.040

1.410
1.244
1.271
1.178
1.157
1.159
1.201
1.104
1.175

.855
1.201
1.509
1.331
1.294
1.175
1.244
1.188
1.119

1.231
1.171
1.293
1.243
1.089
1.109
1.130
1.068
1.003

.978

.968

.974

1.020

.991

1.000

1.063

1.048

1.037

.872
1.040
.959
.956
.976
1.000
.995
.973

.949
.927
1.005
.942
.962
.957
.965
.959
.994

.963
1.005
.952
1.004
.980
.991
1.007
.999
.985

.896
1.151
1.023
1.033
1.019
1.023
1.010
1.022
.964

1.000
.891
.989
.986
.996
.985
.998
.998
1.024

1.172
1.055
.966
1.011
1.014
1.007
1.033
1.002
1.005

1.013
1.186
1.106
1.089
1.064
1.055
1.033
1.039
1.006

.991
.948
1.043
1.088
1.065
1.036
1.018
1.049
1.020

.976
1.090
1.048
1.078
1.021
1.030
1.010
1.014
1.013

.991

.920

.969

.997

1.017

1.013

1.059

1.104

1.056

.889
1.127
.861
.959
.968
.960
.992
1.011

.845
.841
.890
.952
.918
.920
.909
.944
.929

.908
.957
.942
.997
.965
.970
.978
.969
.976

.963
1.006
1.025
1.019
1.021
.983
.997
.992
.986

.853
.960
1.059
1.018
1.011
1.026
.991
1.020
1.051

.958
.956
1.017
1.010
1.063
1.019
.978
.991
1.071

1.141
1.096
1.088
1.053
1.060
1.053
1.051
1.007
1.059

1.043
1.254
1.173
1.093
1.120
1.088
1.150
1.091
1.036

.981
1.145
1.085
1.090
1.037
1.061
1.131
1.068
.972

1.041

.980

.903

.950

1.078

.950

1.059

1.070

1.031

.776

.897
.820
.865
.985
.911
.912
.920
.934
.939

.882
.819
.962
1.033
.947
.914
.957
.938
.988

.779
1.190
1.184
1.017
1.092
1.099
1.044
1.092
1.015

.843
.851
1.021
.988
.978
.974
.939
.949
.966

1.222
.956
1.054
1.028
1.027
1.044
1.110
1.055
1.103

.825
1.015
1.235
1.119
1.083
1.042
1.060
1.037
1.057

1.280
.939
1.136
1.059
1.028
1.016
.989
.986
1.019

1.009
Mining ...............................................................................................................
Construction.......................................................................................................
Durable goods ..................................................................................................
Nondurable goods ............................................................................................
Transportation and public utilities ....................................................................
Trade .................................................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................................................
Services.............................................................................................................
Government.......................................................................................................

_

1973 to 1975

Mining ...............................................................................................................
Construction.......................................................................................................
Durable goods ..................................................................................................
Nondurable goods ............................................................................................
Transportation and public utilities ....................................................................
T ra d e .................................................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................................................
Services.............................................................................................................
Government.......................................................................................................

_

1975 to 1979

Mining ...............................................................................................................
Construction.......................................................................................................
Durable goods ..................................................................................................
Nondurable goods ............................................................................................
Transportation and public utilities ....................................................................
T ra d e .................................................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................................................
Services.............................................................................................................
Government.......................................................................................................

_

1979 to 1985

Mining ...............................................................................................................
Construction.......................................................................................................
Durable goods ..................................................................................................
Nondurable goods ............................................................................................
Transportation and public utilities ....................................................................
T ra d e .................................................................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................................................
Services.............................................................................................................
Government.......................................................................................................

_
1.310
1.098
.973
1.050
1.061
1.061
1.020
.947

1.133

.904
.940
.960
.981
.987
.995
.981

N o t e : A regional share index greater than 1 represents faster than average industry growth; a value less than 1 represents slower than average growth. See text for further explanation.

areas in the Northeast and Midwest regions have shown very
slow growth or absolute declines in population in recent
decades, a factor which results in excess housing stock,
depressed housing prices, and vastly reduced demand for
new residential construction. Likewise, substantial expan­
sion of commercial footage would be unlikely in a stagnant
local economy. Conversely, those Southern and Western
regions experiencing a rapid influx of both population and
business have had to provide new housing, plants, and of­
fice space for newcomers.
The rsi’s reflect the relationship between construction
activity and both population and job growth. For example,
while construction activity nationwide was down substan­
tially during the years 1973-75, New England’s employ­
ment performance for the industry was about 13 percent


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

worse than average, but the West South Central States expe­
rienced a relative increase of nearly 20 percent. The con­
struction rsi’s reflect the West South Central division’s
standing as the best performer during that recessionary pe­
riod in terms of employment growth; it was second only to
the Mountain region in population growth.8
Outside of developments in mining, the 1979-85
performance of construction in both Midwest divisions was
the worst of any region-industry combination. The loss of
nearly 20 percent in the regions’ employment share is in
marked contrast to the 30-percent gain for New England.
The former is a dramatic indication of the Midwest’s indus­
trial and agricultural woes, while the latter reflects not only
New England’s improved overall economy but also a
catching-up after years of lagging construction activity.
7

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

For the entire 1973-85 span, manufacturing is the only
industry division for which a decline in regional share re­
flects an absolute drop in jobs. This is because nationwide
manufacturing employment declined by about 800,000 dur­
ing that period. Thus, the rsi’s for durable and nondurable
manufacturing closely reflect the regional redistribution of
factory jobs. Virtually all of the durable goods job losses
occurred in the Middle Atlantic and East North Central
divisions. (The East South Central and West North Central’s
near-unity rsi’s reflect a small absolute loss due to the
sector’s national employment decline.) Their regional share
losses, in terms of jobs, were more than 400,000 and
800,000, respectively, or about 19 and 22 percent. Five
regions were strong gainers, paced in relative terms by the
Mountain States, followed by the Pacific, New England,
West South Central, and South Atlantic.
The Middle Atlantic States were the only region to expe­
rience serious job losses in both durable and nondurable
manufacturing. New England continued to suffer from the
long-term decline in its textiles and apparel industries in the
earlier years of the study period, but experienced little fur­
ther erosion of nondurables employment after 1979. The
only substantial winners in nondurables were the West
South Central, Mountain, and Pacific regions.
The industries in the service-producing sector tend to
follow the overall regional pattern of population and eco­
nomic growth. The use of aggregated industry data limits
the analysis of these industries. For example, while real
estate employment probably follows the economic trends of
each region, finance and insurance, which are “exportable,”
may follow a different pattern. The aggregated data, of
course, cannot be used to address this point.
Government employment trends are interesting in that
they often differ substantially from regional averages. For
example, between 1979 and 1985, New England gained
more than its fair share of employment in virtually every
industry, but had one of the lowest rates of government
employment growth. In the Pacific States, government em­
ployment also lagged total regional job growth, largely re­
flecting California’s imposition of restrictions on State and
local taxing power.
In summary, the Nation’s regions have experienced virtu­
ally every pattern of job growth over the 12-year study
period— consistently good, as in the Pacific, Mountain, and
West South Central; consistently bad, as in the East North
Central; improving, as in New England; and deteriorating,
as in the East South Central. Strength in manufacturing
probably has the broadest impact on regional economic
well-being (with certain exceptions, such as the West North
Central States where farming is so critical). However, that
well-being is most dramatically reflected in construction
activity, which can increase or decrease precipitously in
response to changing regional fortunes. Service-sector em­
ployment most closely mirrors a region’s overall population
and employment patterns.
8


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

Why these shifting fortunes?
Up to this point, the evidence presented has documented
the change in regional employment performance, particuarly as it relates to regions’ relative competitive position
in each industry. What causes these changes in regional
advantage? The complexity of this question is reflected in
the fact that analysts have not been successful in explaining
a substantial portion of regional growth differences. Several
important regional growth factors are discussed here— mi­
gration, regional income and wages, business location deci­
sions, and economic shocks. The list obviously is not ex­
haustive, but only representative of the wide range of
possible regional growth forces. Finally, some key elements
of the economic renaissance in New England are examined.
Migration and jobs. The relationship between population
and job growth is complex. It is perhaps best viewed as a
cycle that, once begun, is self-sustaining and reinforcing.
Certainly, the availability of jobs in an area is an attraction
to jobseekers from other regions. Michael Greenwood and
Gary Hunt have estimated that in metropolitan areas each
100 additional jobs attract about 45 employed net migrants,
with local residents filling the remaining openings.9 How­
ever, migration in and of itself results in a substantial in­
crease in employment above and beyond the migrant’s own
job. These jobs can be filled by either additional migration
or increased labor force participation of the indigenous pop­
ulation. This direction of causation— with population
growth causing job expansion— would be reflected in the
regional share indexes for industries providing locally con­
sumed products.
Migrants may influence labor demand in several ways.10
For example, they may bring with them assets or income
sources above their wages. Retirees are the prime example
of the indirect effect of migration on jobs because the re­
tirees themselves have little or no direct effect on local labor
markets. Migrants may cause an increase in demand for
infrastructure (roads, schools, utilities, and housing). They
may also transport qualities that change the human capital
makeup of the sending and receiving areas, to the extent that
their age, skills, education, or entrepreneurial talent may be
different than the average in either area. Migration may
directly affect local labor force participation rates, in that the
demographic characteristics of the migrants may differ from
the averages in the receiving area. In fact, migrants tend to
be concentrated in the 20-to-34 age range, have the highest
levels of education, and are somewhat disproportionately
male.11 Also, migrants may influence the prices and prof­
itability of goods and services by changing demand for those
items; housing would be the most common example of this.
Table 3 shows percentage changes in population and
nonagricultural payroll employment by geographic division
between 1973 and 1985.12 The columns in which the regions
are ranked from 1 to 9 according to those changes show that

New England and the East South Central division break an
otherwise close match between population and employment
change rankings. The jump in New England’s employment,
despite slow population growth, resulted in a 5-point in­
crease in the region’s employment-population ratio, a gain
which was more than triple the national average.13 The East
South Central’s employment ratio declined a percentage
point, for the worst regional performance. The strong rela­
tionship between employment and population growth, with
causation running in both directions, is obvious.
Regional income and wages. The second explanation for
the shift in regional economic power towards the South and
West falls under the general heading of regional income (or
factor price) inequality. One common theory states that if
the factors of production— labor, capital, and so forth— are
free to move between regions in order to obtain their highest
return, convergence of factor prices among regions will
occur in the long run.14 As an example, table 4 shows
regional per capita income in relation to the national aver­
age. While per capita income changes may come from sev­
eral sources, wage rates are by far the most important
factor.15
All other things being equal, firms will tend to locate
where labor costs are low. Workers, on the other hand, are
attracted by high wages, but even so, there has been sub­
stantial migration from high- to low-wage areas, as from the
Midwest to the South. One partial explanation for this trend
is the historic regional difference in living costs, which gave
wages earned in the South more real purchasing power than
those earned in higher-cost regions. The key to migration is
in the relationship between wages and job growth. Mancur
Olson, citing his own work and that of Charles Hulten and
Robert Schwab, provides a theoretical framework for such
migration from high- to low-wage regions.16 Olson pro­
poses that regional economic growth in the United States
(and worldwide) is largely dependent on the level of carteli­
zation in each region. In this argument, cartelization refers
to “any organizations or groups that lobby for favorable
legislation and administrative rulings or act cartelistically to
influence prices or wages.”17 Although labor unions are
most often cited in this regard, the theory applies equally to
producers, professional associations, and so forth.
Olson suggests that the older the region, the more estab­
lished are these special interests and the more difficult it
becomes for many firms to compete in the restrictive envi­
ronment. One result of these forces is “supra-competitive”
wages in the Midwest. Firms which do not benefit from
location-specific advantages (proximity to markets or natu­
ral resources) or that are less efficient cannot compete in the
high-wage environment and will fail or locate elsewhere.
Hulten and Schwab conclude that this effect increases pro­
ductivity and has reduced jobs in the North as employers in
that region limit employment until the marginal product of
labor equals the “inflated” wage.

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

Table 3. Percent change in total population and nonagricultural payroll employment by census division, 1973-85
Percent change, 1973-85

Regional ranking1

Census division

New England...................
Middle Atlantic.................
East North Central...........
West North Central...........
South Atlantic...................
East South Central...........
West South C e n tra l.........
Mountain..........................
Pacific..............................

Population

Employment

Population

Employment

4
-1
2
6
22
12
29
37
26

28
11
8
22
38
22
51
57
43

7
9
8
6
4
5
2
1
3

5
8
9
6
4
7
2
1
3

1 Based on percent change in columns 1 and 2.
So u r c e :

Bureau of the Census and Bureau of Labor Statistics. See text footnote 12.

As the economic situation in the high-wage Midwest has
deteriorated, particularly since 1979, the lack of adequate
downward flexibility of wages in response to labor market
changes has led to an outflow of jobs.18 Thus, high wages
are insufficient to attract migrants in the absence of job
growth. In contrast, there has been considerable migration
to the high-growth, and relatively high-wage, Pacific re­
gion.19 Olson suggests, however, that low wages will cease
to draw industry and workers to the South as the regional
wage differentials disappear and as the South loses its eco­
nomic and social peculiarities. The same institutional ar­
rangements that have led to market inefficiencies in the
North, he predicts, will accelerate in the South.
That a general convergence of regional incomes has oc­
curred over time is clearly shown in table 4. During the past
decade, however, regional changes have not necessarily led
towards further convergence. Thus, it seems that while
wage differentials have been an important factor in the loca­

tion decisions of individuals and businesses, they may no
longer contribute as heavily to those decisions in the future.
Regional location— the firm. As we have seen, many of
the factors affecting an individual’s decision to migrate may
be similar to those that influence a firm’s investment loca­
tion decision. Other factors that may be as important to the
firm as to the individual include climate, population density,
and taxes. While the intricacies of location theory are be­
yond the scope of this analysis, it would be a serious omis­
sion to completely ignore the topic.
Two important conclusions can be drawn from a survey
of the literature on business location: These decisions tend
to be quite complex and to be firm- and industry-specific—
why else would new business investment be so geographi­
cally dispersed, even within specific industries? Also, such
predictable factors as wages, taxes, unionization, and en­
ergy costs fail to explain much of the differences in invest­
ment location.
Researchers are unanimous in their finding that the differ­
ences in regional employment growth rates generally are not
the result of actual movement of firms out of the North and
into the South and West.20 The notion of firm relocation is
9

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

based largely on the observed migration of textiles manufac­
turers out of New England and into North and South Caro­
lina in the 1940’s and 1950’s. In fact, regional employment
growth is mostly the result of the formation of new firms and
the expansion of existing ones.
How are business investment decisions made? One tech­
nique used in location factor studies is to list factors as­
sumed to be, or identified by businesses as being, important
in the location decision and to rank States according to those
factors.21 These may include taxes, wages, unionization,
energy costs, and cost of living, among others. As expected,
high-growth States tend to perform well in such rankings.
Studies may also include such factors as supply and quality
of labor and proximity to markets. Generalizations about
regional advantages in the second group of measures are
more difficult to make. However, the importance of such
factors makes it clear that “business climate,” in the lowwage, low-tax sense, is not enough to attract some invest­
ment. For example, a new firm may require certain highly
technical consulting services available in only a few areas of
the country. That requirement alone may make other consid­
erations irrelevant.
Lynn Brown and fellow analysts have shown that the
location factors do not overwhelmingly favor a particular
region.22 Substantial investment occurs in States with a
high-wage or high-energy-cost profile, for example. In fact,
the authors find that the most common factors associated
with regional investment account for only a third of the
regional variation. The conclusion is that States should not
feel helpless in the face of uncontrollable negative business
climate factors. Development strategies can be devised to
attract those firms which may benefit from the State’s posi­
tive attributes. As will be shown later in the discussion, New
England has benefited from its historical position as a man­
ufacturing and finance center, as well as from its history of
academic excellence. Substantial economic progress has
been made there in the face of other business climate factors
which are not so favorable.

“shocks,” those largely unforeseen circumstances that not
only change the Nation’s competitive position in the world
economy but also change the regional locus of economic
power within the United States. Bernard Weinstein and oth­
ers have described the takeoff in economic growth in the
Southern and Western States in terms of W.W. Rostow’s
stages-of-growth model, in which sustained growth does not
occur without some dramatic external stimulus.23 Prior to
World War II, the South was a relatively underdeveloped
economy— the only employment shares above the national
average were in the most basic sectors, agriculture and basic
energy.24 World War II saw the infusion of billions of dol­
lars in investment into the Sunbelt, with an estimated 60
percent of the $74 billion wartime expenditures going to 15
Southern and Western States.25 Particularly important was
the birth and continued expansion of substantial hightechnology and aerospace industries in the Sunbelt. This
event is seen as the takeoff necessary for sustained growth
according to the Rostow model. The distribution of defense
funds continues to have a strong regional impact. However,
as New England, another large defense contracting region,
witnessed during the years following the Vietnam conflict,
such dependence makes a region’s economy susceptible to
the vagaries of defense budgets.26
While not of the same magnitude as the effects of World
War II on regional development, changing energy prices are
generally cited as the most important shock event in the
recent experience. First, rising energy prices, which pre­
vailed throughout most of the study period, change the rel­
ative regional cost of production and transportation. To
some extent, labor costs also may be affected, as workers
attempt to recoup losses in their standard of living. Second,
price changes affect the revenues of producers and, in ef­
fect, redistribute income from energy “have-not” to energy
“have” regions. While the energy sector itself is not a large
employer, the employment effects in related industries— fi­
nance, drilling equipment, and technical services, among
others— can be quite large.
Regarding the first issue, table 5 suggests the effects on
residential business consumers of the two large opec price
increases during the 1970’s. Hans Landsberg stresses that

Economic “shocks. ” The factor that may best explain re­
cent regional shifts in economic performance is economic

Table 4.

Index of per capita income by region, selected years, 1940-85

[National average=100]

Region
Year

1940
1950
1960
1970
1977
1985

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

England

Middle
Atlantic

East
North
Central

West
North
Central

South
Atlantic

East
South
Central

West
South
Central

Mountain

Pacific

Standard
deviation

126
107
110
109
102
114

132
117
116
113
106
110

112
111
108
104
105
99

81
95
92
94
97
99

77
81
84
91
93
96

49
61
69
75
81
77

64
81
82
85
92
92

87
95
93
91
94
92

132
120
119
111
111
110

30.9
19.5
17.5
13.0
9.1
10.9

tnue .w. .

So u r c e : Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. Data through 1977
are published in Lynn Brown, “Narrowing Regional Income Differentials,' New England Economic


10
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Review (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston), September/October 1980, p. 37.

one must consider both actual cost levels, in that certain
regions characteristically have greater energy costs, and
changes in those levels.27 The latter would be most likely to
affect regional competitive positions. For example, while
industrial energy users in the South paid 26 percent less than
the national average in 1970, that advantage had declined to
12 percent by 1980. Landsberg indicates that “it may be
much more punishing for the prosperity of an area with low
energy prices to suffer drastic boosts, while still remaining
below the national average, than for a high-cost area to
undergo modest boosts and still stay above the national
average.”28
Residents of the Northeast may have suffered the most
from energy price rises because they were triply penalized;
they use more energy, they depend disproportionately on
expensive fuel oil, and fuel oil prices rose faster than those
for natural gas, its chief competitor. But with recent decon­
trol of natural gas prices, the current softness in the world
oil market, and the additional cost some low-energy-price
areas have faced since 1980 due to nuclear plant construc­
tion, regional advantage in the energy area has tended to
narrow. 29
While the above discussion focuses on the energy con­
sumer, recent shifts in world oil prices have considerably
altered the fortunes of energy-producing areas as well. For
example, Weinstein and others have commented, not too
facetiously, that “the opec oil embargo did more to revive
Appalachia than ten years and $10 billion of federal aid.”30
Partly as a result of strong growth in its mining sector, West
Virginia’s jobless rate was about the national average in the
late 1970’s.31 However, as weak energy prices, conserva­
tion, and concerns over pollution have lessened the demand
for coal, more recent jobless rates for the State have been
twice the national average. Likewise, Texas had very low
jobless rates, with some labor shortages, during the late
1970’s and early 1980’s, and the State was relatively unaf­
fected by the 1981-82 recession. More recently, however,
lower energy prices have contributed to a deterioration in the
State’s job market. Jobless rates in early 1986 were above
the national average, housing prices were weak, and hous­
ing foreclosure rates were the highest in the country.32
Similar examples of energy-price induced boom and bust
economies can be seen in Alaska, Wyoming, and sev­
eral other States in the Mountain and West South Central
regions.
While defense expenditures and energy prices may be
among the most visible of shock factors which are exoge­
nous to regional economies, many other such events occur
continuously. For example, foreign exchange rates, foreign
policy objectives, social expenditures, and technological
discoveries all affect regions differently. Thus, while certain
redistribution of regional wealth and economic growth is
structural in nature, unanticipated events can render many
regional “power shifts” transitory.

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

New England’s restructured economy
The key ingredient in the economic turnaround in New
England probably has been time. While the deterioration of
the economy in the industrial Midwest is fairly recent, New
England had begun a period of “deindustrialization” at least
four decades ago. The region’s economy initially was dom­
inated by textiles; in 1950, for example, textiles firms em­
ployed 265,000 of the region’s workers.33 By 1984, that
figure had been reduced to 50,000, both because of the early
outmigration of firms to the Carolinas and the long-term
structural decline in the industry nationwide. However,
even as the region’s economic performance deteriorated,
New England already had in place many of the requirements
for reindustrialization. That this process has occurred is
dramatically demonstrated by the regional share indexes in
table 2; over the 1973-85 period, New England’s perform­
ance in nondurable goods was the worst in the Nation, while
that in durables was nearly the best. Time and certain other
prerequisites have allowed a major industrial restructuring
of the region’s economy.
What were the prerequisites for the reindustrialization of
New England? John Hekman and John Strong suggest that
development of a high technology industrial region is most
likely when three factors are ait work— a strong research, or
scientific, component; industrial experience; and financial
resources.34 In tracking New England’s development, the
authors cite the region’s strong historical standing in all
three areas.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology was founded
in the 19th century partly as a way of advancing industrial
technology. By the early 1900’s, the relationship between
m it and the area’s industry was beginning to make original
scientific contributions in the areas of electrical and chemi­
cal engineering. Many companies in the region were formed
or expanded based on the skills and discoveries of m it trained scientists.
Because scientific manpower tends to be in short supply,
high tech firms cluster around academic centers. Many
Table 5. Average residential and industrial energy prices
by region, 1970 and 1980
[Dollars pe r billion

b t u ’ s]

1970

1980

Percentage
increase,
1970-80

Residential:
United S ta te s..........................................................
Northeast..............................................................
Midwest................................................................
South....................................................................
W est....................................................................

$1,403
1,598
1,430
1,411
1,098

$4,472
5,808
4,388
4,136
3,603

219
263
207
193
228

Industrial:
United S tates..........................................................
Northeast..............................................................
Midwest................................................................
South....................................................................
W est....................................................................

628
847
723
462
651

3,166
4,256
3,130
2,795
3,167

403
402
333
505
386

Region

So u r c e :

National and State Energy Expenditures 1970-1980 (Washington, Northeast-

Midwest Institute, July 1981).

11

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

firms are then spawned from these early enterprises, and
these start-ups virtually never involve relocation.35 One rea­
son is that new firms need access to the same limited pool
of technical manpower. Thus, the regional manpower ad­
vantage of a major academic center is in product design and
development, not necessarily in the production phase.
For over a century, New England has been on the cutting
edge of new technology— in the manufacture of textiles,
guns, and machine tools, for example, and later, in applica­
tions of electricity. Some older firms have continued their
technological innovations into today’s high tech fields;
others can trace their lineage back to those firms.36 Thus, to
some extent it is inaccurate to describe today’s high-tech
firms as having “chosen” to locate in New England. To a
large degree, they were already there.
One reason for the continuation of the region’s tradition
of industrial innovation is that it has remained a center for
venture capital. Not only are the region’s banks and other
major financial institutions more inclined toward venture
finance than those in other areas, but the region has also
been a leader in the formation of venture capital firms. And,
in another example of the university-business link, some
academic institutions, such as Harvard and m i t , have been
actively involved in risk financing.37 Conversely, the lack of
venture capital has been cited as an impediment to the
growth of high tech firms in other regions, such as the
Southeast.38
New England was hit very hard by the 1973-75 reces­
sion, in large part because of the combined effects of the oil
price increases and earlier defense cutbacks. However, this
overall weakness tended to obscure the fact that certain of
the region’s industries were expanding. Many of the bud­
ding high tech firms were little affected by the downturn. As
these firms matured, they entered the production stages, in
which labor costs begin to take on a greater role in prof­
itability. While New England’s per capita income levels
have never fallen below the national average, its wage rates
have been low and were driven lower by the 1969-70 and
1973-75 recessions.39 (The reader should also note that the
per capita income figures are inflated by the region’s tradi­
tionally high labor force participation rates.) The evidence
indicates that capital/labor ratios in New England have been
very low over the study period, and firms have taken advan­
tage of these relatively low labor costs.40 Recently, New
England and other regions have seen the movement of some
production facilities to very low-wage foreign countries
such as those in the Pacific Basin. This is to be expected in
the highly cost-sensitive and labor-intensive mass produc­
tion phase of the firms’ growth cycle. What employment
effect these movements will have in the future is unclear.
Another key factor most frequently cited in New Eng­
land’s resurgence is the overall quality of education in the
area, from the public schools through the top levels of
higher education. The region has higher than average rates
of high school and college graduation and a disproportion­
12

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

ately large cadre of scientific manpower.41 Bernard Wein­
stein and Harold Gross cite educational attainment of the
population as one of the key impediments to continued
growth in some Sunbelt areas and the critical factor in New
England’s prominence.42
Thus, New England has benefited from the close and
long-standing relationship among the business, academic,
and financial communities. Employment growth has accel­
erated due to the combined influence of low real wages and
a highly skilled and educated work force. At the same time,
slow population growth has allowed much of the region’s
economic expansion to show up in a rapid rise in its
employment-population ratio and in declining joblessness.
While the region suffered from rising energy costs and
defense cutbacks in the early 1970’s, energy prices have
remained soft in recent years, and the region’s defense con­
tracts have grown in the 1980’s. It should be pointed out that
New England’s economy remains susceptible to changes in
those two factors.43 The region provides clear evidence that
an area can key its growth to the manufacturing sector if its
industries are innovative and government is responsive.44

Conclusions
Over roughly the last decade, the Nation has seen a con­
tinuation of the long-term trend of employment and popula­
tion shifts from much of the Northeast and Midwest to the
South and West. However, the rather poor recent perform­
ance of the East South Central region and the economic
rebirth of New England demonstrate that the shift in
economic power from Snowbelt to Sunbelt is far from
immutable.
Many of the factors that have made the South and West
so attractive to both firms and individuals are becoming less
pronounced. Interregional differences in wages and cost of
living have narrowed, as have differences in nonpecuniary
factors of urban life— population density, pollution, crime,
and congestion. Just as much of the North is affected by a
declining tax base and aging infrastructure, some areas of
the South have been unable to keep pace with the grow­
ing demands for new infrastructure. For example, water
availability may be the “shock” factor that some day forces
a halt to the Southwest’s rapid growth.45
Other developments may place limits on growth in some
rapidly expanding areas. The economies of the West South
Central and Mountain regions benefited greatly from the
energy boom of the 1970’s and early 1980’s, but have been
hurt badly by the recent collapse in the price of oil. And, as
mentioned earlier, the quality of education in much of the
South is often perceived as a limiting factor. Also, the
South’s attractiveness as a low-wage area for production
may be declining as the drawing power of foreign competi­
tors increases.
None of this is to say that an economic shift back towards
the North is inevitable, or even expected. Rather, the evi-

dence suggests that regional advantage is often short-lived.
The lesson of New England is that it takes time to restructure
a region’s economy to meet the requirements of changing
national and world economic environment. But the period of
decline may actually create the conditions for future growth,
while the forces of growth may ultimately result in a loss of

competitive edge.
A decade ago, an analysis of the future of the Northern
regions’ economies typically read like a eulogy. Today, the
scenario of continued deterioration of the Northern areas
and rapid growth in the South and West seems not nearly so
inevitable.
□

-FOOTNOTESa c k n o w l e d g m e n t : The author thanks Maria Roca for her valuable assis­
tance in preparation o f the regional share index calculations.

change in the relative size of the industry. The top line totals thus incorpo­
rate the (usually small) effects o f industry mix— that is, they measure the
combined effects o f regional share and industry mix.

1 Unemployment data are presented in E m ploym ent a n d E arnings and
Consumer Price Index data in c p i D e ta ile d R e p o r t, both published monthly
by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.

7 Robert McGee, “State Unemployment Rates: What Explains the Dif­
ferences?” Q u arterly R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f New York), Spring
1985, pp. 2 8 -3 5 .

2 Kirkpatrick Sale, P o w e r Shift (New York, Random House, 1975).

8 “Estimates o f the Population o f States: 1970 to 1983,” C u rren t P o p u ­
lation R eports, P opulation E stim ates an d P ro je c tio n s, Series P -2 5 , No.

3 For examples o f the application o f shift-share analysis, see M.F.
Petrulis, “Regional Manufacturing Employment Growth Patterns,” R u ral
D eve lo p m en t R esearch R e p o rt N o. 13 (U .S. Department of Agriculture,
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperative Service, June 1979); and Edgar S.
Dunn, Jr., “A Statistical and Analytical Technique for Regional Analysis,”
P a p e rs a n d P ro ceed in g s o f the R eg io n a l Scien ce A sso c ia tio n , Volume 6,
1960, pp. 9 7 -1 1 2 .
4 The three components of regional change are defined as follows:

957 (Bureau of the Census, October 1984).
9 Michael J. Greenwood and Gary L. Hunt, “Migration and Interregional
Employment Redistribution in the United States,” The A m erican E conom ic
R e v ie w , December 1984, pp. 957 -6 9 . Regions are not equal in their ability
to attract migrants by offering jobs. Greenwood and Hunt found that 10
jobs in the South or West would attract 1 more migrant than an equal
number of jobs in the Northeast or North Central regions, indicating some
nonpecuniary component to migration.
10 Greenwood and Hunt, “Migration,” p. 957.

Et+1 — E‘ =
E ‘ ((E j+ V E i*) -

1)

(National share)

11 “Geographic Mobility, March 1982 to March 1983,” C u rren t P o p u la ­
tion R eports, P opulation C h a ra c te ristic s, Series P -2 0 , No. 393 (Bureau of
the Census, October 1984).

+ SjE j ( ( E & V E j J - (E 'tV E < s))

(Industry mix)

+ S jE j ((E j+1/E?) - ( E j + ' / E i J )

(Regional share)

where:
=
=
Ei
=
Eus
=
Eius
t and t+ 1 =

E

total regional employment;
regional employment in industry i ;
total national employment;
national employment in industry i ; and
the base and target years, respectively.

5 The use o f this technique does have several limitations. First, as ap­
plied here, the use o f broad aggregate industries ignores the possible effects
o f industry distributions within those aggregates. For example, if a region
had a higher than average proportion o f durable goods industries in the base
year, that would have a negative effect on the region’s industry mix statis­
tic. However, it is possible that the particular region had a very large share
o f employment in fast-growth durable goods industries. In that event, the
industry mix statistic would paint too negative a picture o f the manufactur­
ing sector’s effect on the region’s industry mix. It would be unusual,
however, for a region’s employment mix within a broad industry group to
differ so markedly from the national average as to change the sign o f the
industry mix statistic for that particular industry (unless, o f course, if the
statistic were already close to zero).
Second, because the technique must be applied over a discrete time
period, the choice o f the base year distribution for the industry mix statistic
may bias the results. Changes in a region’s industry mix over time may alter
the ratio o f slow- to fast-growth industries. The longer the period to which
the technique is applied, the greater the effect of a change in a region’s
industry mix relative to a national average. A check of the data used here
shows that this potential problem has little effect. The industry mix statis­
tics for the most recent period, 1979 to 1985, show essentially the same
pattern as those for the entire 1973-85 span, although the levels are much
smaller because they have a much smaller regional employment growth to
explain. Thus, regional industry distributions have not changed in a pattern
markedly dissimilar to that o f the entire Nation.
6 Unlike individual industries, the regional totals are affected by industry
mix in that they reflect the growth rates in each industry, weighted for the


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

12 Employment data are from the Current Employment Statistics Survey.
Population data are derived from “Estimates o f the Population o f States:
1970 to 1983,” C u rren t P opu lation R e ports, P opu lation E stim ates an d
P ro je c tio n s, Series P -2 5 , No. 957 (Bureau o f the Census, October 1984)
and preliminary 1985 data.
13 Employment-population ratios for 1984 are from G eograph ic P rofile
o f E m ploym ent a n d U nem ploym ent, 1 9 8 4 , Bulletin 2234 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, May 1985). Employment-population ratios for 1973 are unpub­
lished bls data.
14 Bernard L. Weinstein, Harold T. Gross, and John Rees, R egion al
G row th an d D eclin e in the U n ited S tates (New York, Praeger, 1985),
p. 49.
15 Lynn E. Brown, “Narrowing Regional Income Differentials: II,” N ew
E n glan d E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f Boston), November/
December 1980, pp. 4 0 -5 9 .
16 Mancur Olson, “The South Will Fall Again: The South as Leader and
Laggard in Economic Growth,” Southern E conom ic J o u rn a l, April 1983,
pp. 917-32; and Charles R. Hulten and Robert M. Schwab, “Regional
Productivity and Growth in U .S. Manufacturing: 1951-78,” The A m erican
E conom ic R e v ie w , March 1984, pp. 152-62.
17 Olson, “The South,” p. 917.
18 Lynn E. Brown, “How Different are Regional Wages? A Second
Look,” N ew E n glan d E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f Boston),
March/April 1984, pp. 4 0 -4 7 .
19 This phenomenon is discussed in Bernard Okun and Richard W.
Richardson, “R egional Incom e Inequality and Internal Population
Migration,” in John Friedman and William Alonso, eds., R egion al D e v e l­
opm en t an d P lanning, A R e a d er (Cambridge, m a , the m it Press, 1964), pp.
303-18.
20 See, for example, James P. Miller, “Manufacturing Relocations in the
United States,” in Richard B. McKenzie, ed., P la n t C losin g: P u blic o r
P riva te C h oices (Washington, Cato Institute, 1982), pp. 19-36; and Carol
L. Jusenius and Larry C. Ledebur, “Where Have All die Firms Gone? An
Analysis o f the N ew England Economy,” in the same volume, pp. 6 5 -1 0 4 .
21 See, for example, Fantus Company, C om parative B usiness C lim ate
S tudy (Chicago, Illinois Manufacturer’s Association, 1975); and Alexander

13

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Regional Employment Growth, 1973-85

Grant & C o., The Fourth S tu dy o f G en era l M anufacturing B usiness C li­
m ates (Chicago, Alexander Grant & C o., 1983).
22 Lynn E. Brown, Peter Mieszkowski, and Richard F. Syron, “Regional
Investment Patterns,” N e w E n g la n d E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve
Bank o f Boston), July/August 1980, pp. 5 -2 3 .
23 Weinstein, Gross, and Rees, R eg io n a l G r o w th , p. 45, from W.W.
Rostow, The S ta g es o f E conom ic G row th (Cambridge, Cambridge Univer­
sity Press, 1960).
24 W illiam H. Miemyk, The C hanging Structure o f the Southern E con ­
om y (Research Triangle Park, n c , Southern Growth Policies Board, 1977),
p. 18.

34 John S. Hekman and John S. Strong, “The Evolution o f New England
Industry,” N e w E n glan d E con om ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f
Boston), March/April 1981, pp. 3 5 -4 6 .
35 Donald L. Koch, William N. Cox, Delores W. Steinhäuser, and
Pamela V. Whigham, “High Technology: The Southeast Reaches Our For
Growth Industry,” E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f Atlanta),
September 1983, pp. 4—16. See p. 13.
36 I b id ., p. 4 0 -4 3 .
37I b id ., p. 4 4 -4 6 .
38 Koch and others, “High Technology,” p. 13.

25 Sale, P o w e r S h ift, p. 25.
26 Lynn E. Brown and John S. Hekman, “New England’s Economy in
the 1980’s,” N e w E n glan d E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank of
Boston), January/February 1981, pp. 5 -1 6 . See p. 8.
27 Hans H. Landsberg, “Energy ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-Nots’,” in Kent A.
Price, e d ., R eg io n a l C on flict a n d N a tio n a l P o lic y (Washington, Resources
for the Future, Inc., 1982), pp. 5 2 -5 3 .

39 Lynn E. Brown, “How Different are Regional Wages? A Second
Look,” N e w E n glan d E conom ic R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f Boston),
March/April 1984, pp. 4 0 -4 7 .
40 James M. Howell and Linda M. Frankel, “Economic Revitalization
and Job Creation in America’s Oldest Industrialized Region,” Paper pre­
sented at the American Enterprise Institute/Institut La Boetie Conference,
Paris, France, October 2 4 -2 5 , 1985.

28 I b id ., p. 53.
41 Lynn E. Brown, “A Quality Labor Supply,” N ew E n glan d E conom ic
R e view (Federal Reserve Bank o f Boston), July/August 1981, pp. 19-36.

29 I b id ., p. 55.
30 Weinstein, Gross, and Rees, R eg io n a l G r o w th , p. 63.
31 State unemployment rates come from G eo g ra p h ic P ro file s o f E m ploy­
m ent a n d U n em p lo ym en t, published annually by the Bureau o f Labor
Statistics.
32 Bernard L. Weinstein and Harold T. Gross, “The Frost Belt’s Re­
venge,” The W all S tree t J o u rn a l, Nov. 19, 1985, p. 30.
33 Brown and Hekman, “New England’s Economy,” p. 7.

14

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

42 Weinstein and Gross, “The Frost Belt’s Revenge.”
43 Brown and Hekman, “New England’s Economy in the 1980’s,” p. 15.
44 See regional share indexes for government employment in New Eng­
land.
45 William Ashworth, N o r A n y D ro p to D rin k (New York, Summit
Books, 1982).

A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement,
challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be considered
for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not po­
lemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Depart­
ment of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212.

The revised Consumer Price Index:
changes in definitions and availability
The Consumer Price Index for January 1987
will incorporate some new series and
will reflect changes in several old series;
the availability of some indexes will be affected
Jo h n L . M

arcoot a n d

R ic h a r d

C.

B ahr

The release of the January 1987 Consumer Price Index ( c p i )
in February will introduce updated market baskets that re­
flect population distributions from the 1980 census of popu­
lation and spending patterns from the 1982-84 Consumer
Expenditure Survey. This release will be part of a 5-year
program to update the c p i market basket and incorporate
numerous technical enhancements.1
Although the CPI is a measure of price change for a market
basket of constant quality and quantity, it also needs to
retain its relevance to consumers’ experience by pricing
items currently purchased. New consumer purchasing pat­
terns occur as a result of changes in a number of factors,
such as relative prices, income, tastes, demographic charac­
teristics, technological changes, and population shifts.
Thus, periodic revisions of the c p i are necessary to incorpo­
rate updated versions of the market basket.
This article is one of a series that provides detailed infor­
mation about the c p i revision. It highlights the changes that
will occur in the availability and in the definitions of in­
dexes. Many of the changes derive from shifts that have
occurred in the spending patterns of the American public.
Nearly five decades of spending patterns as reflected in the
c p i expenditure weighting patterns and the corresponding
relative importance of major groups are shown in table 1. A
later article will discuss the new expenditure weights in
detail.

John L. Marcoot is the manager o f the c p i Revision Program and
Richard C. Bahr is an economist in the Office of Prices and Living Condi­
tions, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.


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

Item indexes
One clear trend in consumer spending has been a reduc­
tion in the relative importance of expenditures for food,
especially grocery food. Although it is not immediately
obvious from the data in table 1, there have been corre­
sponding increases in importance for new products and serv­
ices such as video recorders and day care. To ensure the
most accurate c p i possible, it has been necessary to allocate
more pricing and calculation resources to these new and
growing expenditure categories, with the correlative result
that proportionately fewer resources will be available for
items of declining importance. This means new indexes for
previously unpriced products will become available. But it
also means that there will be some reduction in product
detail for expenditure categories with declining relative im­
portance. The discontinuation of an index does not mean
that the item is no longer priced for the c p i . All of the
previously priced items will continue to be priced, but with
much smaller samples. The relative proportions that these
items constitute of the new combined strata (class of similar
items) to which they are assigned will also be subject to
annual updating through the sample rotation process.2
Exhibit 1 summarizes the definitions for new item in­
dexes and explains the definitional changes that some other
indexes are undergoing. These definitional changes arise
from the need to combine some previously separate items,
the addition of some previously unpriced items, and concep­
tual or coverage changes which enhance the measurement or
interpretation of the index.
Some of the items that are being discontinued as separate
15

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Changes in

item strata because of their reduced relative importance have
significant applications independent of their use in the c p i .
To accommodate users of these indexes, b l s will continue
to publish a limited number of them as special sub-strata
c p i - u indexes. These sub-strata indexes will be based on
extremely small samples and will be less reliable than the
pre-1987 numbers. Footnote 3 lists the item strata that are
being discontinued and indicates whether a corresponding
sub-strata index will be available.3
Beginning with the c p i -u for January 1983, b l s adopted an
improved method— called rental equivalence— for estimat­
ing homeowner shelter costs.4 (The change was made in
January 1985 for the c p i -w . ) The 1987 c p i revision continues
the definitional and coverage features associated with that
change. In addition, it incorporates two new refinements
consistent with that change. First, the new index for materi­
als, supplies, and equipment for home repairs, which com­
bines three more detailed old indexes, will include for pric­
ing only those types of items that would be purchased by
tenants and exclude those typically purchased by landlords
for major repairs or capital improvements. Second, the
rental value of owner-used vacation property is included in
lodging while out of town.
The definitional treatment of premium costs for health
care insurance will have a change which will affect the
structure of the expediture weights for health insurance, but
not the methodology for estimating price changes affecting
the costs of health insurance. Beginning with January 1987,
the c p i will define the cost of health insurance as the portion
of premium payments which is retained by the insurer in the
form of profits and operating expenses. The portion of the
premium which is either paid directly by the insurer to
health care providers or as reimbursements to policyholders
will no longer be defined as a health insurance expenditure,
but rather as a direct medical care expenditure.
This definitional change will slightly modify the method
used for estimating changes in health insurance premiums.
An indirect method has been used to estimate the changes in
costs of health insurance. The expenditure for health in­
surance has been defined as total consumer premium pay­
Table 1.

cpi

Coverage

ments. The price change for these premiums has been esti­
mated with a combination of the changes in cost for covered
medical services and the changes in premium retained by
insurers for operating costs and profit.5
The revised definition will result in the portion of the
health insurance expenditure that is paid as benefits by the
insurer being included in the directly priced medical care
strata, for example, physician services, hospital room, and
eye care. The result of this treatment is that the expenditure
weights of these directly priced medical care strata will be
increased, and they will also receive a greater proportion of
the price quotations in the c p i . The expenditure weight for
health insurance will represent only the portion of the pre­
mium retained by the insurers, and changes in its costs will
continue to be estimated using an indirect pricing procedure
that relies both on c p i changes for covered medical expenses
and secondary data on premiums retained by insurers. This
definitional change will result in the discontinuation of the
index for “Other medical care services.”

Local area indexes
As announced in 1984, b l s has allocated the price quota­
tion samples among the 91 pricing areas in a sample design
which will produce the most accurate national c p i possible
with the funds authorized. The decision to improve the
national c p i estimate will reduce the frequency of publica­
tion for some areas. Beginning in 1987, semiannual average
indexes will replace bimonthly indexes for 12 currently pub­
lished areas. (See table 2.) These semiannual average in­
dexes, which are the averages of the 6-month periods from
January through June and from July through December, will
be published with the release of the July c p i in August and
the January c p i in February.
The method of calculating the averages for a semiannual
average index derives from the one currently used for calcu­
lating annual average indexes which b l s publishes at the end
of each year. Because monthly and bimonthly indexes are
not published in those areas, the first step will be intermedi­
ate monthly and bimonthly calculations for use in the aver­
age computation. For those items which are priced monthly,

The Consumer Price Index market basket by major expenditure group and benchmark year

[Percent distribution]
W a g e e a rn e rs a n d cle rica l w o rk e rs ( c p i - w )

A ll u rb an c o n s u m e rs ( c p i - u )

M a jo r g ro u p

Food and beverages ...................................................
Housing.........................................................
Apparel .................................................
Transportation .................................................
Medical care ...........................................
Entertainment .............................................
Other goods and services.....................................................

193 9 1

19522

19633

3 5.4

32.2

3 3.7

33.5
9.4

8.1
4.1

19774

19845

1 9 8 2 -8 4 6

25.2

2 0.5

21.3

34.9

4 0.7

34.9

10.6

5.8

11.3

14.0

20.2

5.0
24.1

4.8

5.7

4.5

5.6

2.8

4.0

3.9

4.9

4.8

5.7

3.9
4.4

11.0

1 Relative importance forthe expenditure survey period 1934-36 updated for price change.
2 Relative importance forthe expenditure survey period 1950 updated for price change.
3 Relative importance forthe expenditure survey period 1960-61 updated for price change.
4 Relative importance forthe expenditure survey period 1972-73 updated for price change.
5 Relative importance for the expenditure survey period 1972-73 with the rental equivalence

16

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

19774

19825

20.1

18.8

20.1

18.0

39.2

43.9

37.7

4 2 .2

6.5

5.8

5.2

66

2 1.2

18.0

2 1.8

5.0

6.0

18.9
47

3.9

3.9
4.1

4.1

4.2

45

5.2

5.0

4.4

5.0

5.1

1 9 8 2 -8 4 6

approach to homeowners' costs updated for price change. The rental equivalence approach to
homeowners’ costs was introduced into c p i -u effective January 1983 and into the c p i -w effective
January 1985.
6 Relative importance for the expenditure survey period 1982-84. Revised indexes which re­
quire expenditure weights updated for price change between the survey period and December
1986 will differ from those shown.

Exhibit 1.

Title and definition changes in the Consumer Price Index, beginning with January 1987 data

New series title

Definition change

Food and beverages

Fresh other breads, bis­
cuits, rolls, and
muffins1
Cookies, fresh cakes,
and cupcakes1
Other bakery products1

Ham1
Other pork, including
sausage1
Other dairy products, in­
cluding butter1
Oranges, including tan­
gerines
(Old title—Oranges)
Other fresh fruits
(Old title—Same)
Fruit juices and frozen
fruit1
Other processed vegeta­
bles1
Sweets, including
candy1
Carbonated drinks1

Coffee2
Seasonings, condiments,
sauces, and spices1
Miscellaneous prepared
foods, including baby
food1
Distilled spirits (at
home)1

Combines “Other breads” and
“Fresh biscuits, rolls, and
muffins.”
Combines “Fresh cakes and cup­
cakes” and “Cookies.”
Combines “Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts” and “Frozen
and refrigerated bakery products
and fresh pies, tarts, and
turnovers.”
Combines “Ham other than canned”
and “Canned ham.”
Combines “Sausage” and “Other
pork.”


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

Definition change

Other maintenance and
repair commodities
(Old title—Miscella­
neous supplies and
equipment)
Other household fuel
commodities
(Old title—Same)
Other video equipment

Adds hardsurface floor covering
and landscaping items not previ­
ously priced.

Major household appli­
ances

Combines “Butter” and “Other dairy
products.”
Adds tangerines.

Stoves, ovens, dish­
washers, and air con­
ditioners

Excludes tangerines.

Information processing
equipment

Combines “Frozen fruit and fruit
juices” and “Fruit juices other
than frozen.”
Combines “Cut com and canned
beans except lima” and “Other
canned and dried vegetables.”
Combines “Candy and chewing
gum” and “Other sweets.”
Combines “Cola drinks, excluding
diet cola” and “Carbonated
drinks, including diet cola.”
Combines “Roasted coffee” and
“Freeze dried and instant coffee.”
Combines “Seasonings, olives,
pickles, relish” and “Other condi­
ments.”
Combines “Miscellaneous prepared
foods” and “Other canned and
packaged prepared foods.”
Combines “Whiskey (at home)” and
“Other alcoholic beverages (at
home).”

Housing

Lodging while out of
town
(Old title—Same)
Materials, supplies, and
equipment for home
repairs

New series title

Adds the rental equivalence value
of owner-used vacation property.
Combines “Paint and wallpaper,
supplies, tools, and equipment,”
“Lumber, awnings, glass, and
masonry,” and “Plumbing, elec­
trical, heating, and cooling sup­
plies.” Excludes capital improve­
ments and major repair items
typically provided by landlords.

Other housefumishings

Adds wood, charcoal, and peat not
previously priced.
Consists of video cameras,
recorders, players, cassettes,
disks, and related equipment.
Consists of index series titles:
“Refrigerator and home freezer;”
“Laundry equipment;” and
“Stoves, ovens, dishwashers,
and air conditioners.”
Combines parts of “Stoves, dish­
washers, vacuums, and sewing
machines” and “Office ma­
chines, small electric appliances,
and air conditioners.”
Consists of home computers, tele­
phones, and other electronic and
office equipment for nonbusiness
use.
Consists of index series titles:
(1) “Floor and window cover­
ings, infants’, laundry, cleaning,
and outdoor equipment;”
(2) “Clocks, lamps, and decor
items;” (3) “Tableware, serving
pieces, and nonelectric kitchen­
ware;” (4) “Lawn equipment,
power tools, and other hard­
ware;” and (5) “Sewing, floor
cleaning, and small kitchen and
portable heating appliances.”

Combines parts of “Stoves, dish­
Sewing, floor cleaning,
washers, vacuums, and sewing
and small kitchen and
machines” and “Office ma­
portable heating appli­
chines, small electric appliances
ances
and air conditioners.”
Lawn equipment, power Adds hand tools.
tools, and other hard­
ware
(Old title—Same)
Combines “Soaps and detergents”
Laundry and cleaning
and “Other laundry and cleaning
products including
products.”
soap1
Combines “Cleansing and toilet tis­
Household paper prod­
sue, paper towels, and napkins”
ucts and stationery
and “Stationery, stationery sup­
supplies1
plies, and giftwrap.”
Combines “Miscellaneous house­
Other household, lawn,
hold products” and “Lawn and
and garden supplies’
garden supplies.”

17

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Changes in

cpi

Coverage

Exhibit 1. Continued— Title and definition changes in the Consumer Price Index, beginning with January 1987 data
New series title

Gardening and other
household services

Indoor plants and fresh
flowers
Care of invalids, elderly
and convalescents in
the home

Definition change

Combines “Moving, storage,
freight, household laundry and
dry cleaning services” with
“Gardening and lawn care serv­
ices,” which was previously un­
published.

Not published initially; will be pub­
lished when sample is adequate.

Apparel

Men’s suits, sport coats,
coats, and jackets1
Women’s underwear,
nightwear, hosiery,
and accessories
(Old title—Women’s

Combines “Men’s suits, sportcoats,
and jackets” and “Men’s coats
and jackets.”
Adds women’s accessories.

underw ear, nightw ear,

and hosiery)
Sewing materials, no­
tions, and luggage
Watches
Jewelry

Combines “Sewing materials and
notions” with part of “Jewelry
and luggage.”
Formerly was part of “Jewelry and
luggage.”
Formerly was part of “Jewelry and
luggage.” Excludes watches.

Transportation

New cars
(Old title—Same)
New trucks3

New motorcycles

Used cars
(Old title—Same)

Automobile registration,
licensing; and inspec­
tion fees1
Other automobile related
fees
(Old title—Same)
Other intercity public
transportation1
Intracity public trans­
portation1

18

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

Physicians’ services
(Old title—Same)
Dental services
(Old title—Same)
Eye care

Services by other medical professionals

Hospital and related
services
(Old title—Hospital
and other medical
services)
Hospital room
(Old title—Same)
Other inpatient services

Outpatient services
Transaction expenditure not reduced
by market value of vehicle traded
in.
Transaction expenditure not reduced
by market value of vehicle traded
in.
Transaction expenditure not reduced
by market value of vehicle traded
in.
Purchase of used cars from the
business sector. Excludes value
of used cars sold or traded by
consumers.
Combines “State registration,”
“Automobile inspection,” “Local
registration” (unpublished), and
“Drivers’ license.”
Adds rentals of vehicle equipment.

Combines “Intercity bus fares” and
“Intercity train fares”
Combines “Intracity mass transit”
and “Taxi fare.”

Medical care

Prescription drugs
(Old title—Same)
Nonprescription drugs
and medical supplies
(Old title—Same)

New series title

Adds benefits paid by consumerpurchased insurance.
Excludes eyeglasses.

Health insurance (un­
published)
(Old title—Same)

Definition change

Adds benefits paid by consumerpurchased insurance.
Adds benefits paid by consumerpurchased insurance.
Includes all consumer out-ofpocket expenses for eye care
commodities and services as
well as benefits paid by con­
sumer-purchased insurance.
Includes services rendered by therapists, nurses, and other practi­
tioners including both out-ofpocket expenses and benefits
paid by consumer purchased in­
surance.
Adds previously unpriced out­
patient hospital services.

Adds benefits paid by consumerpurchased insurance.
Consists of other hospital and inpa­
tient services including nursing
and convalescent home service,
paid out of pocket as well as
benefits paid by consumerpurchased insurance.
Consists of emergency room serv­
ices, laboratory fees, and x-rays,
including both out-of-pocket ex­
penses and benefits paid by con­
sumer purchased insurance.
Portion of premium paid by con­
sumer not paid out in benefits.

Entertainment

Sport vehicles, including Combines “Sport vehicles” and
bicycles1
“Bicycles.”
Other sporting goods1
Combines “Indoor and warm
weather sport equipment” and
“Other sporting goods and
equipment” as well as equipment
for water sports.
Club memberships
Formerly part of “Fees for partici­
pant sports.”
Fees for participant
sports, excluding club
memberships
Fees for lessons or in­
structions
Other entertainment
services
(Old title—Same)

Portion of “Fees for participant
sports” exclusive of club mem­
bership dues and fees.
Formerly part of “Other entertain­
ment services.”
Includes film processing, photogra­
pher fees, veterinarian services,
pet services, and rental of mis­
cellaneous entertainment equip­
ment.

Exhibit 1. Continued— Title and definition changes in the Consumer Price Index, beginning with January 1987 data
New series title

Definition change

Legal fees

Other goods, services

Tobacco and smoking
products
(Old title—Tobacco
products)
Other toilet goods and
small personal care
appliances, including
hair and dental prod­
ucts1
Child daycare/nursery
school
Technical and other tu­
ition

New series title

Banking and accounting
expenses
Combines “Products for the hair,
hairpieces, and wigs;” “Dental
and shaving products;” and
“Other toilet goods and small
personal appliances.”
Not published initially; will
be published when sample is
adequate.
Not published initially; will
be published when sample is
adequate.

Funeral expenses

Definition change

Consists of the legal fees portion
of “Personal expenses.”
Consist of the safe deposit box
rental and bank service charge
portion of “Personal expenses”
plus fees for accounting services
not previously priced.
Consist of the funeral services por­
tion of “Personal expenses” plus
charges for cemetery lots and
vaults not previously priced.

1 Historical data available back to January 1978.
2 Historical data available back to January 1967.
3 Historical data available back to January 1984.

such as food at home, an intermediate monthly calculation
will be prepared for each of the 6 months. These six calcu­
lated numbers will be summed and then divided by six to
obtain the semiannual index. A similar but more complex
technique is used for items priced bimonthly in each area.
An intermediate calculation will be compiled for each of the
3 months that items are actually priced during the 6-month
period. The monthly calculation for each of the other
3 months will be interpolated by calculating a geometric
mean of the months adjacent to the one being estimated. For
example, in an area priced in even-numbered months, a
January interpolation would be estimated by taking the geo­
metric mean between the indexes calculations for December
and February. Interpolations would be made in a similar
manner for March and May. The three intermediate num­
bers for February, April, and June, calculated with collected
prices, would be summed with the three interpolations and
divided by six to obtain the semiannual average index for the
first 6 months of the calendar year.
The calculation of semiannual indexes for areas in which
bimonthly items are priced only in odd-numbered months
would use the same methodology except that the data for
February, April, and June would be interpolated by using
the geometric mean between the calculations for their adja­
cent months. For example, the June interpolation would be
estimated from the calculations made for May and July.
Although b l s will calculate semiannual indexes for these
12 areas from intermediate estimates of monthly data, the
samples are much too small to produce a reliable bimonthly
or monthly estimate of price change. Estimates based on a
small number of observations in a single month would be
subject to extremely high volatility resulting primarily from

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

sampling error. The averaging of 6 months of price data
increases the reliability of the estimate. The new semiannual
index estimates of price change will be as accurate as the old
bimonthly index estimates which they replace for the 12
local areas identified in table 2.
The b l s has systematically advised users that local area
c p i ’ s (including the new semiannual averages) are subject to
substantially more statistical error and variability than the
national index. As a result, local indexes should not be used
in escalation provisions. Some individuals may have already
adopted escalation clauses using one of the local indexes
that will change from bimonthly to semiannual publication.
After the data for December 1986, it will not be possible to
use individual monthly estimates for these 12 areas, and
parties to agreements using these indexes may want to agree
on some alternative, b l s does not provide contract interpre­
tation assistance but can provide limited technical assistance
for transition, if requested by both parties to an agreement.
The use of the new Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical
Area ( c m s a ) definitions, issued by the Office of Manage­
ment and Budget, resulted in a number of the published
areas becoming larger in terms of their sampled geography.6
Of the 27 local areas to be published, 5 (Anchorage,
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, Honolulu, Milwaukee, and San
Diego) did not have changes to the geographic coverage
currently being priced by b l s . Only Dallas-Fort Worth be­
came smaller, with Wise County being removed from the
official definition.
Several areas have had significant expansions of their
sampled geography. For example, the New York area now
includes Danbury and other parts of Connecticut; the
Philadelphia area has added Wilmington and Trenton;
19

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Changes in

cpi

Coverage

Table 2. Consumer Price Index sample areas and regions, by size classes, publication schedule, and 1980 and 1970
population weights
S am p le a rea s o r c o u n tie s

s ch e d u le

1980

cpi

p o p ulatio n w eig h t

197 0

cpi

pop ulatio n w e ig h t

CPI-U

CPI-W

CPI-U

CPI-W

Monthly
Monthly
Monthly

23.997
16.241
9.252

22.967
15.150
8.426

26.521
16.743
10.006

27.468
17.452
10.401

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton, p a -d e -n j -m d ..............................................
Pennsylvania portion:
Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Philadelphia
New Jersey portion:
Burlington, Camden, Cumberland, Gloucester, Mercer, Salem
Delaware portion:
New Castle
Maryland portion:
Cecil

Monthly

2.920

2.834

2.825

3.023

Boston-Lawrence-Salem, m a -n h ......................................................................
Massachusetts portion:
Bristol (part), Essex, Middlesex (part), Norfolk (part), Plymouth (part), Suffolk, Worcester (part)
New Hampshire portion:
Hillsborough (part), Rockingham (part)

Bimonthly1

2.141

1.884

1.737

1.658

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, p a ........................................................................
Allegheny, Beaver, Fayette, Washington, Westmoreland

Bimonthly2

1.276

1.327

1.403

1.510

Buffalo-Niagara Falls,
Erie, Niagara

Semiannually

.653

.678

.772

.860

Monthly
Monthly
None

3.579
3.098
1.080

3.663
3.124
1.030

4.331
3.688
1.759

4.473
3.800
1.743

Monthly

24.608

26.795

26.508

28.663

Monthly
Monthly

13.262
4.039

14.685
4.550

12.982
4.436

14.691
5.180

N o r t h e a s t r e g i o n .....................................................................

Metropolitan areas of 1.2 million and above ...........................................
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, n y -n j -c t ....................................................
New York portion:
Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, Richmond, Nassau, Orange, Putnam,
Rockland, Suffolk, Westchester
New Jersey portion:
Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris,
Ocean, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, Union
Connecticut portion:
Fairfield, Litchfield (part), New Haven (part)

n y

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

Northeast metropolitan areas of 500,000 to 1.2 million ..................................
Northeast metropolitan areas of 75,000 to 500,000 ........................
Northeast nonmetropolitan areas of 2,500 to 75,000 ....................................
N orth C e n tra l r e g i o n .............................................................................

Metropolitan areas of 1.2 million and above3 ...............................................
Chicago-Gary-Lake County, il -in -w i .....................................................................
Illinois portion:
Cook, Du Page, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, Will
Indiana portion:
Lake, Porter
Wisconsin portion:
Kenosha
Detroit-Ann Arbor, m i .......................................................................................
Lapeer, Livingston, Macomb, Oakland, St Clair, Washtenaw, Wayne

Bimonthly2

2.363

2.587

2.497

2.833

St Louis-East St Louis, m o - i l .............................................................................................
Missouri portion:
Franklin, Jefferson, St Charles, St Louis, St Louis City
Illinois portion:
Clinton, Jersey, Madison, Monroe, St Clair

Bimonthly1

1.201

1.208

1.376

1.511

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, o h ........................................................................
Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, Summit

Bimonthly1

1.478

1.675

1.208

1.391

Minneapolis-St Paul, m n -w i ................................................................................
Minnesota portion:
Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Scott, Washington, Wright
Wisconsin portion:
St Croix

Semiannually

1.155

1.228

1.118

1.148

Milwaukee, w i ..........................................................
Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, Waukesha

Semiannually

.740

.851

.803

.918

Cincinnati-Hamilton, o h -k y -in .....................................................................
Ohio portion:
Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, Warren
Kentucky portion:
Boone, Campbell, Kenton
Indiana portion:
Dearborn

Semiannually

.855

.946

.787

.865

Kansas City, MO-Kansas City, k s ..................................................................................................
Missouri portion:
Cass, Clay, Jackson, Lafayette, Platte, Ray
Kansas portion:
Johnson, Leavenworth, Miami, Wyandotte

Semiannually

.754

.859

.757

.845

3.189
5.076
3.081

3.683
5.377
3.050

3.912
5.360
4.254

4.320
5.521
4.131

North Central metropolitan areas of 360,000 to 1.2 m illion.............................................
North Central metropolitan areas of 75,000 to 360,000 .........................................
North Central nonmetropolitan areas of 2,500 to 75,000 ........................................................

20

P u b lic a tio n


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

Monthly
Monthly
Monthly

Table 2. Continued— Consumer Price Index sample areas and regions, by size classes, publication schedule, and 1980 and
1970 population weights
P ublication

S am p le area s o r c o u n tie s

s ch e d u le

Southern region ....................................................................

198 0 e n p o p u la tio n w e ig h t

197 0 CPi p o p u la tio n w e ig h t

CPI-U

CPI-W

CPI-U

CPI-W

Monthly

30.097

30.287

27.794

26.289

Metropolitan areas of 1.2 million and above3 ................................................................................................
Washington, d c -m d -v a ..........................................................................................................................................................
District of Columbia portion:
Washington, d c
Maryland portion:
Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, Prince Georges
Virginia portion:
Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William, Stafford, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church
City, Manassas City, Manassas Park City

Montlhly
Bimonthly1

10.304
1.766

10.279
1.489

7.298
1.786

7.477
1.621

Dallas-Fort Worth, t x .......................................................................................................................................................
Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker,
Rockwall, Tarrant

Bimonthly2

1.556

1.793

1.405

1.538

Baltimore, m d ....................................................................................................................................................................
Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, Howard, Queen Annes, Baltimore City

Bimonthly1

1.124

1.164

1.201

1.316

Miami-Ft. Lauderdale,
Broward, Dade

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

Bimonthly1

1.526

1.267

.831

.783

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, t x ................................................................................................................................
Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, Waller

Bimonthly2

1.621

1.974

1.147

1.277

Atlanta, g a .........................................................................................................................................................................
Barrow, Butts, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, De Kalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton,
Gwinnett, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, Walton

Semiannually

1.118

1.234

.928

.942

Monthly
Monthly
Monthly

7.938
7.881
3.973

8.272
7.813
3.923

7.883
7.700
4.913

7.539
6.662
4.611

f l

Southern metropolitan areas of 450,000 to 1.2 m illion.................................................................................
Southern metropolitan areas of 75,000 to 450,000 .....................................................................................
Southern nonmetropolitan areas of 2,500 to 75,000 ...................................................................................
W e s te rn r e g i o n ..................................................................................

Monthly

21.299

19.952

19.177

17.580

Metropolitan areas of 1.2 million and above3 ................................................................................................
Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside, c a ..............................................................................................................................
Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Ventura

Monthly
Monthly

14.116
6.291

13.548
6.201

9.319
5.443

8.877
5.362

San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, c a ...........................................................................................................................
Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo,
Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma

Monthly

3.156

2.855

2.131

1.984

Seattle-Tacoma, w a .............................................................................................................................................................
King, Pierce, Snohomish

Semiannually

1.193

1.196

.890

.893

San Diego, c a .......................................................................................................................................................................
San Diego

Semiannually

.987

.803

.855

.638

Portland-Vancouver, o r -w a ................................................................................................................................................
Oregon portion:
Clackamas, Multnomah, Washington, Yamhill
Washington portion:
Clark

Semiannually

.744

.771

.627

.625

Denver-Boulder, co ..................................................................................................................................
Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson

Semiannually

.929

.945

.750

.725

Western metropolitan areas of 330,000 to 1.2 million3 .................................................................................
Honolulu, h i ............................................................................................................................................................................
Honolulu

Monthly
Semiannually

2.787
.320

2.550
.296

4.915
.344

4.561
.327

Western metropolitan areas of 75,000 to 330,0003 .....................................................................................
Anchorage, a k .......................................................................................................................................................................
Anchorage Borough

Monthly
Semiannually

2.611
.086

2.301
.077

3.028
.070

2.506
.037

Western nonmetropolitan areas of 2,500 to 75,000 .....................................................................................

None

1.785

1.553

1.915

1.636

All metropolitan areas over 1.2 m illio n .................................................

Monthly

53.922

53.661

46.342

48.497

Midsized metropolitan areas..........................................................................................................................
Northeast:
500,000 to 1.2 million
North Central: 360,000 to 1.2 million
South:
450,000 to 1.2 million
West:
330,000 to 1.2 million

Monthly

17.493

18.168

21.041

20.893

Small metropolitan areas ..............................................................................................................................
Northeast:
75,000 to 500,000
North Central: 75,000 to 360,000
South:
75,000 to 450,000
West:
75,000 to 330,000

Monthly

18.666

18.616

19.776

18.489

All nonmetropolitan areas 2,500 to 75,000 ............................................

Monthly

9.919

9.555

12.841

12.121

1 0 d d months (Jan., Mar., May, July, Sept., Nov.).
2 Even months (Feb., Apr., June, Aug., Oct., Dec.).
3 Includes areas not identified separately.


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

N o t e : The size class boundaries have changed since 1978. As shown above, the boundaries
between the midsized and small areas are variable. Previously, the limits were 1.25 million and
above; midsized— 385,000 to 1.25 million; small— 75,000 to 385,000; and less than 75,000.

21

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Changes in

Boston now includes some parts of New Hampshire; the
Chicago area has three additional counties including
Kenosha, wi; Houston has added Galveston; Los Angeles
includes Riverside-San Bernardino; and San Francisco in­
cludes San Jose. Table 2 contains a complete list of counties
for each local area with a published c p i .
Table 2 also shows the population for both the c p i -u and
c p i -w in each of the publication areas as a percentage of their
respective total U.S. 1980 urban population. If these
weights are compared with the weights shown for 1970, one
can ascertain the degree of relative population change in
each area since 1970. For example, the weight for the c p i -u
population in the Northeast region declined from 26.521 in
1970 to 23.997 in 1980. This decline reflects the faster
growth rate of the population of the South and West in
recent years, compared with the Northeast. Even though the
New York area has expanded since 1970, its relative popu­
lation weight has declined.
The population weight for the San Francisco-OaklandSan Jose area has become larger than that for the DetroitAnn Arbor area. Based on population growth since 1970 and
the expansion of its definition, the San Francisco area has
superseded the Detroit area as the fifth largest area covered
by the c p i indexes. For that reason, the San Francisco area,
beginning with data for January 1987, will be published
monthly while the Detroit area will be published bimonthly
(even-numbered months). The publication of indexes for
Cleveland are changing from even-numbered months to
odd-numbered months, D-size (that is, urban areas with
populations under 75,000) strata indexes will not be pub­
lished in the Northeast and West, and indexes will no longer
be published for the Scranton-Northeast Pennsylvania area.
Both the c p i -u and the c p i -w for January 1987 w i l l be

cpi

Coverage

linked to the present series of each index as of December
1986 to provide a continuous series. For most indexes, the
linking will be accomplished by setting the index levels of
the revised c p i with the updated expenditure weights and
samples equal to those published for the present series in
December 1986. Each index will move upward or down­
ward from the December 1986 level in accordance with
subsequent changes in prices. The local area indexes which
are calculated and published for the odd-numbered months
will be linked to their present series in November 1986 and
subsequent changes in prices measured from that point in
time. For new items and for those items that have undergone
significant definition changes, indexes will be introduced
with November or December 1986=100.
As in the past, b l s will publish selected indexes using the
old expenditure weights for 6 months after the issuance of
the revised c p i . Unlike earlier revisions, these overlap in­
dexes will be calculated from the updated item, outlet, and
area samples and will differ from the revised indexes only
by their expenditure weights. As a result of a number of
enhancements made in the c p i during this and the previous
revision, the costly activities of replacing the entire set of
item, outlet, and area samples prior to the issuance of the
revised c p i have been eliminated. Substantial cost reduc­
tions in the revision process were achieved by replacing only
those item, outlet, and area samples which were necessary
for estimating a c p i based on the 1980 population and the
1982-84 market basket of expenditures. In earlier revi­
sions, the 6-month overlap old series indexes used not only
the old expenditure weights but also the old item, outlet,
and area samples. The base period for the revised c p i for
January 1987 will be 1967= 100, the same as for the present
index.
□

-FOOTNOTES-

1 See John L. Marcoot, “Revision of the Consumer Price Index is now
under way,” M onthly L a b o r R e v ie w , April 1985, pp. 2 7 -3 8 , for a fuller
description o f the revision and its enhancements.
2 See BLS H a n dbook o f M ethods: Volum e 2 — The C onsum er P ric e Index,
Bulletin 2 1 3 4 -2 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1984), p. 12, for a description
o f the current rotation process. The post-1986 c p i will have an even broader
rotation process as described in Marcoot, “Revision of the Consumer Price
Index,” pp. 3 4 -3 5 .
3 The following item strata are being discontinued, but a corresponding
sub-strata index will be available:
Other breads
Fresh biscuits, rolls, and
muffins
Fresh cakes and cupcakes
Cookies
Crackers and bread and cracker
products
Fresh sweetrolls, coffee cake,
and donuts
Frozen and refrigerated bakery
products and fresh pies, tarts,
and turnovers
Ham other than canned
Pork sausage

22

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

Other pork
Frankfurters
Bologna, liverwurst, salami
Other lunchmeats
Lamb and organ meats
Butter
Other dairy products
Frozen fruit and fruit juices
Other fruit juices
Cut com and canned beans ex­
cept lima
Other processed vegetables
Candy and chewing gum
Other sweets

Margarine
Other fats, oils, salad dressing
Nondairy substitutes and peanut
butter
Roasted coffee
Instant and freeze-dried coffee
Seasonings, olives, pickles,
relish
Other condiments
Miscellaneous prepared food
and baby foods
Other prepared foods
Whiskey at home
Other alcoholic beverages at
home
Household linens
Curtains, drapes, slipcovers,
sewing materials
Soaps and detergents

Other laundry and cleaning
products
Cleansing and toilet tissue, pa­
per towels, and napkins
Stationery, stationery supplies,
and gift wrap
Men’s suits, sport coats, and
jackets
Men’s coats and jackets
Boys’ coats, jackets, sweaters,
and shirts
B oys’ suits, trousers, sport
coats, and jackets
Girls’ coats, jackets, dresses,
and suits
Girls’ separates and sportswear
State automobile registration
Products for hair, hair pieces,
wigs

A sub-strata index will not be available for the following items:
Canned ham
Cola drinks excluding diet cola
Other carbonated drinks
Paint, wallpaper supplies, tools,
equipment

Lumber, awnings, glass, ma­
sonry materials
Plumbing, electrical, heating,
cooling supplies and
equipment

Other property maintenance and
repair commodities
Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums,
and sewing machines
Office machines, small electric
appliances, and air conditioners
Miscellaneous household products
Lawn and garden supplies
Moving, storage, freight, house­
hold laundry, and dry cleaning
B oys’ furnishings
Girls’ underwear, nightwear,
hosiery and accessories
Sewing materials and notions
Driver’s license
Automobile inspection
Intercity bus fares
Intercity train fares
Intracity mass transit
Taxi fare
Anti-infective drugs


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

Tranquilizers and sedatives
Circulatories and diuretics
Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and prescription
medical supplies
Pain and symptom control
drugs
Supplements, cough and cold
preparations, and respiratory
agents
Eyeglasses
Other professional (medical)
services
Other hospital and medical care
services
Sports vehicles
Bicycles
Indoor, warm weather sport
equipment
Other sporting goods and
equipment

Dental and shaving products
Other toilet goods and personal
care appliances

Cigarettes
Other tobacco products and
smoking accessories

4 See Robert Gillingham and Walter Lane, “Changing the treatment of
shelter costs for homeowners in the c p i ,” M onthly L a b o r R e v ie w , June
1982, pp. 9-1 4 ; and “Changing the Homeownership Component o f the
Consumer Price Index to Rental Equivalence,” c p i D e ta ile d R e p o rt, Janu­
ary 1983, pp. 7 -1 1 , for descriptions of the rental equivalence method.
5 See Marcoot, “Revision of the Consumer Price Index,” pp. 3 6 -3 7 .
6 Because of time constraint, the c pi area samples were drawn on prelim­
inary new Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ( c m s a ) definitions
obtained from the Office of Management and Budget ( o m b ). When the
official definitions were issued, several had been modified slightly. The
most notable difference is that Racine, wi, was sampled as a separate area
in the Class C (population of 75,000 to 385,000) stratum, whereas the final
o m b definition for the Milwaukee c m s a included Racine. Similarly, Mon­
roe County, m i , was dropped by o m b from the Toledo definition and added
to Detroit.

Theories of worker satisfaction
Job satisfaction or, in its broader form, work satisfaction, is a difficult
entity to define even in simplistic terms. For the individual worker, it exists
when the perceived benefits of the work exceed the perceived costs by a
margin deemed by the worker to be adequate under the circumstances. It
is not, however, a static state and is subject to influence and modification
from forces within and outside of the immediate work environment. One
school of thought . . . examines the problem in terms of its extrinsic or
intrinsic orientation, that is whether the worker is primarily concerned with
work as a means to provide fulfillment outside of the job, or finds fulfill­
ment in the work itself, the former perhaps tending to be more of a
working-class value and the latter more of a middle-class one. Further­
more, job satisfaction is not the unitary or integrated state that the name
would imply. There are multiple facets to the working state, some of which
are more satisfying, or perhaps more acceptable, and others less. Job
satisfaction at best describes in comparative terms some integrated mean of
that state at some point in time. There is no absolute on some infinite scale.
At best, we can state that at this particular time one is more satisfied with
some aspect of one’s job than at some other time.
— T. M.

F r a ser

H u m a n S tr e s s , W o r k a n d J o b S a tis f a c tio n :
A C r itic a l A p p r o a c h

(Washington, International
Labor Office, 1983), p. 24.

23

Reconciling divergent trends
in real income
Growth rates in real per capita income
and real family income diverged
between 1970 and 1984 because the concepts
and components of the two series
reflected economic, social,
and demographic changes in different ways
P a u l R y sc a v a g e

The real incomes of American families have not grown very
much since the early 1970’s. Rather, they have varied with
the swings in the business cycle, and the steady increases so
evident in the 1960’s have been absent. But the real incomes
of individual Americans have continued to rise. While they
too were affected by the economic slowdowns, real incomes
of persons have pushed upward as they did in the 1960’s.
The question is: Why did these trends in real incomes di­
verge over the last decade and a half?
Family income data are collected every year in the Cur­
rent Population Survey ( c p s ) , conducted by the Bureau of
the Census. Aggregate personal income is measured each
month by the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic
Analysis ( b e a ) , and can easily be converted into a per capita
income series.1 (Income data for individuals are also col­
lected in the c p s and a per capita series from that survey is
published by the Bureau of the Census.) Both the c p s family
income data and the b e a personal income data are used
extensively by economists for assessing the Nation’s eco­
nomic well-being. The difference in their trends in recent
years is disturbing and raises questions as to what has hap­
pened to real incomes.
This article first discusses these divergent trends within
Paul Ryscavage is a labor economist in the Population Division o f the
Bureau o f the Census. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily
represent those o f the Bureau o f the Census.

24

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

the context of the economic setting and components from
which they emerged. We then examine the concepts under­
lying each measure of real income and conclude with a
reconciliation of the two. (A reconciliation of the b e a per
capita series is also presented.) A technical appendix with
tables is found at the end of the article.

The setting and the trends
The 1970’s and early 1980’s were years of significant
economic, social, and demographic change. The recessions
during this period caused millions of workers to lose jobs.
Inflation eroded incomes, with particularly strong price in­
creases occurring during the recessions. Along with these
economic developments, profound social and demographic
changes, begun years before, continued and intensified.
Women joined the labor force in record numbers; the inci­
dence of single-parent families increased as the divorce rate
soared; the birth rate dropped further and population growth
slowed relative to the 1960’s; and the baby-boom generation
flooded the labor market and sought its place in society.
Because of these changes and a weak economy, govern­
ments struggled to help the poor, the unemployed, the med­
ically needy, and others. Personal and family earnings were,
therefore, frequently supplemented by transfer payments,
such as unemployment insurance, aid to families with de­
pendent children, and food stamps. Many of these changes
affected b e a personal income and c p s family income differ-

ently and caused their trends to diverge.
The divergence can be best observed when the b e a per­
sonal income series is converted into a per capita series. As
shown in chart 1 and table 1, both the real b e a per capita
income series and the real c p s family income series rose at
an average annual rate of slightly more than 3.0 percent
between 1960 and 1970.2 In sharp contrast, real b e a
per capita income continued to grow moderately, at a 1.8percent rate, during the next 14 years while real c p s mean
family income showed little growth— only 0.3 percent a
year.
Differences in the levels of these two income series can
be expected, of course, because one relates to the entire
population and the other only to families. In 1984, for exam­
ple b e a per capita income was $13,145 and c p s mean family
income was $31,052. But differences in these series’ trends
of the magnitude that occurred in the 1970-84 period are
unsettling, especially after they behaved so similarly during
the 1960’s.

Concepts and components
To understand why these real income measures diverged,
it is important to understand the concepts behind them. As
explained below, each measure has similar components, but
conceptual differences exist between them.

Aggregate income. A major difference between the b e a
and c p s income concepts is that b e a personal income relates
to income from all sources, while c p s income relates only to
money income.
The b e a series is developed from a variety of government
statistics, the most important being the Federal tax records
of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the insurance files
of the Social Security Administration, and the State unem­
ployment records collected by the U.S. Department of
Labor. Personal income comprises wages and salaries, in­
cluding cash and in-kind payments; other labor income such
as employer contributions to private pension, welfare, and
workers’ compensation funds; proprietors’ income; the in­
come from rental properties; dividends and interest; and
government and business transfer payments (Social Secu­
rity, food stamps, corporate cash prizes, and so forth). The
sum of all these items minus the amounts paid by individuals
for old age, survivors, disability, and health insurance ( o a s d h i ) , government retirement, and other social programs
equals b e a ’ s aggregate personal income.3
The c p s series is based on a sample of about 60,000
households designed to represent all households in the coun­
try. Each March, Census Bureau interviewers ask household
respondents about their money income in the previous year.
Important nonmoney income items excluded from the c p s

Chart 1. Indexes of real BEA per capita income and real CPS mean family income, 1960-84
[Index I960 = 100]


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

[Index 1960 = 100]

Year

25

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Reconciling Divergent Trends in Real Income

series but included in the b e a series are wages received
in-kind, food stamps, medicare and medicaid, the net rental
value of owner-occupied homes, goods produced and con­
sumed at home, and various fringe benefits provided by
employers, such as health insurance and pension plans.4
Most of the other income items reported in the b e a data are
also collected in the c p s — money wages and salaries, selfemployment income, interest and dividends, rental income,
Social Security, cash transfer payments, and so on— but
because this information is obtained from a sampling of
households, a certain amount of income underreporting oc­
curs.5
Price deflators. Another important conceptual difference
between the b e a real income series and the c p s series con­
cerns the price deflators used to convert nominal incomes
into real incomes.6
c p s family income is converted into real dollars using the
Consumer Price Index ( c p i ) produced by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. The c p i is obtained through direct price
collection and measures price changes for a fixed market
basket of goods and services (established in the 1972-73
period) that represents the average expenditures of urban
consumers, b e a personal income is deflated by the implicit
price deflator for personal consumption expenditures, here­
after referred to as the p c e Deflator. The weights for the
commodities priced in this index are obtained in the period
for which the index is to be computed. The p c e Deflator,
unlike the c p i , is obtained by dividing current consumer
expenditures by real, or constant dollar, expenditures. (To
deflate current consumer expenditures, the b e a uses price
indexes from the c p i for 85 of the 115 commodities included
in the p c e Deflator.)
During the 1970’s, many analysts suggested that the c p i
Table 1. Reconciliation of trends in real b e a per capita
income and in real c p s income measures, 1960-70 and
1970-84
Series and reasons
for differences

Real
Real

bea
cps

per capita income ..............................
family income ....................................
Total difference....................................

Percentage points of difference due to varying
growth rates in:
Aggregate in com es....................................
Number of recipients..................................
Price deflators.............................................
Real
Real

per capita income ..............................
per capita in c o m e ..............................

Average annual rate of
change (in percent)1
1960-70

1970-84

3.2

M

1.8
03

0.1

1.5

-0.1
0.1
0.1

0.8
0.3
0.4

3.2

1.8

1A

Total difference....................................

0.1

0.4

Percentage points of difference due to varying
growth rates in:
Aggregate in com es....................................
Number of recipients..................................
Price deflators.............................................

0.0
0.0
0.1

0.1
-0.1
0.4

1 See text footnote 2.

26

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

Aggregate income
(billions of dollars)
Year or
period

BEA

CPS

Income recipients
(thousands)
BEA

CPS

personal family population family
income income estimate estimate

1960 .................
1970 .................
1984 .................

$ 409.4 $ 283.6
831.8
580.0
3,111.9 1,947.1

Income deflator
PCE

Deflator
(1982=100)

Consumer
Price
Index
(1967=100)

180,760
205,089
236,731

45,539
52,227
62,706

32.9
42.9
108.2

88.7
116.3
311.1

1.3
1.0

1.4
1.3

2.7
6.6

2.7
7.0

Average annual
percent change:1
1960-70 ...........
1970-84 ...........

7.1
9.4

7.2
8.7

1 See text footnote 2.

was overstating the inflation rate when compared to the p c e
Deflator. It was true that the homeownership component of
the c p i (which consisted of house prices, mortgage interest,
and the cost of maintaining a house) was very sensitive to
the activity in the housing market and the wildly fluctuating
mortgage interest rates. After a review of its pricing of
homeownership, b l s concluded that its approach had invest­
ment and consumption aspects which were inconsistent with
the principle that the c p i should focus only on current con­
sumption. b l s therefore began experimenting with a rental
equivalence approach— one similar to the one used in the
pce
Deflator— and eventually adopted it beginning with
publication of the January 1983 c p i .
Income recipients. The income recipients, of course, are
different in the b e a per capita income and the c p s family
income series. One relates to the population and the other to
families.
b e a per capita income is calculated using an annual esti­
mate of population from the c p s . This annual estimate repre­
sents averages of quarterly population estimates and in­
cludes inmates of institutions and military personnel
overseas or living on post in the United States. In the family
income measure, an estimate of the number of families is
obtained through the c p s . Families are defined as a group of
two or more persons related by birth, marriage, or adoption
who reside together.

Reconciling trends

M

bea
cps

Table 2. Changes in components of bea personal income
and c p s family income estimates, 1960-70 and 1970-84

The b e a and c p s real income measures are constructed
similarly. In general, they can be expressed as:

where Y is real mean income; Y is aggregate income; N is
number of recipients; and D is the price deflator. Differ­
ences in the growth rates of the components in both real
income measures were responsible for the divergent trends
in real income. Indeed, it will be shown that these differ-

ences approximately equal the overall trend differences be­
tween the measures.7 (See the appendix for a description of
the reconciliation method.)
As indicated, the difference in annual growth rates in the
per capita and family income series in the 1970-84 period
was 1.5 percentage points. Based on the reconciliation
method used in this article, about half of the trend differ­
ence, or 0.8 percentage points, was caused by different rates
of growth in the aggregate incomes used in each series.
Another 0.4 percentage points was the result of differential
growth rates in the price deflators— the cpi and pce Defla­
tor— of the series. And the remaining difference of 0.3
percentage points was due to different growth rates in pop­
ulation and in number of families. (See table 1.) These
differences are examined in detail below.
Aggregate incomes in the bea per capita series and the cps
family income series grew at about the same average annual
rate in the 1960’s, but between 1970 and 1984, the bea
aggregate rose by 9.4 percent a year, compared to an 8.7percent growth rate in the cps aggregate (table 2). Two
factors may have been responsible for the faster growth in
bea aggregate income. First, nonmoney income (such as
food stamps, medicare, medicaid, and certain fringe bene­
fits) grew rapidly in recent years, and much of the growth
occurred in nonfamily households. (As mentioned earlier,
nonmoney income is included under the bea income con­
cept, but excluded in the cps concept.) Second, bea aggre­
gate income growth was also boosted by the maturing of the
baby-boom generation. Many of the individuals from this
group have not married, preferring to live alone or with
other unrelated individuals. (The number of unrelated indi­
viduals age 25 to 34 grew from 1.8 million in 1970 to 7.3
million by 1984.) Their income is included in the bea aggre­
gate, but excluded from the cps family income aggregate.
Table 2 shows that both the pce Deflator and cpi measured
inflation at the same annual rate during the 1960’s— 2.7
percent. Over the 1970-84 period, however, the cpi
recorded a slightly faster increase in consumer prices than
did the pce Deflator, with the largest annual differences
occurring in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. The homeownership component of the cpi was greatly affected by the
activity in the housing and money markets, and analysts
have identified this component as responsible for the dis­
parate inflation rates.8 Consequently, use of the pce Deflator

1BEA publishes a series on per capita “disposable” income (personal
income minus tax and nontax payments, divided by the population). The
population estimates used in that series were used in deriving the per capita
personal income series discussed in this article. Statistics on per capita
personal income have been published before. For example, see S ocial
In d ica to rs III (Bureau of the Census, December 1980), pp. 474 -7 5 .
2 The average annual rates o f change in this report have been calculated
by the following formula:


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

Pi
Fo

r = In tt- -e N x 100

in the bea series would, other things equal, have less o f an
eroding effect on income than would the cpi in the cps
family income series.

Differences in the rates of growth of the Nation’s popula­
tion and families also affected the trends. As presented in
table 2, the bea estimate of population growth and cps
estimate of growth in numbers of families were very similar
in the 1960-70 period— about 1.3 to 1.4 percent. But be­
tween 1970 and 1984, the number of families continued to
grow by about 1.3 percent a year while population growth
slackened to a 1.0-percent rate.
and cps per capita income.
Income data are also
collected for individuals in the cps , and this information is
published at the same time as the family income data.9 The
level of cps real per capita income is slightly lower than the
bea estimate (as shown in appendix table A-3) because the
cps aggregate income estimate is less inclusive than the bea
estimate. Both series exhibited similar trends in the 1960’s
but then diverged slightly toward the end of the 1970-84
period. As shown in table 1, the trend difference was 0.1
percentage points a year between 1960 and 1970, but then
widened to 0.4 points annually between 1970 and 1984.
According to the reconciliation methodology used in this
article, all of the difference in the growth rates of these two
series was caused by the different price deflators. As men­
tioned earlier, the cpi rose much faster than the pce Deflator
at the end of the 1970’s and beginning of the 1980’s.

bea

divergent trends in real bea per capita income and
real cps family income between 1970 and 1984 are reconcil­
able. Each measure reflected the economic, social, and de­
mographic changes of the period to the extent that its con­
cepts and components allowed. And this illustrates an
important point: During times of rapid economic, social,
and demographic changes, a single income measure may
give a less than complete picture of what has happened
because of the way in which it is constructed. In the case
just discussed, a global measure of real income indicated
that real incomes were rising in the 1970’s and 1980’s,
while a narrower measure showed little growth taking
place. Once the concepts and components of each mea­
sure were understood, however, it could be shown that
both trends were compatible.
□

T he

where In is the natural logarithm of the ratio; P 1 is a number at the end of
some time interval; P 0 is a number at the beginning of the interval; N is the
number of years in the interval; and r is the average annual rate o f percent
change.
3 For a thorough discussion of the BEA income concept, see B usiness
S tatistics 197 9 (U .S. Department o f Commerce, Bureau of Economic
Analysis, 1981).
4 For a full discussion of the cps money income concept, see M oney
Incom e o f H ou seh olds, F am ilies, a n d P erson s in the U n ited S tates: 1983,
Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 146 (Bureau of the Census,

27

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Reconciling Divergent Trends in Real Income

1985), pp. 2 0 7 -1 9 .

“Changing the treatment o f shelter costs for homeowners in the CPI,”

5 In 1983 (the last year for which such data are available), the cps
collected 90.1 percent of an independent estimate o f aggregate income
adjusted to the cps money income concept. See M on ey Incom e o f H ou se­
h olds, p. 219.
6 The discussion in this section is based on two articles: Jack E. Triplett,
“Reconciling the c pi and the pce Deflator,” M onthly L a b o r R eview , Sep­
tember 1981, pp. 3 -1 5; and Robert Gillingham and Walter Lane,

M onthly L a b o r R eview , June 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 .

7 The same methodology was used by the author in reconciling trends in
real per capita disposable income and real net spendable earnings. See Paul
Ryscavage, “Two divergent measures of purchasing power,” M onthly
L a b o r R e view , August 1979, pp. 2 5 -3 0 .
8 Triplett, “Reconciling the

cpi

and

Deflator,” p. 4.

pce

9 M on ey Incom e o f H ouseholds, p. 121.

APPENDIX: Reconciliation method
The method used to reconcile the trends in real b e a per
capita income and real c p s mean family income proceeds as
follows. Let the change in real b e a per capita income be
defined as:

Table A-2. Components of the real
series, 1960-84

cps

mean family income

CPS

Year

Yi
Yj _ Nj x D!

Real c p s
CPS
mean family
mean aggregate
Families
family
family
income
(thousands)
income
(1984 dollars) income
(billions)

Consumer
Price
Index
(1967 = 100)

Yq ~
_ N 0 x D0

1960

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

$ 21 ,84 0

$ 6 ,227

$ 2 83.6

4 5,5 39

1961

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

2 2,468

6,471

3 00.4

4 6,4 18

8 9.6

1962

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

22,9 03

6 ,670

3 13 .9

4 7,0 59

9 0 .6

1963

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

23,741

6,998

3 32 .7

4 7,5 40

9 1.7

where in periods 0 and 1, Y equals real per capita income,
Y the aggregate personal income, N the population of recip­
ients, and D the implicit price deflator for personal con­
sumption expenditures. This expression can then be written
as:

1964

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

1965

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

2 4,5 67
25,3 62

7,336
7,7 0 4

351 .8
3 73 .7

1966
1967

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

26,8 69

8,3 9 5

413 .2

4 7,9 56
4 8 ,5 0 9
4 9 ,2 1 4

9 4.5
9 7.2

9 2.9

8,801

4 41 .0

50,111

100.0

1968

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

28,871

9,6 7 0

4 91.5

5 0,8 23

104.2

1969

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

29,9 68

10,577

545.6

5 1,5 86

109.8

1970
1971

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

29,7 08

11,106

5 80.0

5 2,2 27

29,7 07

11,583

6 17.3

5 3,296

121 .3

Y 1 = Y i x N2 55

1972

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

31,3 46

12,625

6 86.5

5 4,373

125.3

1973

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

3 1,839

13,622

749.9

5 5,053

133.1

Y0

1974

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

3 0,986

14,711

8 19.4

5 5.698

147 .7

1975

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

3 0,002

15,546

8 74.4

5 6,245

161 .2
170.5

Y0

N,

D,

Table A-1. Components of the real
capita series, 1960-84

bea

personal income per

27,3 80

8 8 .7

116.3

1976

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

3 0,7 82

16,870

9 56.7

56,7 10

1977

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

3 1,3 05

18,264

1,045.0

195.4

1978

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

3 1,9 87

20,091

1,161.3

57,2 15
57,8 04

1979

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

3 1,9 34

22,3 16

1,328.9

59,5 50

2 1 7 .4

181.5

1980

2 46 .8

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

3 0,2 20

23,9 74

1,445.8

60,3 09

1981

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

2 9,5 09

25,8 38

1,576.6

61,0 19

1982

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

2 9,4 75

27,391

1,681.6

6 1,393

289.1

1983

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

2 9,8 26

2 8,608

1,774.1

62,0 15

2 98 .4

1984

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

3 1,0 52

31,0 52

1,947.1

62,7 06

311.1

2 72 .4

BEA
R eal
Y ea r

bea

per

bea

per

c a p ita in co m e

cap ita

(1 9 8 2 do llars )

in co m e

a g g re g a te

BEA

PCE

p erso n al

p o p u la tio n 1

D e fla to r

in co m e

(th o u sa n d s )

(1 9 8 2 = 1 0 0 )

(b illio n s)

1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969

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

$ 6,884
6,961
7,165
7,314
7,594
7,978
8,327
8,625
8,964
9,298

$ 2,265
2,318
2,429
2,516
2,658
2,840
3,056
3,243
3,523
3,812

$ 409.4
426.0
453.2
476.3
510.2
552.0
600.8
644.5
707.2
772.9

180,760
183,742
186,590
189,300
191,927
194,347
196,599
198,752
200,745
202,736

32.9
33.3
33.9
34.4
35.0
35.6
36.7
37.6
39.3
41.0

1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979

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

9,455
9,586
10,013
10,480
10,323
10,272
10,631
10,924
11,370
11,554

4,056
4,304
4,676
5,198
5,657
6,081
6,655
7,297
8,141
9,036

831.8
894.0
981.6
1,101.7
1,210.1
1,313.4
1,451.4
1,607.5
1,812.4
2,034.0

205,089
207,692
209,924
211,939
213.898
215,981
218,086
220,289
222,629
225,106

42.9
44.9
46.7
49.6
54.8
59.2
62.6
66.7
71.6
78.2

1980
1981
1982
1983
1984

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

11,452
11,581
11,493
11,637
12,149

9,917
10,956
11,493
12,091
13,145

2,258.5
2,520.9
2,670.8
2,836.4
3,111.9

227,732
230,087
232,376
234.579
236,731

86.6
94.6
100.0
103.9
108.2

1 1ncludes members of the Armed Forces living abroad.

28


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

Taking the natural logarithms of each side yields the
following equation:
Yj
Yl
N0
D0
l n ^ ^ l n - ^ ln rf + In -2
Y0
Y0
Nj
Dj
and when the deflator and recipient components are inverted
for the purpose of the reconciliation, the equation becomes:
Ni
—In —— In P i
Nn
Do
The same procedure is used with real c p s family income,
and for the purposes of this description, components are
notated in the same, but lower case, letters. That is, y equals
mean family income, y the aggregate family income, n the
number of families, and d the Consumer Price Index ( c p i ) .
Consequently, the difference in growth rates between real

b e a

Table A-3. Components of the real
series, 1960-84
R e al
Y ea r

cps

p er

cps

pe r

c a p ita In co m e

c ap ita

(1 9 8 4 d o llars )

in co m e

cps

a g g re g a te

CPS

P rice

in co m e

p o p u la tio n 1

Index

(b illio n s)

(1 9 6 7 = 100)

1960

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

$ 6 ,2 0 4

$ 1,769

$ 3 20.6

181,252

88.7

1961

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

6 ,528

1,880

3 45.3

183,682

89.6

196 2

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

6 ,569

1,913

357.1

186,695

90.6

1963

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

6 ,738

1,986

3 94.0

189,400

91.7

1964

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

92.9

6 ,989

2 ,087

4 00 .6

191,967

1965

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

7 ,2 7 5

2 ,2 1 0

4 28.8

194,013

94.5

1966

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

7 ,569

2 ,365

4 63.2

195,855

97.2

1967

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

7 ,666

2 ,464

198,120

100.0

1968

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

8 ,154

2,731

5 46.6

200 ,13 9

104.2

196 9

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

8 ,5 2 0

3 ,0 0 7

6 08 .0

2 02 .18 9

109.8

1970

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

8 ,498

3 ,1 7 7

6 52 ,0

2 05 .21 4

116.3

1971

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

8 ,764

3 ,4 1 7

699.9

2 04 ,84 0

121.3

1972

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

9,358

3 ,769

7 77.6

2 06 ,30 2

1973

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

9 ,679

4,141

861.1

2 07 ,94 9

133.1

1974

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

9,362

4 ,445

9 31.5

2 09 ,57 2

147.7

1975

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

9,298

4 ,8 1 8

1,017.3

2 11 ,14 0

161.2

1976

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

9,618

5,271

1,120.4

2 12 ,56 6

170.5

197 7

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

9 ,9 1 6

5 ,785

1,238.9

2 14 ,15 9

181.5

1978

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

1 0,277

6 ,455

1,393.9

2 15 ,93 5

195.4

197 9

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

10,257

7 ,168

1,599.6

2 23 ,16 0

2 17.4

1980

125.3

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

9 ,816

7 ,7 8 7

225 .24 2

2 46.8

1981

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

9 ,680

8 ,4 7 6

1,927.2

227 ,37 5

2 72.4

1982

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

9 ,663

8,9 8 0

2 ,0 6 1.7

229 ,58 7

289.1

1983

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

9 ,954

9,5 4 8

2 ,2 1 4.5

231 ,93 8

2 98.4

1984

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

10,328

10,328

2 ,4 1 7.4

234 ,06 6

311.1

1,754.0

1 The population estimates are as of March of the following year. They represent the civilian
noninstitutional population plus the Armed Forces personnel living off post or with their families
on post in the United States.


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

cps

mean family income is:

Ÿj

ÿj

Yi

Ni

DIFFERENCE = ln ^ - ln =i
Y0
y0

Consum er

CPS

4 88 .2

per capita income and real

per capita income

or

yi

Dl

DIFFERENCE = ln rr1 - ln rr1 - ln zr1 - ln —
Nfi
Do
yo
nl
dl
+ ln — F ln —

no

do

The terms in the above expression can be rearranged to
define the following effects, all of which approximately add
to the difference in growth rates between the real income
measures:
Yi
yj
Aggregate income effect = In — - I n —
y0
y0
Ni
n!
Recipient effect
= —ln — + ln —
N0
%
Deflator effect

Di
di
= — ln rr- + ln t ~
uo

Appendix tables A -l, A-2, and A-3 contain the basic data
to which this reconciliation method was applied.

29

Keeper of the gate

Ellis Island a welcome site?
Only after years of reform
With the reopening of the immigration center
as a historic landmark, it may surprise many
to learn that the Labor Department operated
the complex for years; administrators struggled
to end corruption and the exploitation of aliens
H enry P. G uzda

Between 1903 and 1920, 10 million people emigrated to the
United States by passing through the portals of the receiving
station on Ellis Island. During that period, the U.S. Depart­
ment of Labor and its predecessor agency, the Department
of Commerce and Labor, administered the immigration laws
of the country, including those providing for the operation
of Ellis Island.
The island lies just a short distance from the New Jersey
shoreline in New York Harbor. The Federal Government,
over many years, expanded the land area from 7.5 acres to
a landfilled 27.5 acres for new buildings, park areas, and
other facilities. The main hall, a spacious brick building
with white limestone trim, in French Renaissance style, is
the most striking landmark on the island and the site where
immigrants first entered for processing. Kitchen facilities,
dormitories, a hospital, and a power plant also occupied
island space. Docks to receive passenger and cargo vessels
expanded in proportion to the island’s growth.1
Men, women, and children segregated by sex, stood in
lines on Ellis Island awaiting a barrage of questions on their
potential destinations, intentions for going there, and job
prospects upon arrival. Prearranged labor contracting was
Henry P. Guzda is an industrial relations specialist, Bureau o f LaborManagement Relations and Cooperative Programs, U .S. Department of
Labor, and was formerly a historian with the Department.

30

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

illegal and would mean deportation. Inspectors often had
limited comprehension of certain languages, especially
Slavic ones, and misinterpretations were common. The
newcomers faced assembly-line medical exams and if doc­
tors or nurses put certain chalk letters on an immigrant’s
outergarment it meant detention and possible deportation.
(The letter T signified suspected trachoma, H meant a pos­
sible heart condition, and LCD translated as loathsome conta­
gious disease. Nonmedical examiners could put lpc (likely
to become a public charge) on a person’s coat, which also
could result in deportation.) One of the island’s Public
Health Service physicians commented, “these methods,
crude as they seem, had to be used because of the great
numbers [of immigrants] and the language difficulties.”2
Detention could last weeks, even years in wartime. Dur­
ing detention the immigrants fell prey to the avarice of
contractors handling food concessions, money exchanges,
and other personal services. Federal employees of Ellis
Island extorted money from detained immigrants by threat­
ening them with deportation. Finally, a special board of
inquiry determined whether a detainee was admissible or
deportable, the latter was subject to approval by the Secre­
tary of Labor. It was not incomprehensible why the immi­
grants referred to Ellis Island as the “Isle of Tears.”
Processing millions of people, however, was a tedious
and taxing chore. The Labor Department and Public Health

Service employees, grossly understaffed and overworked,
faced difficult problems even during the ebb of immigra­
tion. During the peak year of 1907, an average 5,000 immi­
grants arrived daily and 11,747 landed on a recordbreaking
day. Inspectors with command of certain languages were in
demand, but the supply was always low. To compound
these problems, the immigration laws were complex— defy­
ing interpretation even by some legal authorities— yet only
1.5 percent of all immigrants were excluded.3

Commerce and Labor: the first 10 years
When the Department of Commerce and Labor assumed
responsibility for administration of the island from the
Treasury Department in 1903, it received a rather sordid
legacy. Both the friends of immigration and those favoring
immigration restriction viewed the islands operation as dis­
graceful. President Theodore Roosevelt, who created the
Department of Commerce and Labor in 1903, wanted the
agency to reform conditions without delay.

Table 1. Immigration to the United States through Ellis
Island and all entry ports, 1903-24
Y ear

“I witnessed with my own eyes the fact that immigrants were
often fed without knives, forks, or spoons, and I saw them extract
boiled beef from their bowls of soup with their fingers . . . (the
meat was tainted) and the floors were covered with grease, bones,
and other remnants of food for days at a time.”

He canceled the existing food contract and awarded one to
a different firm at a savings of 15 percent. In his annual
report Williams noted that such reforms were gratifying,
“but that numerous other instances of abuses or lack of
system could be cited.”5


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

A ll e n try p o rts

1903.............................................................................
1904.............................................................................

631,835
606,019

857,046
812,870

1905.............................................................................
1906.............................................................................
1907.............................................................................
1908.............................................................................
1909.............................................................................

788,219
880,036
1,004,756
585,970
580,617

1,026,499
1,100,735
1,285,349
782,870
751,786

1910.............................................................................
1911.............................................................................
1912.............................................................................
1913.............................................................................
1914.............................................................................

786,094
637,003
605,151
892,653
878,052

1,041,570
878,587
838,172
1,197,892
1,218,480

1915.............................................................................
1916.............................................................................
1917.............................................................................
1918.............................................................................
1919.............................................................................

178,416
141,390
129,446
28,867
26,731

326,700
298,826
295,403
110,618
141,132

1920.............................................................................
1921.............................................................................
1922.............................................................................
1923.............................................................................
1924.............................................................................

225,206
560,971
209,778
295,473
315,587

430,001
805,228
309,556
522,919
706,896

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

10,988,270

15,739,135

So u r c e :

William Williams to lead. Roosevelt chose the new Com­
missioner of Ellis Island, William Williams, a corporation
lawyer from New York. He was an unlikely choice because
of his jaundiced views on immigrants from Southern and
Eastern Europe.
But Williams was honest, humane, and very concerned
about reports from undercover agents on the conditions al­
lowed by the former commissioner, Thomas Fitchie. Those
reports illustrated that the depth of graft and corruption
extended from the immigrant inspectors, who extorted bribes
from aliens, to aldermen at New York’s City Hall, who per­
formed marriage ceremonies for exorbitant fees and “kicked
back” commissions to Fitchie. Graft was so well-woven into
the administrative fabric of the island’s operations that the
undercover agents feared for their lives if exposed.4
Williams acted quickly; his first official order was for
employees to treat immigrants with “kindness and decency”
or face dismissal. Several workers were fired after they tried
to remove information on the confinement and isolation of
immigrants into “pens” from official files. Williams told the
President that the term “pen” intimated the kind of treatment
the immigrants received, and that Fitchie was aware of the
abuse and exploitation.
The food concession on Ellis Island particularly upset the
new commissioner. Williams reported:

E llis Island

Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, Historical Study, 1935.

Reforming the deeply embedded corruption of many
years took time, and it appeared too slow for some interested
parties. Foreign language newspapers and immigrant aide
societies, in particular, accused the Department of Com­
merce and Labor of countenancing exploitation of the immi­
grants. The New York Stoats Zeitung so severely com­
plained that Roosevelt appointed a special investigatory
commission in September 1903. Its report illustrated that the
drive for reform had taken hold very quickly. Buildings
were clean and immigrants were well-fed, and treated with
decency. Delays in processing functions and overcrowding
resulted, the report concluded, from insufficient staffing and
poor facilities, not mistreatment.6
By 1905, the island’s operation ran very smoothly.
Williams believed his job had been completed and returned
to private law practice. Reforms continued, however, under
his successor Robert Watchom.
Robert Watchom's administration. Watchom, like many
immigration officials, came from the labor movement, hav­
ing served as an official of the United Mine Workers union.
Unlike many of his labor colleagues, Watchom was not an
immigration restrictionist.7
Watchom had a kindred spirit in Secretary of Commerce
and Labor Oscar Straus. Straus, an immigrant and the first
Jewish person to serve in a presidential cabinet, believed in
an open-door policy for immigration. Whereas previous
Secretaries of Commerce and Labor had viewed Ellis Island
as an administrative headache, Straus took greater interest in
immigration than his predecessors and gave full support to
the views of the new commissioner.
The Straus-Watchom tandem served during the “high
tide” of immigration, 1905-09. In the peak year of 1907, 1.3
31

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Ellis Island a Welcome Site?

million people came to the United States. (See table 1 for
immigration totals.) Delays in processing and admissions
increased despite Watchom’s efforts to streamline opera­
tions. He abolished the “temporarily detained” category for
immigrants suspected of a minor infraction of law or unable
to produce a $10 minimum reserve before being allowed
entry to the mainland. Steamship lines had to provide island
officials with informational lists of all passengers before
disembarking them. Nonetheless, immigrant inspectors worked
7 days a week from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. for 31 consecutive days
in which more than 5,000 persons arrived daily in 1907.8
Working conditions for Ellis Island employees worsened
considerably during this period. The close proximity of so
many people and unsanitary conditions on passenger ships,
especially for the bulk of immigrants traveling in steerage,
spread vermin and disease among both immigrants and Fed­
eral employees. To compensate for long hours and poor
conditions, Watchom petitioned the Congress to raise em­
ployees’ wages, add staff positions, and appropriate funds
for other morale-building efforts. But his endeavor was fruit­
less, and between 1905 and 1907 there was a turnover rate of
approximately 40 percent. Immigration inspector Fiorello LaGuardia, who later became Mayor of New York, commented,
“At best, the work was an ordeal. Our compensation, be­
sides our salaries, for the heartbreaking scenes we witness
(sic) was the realization that a large percentage of these
people pouring into Ellis Island would probably make good
and enjoy a better life than they had been accustomed to.”9
Under Watchom and Straus, general improvement in the
prevention of immigrant exploitation accelerated. Watchom
assigned undercover agents to find abuses, and their reports
confirmed his suspicions. For example, steamship compa­
nies made $39 of profit from the $42 charged to immigrants
for transportation from Europe. Agents for employment
services conducted an illicit business in contract labor and
cooperated with both steamship lines and railroad interests
to fleece the aliens. For example, one employment agent
charged 500 for a short ride from the Ellis Island de­
barkation point to Grand Central Station and received an
additional 45-cent commission for placing them on the New
York, New Haven, and Hartford line, regardless of a pas­
senger’s actual destination. Railroads re-routed passenger
service in order to maximize fares; immigrants bound for
Chicago, therefore, often traveled a circuitous route through
Norfolk, Virginia. “I am shocked and outraged,” said
Watchom, “by the many pretexts resorted to by the opulent and
powerful, and by petty grafters to squeeze the last dollars out
of the immigrant in quest of work and wages. . . .’’ In 1907,
Watchom filed charges against railroad and steamship com­
panies with the Interstate Commerce Commission and
achieved some success in eliminating the worst abuses.10
Watchom’s crusade was noticed. Food contractors, trans­
portation concerns, and employment agencies pressured
Straus, the Congress, and President Roosevelt to remove the
commissioner from office. In addition, organized labor
32


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

complained that the new Ellis Island policies had swamped
the U.S. work force with undesirables willing to work for
below minimum wages. Even some Federal employees on
Ellis Island protested that Watchom had exceeded his au­
thority by disregarding laws and longstanding work rules.11
In response, Straus sent an investigatory commission to the
island. This commission, headed by popular reformer and
intellectual Washington Gladden, and consisting of other
ministers and rabbis, found conditions to be exemplary.
Gladden reported:12
“I am sure that anyone who visits Ellis Island, and intelligently
observes what is going on there; who sees the cleanliness and
convenience and comfort by which the immigrants are sur­
rounded when they first set foot upon our soil; the ample and
beautiful dining room where good food is served to them; the
commodious and comfortable sleeping apartments, the roof gar­
den where, in the summer, they may breathe the cool air in the
evening; the small army of intelligent and kindly men and women
who speak to them in their own languages, and administer to all
their wants; the vigilance with which they are safeguarded from
the wolves and harpies which in former times were wont to make
them a prey . . . I am sure that anyone who sees all this will feel
that he has witnessed one of the triumphs of civilization.”

Straus also ordered the Commissioner of Corporations to
conduct an internal investigation of the island’s operations.
While not as ebullient and optimistic as the Gladden report,
this study gave Watchom and his administration a good
rating. The facilities at the complex, it stated, were clean,
sanitary, and well-organized. Watchom, despite criticisms
to the contrary, had deported more immigrants during his
years than had Commissioner Williams and was not lax in
law enforcement.13
Yet the very controversial nature of the immigration ques­
tion eventually contributed to Watchom’s departure. His
former colleagues in the labor movement vehemently op­
posed “open door” immigration policies, including redistri­
bution of immigration away from labor surplus areas on the
eastern seaboard and in the industrial north. Watchom tried
to explain that redistribution could work, at a Labor Depart­
ment conference on the immigration issue, but ran into
criticism from his agency associate, Commissioner of Labor
Charles Neill, who argued that the plan wouldn’t work.14
Such controversy illuminated the serious impediments to
a reconfirmation of Watchom as commissioner. Straus en­
gaged an intensive campaign to have his friend reconfirmed.
The Immigrant Protective League and other ethnic organiza­
tions joined the campaign, but there were just as many
groups, the American Federation of Labor, for example,
that opposed a second term. On March 4, 1909, the newly
inaugurated President, William Howard Taft, withdrew
Watchom’s name from consideration.15
Williams returns. Taft’s Secretary of Commerce and
Labor, Charles Nagel, also chose to avoid controversy by
persuading William Williams to return as Ellis Island Com­
missioner in the role of a compromise appointment.

Williams’ second term paralleled the first and mirrored that
of Watchom’s in attacking corruption. For example, in De­
cember 1910, he had the Hellenic Transatlantic Steamship
Company prosecuted for willfully smuggling diseased aliens
through the island and attempting to bribe immigration offi­
cials; 15 company officials went to jail as a result. Williams
also withdrew privileges for operating services on the island
from some immigrant aid societies which ran unclean board­
ing houses on the mainland. Thus, Williams received criti­
cism from both sides of the immigration question. Ironi­
cally, despite his own restrictive beliefs, he was criticized
for lax administration of the immigration laws. Williams
voluntarily resigned in 1913, leaving a fairly well-run and
efficient operation.16

New problems
As World War I erupted in 1914, an ideological move­
ment swept across the United States. Racial and ethnic
stereotyping and eugenics were popularly discussed as an
exact science. The president of the New York Zoological
Society, Madison Grant, published Passing o f the Great
Race, which called for “Nordic supremacy;” Grant com­
pared old immigration from Northern and Western Europe
to the strong species of the animal kingdom and relegated
new immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe to the
weakest species. In addition, Majority Whip Harold Knutson
complained about the “mongrelizing” effect the new immigra­
tion had on American society and the Eugenicist for the Con­
gressional Committee on Immigration, Harry Laughlin, theo­
rized that the recent immigration possessed a high percentage
of inborn socially deviant qualities based on empirical data.17
These attitudes were prevalent when the newly created
Department of Labor assumed responsibility for Ellis Island
in 1913. The labor function in the Department of Commerce
and Labor had been secondary in the organization and many
interests, especially Samuel Gompers and the American
Federation of Labor, wanted it removed and elevated to
Cabinet status without nonrelated encumberances. Orga­
nized labor did not particularly want the immigration func­
tion placed in the Department of Labor but believed it could
be monitored better under friends than in the employeroriented Department of Commerce.18
The first Secretary of Labor, William B. Wilson, a long­
time official of the United Mine Workers union, however,
did not have the animus toward immigrants held by many
labor leaders. His Commissioner of Ellis Island, Frederick
C. Howe, was a philosophical ally of Robert Watchom.
While Howe did not have views concurrent with some other
Labor Department officials, including his immediate supe­
rior Commissioner General of Immigration Anthony
Caminetti, he had the support of Wilson and Assistant Sec­
retary of Labor Louis Post.
Frederick C. Howe’s efforts. Howe’s goal was the com­
plete “humanization” of Ellis Island. The temporary occu­


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

pants of the station, he said, were human beings, not digits
in an annual report. He ordered the employees of the island
to treat immigrants with respect and, as one of his first acts,
ordered the construction of playgrounds for children and
opened restricted grassy areas for adults. His two predeces­
sors, Howe noted, had done a fine job improving conditions
of Ellis Island, and now it was time to refine their efforts.
But World War I immediately altered his plans.19
The war severely restricted the flow of immigration. By
late 1915, the island’s staff faced a turnabout in their work
environment. Almost 900,000 people passed through the
island during fiscal year 1914, but the number declined to
less than 200,000 in 1915 and to less than 30,000 by 1919.
During the harsh winter of 1915, Howe provided sleeping
quarters on the island to the indigent of New York, but this
did not affect the staff. The previously overworked em­
ployees now faced Federal reductions-in-force. Howe com­
plained that personnel reductions were harmful and would
impair efficiency by decreasing morale. The previously ex­
cessive workloads would become normal because of a slack
in immigration, he said, so the staff levels should be main­
tained. “Should immigration materially increase (following
the war),” he told Secretary Wilson, “it will require consid­
erable time to restore the staff operations to its former de­
gree of efficiency.” Immigration remained low until 1919,
but personnel cutbacks resulted in Howe working many of
the 400-person staff (650 was the pre-war level) overtime
and in functions unfamiliar to employees.20
One of the war-related problems was that the island be­
came a domicile for detained and potentially deportable
immigrants unable to return to their conflict-ridden home­
lands. Detention periods extended from weeks to years, and
Howe ordered the creation of schools and recreational areas.
When some immigration employees protested that the grass
and shrubs would be ruined, Howe answered that live babies
took precedence over live grass. Buildings received fresh
coats of colorful paint and plants were hung in all buildings;
some members of the press criticized Federal expenditures
for plants until they discovered Howe had paid for them
from his own salary.21
Special efforts were made to provide for a healthy environ­
ment. Island staffers coordinated immigrant recreational events
such as baseball games and sewing bees. Immigrant benevo­
lent societies arranged for ethnic celebrations: and American­
ization themes dominated events such as patriotic concerts.
Immigrant children competed in essay contests describing the
American way of life and were rewarded by raising the Amer­
ican flag in special ceremonies. Mrs. Harry Payne Whitney, of
Whitney museum fame, donated over 30 paintings and statuary
depicting immigrant contributions to America to adorn the
grounds and the buildings of Ellis Island.22
Critics asked why the Ellis Island commissioner devoted
so much time and effort to Americanize potentially de­
portable immigrants? Howe answered them by releasing
some detainees labeled “likely to become a public charge”
33

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Ellis Island a Welcome Site?

to sponsors on the mainland providing homes and employ­
ment. He conducted similar “work-release” programs for
women charged with “moral turpitude,” believing that such
crimes were the results of poverty and lack of opportunity,
not innate proclivities. In one 18-month period, only 6 of
340 people released had failed the program and other release
groups had similar success ratios.23
Howe also tried to improve conditions for the Federal
employees of Ellis Island. He persuaded the Secretary of
Labor to give promotions to deserving employees and ar­
ranged for a guest lecture series for the staff; Secretary
Wilson and former President William Howard Taft were
among the speakers in this forum. Howe also published a
series of articles on the competency and integrity of the
workers at the complex. “I have never known a group of 500
men and women,” he said in one article, “either in public or
private work, who were more devoted to their employment
or more willing to be of personal service than the govern­
ment employees stationed at Ellis Island.”24
Efforts turn to controversy. It was the promotion of
Howe’s own employees over the interests of private contrac­
tors that engulfed him in a major controversy. The private
concession for feeding immigrants and operating the public
restaurant on Ellis Island had been a source of anguish to all
commissioners. When the contract for Hudgins and Dumas
Co. expired in 1916, Howe did not renew it, operating the
concession “in house” with Federal employees. The con­
stant temptation for contractors to reduce food quality and
quantity, he said, made such an action necessary. This step,
however, aroused much protest from New York business­
men and especially from Congressman William Bennet, a
former attorney for Hudgins and Dumas. Secretary Wilson
feared a major political problem would develop and ordered
Howe to award a contract to a concessionaire.25
This was not the sole controversy of Howe’s administra­
tion. Many immigrants were taken advantage of by employ­
ment agents, transportation companies, boardinghouse op­
erators, and other commercial interests. Howe proposed the
creation of an Immigration Bureau to oversee the process of
relocating aliens away from congested labor surplus areas.
Even though he only got an immigration information divi­
sion similar to the one Robert Watchom created, it raised
protest from businessmen who earned considerable profit
from the immigration trade. When Howe broke up a pooling
arrangement between steamship lines and railroads, stating,
“immigrants should not be sent around Robin Hood’s bam
because the railroads decreed no single road should get the
bulk of traffic,” it spawned a letter-writing campaign to the
Congress for his removal. Howe also disguised Federal
employees as immigrants and uncovered fraud of up to
$12 million propogated by area bankers; this, of course,
drew the wrath of the less than honest members of the
financial community.26
Cries for Howe’s removal escalated inversely to the level
34

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

of world-wide conflict. As the war waned, his critics, espe­
cially steamship lines, increased pressure on their lobbyists
to persuade the Congress to restrict the commissioner’s ac­
tivities. Some officials of several steamship lines even paid
an immigrant woman $500 to accuse Howe of engaging in
illicit relationships with her and other immigrant women on
Ellis Island. Secretary Wilson investigated and found all
such charges against Howe were false, but pressure for
removal from office did not abate until he resigned in Sep­
tember of 1919— 10 months after the war terminated.27
Several other problems plagued the administration of
Ellis Island during and after Howe’s departure. On July 30,
1916, German saboteurs dynamited a munitions storage area
near the island, and, while the only serious casualty of the
“Black Tom Explosion” was a cat, property damage to the
buildings and grounds was extensive. The military comman­
deered part of the complex to detain prisoners of war follow­
ing America’s entry into the conflict in 1917, and the de­
tainees, confined to overcrowded facilities, conducted
several mini-riots in protest. Conditions deteriorated to the
point that the local chapter of the National Federation of
Federal Employees filed an official protest over wage and
working conditions with Howe’s successor, Acting Com­
missioner Byron Uhl. Soon afterward, Secretary Wilson
told Assistant Secretary Louis Post and Immigration Com­
missioner General Anthony Caminetti to “visit Ellis Island
and clean up the mess.”28

Immigrant radicals
With the end of World War I came one of the most
controversial and notorious events in the history of civil
rights, and Ellis Island was an integral part of the drama.
War hysteria, fueled by yellow journal newspapers and eugenical publications, promoted the postwar phenomenon
called the “red scare.” The ghost of Bolshevism seemed, to
many Americans, to haunt the land in the specter of immigrant
radicals, especially after the 1919 wave of industrial unrest
in immigrant-dominated work forces of the coal, steel,
meatpacking, and transportation industries. In 1919, an an­
archist placed a bomb on the doorstep of Attorney General
A. Mitchell Palmer, and, while the blast’s only victim was
the would-be terrorist, it sparked Palmer and his assistant,
J. Edgar Hoover, into a crusade to deport all alien “reds.”
Department of Justice marshals swept into immigrant
union halls, fraternal society meeting houses, dance halls, and
saloons, arresting aliens en masse, often without warrants or
concern for due process, under Palmer’s orders. While Howe
was commissioner only 60 of the 697 arrested aliens were
actually deported for willful advocacy of the overthrow of
the Federal Government (including membership in the Com­
munist Party). But when Howe was away, and again after
his departure, Acting Commissioner Uhl and Commissioner
General Caminetti enthusiastically assisted the Justice De­
partment. Ellis Island became a jail for the potential depor­
tees and disembarkation point for shipment overseas.29

A heated political and administrative conflict occurred
when Justice Department and Labor Department leaders
interpreted the immigration laws differently. Secretary of
Labor Wilson and Assistant Secretary Post believed the
laws, which denied juridical rights to aliens and left their
fate in the administrative hands of the Secretary of Labor,
were poorly written and ambiguous. They believed that
aliens should only face deportation if they openly advocated
violent overthrow of the Government. Justice officials
viewed membership in a radical organization as a deportable
offense. When these officials arrested and scheduled depor­
tation for more than 300 aliens in December 1919, Wilson,
who believed some of the detainees were deportable,
ordered a stay of deportation for aliens having families (who
could not be deported even voluntarily under the immigra­
tion laws). All aliens arrested and taken to immigrant sta­
tions other than Ellis Island were spared, but Uhl, collabo­
rating with Palmer and Hoover, ignored his superior’s order
and allowed 249 persons, including anarchists Emma Gold­
man and Alexander Berkman, to be deported.30
Apparently encouraged by their success, Hoover and
Palmer ordered a massive arrest program in January 1920.
Thousands of aliens, many of whom had attained U.S. citi­
zenship, were arrested without warrants and placed in tem­
porary jails to await transportation to Ellis Island. Immigra­
tion Commissioner Caminetti approved of ex post facto
warrants and held special boards of inquiry to process depor­
tation papers without notifying the Secretary of Labor, with
whom responsibility for such a procedure rested.
After Wilson became ill, Assistant Secretary Post took
immediate steps to correct the illegal and unethical actions
of his subordinate. He ordered Caminetti to forward all
cases to him and release all detainees on bail until the review
process was complete. Post also told J. Edgar Hoover to
cease interrogating aliens detained at Ellis Island unless
approved by an official board of inquiry sanctioned by the
Secretary of Labor or himself. Immigration officials, citing
lack of evidence and a low percentage of “guilty” findings
of those arrested previously, began refusing warrant re­
quests from Justice officials.31
This battle between the two departments continued into
the summer of 1920, but it was clear that the Labor Depart­
ment would not let Ellis Island become a court of star cham­
ber. When Attorney General Palmer ordered his agents to
censor the mail of detained aliens on Ellis Island, Labor
Department Solicitor Rowland B. Mahany informed him
that censorship in peacetime would not be tolerated. Palmer
withdrew all but a token force of agents from Ellis Island
and other immigrant stations. By mid-1920 the “red scare”
had abated, and Post, who faced a Congressional impeach­
ment hearing for his stand against injustice, commented,
“We have been going through a state of hysteria. Folks will
look back with regret for having made fools of themselves,
but there is nothing like a panic to make fools of us all.”32

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

Restrictions begin, Island closes
Historian John Higham contends that the notion of 100
percent Americanism emerged from World War I and man­
ifested itself in measures to restrict immigration. Ellis Island
witnessed an immediate surge in postwar immigration, but
soon afterward experienced a decline attributable to xeno­
phobia. President Woodrow Wilson pocket-vetoed an immi­
gration restriction bill in February 1921; however, the Con­
gress reintroduced and passed it in April. President Warren
G. Harding signed the Quota Act of 1921 into law on May
19th. The new Secretary of Labor, James J. Davis, ap­
proved of restrictive ideology stating, “I would say that the
regulation of immigration is about the most important (issue
facing him)”. Davis even wrote a book entitled Selective
Immigration in which he lamented the “mongrelizing” influ­
ences on American society wrought by the new immi­
grants.33
But the Quota Act of 1921 would have affected Ellis
Island regardless of the philosophical leanings of the Secre­
tary of Labor. It limited the number of foreign nationals
allowed entry to 3 percent of their compatriots in the United
States, according to the census of 1910; no more than 20
percent of the admissible number could arrive in a single
month. The Quota Act of 1924 limited the number further
by basing entry quotas on the census of 1890, when even
fewer immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe lived
in the United States. Ellis Island assumed the role of a
detention center for potential deportations more than of an
entry-processing center because immigrant inspections be­
gan to occur to an increasing degree in Europe, and also
because of the policies of the next Secretary of Labor,
William N. Doak (1930-33). Doak so intently wanted to
relieve the United States of a perceived foreign menace that
he resurrected the Hooverian practice of mass arrests and
deportations; this earned for Doak the nicknames “Secretary
of Sedition” and “Deportation Chief.” While several thou­
sands of immigrants still passed through the station at the
Port of New York, totals would never again approach those
of 1903-14. And, conditions on the island during the DoakDepression years reverted to those of the corrupt Fitchie
administration, not to improve until 1934. In 1940, the
responsibility for administering the immigration laws was
transferred to the Department of Justice along with the re­
sponsibility for Ellis Island.34
The days of massive immigration, however, had passed.
Ellis Island served its primary function for only 14 more
years, and decay and disrepair had already set in when the
doors closed in 1954. But the new historic site has generated
considerable attention and enthusiasm; plans for reenactments
of the immigrant experience—living history—have already
been formulated. The administrative and institutional details
of that experience, one hopes, will not be lost, and the roles
played by both the Department of Commerce and Labor and
the Department of Labor will not be forgotten.
EH
35

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Ellis Island a Welcome Site?
--------- FO O TN O T E S ---------

1 U .S. Department of Labor, R e p o rt o f the E llis Isla n d C om m ittee to
S ecreta ry o f L a b o r F ra n ces P erkin s (Washington, 1934), pp. 1-10; and the
General Committee o f Immigrant Aid, R e p o rt on E llis Isla n d , undated
pamphlet in files o f Labor Department Historical Office.
2 U .S. Department o f Commerce and Labor, Annual R e p o rt o f the C om ­
m ission er o f Im m igration, 190 5 (Washington, 1906), pp. 6 1 -6 4 . For a
detailed account o f administrative and legal procedures for immigration and
Ellis Island see: Harlan Unrau, Statue o f L ib e rty E llis Isla n d H isto rica l
R eso u rce Study (Washington, 1984), 3 volumes.
3 U .S. Department o f Commerce and Labor, A nnual R e p o rt o f the C om ­
m ission er o f Im m igration, 1 9 0 7 (Washington, 1908), pp. 76-79; and Har­
lan Unrau, H isto ric R eso u rce Study, p. xix.
4 F.H. Ainsworth, “Are We Shouldering Europe’s Burden?” C h arities ,
Feb. 6, 1904, p. 135; R e p o rt to the P resid en t b y the E llis Isla n d C om m is­
sion , Oct. 6, 1904, pp. 1—15; Maurice Fishberg (Immigration Official) to
Terrence Powderly (undated) 1902 and Frank Sargent to Terrence Powderly, Mar. 24, 1903, in Terrence Powderly Papers, Reel No. 80 (Wash­
ington, the Catholic University o f America.)
5 U .S. Department o f Commerce and Labor, A nnual R e p o rt o f the C om ­
m issio n er o f Im m igration, 1902 (Washington, 1903), pp. 5 7 -6 0 .
6 N ew York S to a ts Z eitung, Nov. 7, 1908, Translation in Oscar Straus
Papers, Library o f Congress Manuscript Division.

7 Robert Watchom to Theodore Roosevelt, Jan. 21, 1905, Theodore
Roosevelt Papers, Library of Congress Manuscript Division; and Robert
Watchom to Oscar Straus, June 5, 1907, Oscar Straus Papers, Library of
Congress Manuscript Division.
8 “Flood Gates Taxed at Ellis Island,” C om m ons an d C h a rities , Vol. 17,
1906-07, p. 1035.
9 Robert Watchom to Oscar Straus, June 18, 1907, file 43/2, National
Archives Record Group, 174; Edward Corsi, In the S h adow o f L ib e rty: The
C h ron icle o f E llis Isla n d (New York, Am o Press, 1969), pp. 71-92;
Fiorello La Guardia, The M aking o f A n Insurgent: A n A u tobiography
(Philadelphia, P A , 1948), p. 70.
10 U .S . Department of Commerce and Labor, A nnual R e p o rt o f the
C om m ission er o f Im m igration, 1 9 0 7 (Washington, 1908), pp. 155—60;
Robert Watchom to Oscar Straus, May 28, 1906, Straus Papers, Library of
Congress Manuscript Division; Robert Watchom to Oscar Straus, June 22,
1907, file 43/2, National Archives Record Group, 174; C.L. Green to
Terrence Powderly, Nov. 2, 1906, Powderly Papers (Washington, Catholic
University o f America); U .S. Congress, Senate, C o n g ressio n al R e c o r d ,
May 1906, 5 9 C , is, pp. 7213-17.
11 Anonymous letter to Theodore Roosevelt, Sept. 11, 1908, Roosevelt
Papers, Library o f Congress Manuscript Division, Robert Watchom to
Oscar Straus, June 22, 1907 and Watchom to H. Stevens (Office of Secre­
tary o f Commerce and Labor), Sept. 18, 1908, file 43/2, National Archives
Record Group, 174; K n igh ts o f L a b o r J o u r n a l , April 1909, p. 5 and
November 1909, pp. 1 and 4.
12 “Watchom Doing Splendid Work,” Press clippings on Gladden visit
in file 43/2 National Archives Record Group, 174; “Politicians, Hands
O ff,” O u tlook, Vol. 92, 1907, p. 139.
13 Oscar Straus to Clair Hillyer, Bureau of Corporations, Feb. 27, 1909,
file 43/2 National Archives Record Group, 174, and unpublished report in
this file.
14 P ro ceed in g s o f the C onference on Im m igration D istrib u tio n , Feb. 11,
1909, pp. 24, 80, 83, 104; Theodore Roosevelt to Oscar Straus, Jan. 18,
1907, Straus Papers, Library of Congress Manuscript Division, K n igh ts o f
L a b o r J o u rn a l, May 1909, p. 1.
15 William Howard Taft to Philander Knox, Dec. 22, 1908, William
Howard Taft Papers, Library of Congress Manuscript Division; folder on
Watchom reappointment in 43/2, National Archives Record Group, 174.
16 Secretary o f Labor William B. Wilson to William Williams, May 17,
1913, file 2/2 National Archives Record Group, 174; U .S. Department of
Labor, A nnual R e p o rt o f the C om m ission er o f Im m igration, 1913 (Wash­
ington, 1914), pp. 5 5 -6 7 .
17 Madison Grant, P a ssin g o f the G rea t R a ce (New York, 1916), pp.
i—21; Irving Bush, “Immigration Into the U .S .,” M onthly B u lletin , January

36


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

1921, reprint; “The Incomparable Migration,” O u tlook, Dec. 29, 1920, pp.
763-65; U .S . Congress Committee on Immigration and Naturalization,
H earin gs on the A n alysis o f A m erica ’s M eltin g P o t (1923), 67C, 3S, pp.
755-56; “The Old Immigration and the N ew ,” N ew R e p u b lic, Nov. 28,
1914, p. 10.
18 Julius Rosenwald to William Howard Taft, Feb. 28, 1913, file 8/3,
National Archives Record Group, 174.
19 “Interview with Frederic C. H owe,” Im m igrants in A m erica R e view ,
June 1915, reprint; “Record of Progress,” Im m igrants in A m erica R e v ie w ,
September 1915, pp. 75-76; “Turning Ellis Island Inside Out,” S u rvey,
Oct. 17, 1914, p. 63; Frederic C. Howe to William B. Wilson, Dec. 26,
1914, file 19/31, National Archives Record Group, 174.
20 U .S . Department of Labor, Annual R e p o rt o f the C om m ission er o f
Im m igration, 1915 (Washington, 1916), pp. 308-09; Samuel Gompers,
Jr., Chief Clerk, U .S. Department o f Labor, to Wiliam B. Wilson, Aug.
2, 1918, file 16/706, National Archives Record Group, 174.
21 “Turned Back in Time o f War,” S u rvey, May 15, 1916, p. 154.
22 Frederic C. Howe to William B. Wilson (reports on Ellis Island
1914-19), file 19/31 (Washington, National Archives Record Group, 174);
“Turned Back in Time of War,” p. 154.
23 “Investigation of Ellis Island Proposed,” S u rvey , July 29, 1916,
p. 445; The N ew York T im es, July 20, 1916, p. 1; U .S. Congress, Commit­
tee on Rules, H earin gs on the C on dition s a t E llis Isla n d , Feb. 17, 1917,
64C, 2S (Washington, 1917), pp. 1-7.
24 U .S. Department of Labor, Annual R e p o rt o f the C om m ission er o f
Im m igration, 1 9 1 7 (Washington, 1918), pp. 364-70; and Frederic C.
Howe, C onfessions o f a R eform er (New York, Revisionist Press, 1981),
pp. 255 -6 0 .
25 Frederic C. H ow e, C o n fe s s io n s o f a R e fo r m e r , pp. 2 6 0 -6 4 ;
“Investigation o f Ellis Island Proposed,” S u rvey, July 29, 1916, pp. 763;
The N e w York T im es, Oct. 26, 1915, p. 4.
26 Frederic C. Howe, C onfessions o f a R eform er, pp. 2 6 0 -6 4 and A n ­
nual R e p o rt f o r 1 9 1 7 , pp. 365-75.
27 Frederic C. Howe, C onfessions o f a R eform er, pp. 266 -7 6 .
28 William B. Wilson to Louis Post, Jan. 23, 1920, file 151/119, Na­
tional Archives Record Group, 174, and William B. Wilson to Congress­
man W .C. Adamson (actually a series o f papers on the Black Tom Explo­
sion), January-December 1916, file 16-342, National Archives Record
Group, 174; John Mann (National Federation of Federal Employees, Local
4) to Samuel Gompers, Jr., Aug. 2, 1918, file 16/706, National Archives
Record Group, 174.
29 “Ellis Island Gates Ajar,” L itera ry D ig e s t, Dec. 13, 1919, pp. 17-18;
Wilson to Anthony Caminetti, Commissioner General o f Immigration,
Mar. 20, 1919, file 167/255 and Louis Post to Caminetti, May 8, 1920, file
167/642, National Archives Record Group, 174.
30 William B. Wilson to Anthony Caminetti, Mar. 20, 1919, file 167/
255; Wilson to F.L. Douglas, New York City, n y , Feb. 5, 1920, file
167/255 and Wilson to Caminetti, Mar. 25, 1920, file 151/29, National
Archives Record Group, 174).
31 Louis Post to Anthony Caminetti, Mar. 31, 1920, file 151/29; and
Post to J. Edgar Hoover, Justice Department, Apr. 21, 1920, file 167/255,
National Archives Record Group, 174.
32 Louis Post to O.F. Thum (personal friend), May 16, 1920, file 167/
255, National Archives Record Group, 174.
33 John Higham, S tran ger in the L and (New York, n y , Atheneum,
1983), p. 235; Robert Zieger, “The Career of James J. Davis,” P en n sylva ­
nia M agazin e o f H isto ry an d B io g ra p h y, January 1974, pp. 81-84; (Tran­
script) Radio Address by James J. Davis over w r c Radio, Washington,
Feb. 2, 1924; James J. Davis, S elective Im m igration ( St. Paul, m n , ScottMitchell Publishers, 1925), pp. 12-46.
34 Gardner Jackson, “Doak the Deportation Chief,” N a tio n , Mar. 18,
1931, p. 295; Correspondence files of William N. Doak, July 1931, file
167/255-B , National Archives Record Group, 174; Files of U .S. Depart­
ment o f Labor Historical Office, Doak-Davis folders. For additional read­
ing on the “red scare” see, Robert K. Murray, The R e d Scare: A Study in
N ation al H ysteria (Westport, c t , Greenwood Press, 1955, and reprinted
1980).

o

Conventions
Communications Workers focus
on bargaining with a t & t
S teven M. D onahue

With the theme, “we’re union, family, and proud,” and
promises that no concessions will be given to profitable
companies, the Communications Workers of America
(cwa ) met in Washington, DC, for their 48th annual conven­
tion. Convention activities centered on current and pending
negotiations, organizing, the union’s finances, and the elec­
tion of officers. In most of these actions, the influence of
cwa ’s Committee on the Future and the effects of corporate
divestiture were apparent. Gaveling the convention to order
for the first time was Morton Bahr, who replaced Glenn
Watts as president when the latter retired in 1985.
Bargaining. For the cwa , 1986 will be filled with critical
bargaining activity. For the first time, the union will ne­
gotiate with an American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
(at &t ) divested of its operating arms, which have become
the Regional Bell Operating Companies. Also scheduled for
negotiations are agreements at the General Telephone Co.
subsidiaries across the United States, the Alltel system,
four units of the Continental System, and public sector
workers in a number of States, most importantly, New
Jersey.
at &t negotiations began April 2 after the union and the
company agreed to move the scheduled August 9, 1986,
contract expiration date to May 31. Expiration of the Re­
gional Bell Operating Companies’ contracts will remain Au­
gust 9. President Bahr noted that the early negotiations at
at &t
. . allow us to concentrate our resources and ener­
gies on these talks so that in turn, we can focus better on the
task of bargaining with the Regional Bell companies later
on.” In support of bargaining, the Executive Board author­
ized the transfer of $1 million from the general fund to the
defense fund, permitting Communication Workers to strike
June 1 in the event an agreement is not reached. The nego­
tiations will be conducted on behalf of 155,000 employees.
In concurrent bargaining, the International Brotherhood of
Steven M. Donahue is a labor economist at the Bureau of LaborManagement Relations and Cooperative Programs, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Department of Labor.

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

Electrical Workers will represent an additional 40,000
workers, making this round of negotiations the largest
single-employer talks to be held during 1986.
Negotiations with General Telephone began in March at
General of California and will continue through December
at nine other sites. At Alltel, another independent system,
talks also run through the end of 1986, while bargaining
with the four units of Continental will take place in Septem­
ber and November.
Citing increased profits and continued growth in the
telecommunications industry, in particular, at at&t and the
regionals, Bahr told the convention that the union will seek
a base wage increase and will oppose a two-tiered wage
structure. In the California negotiations with General Tele­
phone, union leaders rejected a two-tiered proposal that
would have downgraded jobs held predominantly by
women. In the at&t negotiations, said Bahr, the union’s
goal is to obtain a fair settlement which would also keep the
company financially healthy without the need for a twotiered wage structure. In justification, Bahr noted that
telecommunications worker productivity had increased at an
average rate of 6 percent per year for the past 10 years, a
period when U.S. industry overall experienced negative
productivity growth rates. In addition, he cited financial
reports which stated that at &t had net profits of $1.56
billion in 1985, and quoted forecasts for an additional
8 percent profit increase during 1986. Moreover, all seven
regional companies reported higher profits in 1985.
According to cwa officials, the divestiture of at &t has
cost union members 53,000 jobs over the past 12 months.
Decrying the increased contracting out of union jobs to
nonunion subsidiaries and outside contractors, the union has
made establishment of a training and retraining program for
cwa employees at at &t a major goal. The retraining pro­
gram, Bahr said, could be designed to parallel the Forduaw training and development program currently in place.
Ford has established a fund for the purpose of training and
retraining to be used by all employees, including those fac­
ing layoff. It is funded by a 5-cent-per-hour setaside paid for
by Ford. A similar program at at&t would enable cwa
members to fill job openings in other parts of the company.
The union is also seeking comparable jobs within the com­
pany for employees affected by work force adjustments and
plant and office closings. Bahr noted that his members will
have to become more mobile as jobs and opportunities
emerge in various parts of the country.
37

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Conventions

The convention was told that a major change in bargain­
ing being introduced this year employs much of the same
technology currently causing layoffs in the telecommunica­
tions industry. An electronic hookup using ‘Easylink’ satel­
lite services will allow local unions to receive up-to-date
information pertaining to at &t district bargaining matters
anywhere in the country. In addition to this daily hook-up,
a nationwide conference is planned via the pbs tv network
which will be beamed into closed door meetings on pbs ’
private downlinks, cwa ’s nationwide conference will allow
stewards across the country to communicate face-to-face
and will expedite the free exchange of necessary informa­
tion on a more timely basis. The resulting rapid communica­
tion should forestall, said the Committee on the Future in its
1983 report, Regional Bell management from using whip­
saw strategies and would limit internal dissent over per­
ceived contract inequities among regions. The May 24
meeting was attended by local stewards in more than
40 cities.
Another concern of the cwa centers on health care cost
containment. Bahr noted that health care costs have esca­
lated dramatically in the past few years and that the union
intends to work with at&t to control them. The union,
however, will not allow at&t to control its costs by shifting
the burden to union members and other employees, Bahr
said. Such a strategy was attempted at General Telephone in
early 1986 negotiations. Delegates also passed a resolution
which called for the union to work for enactment of a na­
tional health care cost containment bill and to support multi­
union and coalition attempts (including labor-management
cooperative programs) to control costs.
In conjunction with the opening of the 1986 bargaining
round, the cwa unveiled an extensive public relations compaign aimed at the Nation’s decisionmakers and the general
public. The program began in April with a full-page ad in a
major U.S. newspaper. The cost to the national union for the
overall program is expected to be approximately $1 million
and does not include local participation in the program. The
advertising, which will also be in broadcast form, revolves
around the theme of “fair settlements from profitable com­
panies.” In addition to this ongoing campaign, there were
special advertisements on Mother’s Day, one of the largest
phone calling days of the year. This Mother’s Day campaign
provided free phone calls, special local newspaper supple­
ments, and Mother’s Day cards for specified at &t and
Regional Bell employees, and revolved around the theme,
“Ma Bell’s gone but the cwa family lives on.” Both cam­
paigns were designed to draw positive public attention to the
work of cwa members during national bargaining. The cam­
paign arose from a recommendation of the Committee on the
Future.
In public sector developments, the union noted job losses
as work, formerly done by members, is contracted out by
many local governments. Delegates passed a resolution
which resolved to fight privatization of public sector work

38
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

and to make any nonunion firm which accepts privatized
work a target of union organizing drives.
Organizing. Faced with the continuing erosion of mem­
bership in an industry which has dropped from 100 percent
unionization to 38 percent, organizing has become a major
goal of the cwa . Delegates were notified of recent success­
ful organizing campaigns and amalgamation agreements. In
the public sector, major representation elections were won
in New Jersey at Passaic County’s Board of Social Services,
at the University of Toledo (oh), and among environmental
protection employees in western New York. The 5,800member Union of Telegraph Employees voted to recom­
mend a merger with the cwa , and 10,000 members of the
Telephone Traffic Union in upstate New York have already
merged.
In keeping with the recommendations of the Committee
on the Future, cwa is targeting public sector workers as a
major component of organizing campaigns. The Committee
recommended that external growth be centered mainly on
the information/service sectors, which is one of the fastest
growing segments of the American economy. The establish­
ment of a national vice president for public workers was the
first step in this strategy. To date, the cwa is the bargaining
agent for more than 80,000 public sector workers. “In addi­
tion,” said Bahr, “we are establishing new lines of coopera­
tion with the American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees International Union and others that
will lead to a cooperative effort to organize millions of
unorganized government and service workers in this
country.”
Future organizing campaigns are being undertaken, the
convention delegates were told, as part of afl- cio coordi­
nated campaigns at both Northern Telecom and Blue Cross/
Blue Shield. In the Blue Cross coordinated campaign, the
cwa has been awarded jurisdiction in New York City and
Denver. The union has already negotiated a neutrality agree­
ment with Blue Cross of New York City under which the
company agreed not to oppose cwa . The organizing cam­
paign at the 29 plants of Northern Telecom is being coor­
dinated by the afl- cio’s Industrial Union Department.
Northern Telecom is one of at&t ’s largest U.S. telecommu­
nications equipment competitors.
In addition, organizers for cwa have laid the groundwork
for a campaign at the ibm Corp., long a bastion of nonunion
work forces. While no details were given pertaining to the
ibm campaign to ensure needed secrecy, delegates were told
that ibm employees had been contacted. Said Bahr, “ibm
Workers United has been bom and has chapters around the
United States. We are providing assistance and encourage­
ment to this fledgling organization.” cwa is also meeting
with labor leaders around the world to extend IBM organizing
to other countries.
The cwa has also targeted at &t competitors in the
telecommunications industry for organizing. Bahr stated

that organizers already are actively contacting
ployees.

mci

em ­

Finances. Secretary-Treasurer James Booe noted in an
addendum to the financial committee’s report that the union
was experiencing a cash flow shortage which, if not treated,
would entail cutbacks or dues increases by the 1987 conven­
tion. According to the Report o f the Finance Committee, it
expects a cash shortage of approximately $3.5 million by
1987. Booe blamed the revenue shrinkage on new losses
averaging an additional 1,500 dues units each month, most
arising from divestiture.
Delegates to the convention rejected a proposal by the
union’s officers to make the convention biennial as a cost­
saving measure. Citing increased expenses at a time of con­
stricting membership, executive board officers estimated
substantial annual savings if biennial conventions were to
start in 1989. But delegates maintained that the union
needed to continue the tradition of democracy which the
cwa had built up over the years. A second amendment to
hold conventions every 18 months was also rejected by
convention delegates.
Elections and other activities. The completion of the cwa
restructuring program reduced the number of districts from
13 to 8, resulting in the displacement of 5 incumbent district
directors. The new districts were designed to parallel the
Regional Bell Operating Companies’ geographical struc­
ture. Elected as district vice presidents were: Jan D. Pierce,
R. Ben Porch, Martin J. Hughes, Walter Maulis, Harry
Ibsen, Pete Catucci, T.O. Parsons, and Vincent Maisano. In
addition, M.E. Nichols and John C. Carroll were both
reelected unanimously as executive vice presidents. In the
national bargaining unit elections, James Irving was named
AT&T communications vice president, Ronald J. Allen was


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

elected vice president for at&t technologies, John Browning
retained his seat as vice president for communications, and
Connie Bryant was elected as the first vice president for
public workers. The addition of two national bargaining unit
vice presidents and the transformation of two national direc­
tors into bargaining unit vice presidents arose from recom­
mendations of the cwa ’s Committee on the Future, which
suggested that strategy centers be created to allow the union
to deal creatively and directly with external power centers
(that is, AT&T).
Delegates to the convention passed a resolution support­
ing the afl- cio boycott of Royal Dutch Shell and its sub­
sidiaries. The boycott was called because of Shell’s mining
and exploration activities in South Africa. In a related mat­
ter, delegates also called for complete removal of Bieme
Foundation funds which are invested in South Africa. It was
noted that the Foundation still had investments in two com­
panies which do business in South Africa.
Speakers at the convention included Senator Edward
Kennedy of Massachusetts, Representative James Wright of
Texas, Washington, DC Mayor Marion Barry, United Farm
Workers President Cesar Chavez, and afl- cio President
Lane Kirkland.
□

P o stscr ip t:

c w a

w o r k e r s str ik e

A nationwide strike by 155,000 cwa members at AT&T began
when the existing contract expired on May 31. However, the
parties continued to negotiate on issues involving wages, job
security, and changes in job classifications and pay levels.
Further information on the talks will be reported in the
“Developments in Industrial Relations” section of future issues
of the R e view .

39

Research
Summaries

Displaced workers:
one year later
Richard M. Devens, Jr.
In January 1984, a special supplement to the Current Popu­
lation Survey (cps) focused on the extent of worker displace­
ment in the labor force.1 Using the data collected in that
supplement, the Bureau of Labor Statistics defined dis­
placed workers as those adults who, after holding a job for
3 years or more, lost or left that job because of plant shut­
down or relocation, slack work, or abolishment of shift or
job during January 1979 to January 1984. In several reports,
bls determined that 5.1 million persons were categorized as
displaced under that definition in January 1984.2 At the time
of the survey, about three-fifths of those persons identified
as displaced were employed again, about a quarter were
unemployed, and the remainder were not in the labor force.
About one-fourth of those displaced from a private nonagricultural job were reemployed in the same broad industrial
classification as the job they had lost, while one-third re­
turned to the same broad occupational group. Among work­
ers who had been displaced from full-time wage and salary
jobs and were reemployed in such positions, about half had
weekly earnings at least as high as they had on the prior job,
while more than one-fourth experienced earnings losses of
20 percent or more. What happened to these workers subse­
quently? Did the unemployed find jobs? Did the employed
upgrade their status?
Using the longitudinal potential of the cps, this report
provides information on changes in the labor market status
of displaced workers between January 1984 and January
1985. It must be noted at the outset that the use and analysis
of longitudinal cps data have technical limitations which
have received much attention in the statistical community.
The results of this research suggest that these types of data
be treated with some circumspection and that analyses from
such data be made with caution.3 (See box.) The following
sections report on the January 1985 status of workers iden­
tified in January 1984 as displaced whose cps micro-record
Richard M. Devens, Jr. is an economist in the Division of Employment and
Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

40
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Q

could be matched with a January 1985 cps record, and on
the changes in that group’s labor force status.
In January 1985, workers displaced between January
1979 and January 1984 were more likely to be working and
less likely to be unemployed than they had been a year
earlier. Seventy-one percent of the displaced men were em­
ployed in January 1985, compared with 64 percent a year
earlier and 61 percent of the women, compared with 53
percent in 1984. (See table 1.) Overall, about 30 percent of
displaced workers had changed status over the year, com­
pared with about half that change for the rest of the workingage population. Displaced workers in all labor force cate­
gories were more likely to have moved into employment and
less likely to have left the labor force than comparable
workers who were not displaced. (See table 2.)
A little more than half the displaced workers who were
unemployed in January 1984 had jobs in 1985; among men,
the remainder were more likely to still be unemployed,
while women were more likely to be out of the labor force.
(See table 2.) There were divergent developments in the
labor market status of displaced workers of the various racial
and ethnic groups. Among both blacks and whites, about 88
percent of those employed in January 1984 also were em­
ployed in 1985, while among Hispanics, that proportion was
about 81 percent.4 Hispanic workers who had been em­
ployed in 1984 were somewhat more likely to be unem­
ployed in January 1985 than were whites or blacks. (See
table 2.)
Among the unemployed of January 1984, 50 percent or
more of both white and Hispanic workers were employed in

Table 1. Employment status of displaced workers by sex,
race, and Hispanic origin, January 1985
[Percent distribution]

Characteristic
T o ta l.............................................
M e n ...........................................
Women.......................................
W h ite .........................................
B la c k .........................................
Hispanic origin1..........................

Total

Employed

Unemployed

Not in the
labor force

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

67.3
71.0
61.0
69.2
51.2
66.5

12.4
15.2
7.5
11.1
22.0
11.2

20.4
13.8
31.6
19.7
26.7
22.3

1 Hispanics are included in both the white and black population groups.
No t e : Data refer to persons age 20 and over with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left
a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work,
or the abolishment of their positions or shifts.

Table 2.

Labor force transition rates for displaced workers by sex, race, and Hispanic origin, January 1984 to January 1985

[Percent]

__________ _______________________________________________________________________
Displaced workers, 20 years and over1
Labor force category

Total

Men

Women

White

Black

87.9
7.8
4.3

88.8
9.2
1.8

85.9
4.6
9.5

87.8
7.7
4.5

89.1
8.4
3.5

80.8
11.5
8.5

89.4
3.0
7.6

53.0
27.5
19.5

53.5
31.8
14.6

52.1
18.7
28.8

55.3
24.3
20.3

42.4
42.4
15.2

50.0
15.0
35.0

47.8
26.3
25.9

19.8
5.5
74.6

17.1
8.9
73.7

21.8
2.7
75.5

19.5
4.2
76.3

15.3
12.6
72.1

32.0
4.0
64.0

10.8
2.5
86.7

From employed to—
Employed..................................................................................................................................................
Unemployed.............................................................................................................................................

From not in labor force to—

From unemployed to—
Employed..................................................................................................................................................
Unemployed.............................................................................................................................................
Not in labor force.......................................................................................................................................
1 Data refer to persons age 20 and over with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job

2 Hispanics are included in both the white and black population groups,

between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the
abolishment of their positions or shifts.

Table 3.

Others,
20 years
and over

Hispanic
origin2

The transition rate represents the proportion of workers in the first labor force category
¡n j anuary 1984 who were in the second labor force category in January 1985.
No t e :

Reemployed wage and salary workers by industry of lost job and industry of job held in January 1985

[Percent distribution]
Industry of job held in January 1985
Total
Manufacturing
Transportation
displaced Mining Construction
Wholesale Retail
and public
workers
trade
trade
Durable Nondurable
utilities

Industry of job lost

Minining............................
Construction.....................
Manufacturing...................
Durable goods...............
Nondurable goods.........
Transportation and
public utilities.................
Retail trade........................
Finance, insurance,
and real estate...............
Services............................
Professional services...
Other services...............

and real
estate

Farming, Percent
not
forestry,
Public
employed2
and
Professional Other administration
fisheries
services services
Services

—

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

19.8
.3
.1
.1
-

10.4
36.4
3.4
4.0
2.2

0.9
3.7
21.3
27.4
8.2

0.3
10.8
4.5
24.6

10.4
2.4
5.0
5.7
3.5

4.7
1.4
4.1
4.2
3.7

6.6
7.1
7.1
7.3
6.7

2.8
2.4
2.0
1.3
3.5

6.6
14.6
6.1
3.6
11.4

10.4
7.5
5.1
5.3
4.8

8.2
1.4
1.5

100.0
100.0
100.0

_

11.1
1.7
0.3

5.1
9.9
5.5

3.7
3.9
1.2

25.5
11.0
0.9

3.7
20.4
7.6

6.9
5.5
35.9

.9
9.4
2.0

3.7
.6
7.0

1.9
3.9
6.4

1.4
—
—

100.0

-

5.8

—

—

13.5

—

—

17.3

15.4

36.5

5.8

5.9
6.8
5.5

2.8
8.7
—

1.2

4.3
—
6.4

13.7
16.5
12.3

1.6
1.0
1.8

20.5
39.8
11.0

20.5
6.8
26.9

2.8
1.0
3.7

100.0
100.0
100.0

—

_
—

—

4.7
3.9
5.5

—

1.8

1 Data for 1984 include nonagricultural workers In private industry.

—

_
.2
.3

h

27.4
15.7
33.4
34.8
30.3

1.9
3.3
—

34.2
30.1
33.2

—

22.0
15.5
25.1

5.7

No t e : Data refer to persons age 20 and over with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a
job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or
the abolishment of their positions or shifts,

2 Includes displaced persons who are considered out of the labor force as well as those unemployed.

Table 4.

Finance,

Reemployed workers by occupation of lost job and occupation of job held in January 1985

[Percent distribution]

_____________________________________________
Occupation of job held in January 1985
Occupation of lost job

Total
displaced
workers

Managerial
and
professional
specialty

Technical,
sales, and
administrative
support

Service
occupations

Precision
production,
craft, and
repair

Operators,
fabricators,
and
laborers

Farming,
forestry,
and
fishing

Percent
not
employed1

Managerial and professional specialty......................................................

100.0

29.5

29.1

6.4

7.9

4.9

-

22.2

Technical, sales, and administrative support...........................................

100.0

10.6

42.5

5.1

8.0

4.0

—

29.8

Service occupations.................................................................................

100.0

4.8

9.6

33.5

5.9

6.4

—

100.0

5.6

6.8

6.6

30.9

18.7

Precision production, craft, and repair......................................................

.3

39.8
31.1

Operators, fabicators, and laborers..........................................................

100.0

1.3

6.9

7.6

9.1

35.0

1.0

39.1

Farming, forestry, and fishing..................................................................

100.0

21.2

5.8

—

9.6

26.9

7.7

28.8

1 1ncludes displaced persons who are considered out of the labor force as well as those unemoyed


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

No t e : Data refer to persons age 20 and over with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a
job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or
the abolishment of their positions or shifts.

41

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Research Summaries

1985, compared with 4 percent of black workers. Hispanic
workers were far more likely than white or black to have
moved from unemployed to not in the labor force.
Displaced workers not in the labor force in January 1984
tended to remain in that category, in large part because they
were concentrated in the older age groups. Overall, about
three-quarters of those not in the labor force in January 1984
were also out of the labor force a year later. This tendency
was most pronounced among whites and least among per­
sons of Hispanic origin. Hispanics were the most likely of
the three major racial and ethnic groups to have moved from
not in the labor force to employed, and black workers were
the most likely to have moved from out of the labor force to
unemployed.
A useful indicator of the degree to which displaced work­
ers are reintegrated in the labor force is the proportion who
return to the same industry or occupation.5 In January 1985,
the proportion of displaced workers who were reemployed
in a private nonagricultural industrial group broadly similar
to that of the job they lost was 28 percent. In January 1984,
the corresponding proportion was 23 percent. The industries
with the highest rate of rehiring were professional services
(40 percent) and retail trade (36 percent); the lowest rate was
in finance, insurance, and real estate, in which many work­
ers, displaced from the industry, had found jobs in the
services field. (See table 3.)
Among occupational groups, workers in technical, sales,
and administrative support occupations were most likely to
be reemployed in a broadly similar occupation; farming,
forestry, and fishing workers were least likely. In all, by
January 1985, 34.5 percent of displaced workers were reem-

Table 5. Current earnings relative to previous earnings of
displaced workers reemployed in full-time wage and salary
jobs by industry of lost job, January 1985
[Percent distribution]
Earnings in January 1985 relative to those of lost job
Industry of lost job
Total

Total1..........................
Construction...........
Manufacturing........
Durable goods. . .
Nondurable
goods ...............
Transportation and
public utilities.........
Wholesale and
retail trade.............
Finance and service
industries.............
Public
administration___

20 percent
or more
below

Below, but
within
20 percent

Equal or
above, but
within
20 percent

20 percent
or more
above

17.9

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

23.0
24.9

15.6
11.1
17.9
21.5

24.5
33.3
22.8
18.6

34.9
55.6
30.9
29.3

100.0

19.9

11.7

30.0

33.6

47.3

20.3

38.9

40.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

—

—

10.5
—

52.8

25.7
—

17.3

15.4

67.3

-

-

44.4

1 1ncludes mining, not shown separately.
Data refer to persons age 20 and over with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left
a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work,
or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. Includes workers who did not report earnings on
lost job.
No t e :

42

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

Limitations of the data base
The 59,500 households that are interviewed in the monthly
Current Population Survey (cps) comprise eight national sub­
samples or rotation groups. One new group is introduced each
month, is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, is out of the
sample for 8 months, and is returned for 4 more months of
interviews. Thus, in any 2 consecutive months, 75 percent of
the addresses are common to each month, and, in months a year
apart, January to January, for instance, 50 percent of the ad­
dresses are common. This sample rotation scheme gives the cps
its longitudinal flavor.
In all phases of administration of the cps—sampling, inter­
viewing, data preparation and processing—there are factors
that affect the survey’s usefulness as a longitudinal data base.
For example, because the interviewer goes to a sample address,
not to a household or specific persons living at an address,
those who move into, or out of, a sample address between
interviews cannot be matched. Other sources of difficulty in­
clude respondent bias (answering identical questions differently
when there is no change in status), interviewer error, transcrip­
tion mistakes, processing problems, and noninterviews.
The CPS is designed to provide accurate estimates of labor
market activity in a particular month. Longitudinal aspects of
the survey are a byproduct and, as such, are subject to defects
and limitations that must be fully considered in any application
of the data.

—Adapted from Ronald Dopkowski, “Practical Limitations on
Using the cps as a Longitudinal Survey,” U sin g th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n
S u r v e y a s a L o n g itu d in a l D a ta B a s e , Report 608 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1980), pp. 3-4.

ployed in the same broad occupational group as they worked
in at the job they lost. (See table 4.) This proportion is a
slight change from that of a year earlier.
Another useful comparison to make in assessing the labor
market experience of reemployed workers is to examine
current earnings relative to previous earnings.6 To minimize
the effect of differences in hours worked on weekly earn­
ings, the earnings data were compared only for persons who
lost a full-time wage and salary position and were similarly
reemployed. Among such workers, almost 60 percent
earned as much or more in the January 1985 job as they had
in the lost job. However, about 18 percent earned substan­
tially less— 20 percent or more— in their new job than they
had earned in their previous employment. (See table 5.) In
January 1984, only about half of the reemployed full-time
wage earners made as much, or more, than they had in their
old jobs and more than a quarter had suffered losses of 20
percent or more.
Overall, persons displaced during the 1979-83 period
appeared to be generally better off in January 1985 than they
had been in January 1984. Individuals were more likely to
be working and, when employed in full-time jobs, were
more likely to have matched their former earnings. A sizable
group, however, continued to have difficulty in the labor

market. For the most part, those with continuing difficulty
were blacks, blue-collar workers, and persons formerly em­
ployed in manufacturing. More information on displaced
workers will be available by the end of the 1986, when
information from a second survey of displaced workers be­
comes available.7
□
--------- F O O TN O TE S ---------

'The displaced worker supplement was administered to all adult (20
years and older) respondents to the January 1984 Current Population Sur­
vey which is conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Those who answered in the affirmative to the question, “In
the past 5 years, that is, since January 1979, has (name of respondent) lost
or left ajob because of a plant closing, an employer going out of business,
a layoff fromwhich (name of respondent) was not recalled, or other similar
reasons?”, were asked a series of more detailed questions about that job
loss.
2“ bls Reports on Displaced Workers,” u s d l 84-492, Nov. 30, 1984;
Paul O. Flaimand Ellen Sehgal, “Displaced workers of 1979-83: how well
have they fared?” M onthly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1985, pp. 3-16; and D is ­
p la c e d W orkers: 1 9 7 9 - 8 3 , Bulletin 2240 (Bureau of Labor Statistics
1985).
3Robert W. Bednarzik and Richard M. Devens, Jr., eds., U sing the
C u rren t P o p u la tio n Survey a s a L ongitudinal D a ta B a s e , Report 608
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1980); and P ro ceed in g s o f the C onference on
G ro ss F lo w s in L a b o r F orce S ta tistics (Bureau of the Census and Bureau
of Labor Statistics, June 1985).
4Hispanic origin includes both the white and black population groups.
5Michael Podgursky and Paul Swaim, “Labor Market Adjustment and
Job Displacement: Evidence from the January 1984 Displaced Worker
Survey” (Washington, Bureau of International Labor Affairs, November
1985), pp. 12 ff.
6Ib id .

7In January 1986, a second displaced workers supplement to the Current
Population Survey was administered by the Census Bureau, sponsored
jointly by the Employment and Training Administration and the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. The data from the survey cover displacements over the
January 1981-86 period.

Occupational pay structure
in petroleum refineries
Hourly earnings of production workers in the Nation’s
petroleum refineries averaged $14.20 in June 1985, accord­
ing to a Bureau of Labor Statistics wage survey.1 Just over
nine-tenths of the 51,203 workers covered by the survey
earned between $12 and $16 an hour; about one-half had
earnings within a $1 range— $14.50 to $15.50. The number
of refineries paying single rates for individual occupations
contributed substantially to this narrow spread, as did the
relatively large proportion of skilled workers in the industry,
the concentrations of employment in relatively few large
companies, and the high degree of collective bargaining
with a single union (the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers
International Union, AFL-CIO).
Refinery workers averaged 23 percent more in June 1985
than in May 1981, when the last survey was conducted.2

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

This increase compares with a 22-percent rise in the wage
and salary component of the Bureau’s Employment Cost
Index for all manufacturing industries between the second
quarters of 1981 and 1985. The petroleum industry’s wage
change largely reflected increases granted to nearly seveneighths of the workers under collective bargaining agree­
ments. Provisions for automatic cost-of-living adjustments
(cola), triggered primarily by specified changes in the bls
Consumer Price Index, applied to less than 5 percent of the
work force.
Among the eight geographic regions studied in 1985, pay
levels for six fell within 4 percent of the industry’s nation­
wide average ($14.20 an hour). Averages were about
10 percent below this mark in the Western PennsylvaniaWest Virginia region and in the Texas Inland-North
Louisiana-Arkansas region. Regionally, pay levels of pro­
duction and related workers ranged from $12.65 in Western
Pennsylvania-West Virginia to $14.62 in the East Coast
region. Workers in the Texas-Louisiana-Gulf Coast region,
where two-fifths of the industry’s work force was concen­
trated, averaged $14.50 an hour.
Twenty-six occupations, accounting for nearly four-fifths
of the production workers, were selected to represent the
wage structure and activities of production and related
workers in the industry. (See table 1.) Among these jobs,
average hourly earnings ranged from $11.41 for laborers to
$15.38 for chief operators of stills. Assistant operators, who
help chief operators maintain stills, accounted for one-fifth
of the industry’s work force and averaged $14.45 an hour.
Chief operators’ helpers, who maintain required tempera­
tures in furnaces of stills and pumpers, averaged $13.65 and
$14.49 an hour, respectively.
Average hourly earnings of the nine journeyman mainte­
nance trades studied were closely grouped— ranging from
$14.07 for machinery mechanics to $14.82 for boilermak­
ers. General mechanics, the most numerous of these work­
ers, averaged $14.60 an hour. General mechanic includes
skilled workers operating under maintenance craft consoli­
dation plans (which combine two crafts or more into a single
job), and mechanics working in small refineries where spe­
cialization in maintenance work is impractical. Maintenance
trades helpers averaged $12.77— 9 percent below the lowest
paid journeyman trade studied.
Paid holidays, usually 10 days annually, were provided to
all production workers in the industry. All refineries studied
also provided paid vacations to their production workers
after qualifying periods of service. Typically, workers re­
ceived 2 weeks of vacation pay after 1 year of service,
3 weeks after 5 years, 4 weeks after 10 years, 5 weeks after
15 years, and 6 weeks after 30 years. Virtually all refinery
workers were provided at least part of the cost of life,
hospitalization, surgical, basic medical, and major medical
insurance, as well as retirement plans. Dental insurance and
full or partial paid sick leave were provided to just over
nine-tenths of the workers. Accidental death and dismem­
berment insurance was available to slightly more than four43

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Research Summaries

Table 1. Average straight-time hourly earnings and
number of production and related workers in selected
occupations, petroleum refineries, United States,
June 1985

Occupation

Maintenance:
Boilermakers.............................................................................
Carpenters ...............................................................................
Electricians...............................................................................
Helpers, maintenance trad es...................................................
Instrument repairers ................................................................
Machinists.................................................................................
Mechanics, general..................................................................
Mechanics (machinery) ............................................................
Pipefitters .................................................................................
Welders, han d...........................................................................
Processing:
Assistant operators ..................................................................
Chief operators.........................................................................
Chief operators' helpers............................................................
Compounders...........................................................................
Laborers....................................................................................
Loaders, tank cars or trucks......................................................
Package fillers, m achin e..........................................................
Pumpers....................................................................................
Pumpers’ helpers .....................................................................
Treaters, o ils .............................................................................

Number
of
workers

Average
(mean)
hourly
earnings1

756

$ 14.82

370

14.63

1,316

14.69

7 17

12.77

1,490

14.74

1,905

14.74

4 ,848

14.60

534

14.07

1,563

14.61

783

14.58

10,513

14.45

6,063

15.38

2 ,135

13.65

157

14.14

1,252

11.41

539

13.20

198

11.63

1,155
374

14.49
13.96

324

13.09

Inspecting and testing:
Routine testers, laboratory........................................................

1,904

14.13

Recording and control:
Stock clerks .............................................................................

561

13.92

40

13.00

Material movement:
Truckdrivers2 .............................................................................
Truckdrivers, medium tru c k ...............................................
Truckdrivers, tractor-trailer ...............................................
Power-truck operators2 ............................................................
Forklift ...............................................................................
Custodial:
Guards2 ....................................................................................
Guards I .............................................................................
Janitors......................................................................................

12

12.74

96

12.57

127

12.43

120

12.43

281

12.64

71

12.22

78

11.98

1 Wage data are straight-time earnings which exclude premium pay for overtime and for work
on weekends, holidays, and late shifts. Cost-of-living pay increases (but not bonuses) were
included as part of the workers' regular pay. Excluded were performance bonuses and lumpsum payments of the type negotiated in the auto and aerospace industries as well as profitsharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or yearend bonuses, and other nonproduction bonuses.
2 Includes data for subcategories not shown separately.

fifths of the work force; long-term disability insurance, to
nearly three-fifths; and sickness and accident insurance, to
two-fifths. Health plan coverage was usually financed jointly
by the employer and employee.
The petroleum refining industry includes establishments
engaged primarily in producing gasoline, kerosene, distil-


44
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

late fuel oil, residual fuel oils, lubricants, and other products
from crude petroleum and its fractionation products. Pro­
duction is accomplished through straight distillation of
crude oil, redistillation of unfinished petroleum derivatives,
cracking, or other processes as defined in the Standard
Industrial Classification Manual, 1972, prepared by the
U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
The 142 refineries within scope of the survey (those with
at least 100 workers) employed 51,203 production and re­
lated workers in June 1985, down 22 percent from the
65,566 recorded in May 1981. Employment declines among
the eight regions studied ranged from 2 percent in the West
Coast to 40 percent in the East Coast, but typically ranged
from about 20 to 30 percent among the other six regions. Much
of this employment loss resulted from a lesser demand for
petroleum products and the increased use of computerized
processing equipment and other technological innovations.
Gasoline— including naphtha— was the major product of
refineries employing more than nine-tenths of the produc­
tion workers covered by the survey. Other products included
distillated fuel oil, residual fuel oil, jet fuel, lubricating oil,
and asphalt. Most workers in the Western PennsylvaniaWest Virginia region were employed in refineries that were
primarily manufacturing products other than gasoline, usu­
ally lubricating oil or distillate fuel oil. Refineries employ­
ing nearly three-fifths of the industry’s workers were also
processing petrochemicals.
A comprehensive report on the survey findings of Indus­
try Wage Survey: Petroleum Refining, June 1985 (Bul­
letin 2255), may be purchased from the Superintendent of
Documents, Washington, DC 20402, or from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, Publications Sales Center, P.O. Box 2145,
□
Chicago, IL 60690.
------ F O O T N O T E S -----1Wage data are straight-time earnings which exclude premium pay for
overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts. Cost-ofliving pay increases (but not bonuses) were included as part of the worker’s
regular pay. Excluded were performance bonuses and lump-sumpayments
of the type negotiated in the auto and aerospace industries, as well as
profit-sharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or yearend
bonuses, and other nonproduction bonuses.
2For summary findings of the May 1981 study, see “Pay in petroleum
refineries outpaces manufacturing rise,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February
1983, pp. 42-43.

M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
This list o f selected collective bargaining agreem ents expiring in August is based on information
collected by the Bureau’s Office o f W ages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreem ents
covering 1,000 workers or m ore. Private industry is arranged in order of Standard Industrial
Classification.

Employer and location

Industry or activity

Labor organization1

Number of
workers

Private
Construction.........................................................

Apparel.................................................................
Chemicals.............................................................
Leather.................................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products........................
Primary m etals....................................................

Fabricated metal products.................................
Machinery.............................................................
Communication....................................................

Utilities.................................................................
Restaurants...........................................................

National Electrical Contractors Association,
Inc., Southeast Texas Chapter, Houston
Division (Texas)
Roofing Contractors Association of Southern
California, Inc., and others (California)
National Neckwear Conference (New
York, NY)
Avtex Fibers Inc. (Interstate)..............................
Massachusetts Leather Manufacturers
Association (Massachusetts)
Wheaton Industries (Millville, NJ) ....................
Armco Steel Corp. (Interstate) ..........................
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (Interstate) . . . .
Republic Steel Corp. (Interstate) ......................
Sharon Steel Corp. (Interstate)..........................
Bethlehem Steel Co. (Interstate) ......................
United States Steel Corp. (Interstate)...............
Babcock & Wilcox Co., Tubular Products
Division (Beaver Falls, pa)
National Steel Corp. (Interstate)........................
Inland Steel Co. (Interstate)................................
Northwestern Steel and Wire Co. (Sterling, 1L)
Fisher Controls Co. (Marshalltown, la) ...........
Cameron Iron Works, Inc. (Houston, TX) . . . .
Timken Co. (Canton, oh) ...................................
Regional telephone companies:
Ameritech, Bell Atlantic, Bell South,
Nynex, Pacific Telesis, Southwestern Bell,
and U.S. West
Alabama Power Co. (Alabama) ........................
Wisconsin Electric Power Co. (Wisconsin) . . .
East Bay Restaurant Association (Alameda,
CA)
Hotel Employers Association of San Francisco
(California)

Electrical W orkers.............................................

3,700

Roofers.................................................................

1,000

Clothing and Textile Workers..........................

1,600

Clothing and Textile Workers..........................
Leather Workers..................................................

1,500
1,000

Glass, Pottery, Plastics.......................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................

1,500
14,000
32,000
30,000
2,850
49,000
102,000
4,500

Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Steelworkers........................................................
Auto Workers......................................................
Machinists.............................................................
Steelworkers........................................................

15,000
21,100
1,600
1,300
1,700
8,000

Communications Workers; Electrical Workers
(ibew); and others

375,000

Electrical Workers (ibew) .................................
Electrical Workers (ibew) .................................
Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees

3,950
2,050
2,300

Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees .

5,000

Florida:

Teachers...............................................................
Teachers...............................................................

7,700
2,900

Service Employees..............................................

1,300

Teachers...............................................................

1,050

Education Association (Ind.)............................

1,500

Education Association (Ind.)............................
Education Association (Ind.)............................

1,500
1,100

Teachers...............................................................

4,800

Education Association (Ind.)............................

4,500

Firemen and Oilers.............................................

5,000

Service Employees.............................................

2,800

Public
Education.............................................................

General government .........................................

Broward County teachers...........
Brevard County Board
of Education, teachers
Illinois:
University of Illinois
(Chicago), clerical
Peoria Board of
Education, teachers
Indiana:
Fort Wayne Board of
Education, teachers
Kansas:
Kansas City teachers...............
Michigan:
Warren Consolidated
School District, teachers
New Mexico: Albuquerque Board of
Education, teachers
Ohio:
Columbus Board of
Education, teachers
Pennsylvania: Philadelphia Board of
Education, blue collar
Ohio:
Cincinnati general unit.............

1 Affiliated with afl -CIO except where noted as independent (Ind.).


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

45

Developments in
Industrial Relations
High court backs laid-off white teachers
The Supreme Court rejected an affirmative action plan
that permitted black teachers in Jackson, mi, to retain their
jobs while more senior white teachers were laid off. The
plan had been instituted by the Jackson school board and the
teachers’ union after they had determined that the percent­
age of black teachers in the school system was substantially
less than the percentage of black students. Despite the
Court’s ruling, it appears that the validity of using employ­
ment goals and quotas to equalize employment opportunities
must await clarification in two cases scheduled to be heard
by the Court this term. This is apparent from the fact that the
Court was sharply divided in the Jackson case: there were
three opinions by the five-member majority and two by the
minority.
Not surprisingly, both proponents and opponents of the
use of goal and quota systems claimed that the decision
strengthened or at least did not nullify their positions. Terry
Eastland, spokesman for the Department of Justice, said the
decision “leaves for another case the bottom-line gut issue
of when race may be taken into account in employment.”
During the arguments before the Court, Assistant Attorney
General William Bradford Reynolds had expressed the Rea­
gan Administration’s position that affirmative action plans
may not use quotas or goals and that the Government should
intervene only on behalf of individuals who can prove that
they are victims of specific acts of discrimination, rather
than on behalf of groups or classes of people seeking redress
of alleged broad patterns of discrimination.
The events leading to the decision began in 1973, when
the school board and the Jackson Education Association
revised the seniority provisions in their contract by provid­
ing that “at no time will there be a greater percentage of
minority personnel laid off than the current percentage of
minority personnel at the time of layoff.” This change was
based on a finding that in 1969, 15.2 percent of the students
but only 3.9 percent of the teachers were black. When
Jackson was forced to lay off teachers in 1981 and 1982, the
contract requirement was followed and some black teachers
were retained while several white teachers with more serv­
ice were terminated. Eight of the laid-off white teachers then

“Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben of the
Division of Developments in Labor-Management Relations, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, and is largely based on information from secondary
sources.
46

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

sued the school board, contending that the action violated
their rights to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amend­
ment to the Constitution. A Federal district judge ruled in
favor of the school district, and his decision was upheld by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
In reversing the Court of Appeals’ decision, the Supreme
Court said that the board of education did, in fact, violate
the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Writing for four members of the Court, Justice Lewis Powell
rejected the Court of Appeals’ position that the school
board’s efforts to provide “role models” for minority stu­
dents or its efforts to reduce the effects of broad “societal
discrimination” justified race-based layoffs. Justice Powell
said, “This Court has never held that societal discrimination
alone is enough to justify a racial classification. Rather, the
Court has insisted upon some showing of prior discrimina­
tion by the governmental unit involved before allowing lim­
ited use of racial classifications to remedy such discrimina­
tion.” In this case, Justice Powell said, there was no
evidence that the school board had determined that prior
discrimination in hiring teachers had actually occurred. In
another aspect of the ruling, Justice Powell said the Court’s
1977 ruling in Hazelwood School District vs. United States
established that the proper statistical measure the school
board should have used in assessing the makeup of the
system’s staff of teachers was the percentage of black teach­
ers relative to the pool of available teachers, rather than
relative to the racial composition of the student body.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
said that the petitioner had proved that the“layoff provision
is ‘not narrowly’ tailored to achieve its asserted remedial
purpose by demonstrating that the provision is keyed to a
hiring goal that itself has no relation to the remedying of
employment discrimination.”
In another concurring opinion, Justice Byron White said
the board’s action clearly violated the equal protection
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, adding, “Whatever
the legitimacy of hiring goals or quotas may be, the dis­
charge of white teachers to make room for blacks, none of
whom has been shown to be a victim of any racial discrim­
ination, is quite a different matter. I cannot believe that in
order to integrate a work force, it would be permissible to
discharge whites and hire blacks until the latter comprised a
suitable percentage of the work force.”
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Thurgood Marshall,
joined by Justices William Brennan and Harry Blackmun,
said the Fourteenth Amendment does not prohibit “a union

and a local school board from negotiating a collective bar­
gaining agreement that apportions layoffs between two
racially determined groups as a means of preserving the
effects of an affirmative hiring policy, the constitutionality
of which is unchallenged.” Justice Marshall accused the
Court majority of overlooking the racial tensions and threats
of litigation that prevailed when the job retention preference
was adopted and concluded, “a public employer, with the
full agreement of its employees, should be permitted to
preserve the benefits of a legitimate affirmative-action hir­
ing plan even while reducing its work force.”
In a separate dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said the
board’s efforts to attain “multi-ethnic representation” on the
faculty were permissible under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Eastern Airlines update
The travails of Eastern Airlines continue, but there was
some hope for improvement in the financial condition of the
carrier when the U.S. Department of Justice dropped its
objections to Texas Air Corp.’s acquisition of Eastern (ap­
proval is still required from the Department of Transporta­
tion). In another unsettled matter, Eastern was continuing a
court case to force the Machinists union to reopen its con­
tract and negotiate wage and benefit reductions and changes
in work rules similar to those negotiated by the Air Line
Pilots and Transport Workers unions.
The latest series of crises at Eastern began in late 1985,
when company chairman Frank Borman and president
Joseph Leonard notified employees that, “the temporary
[wage concession] programs that we have participated in
since 1983 simply will not permit us to prosper in the new
economic environment of our industry. . . . We must design
and implement a restructuring of our employment costs that
will allow us to resume the success of early 1985.” During
the first half of 1985, Eastern— which had not showed an
annual profit since 1979— earned $46.4 million, but
prospects for a full-year profit were dimmed by intensifying
fare wars. (In fact, Eastern did show a profit of $6.3 million
for the year.)
Following this announcement, Eastern informed the
unions that its survival required a permanent pay cut of 22
percent; two-tier pay systems; changes in work rules, in­
cluding more monthly flying time by plane crews; and some
reduction in benefits. The proposed 22-percent pay cut
would be only a few percentage points more than the tempo­
rary cuts the unions had negotiated in 1983. The temporary
cuts— to apply only during 1984— were 20 percent for the
4,000 pilots represented by the Air Line Pilots Association;
and 18 percent for the 6,800 flight attendants represented by
the Transport Workers and for the 13,000 mechanics and
related ground service employees represented by the Ma­
chinists union. In 1985, the Air Line Pilots and the Machin­
ists had negotiated agreements with the carrier to restore the
temporary cuts in January 1986. The Machinists contract,


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

extending through 1987, also provided for pay increases in
1986 and 1987. The Transport Workers did not settle at the
same time as the other unions, contending that Eastern re­
fused to offer the same terms as those accepted by the other
unions, and that Eastern’s extension of the pay reduction
into 1985 violated the 1983 agreement.
At yearend, the pressure on Eastern and the unions in­
creased when the company’s lenders set a March 31 dead­
line for negotiation and ratification of cost-reducing labor
contracts. If the parties were unable to agree, the lenders
could have seized Eastern’s assets because the company
would have been in default on it $2.5 billion in debts.
In mid-January, Eastern announced it was cutting 1,010
flight attendants from the payroll and was reducing the pay
of the remaining attendants by 20 percent and increasing
their flight hours to about 63 per month (from 52). Finally,
the company said that it would institute a two-tier pay sys­
tem. Eastern’s action came after the expiration of a 30-day
“cooling o ff’ period declared by the National Mediation
Board under the Railway Labor Act. The end of the 30-day
period freed the union to strike and the company to impose
contract changes or to lock out employees.
In late February, Frank Lorenzo, Chairman of Texas Air
Corp., offered to buy Eastern. This impelled the unions to
intensify efforts to settle on cost reductions and thus end the
carrier’s need for assistance from Lorenzo, who is viewed
with disfavor by the unions because of his 1983 acquisition
of Continental Airlines and subsequent dismissal of the
union-represented employees, followed by resumption of
operation at reduced pay levels. The Air Line Pilots settled
as Eastern’s board of directors was meeting to consider
Lorenzo’s offer. The Transport Workers claimed that it also
settled at that time, but Eastern said that the document was
never properly completed. Eastern rejected the Machinists’
offer of a 15-percent pay cut because the union made it
contingent on the resignation of company chairman Frank
Borman. (Later, the airline initiated a lawsuit against the
Machinists in an effort to force the union to negotiate on cost
reduction measures, contending that the offer to cut pay in
exchange for the resignation of Borman was a valid reopen­
ing of the contract.)
The 28-month Air Line Pilots accord calls for a 20percent permanent pay cut that could be offset by a possible
1988 distribution to employees from an allocation equal to
5 percent of any 1987 profits. Other terms included in­
creased flying hours; a two-tier pay system under which new
employees receive 20 percent lower pay during their first
5 years on the job; a cut in vacation time; and a requirement
that workers begin paying part of their medical insurance
premiums.
The Transport Workers also negotiated a 33-month con­
tract containing similar terms. It also provides for binding
arbitration of several issues which arose during the workers
balloting and threatened the entire accord.
In conjunction with the Transport Workers settlement,
47

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Developments in Industrial Relations

Eastern also agreed to recall the laid-off flight attendants and
to pay employees part of the money they lost because the
company extended the pay cut through 1985. The payment
was calculated at 6 percent of earnings from February 1,
1985, through January 20, 1986.

Flight attendants at

tw a

end strike

At t w a , the Independent Federation of Flight Attendants
ended its 2 1/ 2-month strike but rejected the carrier’s last
offer. Retum-to-work prospects were uncertain for the
6,000 employees. Apparently, the union decided to end the
stoppage because t w a was hiring replacements— and some
strikers had returned to work— permitting the airline to at­
tain nearly full operation. Just before the employees voted
to accept the offer, t w a announced that all but 600 of their
jobs had been filled.
In May 1985, financier Carl Icahn began a drive to gain
control of the financially stricken t w a . In August, the Air
Line Pilots and the Machinists agreed to cuts in compensa­
tion and changes in work rules to aid Icahn in gaining

control. To some extent, the unions were impelled to coop­
erate because they feared that Frank Lorenzo of Texas Air
Corp. might outbid Icahn for control of the airlines.
At yearend, Icahn was encountering difficulties in gain­
ing the financial backing necessary to complete the acquisi­
tion, leading the unions to agree to modifications of the
original accords. Reportedly, the combined cut in compen­
sation resulting from the settlements amounted to 23 percent
for employees represented by the Air Line Pilots and 17
percent for those represented by the Machinists.
The Flight Attendants did not settle with t w a in 1985.
Instead, it continued bargaining into 1986. Talks became
increasingly difficult, with the union contending that t w a
was seeking larger cuts in compensation than those accepted
by the other unions. Finally, the union struck in March, but
as time passed, the stoppage became less and less effective,
leading to the union members’ decision to end the strike.

Illinois State workers; firefighters accords
About 40,000 employees of the State of Illinois were
covered by a 3-year contract negotiated by the State, County
and Municipal Employees. The agreement, effective July 1,
provides for general wage increases of 4 percent on Octo­
ber 1, 1986, 4.5 percent on July 1, 1987, and 5 percent on
July 1, 1988. Employees at the top of their rate range—
about half of those in the unit— received an additional 2percent increase on July 1, 1986. The State also agreed to
provide $4 million for special pay increases to employees
the parties agree are underpaid.
The accord, which covered workers in a variety of State
agencies, also provides for negotiations on the impact on
employees of the closing of any facilities; a new Statefinanced dental plan; and reduced deductibles and copay­
48

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

ments for workers who use preferred provider medical care
organizations.
Also in Illinois, 4,500 Chicago firefighters were covered
by a 3-year arbitration award. Martin O. Holland, President
of Local 2 of the International Association of Fire Fighters,
said the award “was worth the wait,” while Carl S. Tomnberg,
the city’s counsel for the negotiations, said the award gives
back “operational control of the fire department to the city.”
The parties’ contract expired on December 31, 1983, and
the arbitration period was concluded in March 1986, when
arbitrator Irwin M. Lieberman issued his findings.
The union won its demand for five person staffing of fire
companies, but the city won the right to 15 staffing vari­
ances per day, meaning that 15 companies can be comprised
of four firefighters.
Other terms included, a reduction in the workweek to an
average of 44.8 hours, from 46.7; 12 paid furlough days
(formerly 10); 13 paid holidays (formerly 12); $15,000 cityfinanced life insurance (formerly $5,000); and elimination
of the annual clothing allowance, with the city now required
to open a commissary to provide uniforms and work clothes
and to give each employee $50 a year for maintenance.
The settlement was financed by a $45.4 million a year
increase in property taxes voted by the city council, which
also appropriated $500,000 to aid employees who retired or
became disabled during the arbitration period or to aid the
survivors of firefighters who died.

Oscar Mayer plant shutdown averted
A shutdown of Oscar Mayer Food Corp.’s hog slaughter­
ing plant in Perry, i a , was averted when employees ap­
proved a new 3-year contract. Included was a company
guarantee that it will not shut down the facility for 18
months and will give a 90-day notice of any intention to shut
down. The workers had turned down an earlier offer because
it did not include these provisions.
The accord also raised the base pay rate to $9 an hour,
from $8.69, effective immediately, and to $9.10 in April
1987. According to a company official, the new rates will
be among the highest in the slaughtering industry.

uaw

ends strike at Champion Spark Plugs

In the automobile parts industry, Champion Spark Plug
Co. and the Auto Workers settled, ending a 10-week strike.
The settlement covered 2,400 active and 600 laid-off work­
ers at two plants in Ohio and one each in Michigan, Iowa,
and Ontario, Canada.
The workers will receive $500 lump-sum payments in the
first and second years and a 2.25-percent wage increase in
the final year. The cost-of-living clause was continued, but
3 cents an hour will be diverted from each resulting quar­
terly pay adjustment.
The contract, running to February 1, 1989, also provided

for benefit changes: adoption of health care cost contain­
ment requirements such as precertification for hospital ad­
missions and second opinions on surgery; increased life
insurance for retirees; a pension rate of $22.50 a month (was
$18.95) for each year of credited service, a $1,205 a month
pension (was $935) for employees retiring under the 30year-and-out provision, and two payments of up to $200
each for current retirees.

uaw

the automobile, truck, aerospace, and shipbuilding indus­
tries.
The 3-year contract, scheduled to expire on May 3, 1989,
does not provide for specified wage increases but the em­
ployees will receive $700 lump-sum payments in May of
each year. The cost-of-living provision was continued, sub­
ject to a 2-cent-an-hour diversion from each of the first eight
possible quarterly adjustments. There will be no diversion
from the last three possible adjustments, which will be ac­
crued and paid in lump sums at the end of the 3-month
periods, rather than being paid immediately in regular
weekly pay checks.
In other changes, the pension rate was increased to
$20.50 a month for each year of credited service (from
$18.45), and the 30-and-out pension was increased to
$1,100 a month (from $935).
□

settle at former Bendix plants

The Auto Workers and Allied Corp. settled for 4,800
workers at former Bendix Corp. plants that were acquired by
Allied in 1983. The plants, located in Michigan, Indiana,
New Jersey, New York, and California, produce parts for


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

‘Solidarity’ ends at the border
It seems very clear that employee interest in multinational union action
is probably close to being nonexistent. The idea that workers of one country
will enthusiastically, or even reluctantly, support the cause of their brothers
and sisters in another country simply lacks credible evidence. Typical is the
case of rubber workers. Members of the same union in the United States
and Canada supplied each other’s markets in the Canadian strike of 1974
and the U.S. strike 2 years later. In the latter stoppage, the companies sent
molds to European plants for manufacture there and imported tires from
these plants to the United States without any interference, despite calls for
boycotts by American and multinational union organizations. This is typi­
cal of most such situations. Claims of international solidarity actions during
such strikes rarely amount to more than leaflets promising support, state­
ments of “solidarity” by union officials, or letters from foreign unions to
company headquarters’ officials “demanding” that they agree to the striking
union’s terms.
— G ordan

F.

B loom

and

H erbert

R.

N orthrup

E c o n o m ic s o f L a b o r R e la tio n s

9th ed. (Homewood, 111., Richard D. Irwin,
Inc., 1981), pp. 170-71.

49

Book Reviews

A familiar cure
The Economics o f Unemployment: A Comparative Analysis
o f Britain and the United States. By James J. Hughes
and Richard Perlman. New York, Cambridge Univer­
sity Press, 1984. 258 pp.
The main theme of this book is that unemployment is
mainly a consequence of inadequate demand, the only cure
therefore being stimulation of aggregate demand. Through
this work, James J. Hughes and Richard Perlman attempt to
spark renewed interest in the subject, which they feel has
been given short shrift in the two countries studied.
The reader is asked to accept at face value the premise
that demand is indeed inadequate. Many, however, will find
that a difficult idea to accept. In the United States, for
example, we have the following phenomena: consumer debt
per capita continues to break records; ditto government
spending; the dollar is too strong for its own good, as spend­
ing on foreign goods skyrockets. In addition, the economy
has performed remarkably well in employing the legions of
baby-boomers, and their spouses. Indeed, the proportion of
the population which is in the labor force has continually
been increasing. If demand needs to be expanded, just
where will it come from? Unfortunately, this question is not
addressed by the authors.
It should by now surprise no one that the authors are of
the Keynesian persuasion, a gutsy proposition these days.
They feel that
. . there needs to be a renewed attempt to
develop a spirit of international Keynesianism . . . ” And
they come to bat for the beleaguered Phillips curve.
The authors of The Economics o f Unemployment provide
an excellent consolidation of recent research, presented in
their theoretical frameworks. Opposing viewpoints are
aired. There are separate chapters on unemployment statis­
tics, unemployment categories, macroeconomic issues, re­
lationship with inflation, effect of minimum wage legisla­
tion, unemployment insurance, experience since World
War II, high-incidence population groups, costs, and the
authors’ prescription. The book suffers from a paucity of
punctuation, which makes the going rough in some places.
Also evident is the authors’ penchant for the use of both
tautology and understatement.
The reader will find The Economics o f Unemployment
heavier with polemic and politics than the title would indi­
cate. The current U.S. and UK administrations are accused
50

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

of “. . . creating unemployment to dampen down wage
inflation . . . ,” for example. To a large extent, the book is
a call for the revival of Keynesianism, which leads one to
question the objectivity of the analysis.
The book concludes by advocating an expanded scope for
the Federal Government. The authors’ program features ex­
pansionary demand policies, together with a flexible in­
comes policy and an active manpower policy. No evidence
or argument is presented to support central government’s
increased role in economic decisionmaking. Apparently,
the authors assume that the reader shares their distrust of
free markets.
— M ichael W einert

Bureau of Labor Statistics
Chicago Regional Office

Publications received
Agriculture and natural resources
Mueller, William, “Can We Cope With Farming’s Failures?”
A m eric a n D e m o g ra p h ic s, May 1986, beginning on p. 40.
Paarlberg, Philip L. and Alan J. Webb, “Public Policy and the
Reemergence of International Economic Influences on U.S.
Agriculture,” A g ric u ltu ra l E c o n o m ic R e se a rc h , Winter 1986,
pp. 45-56.
“The Outlook for Agricultural Policies and Markets,” The OECD
O b s e r v e r, March 1986, pp. 27-32.

Economic and social statistics
Bianchi, Suzanne M. and Nancy Rytina, “The Decline in Occupa­
tional Sex Segregation During the 1970’s: Census and CPS Com­
parisons,” D e m o g ra p h y , February 1986, pp. 79-86.
Bloom, David E., E m p ir ic a l M o d e ls o f A r b itr a to r B e h a v io r U n d er
C o n v e n tio n a l A rb itra tio n . Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of
Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 18 pp. ( n b e r Working Paper
Series, 1841.) $2, paper.
Dunn, William, “In Pursuit of the Downscale,” A m eric a n D e m o ­
g ra p h ic s, May 1986, pp. 26-33.
Fuss, Melvyn and Leonard Waverman, The E x ten t a n d S o u rc es o f
C o s t a n d E fficien cy D ifferen ce s B e tw e e n U .S . a n d J a p a n e se
A u to m o b ile P ro d u c e rs. Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of
Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 52 pp. ( n b e r Working Paper

Series, 1849.) $2, paper.

Geroski, Paul A. and Mark B. Stewart, “Specification-Induced
Uncertainty in the Estimation of Trade Union Wage Differen­
tials from Industry-Level Data,” E c o n o m ic a , February 1986,
pp. 29-39.
Hamermesh, Daniel S. “Inflation and Labour Market Adjust­
ment,” E c o n o m ic a , February 1986, pp. 63-73.
Hoel, Michael, “Employment and Allocation Effects of Reducing
the Length of the Workday,” E c o n o m ic a , February 1986,
pp. 75-85.
Kim, Moon K ., G. Geoffrey Booth, Chunchi Wu, “Stock Returns,
Inflation, and the Phillips Curve,” S ou th ern E c o n o m ic Jou rn al,
April 1986, pp. 973-83.
Morrison, Peter A. and Paola Scommegna, D e m o g ra p h ic T ren ds
‘T a x ’ th e IRS. Washington, Population Reference Bureau, Inc.,
1986, 12 pp. $4, paper.
O’Hare, William, “The Eight Myths of Poverty,” A m eric a n
g ra p h ic s, May 1986, pp. 22-25.

D em o­

Shughart, William F. II, Robert D. Tollison, Brian L. Goff,
“Bureaucratic Structure and Congressional Control,” S ou th ern
E c o n o m ic J o u rn a l, April 1986, pp. 962-72.
Vijverberg, Wim P. M ., “Consistent Estimates of the Wage Equa­
tion When Individuals Choose among Income-Earning Activi­
ties,” S o u th ern E c o n o m ic J o u rn a l, April 1986, pp. 1028—42.

Economic growth and development
Henry, John F ., “On Economic Theory and the Question of Solv­
ability,” J o u rn a l o f P o s t K e y n e s ia n E c o n o m ic s, Spring 1986,
pp. 371-86.
Higgins, Christopher, “The ‘School of Hard Shocks:’ Reflections
of a Practical Macro-Economist,” T he O E C D O b s e r v e r, March
1986, beginning on p. 10.
Norton, R. D., “Industrial Policy and American Renewal,” J o u r­
n a l o f E c o n o m ic L ite r a tu r e , March 1986, pp. 1-40.

Industrial relations
Booth, Alison, “Estimating the Probability of Trade Union Mem­
bership: A Study of Men and Women in Britain,” E co n o m ica ,
February 1986, pp. 41-61.
Felker, Lon, “Public Sector Labor Relations in the States and
Municipalities: The Impact of Union Legislative Environment,”
P u b lic P e r so n n e l M a n a g em e n t, Spring 1986, pp. 41-50.
Freeman, Richard B., “Unionism Comes to the Public Sector,”
J o u rn a l o f E c o n o m ic L ite ra tu re , March 1986, pp. 41-86.
Gould, William B. IV, “Fifty Years Under the National Labor
Relations Act: A Retrospective View,” L a b o r L a w Jou rn a l,
April 1986, pp. 235-43.
Kenny, John J., P r im e r o f L a b o r R e la tio n s. 23d ed. Washington,
The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1986, 167 pp.
Mitchell, Daniel J. B., “Concession Bargaining in the Public Sec­
tor: A Lesser Force,” P u b lic P e r so n n e l M a n a g em en t, Spring
1986, pp. 23-40.
Mooney, Linda, “The Behavior of Law in a Private Legal Sys­
tem,” S o c ia l F o rc e s, March 1986, pp. 733-50.
Myers, Howard N., “The Ever Changing Labor-Mangement Envi­
ronment,” L a b o r L a w J o u rn a l, April 1986, pp. 250-55.
Richmond, William L. and Daniel L. Reynolds, “The Fair Labor
Standards Act: A Potential Legal Constraint Upon Quality Cir­


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

cles and Other Employee Participation Programs,”
April 1986, pp. 244-49.

L abor Law

J o u rn a l,

Riggs, Arthur J., “Legal Principles Applicable to Proper Discharge
Procedures,” L a b o r L a w J o u rn a l, April 1986, pp. 204-23.
Rosow, Jerome M., ed.,

T ea m w o rk : J o in t L a b o r-M a n a g em e n t

P r o g ra m s in A m eric a .

New York, Pergamon Press, 1986,

199 pp. $27.50.
Rothstein, Lawrence E., P la n t C lo sin g s: P o w e r , P o litic s , a n d
W o rkers. Dover, MA, Auburn House Publishing Co., 1986,
201 pp. $27.95.
Silberman, R. Gaull and Clint Bolick, “The eeoc’s Proposed Rule
on Releases of Claims Under the adea,” L a b o r L a w J o u rn a l,
April 1986, pp. 195-203.
Zimmerman, Don A. and Jane Howard-Martin, “The National
Labor Relations Act and Employment-at-Will: The Federal Pre­
emption Doctrine Revisited,” L a b o r L a w J o u r n a l, April 1986,
pp. 223-34.

International economics
Bloom, David E. and Richard B. Freeman,

P o p u la tio n G ro w th ,
L a b o r S u p p ly, a n d E m p lo y m en t in D e v e lo p in g C o u n tries. Cam­
bridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986,
71 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1837.) $2, paper.

“Change and Continuity in OECD Trade in Manufacturers with
Developing Countries,” The O E C D O b s e r v e r, March 1986,
pp. 3-9.
Haynes, Stephen E., Michael M. Hutchison, Raymond F.
Mikesell, “U.S.-Japanese Bilateral Trade and the Yen-Dollar
Exchange Rate: An Empirical Analysis,” S ou th ern E co n o m ic
J o u r n a l, April 1986, pp. 923-32.
Kamerschen, David R. and Roger J. Robinson, “An Analysis of
the Export Licensing Mechanism and Its Effect Upon the Com­
petitiveness of U.S. High Technology Exports,” A k ro n B u sin e ss
a n d E c o n o m ic R e v ie w , Spring 1986, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 12-22.
“Liberalization of Trade and Investment in the Services Sector:
The Role of the OECD Codes,” The O E C D O b s e r v e r, March 1986,
pp. 25-27.
Lowe, Jeffrey H., “Capital Expenditures by Majority-Owned For­
eign Affiliates of U.S. Companies, 1986,” S u rv ey o f C u rren t
B u sin ess, March 1986, pp. 18-23.

Labor force
Forbes, Daniel, “The Growing Ranks of Contract Workers,”
D u n ’s B u sin e ss M on th , March 1986, pp. 56-57.
Freedman, Audrey, P e r s p e c tiv e s on E m p lo ym en t: M a n a g em e n t
S u m m ary. New York, The Conference Board, 1986, 14 pp.
(Conference Board Research Bulletin, 194.)
Hadjimatheou, George, “Why Has Britain Not Had Full Employ­
ment Since the Early 1970s?” J o u rn a l o f P o s t K e yn esia n E c o ­
n o m ics, Spring 1986, pp. 359-70.
Hatton, T. J. “Rational Expectations and Labour Market Equi­
librium in Britain, 1855-1913,” O x fo rd E c o n o m ic P a p e r s ,
March 1986, pp. 160-73.
E m p lo ym en t: A S ym p o siu m : “Introduction,” by Ray
Richardson and David Marsden; “Employment Policies and the
Entry of Young People into the Labour Market in France,” by
J. F. Germe; “Youth Unemployment, Labour Market Deregula­
tion, and Union Strategies in Italy,” by Paolo Garonna; “The

Youth

51

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Book Reviews

Dual Apprenticeship System and the Recruitment and Retention
of Young Persons in West Germany,” by Bernard Casey;
“Where Do Young Workers Work? Youth Employment by In­
dustry in Various European Economies,” by David Marsden and
Paul Ryan, B ritish J o u rn a l o f In d u stria l R e la tio n s, March 1986,
pp. 25-102.

Management and organization theory
Friedman, Steward D ., L e a d e rs h ip S u cc e ssio n sy ste m s a n d C o r p o ­
ra te P erfo rm a n c e. New York, Columbia University Center for
Career Research and Human Resource Management, Graduate
School of Business, 1985, 141 pp. $35, paper.

Productivity and technological change
Morrison, Catherine and W. Erwin Diewert,

P ro d u c tiv ity G ro w th
a n d C h a n g es in th e T erm s o f T ra d e in J a p a n a n d th e U .S .

Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1986, 50 pp., bibliography, (nber Working Paper Series,
1848.) $2, paper.
Senensieb, Gideon, “Teaching Computers to Listen,” G o v ern m e n t
D a ta S y stem s, October-November 1985, pp. 52-54.

Wages and compensation
Aldrich, Mark and Robert Buchele, The E c o n o m ic s o f C o m p a ra b le
W orth . Cambridge, MA, Ballinger Publishing Co., A subsidiary
of Harper & Row, 1986, 180 pp. $29.95.

Ginzberg, Eli, R e sizin g f o r O r g a n iza tio n a l E ffe ctiv e n e ss: A R e p o r t
o f a W ork sh o p . New York, Columbia University, Center for
Career Research and Human Resource Management, Graduate
School of Business, 1985, 43 pp. $20, paper.

Arestis, Philip, “Wages and Prices in the UK: The Post Keynesian
V i e w J o u rn a l o f P o s t K e yn esia n E co n o m ics, Spring 1986, pp.
39-58.

Gottlieb, Marvin,
200 pp.

New York, Longman, Inc., 1986,

Collier, P. and J. B. Knight, “Wage Structure and Labour
Turnover,” O x fo rd E c o n o m ic P a p e r s , March 1986, pp. 77-93.

Johnson, Victoria E. and David Sink, “Personnel Reform in Con­
solidated Metropolitan Governments: Executive Responsibility
and Neutral Competence,” P u b lic P e r so n n e l M a n a g em en t,
Spring 1986, pp. 11—21.

DeVol, Karen R ., In co m e R e p la c e m e n t f o r S h o rt-T erm D is a b ility :
The R o le o f W o rk e rs’ C o m p en sa tio n . Cambridge, MA, Workers
Compensation Research Institute, 1985, 64 pp., bibliography.
Hutner, Frances C., E q u a l P a y f o r C o m p a ra b le W orth : The W o rk ­
ing W o m a n ’s Issu e o f th e E ig h tie s. Westport, CT, Praeger Pub­
lishers, A Division of Greenwood Press, Inc., 1986, 227 pp.,
bibliography. $29.95.

I n te r v ie w .

McGuire, Jean B. and Joseph R. Liro, “Flexible Work Schedules,
Work Attitudes, and Perceptions of Productivity,” P u b lic P e r ­
so n n e l M a n a g em en t, Spring 1986, pp. 65-73.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, A re a

Monetary and fiscal policy
Aaron, Henry, J. and others, E c o n o m ic C h o ic es, 1 9 8 7 . Washing­
ton, The Brookings Institution, 1986, 126 pp. $22.95, cloth;
$8.95, paper.
Holloway, Thomas M., “The Cyclically Adjusted Federal Budget
and Federal Debt: Revised and Updated Estimates,” S u rv ey o f
C u rre n t B u sin ess, March 1986, pp. 11-17.

52


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

W a g e S u rv ey s: M in n ea p o lisSt. P a u l, M in n eso ta -W isco n sin , M e tro p o lita n A re a , J a n u a ry
1 9 8 6 (Bulletin 3035-1, 42 pp., $1.75); J a ck so n , M iss is sip p i,
M e tro p o lita n A re a , J a n u a ry 1 9 8 6 (Bulletin 3035-2, 29 pp.,
$1.25); Y ork, P en n sy lva n ia , M e tro p o lita n A re a , J a n u a ry 1 9 8 6
(Bulletin 3035-3, 31 pp., $1.25); P ittsb u rg h , P en n sy lva n ia ,
M e tro p o lita n A re a , J a n u a ry 1 9 8 6 (Bulletin 3035-4, 43 pp.,

$1.75). Available from the Superintendent of Documents,
Washington 20402 or bls Publication Sales Center, Chicago, IL
60690.
□

Current
Labor Statistics
Schedule of release dates for major
Notes on Current Labor Statistics

bls

statistical series

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

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

54
55

Comparative indicators
1. Labor market indicators...................................................................................................................................................................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity ........................................................................................
3. Alternative measures o f wage and compensation changes ...................................................................................................................................

64
65
65

Labor force data
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.

Employment status o f the total population, data seasonally ad ju sted .................................................................................................................
Employment status of the civilian population, data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................................................................
Selected employment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ...................................................................................................................................
Selected unemployment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates by sex and age, data seasonally adjusted ..........................................................................................................................
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, data seasonally a d ju sted .................................................................................................
Duration o f unemployment, data seasonally adjusted ............................................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates o f civilian workers, by State ......................
Employment o f workers by State .................................................................................................................................................................................
Employment o f workers by industry, data seasonally adjusted.............................................................................................................................
Average weekly hours by industry, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Average hourly earnings by industry ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Average weekly earnings by industry................................................................................................. ........................................................................
Hourly Earnings Index by industry..............................................................................................................................................................................
Indexes o f diffusion: proportion o f industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted ......................................................
Annual data: Employment status o f the noninstitutional population
...........................................................................................................
Annual data: Employment levels by industry ..........................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Average hours and earnings levels by industry...............................................................................................................................

66
67
68
69
70
70
70
71
71
72
73
74
75
75
76
76
76
77

Labor compensation and collective bargaining data
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.

Employment Cost Index, compensation, by occupation and industry group ....................................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry g r o u p ...........................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area s i z e ...............................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments,
situations covering 1,000 workers or more ...........................
Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, bargainingsituations covering 1,000 workers or m o r e ......................................
Average effective wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers ormore ......................................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments, State and local government bargaining
situations covering 1,000 workers or more ..............................................................................................................................................................
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more .................................................................................................................................................

78
79
80
81
81
82
82
82

Price data
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.

Consumer Price Index: U .S . City average, by expenditure category and commodity and service groups ............................................
Consumer Price Index: U .S. City average and local data,all items ...................................................................................................................
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items and major groups ......................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes by stage o f processing ........................................................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ...................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes by stage o f p ro cessin g ...............................................................................................................................
U .S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade C lassification .......................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade C lassification.......................................................................................................
U .S. export price indexes by end-use category .......................................................................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by end-use ca teg o ry .......................................................................................................................................................
U .S . export price indexes by Standard Industrial C lassification.........................................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification .......................................................................................................................


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

83
86
87
88
89
89
90
91
92
92
92
93

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

C u r r e n t L a b o r S ta tis tic s

Contents—Continued
Productivity data
42. Indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted .............................................................................
43. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity ..............................................................................................................................................................
44. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and p r ic e s.................................................................................................

93
94
95

International comparisons
45. Unemployment rates in nine countries, data seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................................................
46. Annual data: Employment status of civilian working-age population, ten countries ....................................................................................
47. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures, twelve countries ..........................................................................................................

95
96
97

Injury and illness data
48. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness incidence r a te s...............................................................................................................................

Schedule of release dates for
Series

Employment situation ............................

b ls

statistical series

Release
date

Period
covered

Release
date

Period
covered

Release
date

Period
covered

MLR table
number

1; 4-21

July 3

June

A u gust 1

July

Septem ber 5

A u gust

June

A u gust 15

July

S eptem ber 12

A u gust

2; 33-35

Septem ber 23

A u gust

2;30-32

Septem ber 23

A ugust

14-17

Producer Price Index..............................

July 11

Consumer Price Index............................

July 23

June

A u gust 21

July

Real earnings...........................................

July 23

June

A u gust 21

July

Major collective bargaining
settlements...........................................

July 28

3; 25-28
2nd qua rter

Employment Cost Index .......................
Productivity and costs:
Nonfarm business and
manufacturing..................................

July 30

54

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

1-3; 22-24

2nd qua rter

Nonfinancial corporations...................
U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes ..

98

2; 42-44
A u gust 27

July 31

2nd quarter

2nd qua rter

2;42-44
2; 36-41

NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS
This section o f the R e v ie w presents the principal statistical series collected
and calculated by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics: series on labor force,
employment, unemployment, collective bargaining settlements, consumer,
producer, and international prices, productivity, international comparisons,
and injury and illness statistics. In the notes that follow, the data in each
group o f tables is briefly described, key definitions are given, notes on the
data are set forth, and sources of additional information are cited.

Adjustments for price changes. Some data— such as the Hourly
Earnings Index in table 17— are adjusted to eliminate the effect o f changes
in price. These adjustments are made by dividing current dollar values by
the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate component o f the index, then
multiplying by 100. For example, given a current hourly wage rate o f $3
and a current price index number of 150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate
expressed in 1967 dollars is $2 ($3/150 X 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,” “constant,” or “1967” dollars.

General notes
Additional information
The following notes apply to several tables in this section:

Seasonal adjustment.

Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect on the data of such factors as climatic conditions,
industry production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday
buying periods, and vacation practices, which might prevent short-term
evaluation o f the statistical series. Tables containing data that have been
adjusted are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” (All other data are not
seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past
experience. When new seasonal factors are computed each year, revisions
may affect seasonally adjusted data for several preceding years. (Season­
ally adjusted data appear in tables 1 -3 , 4 -1 0 , 13, 14, 17 and 18.) Begin­
ning in January 1980, the bls introduced two major modifications in the
seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are
seasonally adjusted with a procedure called x - n arima, which was devel­
oped at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard x - n method
previously used by bls. A detailed description o f the procedure appears in
T h e x - l i arima S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t M e th o d by Estela Bee Dagum (Statis­
tics Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E , February 1980). The second change
is that seasonal factors are calculated for use during the first 6 months of
the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year
for the July-December period. However, revisions o f historical data con­
tinue to be made only at the end of each calendar year.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 1 and 4 -1 0 were revised
in the February 1986 issue of the R e v ie w , to reflect experience through
1985.
Annual revisions o f the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in tables
13, 14, and 18 were made in the July 1986 R e v ie w using the X-ll arima
seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for productivity
data in table 42 are usually introduced in the September issue. Seasonally
adjusted indexes and percent changes from month to month and from
quarter to quarter are published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price
Index series. However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for
the U .S. average All Items cpi. Only seasonally adjusted percent changes
are available for this series.

Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the
Bureau in a variety of sources. News releases provide the latest statistical
information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule preceding these general notes. More
information about labor force, employment, and unemployment data and
the household and establishment surveys underlying the data are available
in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s , a monthly publication of the Bureau. More
data from the household survey is published in the two-volume data book—
L a b o r F o r c e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d F ro m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u r v e y , Bul­
letin 2096. More data from the establishment survey appears in two data
books— E m p lo y m e n t, H o u r s , a n d E a rn in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , and E m p lo y ­
m e n t, H o u r s , a n d E a rn in g s , S ta te s a n d A r e a s , and the annual supplements
to these data books. More detailed information on employee compensation
and collective bargaining settlements is published in the monthly periodi­
cal, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts . More detailed data on consumer and
producer prices are published in the monthly periodicals, T h e cpi D e ta ile d
R e p o r t, and P r o d u c e r P r ic e s a n d P r ic e I n d e x e s . Detailed data on all o f the
series in this section are provided in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s ,
which is published biennally by the Bureau, bls bulletins are issued cover­
ing productivity, injury and illness, and other data in this section. Finally,
the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w carries analytical articles on annual and longer
term developments in labor force, employment and unemployment; em­
ployee compensation and collective bargaining; prices; productivity; inter­
national comparisons; and injury and illness data.

Symbols
p = preliminary. To increase the timeliness of some series, prelim­
inary figures are issued based on representative but incom­
plete returns.
r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability o f later
data but may also reflect other adjustments,
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified,
n .e.s. = not elsewhere specified.

COMPARATIVE INDICATORS
(Tables 1 -3 )

Comparative indicators tables provide an overview and comparison of
major bls statistical series. Consequently, although many of the included
series are available monthly, all measures in these comparative tables are
presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include employment measures from two ma­
jor surveys and information on rates o f change in compensation provided
by the Employment Cost Index (eci) program. The labor force participation
rate, the employment-to-population ratio, and unemployment rates for
major demographic groups based on the Current Population (“household ”)
Survey are presented, while measures of employment and average weekly


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

hours by major industry sector are given using nonagricultural payroll data.
The Employment Cost Index (compensation), by major sector and by
bargaining status, is chosen from a variety of bls compensation and wage
measures because it provides a comprehensive measure of employer costs
for hiring labor, not just outlays for wages, and it is not affected by
employment shifts among occupations and industries.
Data on changes in compensation, prices, and productivity are pre­
sented in table 2. Measures of rates of change of compensation and wages
from the Employment Cost Index program are provided for all civilian

55

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics

nonfarm workers (excluding Federal and household workers) and for all
private nonfarm workers. Measures o f changes in: consumer prices for all
urban consumers; producer prices by stage of processing; and the overall
export and import price indexes are given. Measures o f productivity (output
per hour o f all persons) are provided for major sectors.

Alternative measures of wage and compensation rates of change,
which reflect the overall trend in labor costs, are summarized in table 3.
Differences in concepts and scope, related to the specific purposes o f the
series, contribute to the variation in changes among the individual mea­
sures.

Notes on the data
Definitions o f each series and notes on the data are contained in later
sections o f these notes describing each set o f data. For detailed descriptions
of each data series, see bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Volumes I and II,
Bulletins 2134-1 and 2 1 34-2 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982 and 1984,
respectively), as well as the additional bulletins, articles, and other publi­
cations noted in the separate sections of the R e v ie w 's “Current Labor
Statistics Notes.” Historical data for many series 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 u lle tin 2 2 1 7 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
Users may also wish to consult M a jo r P r o g r a m s , B u r e a u o f L a b o r S ta tis ­
tic s , Report 718 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).

EMPLOYMENT DATA
(Tables 1; 4 -2 1 )

Household survey data
Description of the series
employment data in this section are obtained from the Current Population
Survey, a program o f personal interviews conducted monthly by the Bureau
o f the Census for the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. The sample consists of
about 59,500 households selected to represent the U .S. population 16 years
o f age and older. Households are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that
three-fourths o f the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months.

Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any time
during the week which includes the 12th day o f the month or who worked
unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and (2) those
who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because o f illness,
vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. Members o f the Armed
Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the employed
total. A person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at
which he or she worked the greatest number of hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey
week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had
looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for
work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within the
next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The overall unem­
ployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent o f the labor
force, including the resident Armed Forces. The civilian unemployment
rate represents the number unemployed as a percent o f the civilian labor
force.
The labor force consists o f all employed or unemployed civilians plus
members o f the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. Persons not
in the labor force are those not classified as employed or unemployed; this
group includes persons who are retired, those engaged in their own house­
work, those not working while attending school, those unable to work
because o f long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because
o f personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The
noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years o f age and
older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions, sanitariums, or
homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members of the Armed Forces
stationed in the United States. The labor force participation rate is the
proportion o f the noninstitutional populaton that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is total employment (including the resident
Armed Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional population.

Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjustments

56

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

are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for estimating
errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect the comparabil­
ity o f historical data. A description o f these adjustments and their effect on
the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m p lo y m e n t a n d
E a rn in g s .

Data in tables 4 - 1 0 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1985.

Additional sources o f information
For detailed explanations o f the data, see bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s ,
Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 1, and for
additional data, H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau o f
Labor Statistics, 1985). A detailed description o f the Current Population
Survey as well as additional data are available in the monthly Bureau o f
Labor Statistics periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s . Historical data
from 1948 to 1981 are available in L a b o r F o r c e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d f r o m th e
C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u r v e y : A D a ta b o o k , Vols. I and II, Bulletin 2096
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .

Establishment survey data
Description of the series
E mployment, hours, and earnings data in this section are compiled from
payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by more than 250,000
establishments representing all industries except agriculture. In most indus­
tries, the sampling probabilities are based on the size of the establishment;
most large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An establishment is
not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for example, or ware­
house.) Self-employed persons and others not on a regular civilian payroll
are outside the scope o f the survey because they are excluded from estab­
lishment records. This largely accounts for the difference in employment
figures between the household and establishment surveys.

Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which produces goods or services
(such as a factory or store) at a single location and is engaged in one type
o f economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holiday

and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th o f the
month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 percent o f all persons
in the labor force) are counted in each establishment which reports them.
Production workers in manufacturing include working supervisors and
all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with production operations.
Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 include production workers in
manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construction; and non­
supervisory workers in the following industries: transportation and public
utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and
services. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employ­
ment on private nonagricutural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers re­
ceive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime or
late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special payments.
Real earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of changes in
consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from the Consumer
Price Index for Urban Wage Earner and Clerical Workers (cpi- w). The
Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from average hourly earnings data
adjusted to exclude the effects of two types o f changes that are unrelated
to underlying wage-rate developments: fluctuations in overtime premiums
in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available)
and the effects o f changes and seasonal factors in the proportion o f workers
in high-wage and low-wage industries.
Hours represent the average weekly hours o f production or nonsupervi­
sory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard
or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the portion o f gross average
weekly hours which were in excess o f regular hours and for which overtime
premiums were paid.
The Diffusion Index, introduced in the May 1983 R e v ie w , represents
the percent o f 185 nonagricultural industries in which employment was
rising over the indicated period. One-half o f the industries with unchanged
employment are counted as rising. In line with Bureau practice, data for
the 1-, 3-, and 6-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while those for the
12-month span are unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measur­
ing the dispersion o f economic gains or losses and is also an economic
indicator.

Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are peri­
odically adjusted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release
o f May 1986 data, published in the July 1986 issue of the R e v ie w . Conse­
quently, data published in the R e v ie w prior to that issue are not necessarily
comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to
April 1984; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January
1981. These revisions were published in the S u p p le m e n t to E m p lo y m e n t
a n d E a r n in g s (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1986). Unadjusted data from
April 1985 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1982 for­
ward are subject to revision in future benchmarks.

Additional sources of information
Detailed data from the establishment survey are published monthly in the
bls periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s . Earlier comparable unadjusted

and seasonally adjusted data are published in E m p lo y m e n t, H o u r s , a n d
E a r n in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 0 9 —8 4 , Bulletin 1312—12 (Bureau o f Labor

Statistics, 1985) and its annual supplement. For a detailed discussion o f the
methodology o f the survey, see bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 2. For additional data, see
H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
1985).
A comprehensive discussion o f the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1969, pp. 9—20.

Unemployment data by State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained from two major sources— the
Current Population Survey (cps) and the Local Area Unemployment Statis­
tics (laus) program, which is conducted in cooperation with State employ­
ment security agencies.
Monthly estimates o f the labor force, employment, and unemployment
for States and sub-State areas are a key indicator o f local economic condi­
tions and form the basis for determining the eligibility of an area for
benefits under Federal economic assistance programs such as the Job Train­
ing Partnership Act and the Public Works and Economic Development Act.
Insofar as possible, the concepts and definitions underlying these data are
those used in the national estimates obtained from the cps .

Notes on the data
Data refer to State of residence. Monthly data for 11 States— California,
Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas— are obtained directly from the
cps , because the size o f the sample is large enough to meet bls standards
of reliability. Data for the remaining 39 States and the District o f Columbia
are derived using standardized procedures established by bls. Once a year,
estimates for the 11 States are revised to new population controls. For the
remaining States and the District o f Columbia, data are benchmarked to
annual average cps levels.

Additional sources of information
Information on the concepts, definitions, and technical procedures used
to develop labor force data for States and sub-State areas as well as addi­
tional data on sub-States are provided in the monthly Bureau o f Labor
Statistics periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s , and the annual report,
G e o g r a p h ic P r o f ile o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics). See also bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 4.

COMPENSATION AND WAGE DATA
(Tables 1 -3 ; 22-29)
Compensation and wage data are gathered by the Bureau from business
establishments, State and local governments, labor unions, collective bar­
gaining agreements on file with the Bureau, and secondary sources.

Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index ( e c i ) is a quarterly measure of the rate of
change in compensation per hour worked and includes wages, salaries, and
employer costs o f employee benefits. It uses a fixed market basket of


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

labor— similar in concept to the Consumer Price Index’s fixed market
basket of goods and services— to measure change over time in employer
costs o f employing labor. The index is not seasonally adjusted.
Statistical series on total compensation costs and on wages and salaries
are available for private nonfarm workers excluding proprietors, the selfemployed, and household workers. Both series are also available for State
and local government workers and for the civilian nonfarm economy,
which consists of private industry and State and local government workers
combined. Federal workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability sample consists o f about 2,200
private nonfarm establishments providing about 12,000 occupational ob­
servations and 700 State and local government establishments providing

57

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

July 1986

•

C u rre n t L a b o r S ta tistics

3,500 occupational observations selected to represent total employment in
each sector. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensa­
tion information on five well-specified occupations. Data are collected each
quarter for the pay period including the 12th day o f March, June, Septem­
ber, and December.
Fixed employment weights from the 1970 Census o f Population are used
each quarter to calculate the indexes for civilian, private, and State and
local governments. These fixed weights, also used to derive all o f the
industry and occupation series indexes, ensure that changes in these in­
dexes reflect only changes in compensation, not employment shifts among
industries or occupations with different levels o f wages and compensation.
For the bargaining status, region, and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan area
series, however, employment data by industry and occupation are not
available from the census. Instead, the 1970 employment weights are
reallocated within these series each quarter based on the current sample.
Therefore, these indexes are not strictly comparable to those for the aggre­
gate, industry, and occupation series.

Definitions
Total compensation costs include wages, salaries, and the employer
costs for employee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist o f earnings before payroll deductions, in­
cluding production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-ofliving adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers for paid leave, supplemental pay
(including nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retirement and savings
plans, and legally required benefits (such as social security, workers’
compensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and employee benefits are such items
as payment-in-kind, free room and board, and tips.

Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quarter o f
1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in the private
nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee benefits were in­
cluded in 1980 to produce, when combined with the wages and salaries
series, a measure o f the percent change in employer costs for employee
total compensation. State and local government units were added to the eci
coverage in 1981, providing a measure o f total compensation change in the
c iv ilia n nonfarm economy (excluding Federal employees). Historical in­
dexes (June 1981 = 100) o f the quarterly rates o f change are presented in the
May issue o f the BLS monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts .

Additional sources o f information
For a more detailed discussion o f the Employment Cost Index, see
Chapter 11, “The Employment Cost Index,” in the H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s ,
Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 11, and the
following M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w articles: “Employment Cost Index: a
measure o f change in the ‘price o f labor’,” July 1975; “How benefits will
be incorporated into the Em ploym ent C ost In d ex,” January 1978;
“Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost Index,” May 1982; and
“Introducing new weights for the Employment Cost Index,” June 1985.
Data on the eci are also available in bls quarterly press releases issued
in the month following the reference months o f March, June, September,
and December; and from the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217
(Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1985).

C o lle c tiv e b a r g a in in g se ttle m e n ts
Description o f the series

(wages and benefits costs) and wages alone, quarterly for private industry
and semiannually for State and local government. Compensation measures
cover all collective bargaining situations involving 5,000 workers or more
and wage measures cover all situations involving 1,000 workers or more.
These data, covering private nonagricultural industries and State and local
governments, are calculated using information obtained from bargaining
agreements on file with the Bureau, parties to the agreements, and second­
ary sources, such as newspaper accounts. The data are not seasonally
adjusted.
Settlement data are measured in terms o f future specified adjustments:
those that will occur within 12 months after contract ratification— first
year— and all adjustments that will occur over the life o f the contract
expressed as an average annual rate. Adjustments are worker weighted.
Both first-year and over-the-life measures exclude wage changes that may
occur under cost-of-living clauses that are triggered by future movements
in the Consumer Price Index.
Effective wage adjustments measure all adjustments occurring in the
reference period, regardless o f the settlement date. Included are changes
from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from con­
tracts negotiated in earlier periods, and changes under cost-of-living adjust­
ment clauses. Each wage change is worker weighted. The changes are
prorated over all workers under agreements during the reference period
yielding the average adjustment.

Definitions
Wage rate changes are calculated by dividing newly negotiated wages
by the average hourly earnings, excluding overtime, at the time the agree­
ment is reached. Compensation changes are calculated by dividing the
change in the value o f the newly negotiated wage and benefit package by
existing average hourly compensation, which includes the cost o f previ­
ously negotiated benefits, legally required social insurance programs, and
average hourly earnings.
Compensation changes are calculated by placing a value on the benefit
portion o f the settlements at the time they are reached. The cost estimates
are based on the assumption that conditions existing at the time o f settle­
ment (for example, methods of financing pensions or composition o f labor
force) will remain constant. The data, therefore, are measures o f negotiated
changes and not o f total changes in employer cost.
Contract duration runs from the effective date o f the agreement to the
expiration date or first wage reopening date, if applicable. Average annual
percent changes over the contract term take account o f the compounding o f
successive changes.

Notes on the data
Care should be exercised in comparing the size and nature o f the settle­
ments in State and local government with those in the private sector because
o f differences in bargaining practices and settlement characteristics. A
principal difference is the incidence o f cost-of-living adjustment (cola)
clauses which cover only about 2 percent o f workers under a few local
government settlements, but cover 50 percent o f workers under private
sector settlements. Agreements without cola’s tend to provide larger speci­
fied wage increases than those with cola’s . Another difference is that State
and local government bargaining frequently excludes pension benefits
which are often prescribed by law. In the private sector, in contrast,
pensions are typically a bargaining issue.

Additional sources o f information
For a more detailed discussion on the series, see o f the bls H a n d b o o k o f
M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 10.

Collective bargaining settlements data provide statistical measures of
negotiated adjustments (increases, decreases, and freezes) in compensation

58

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

Comprehensive data are published in press releases issued quarterly (in
January, April, July, and October) for private industry, and semi-

annually (in February and August) for State and local government. Histor­
ical data and additional detailed tabulations for the prior calendar year
appear in the April issue o f the bls monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e

monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts . Historical data appear in
the bls H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s .

Other compensation data

D e v e lo p m e n ts .

Other bls data on pay and benefits, not included in the Current Labor
Statistics section of the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , appear in and consist o f the

Work stoppages

following:

Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the number and duration of major
strikes or lockouts (involving 1,000 workers or more) occurring during the
month (or year), the number of workers involved, and the amount of time
lost because o f stoppage.
Data are largely from newspaper accounts and cover only establishments
directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or second­
ary effect o f stoppages on other establishments whose employees are idle
owing to material shortages or lack of service.

Definitions
Number of stoppages:

The number o f strikes and lockouts involving
and lasting a full shift or longer.
Workers involved: The number of workers directly involved in the

1,000 workers or more

I n d u s tr y W a g e S u r v e y s provide data for specific occupations selected to
represent an industry’s wage structure and the types o f activities performed
by its workers. The Bureau collects information on weekly work schedules,
shift operations and pay differentials, paid holiday and vacation practices,
and information on incidence of health, insurance, and retirement plans.
Reports are issued throughout the year as the surveys are completed.
Summaries of the data and special analyses also appear in the M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w .
A r e a W a g e S u r v e y s annually provide data for selected office, clerical,
professional, technical, maintenance, toolroom, powerplant, material
movement, and custodial occupations common to a wide variety o f indus­
tries in the areas (labor markets) surveyed. Reports are issued throughout
the year as the surveys are completed. Summaries of the data and special
analyses also appear in the R e v ie w .
T h e N a tio n a l S u r v e y o f P r o fe s s io n a l, A d m in is tr a tiv e , T e c h n ic a l, a n d
C le r ic a l P a y provides detailed information annually on salary levels and

stoppage.

Number of days idle: The aggregate number of work days lost by
workers involved in the stoppages.
Days of idleness as a percent of estimated working time: Aggregate
work days lost as a percent of the aggregate number of standard work days
in the period multiplied by total employment in the period.

Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one terminated in 1981 that
covered strikes involving six workers or more.

Additional sources o f information
Data for each calendar year are reported in a bls press release issued in
the first quarter o f the following year. Monthly data appear in the BLS

distributions for the types o f jobs mentioned in the survey’s title in private
employment. Although the definitions of the jobs surveyed reflect the
duties and responsibilities in private industry, they are designed to match
specific pay grades of Federal white-collar employees under the General
Schedule pay system. Accordingly, this survey provides the legally re­
quired information for comparing the pay of salaried employees in the
Federal civil service with pay in private industry. (See Federal Pay Com­
parability Act o f 1970, 5 u.s.c. 5305.) Data are published in a bls news
release issued in the summer and in a bulletin each fall; summaries and
analytical articles also appear in the R e v ie w .
E m p lo y e e B e n e fits S u r v e y provides nationwide information on the inci­
dence and characteristics of employee benefit plans in medium and large
establishments in the United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Data are
published in an annual bls news release and bulletin, as well as in special
articles appearing in the R e v ie w .

PRICE DATA
(Tables 2; 30-41)
PRICE DATA are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from retail
and primary markets in the United States. Price indexes are given in
relation to a base period (1967 = 100, unless otherwise noted).

Consumer Price Indexes
Description o f the series
The Consumer Price Index (cpi) is a measure of the average change in
the prices paid by urban consumers for a fixed market basket of goods and
services. The cpi is calculated monthly for two population groups, one
consisting only o f urban households whose primary source o f income is
derived from the employment of wage earners and clerical workers, and the
other consisting o f all urban households. The wage earner index (cpi- w) is
a continuation o f the historic index that was introduced well over a halfcentury ago for use in wage negotiations. As new uses were developed for
the cpi in recent years, the need for a broader and more representative index
became apparent. The all urban consumer index (cpi- u) introduced in 1978
is representative o f the 1972-73 buying habits of about 80 percent of the
noninstitutional population o f the United States at that time, compared with
40 percent represented in the cpi- w . In addition to wage earners and clerical


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

workers, the cpi- u covers professional, managerial, and technical workers,
the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, retirees, and oth­
ers not in the labor force.
The cpi is based on prices o f food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, trans­
portation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and services
that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality o f these
items are kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only
price changes will be measured. All taxes directly associated with the
purchase and use o f items are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000
tenants in 85 urban areas across the country are used to develop the “U .S.
city average.” Separate estimates for 28 major urban centers are presented
in table 31. The areas listed are as indicated in footnote 1 to the table. The
area indexes measure only the average change in prices for each area since
the base period, and do not indicate differences in the level o f prices among
cities.

Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the way in which homeownership
costs are measured for the cpi-U. A rental equivalence method replaced the

59

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics

asset-price approach to homeownership costs for that series. In January
1985, the same change was made in the cpi- w . The central purpose o f the
change was to separate shelter costs from the investment component of
homeownership so that the index would reflect only the cost o f shelter
services provided by owner-occupied homes.

Additional sources of information

manufacturing sectors; a shift from a commodity to an industry orientation;
the exclusion o f imports from, and the inclusion of exports in, the survey
universe; and the respecification of commodities priced to conform to
Bureau o f the Census definitions. These and other changes have been
phased in gradually since 1978. The result is a system o f indexes that is
easier to use in conjunction with data on wages, productivity, and employ­
ment and other series that are organized in terms o f the Standard Industrial
Classification and the Census product class designations.

For a discussion o f the general method for computing the cpi, see bls
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , V o lu m e II, T h e C o n s u m e r P r ic e I n d e x , Bulletin

2 1 3 4 -2 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1984). The recent change in the mea­
surement o f homeownership costs is discussed in Robert Gillingham and
Walter Lane, “Changing the treatment of shelter costs for homeowners in
the CPI,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 .
Additional detailed cpi data and regular analyses o f consumer price
changes are provided in the cpi D e ta ile d R e p o r t, a monthly publication of
the Bureau. Historical data for the overall cpi and for selected groupings
may be found in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1985).

Producer price indexes

Additional sources o f information
For a discussion o f the methodology for computing Producer Price In­
dexes, see bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 7.
Additional detailed data and analyses o f price changes are provided
monthly in P r o d u c e r P r ic e I n d e x e s . Selected historical data may be found
in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1985).

International price indexes
Description o f the series

Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes (ppi) measure average changes in prices re­
ceived in primary markets o f the United States by producers o f commodi­
ties in all stages o f processing. The sample used for calculating these
indexes currently contains about 3,200 commodities and about 60,000
quotations per month selected to represent the movement o f prices of all
commodities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing,
mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The stage o f proc­
essing structure o f Producer Price Indexes organizes products by class of
buyer and degree o f fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate
goods, and crude materials). The traditional commodity structure of ppi
organizes products by similarity o f end-use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price Indexes
apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the United States
from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally
collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. Most prices are ob­
tained directly from producing companies on a voluntary and confidential
basis. Prices generally are reported for the Tuesday o f the week containing
the 13th day o f the month.
Since January 1976, price changes for the various commodities have
been averaged together with implicit quantity weights representing their
importance in the total net selling value of all commodities as o f 1972. The
detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage-of-processing
groupings, commodity groupings, durability-of-product groupings, and a
number o f special composite groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original publication.

Notes on the data
Beginning with the January 1986 issue, the R e v ie w is no longer present­
ing tables o f Producer Price Indexes for commodity groupings, special
composite groups, or sic industries. However, these data will continue to
be presented in the Bureau’s monthly publication P r o d u c e r P r ic e I n d e x e s .
Series on the net output o f major mining and manufacturing industry groups
will appear in the R e v ie w starting with data for July 1986.
The Bureau has completed the first major stage o f its comprehensive
overhaul o f the theory, methods, and procedures used to construct the
Producer Price Indexes. Changes include the replacement o f judgment
sampling with probability sampling techniques; expansion to systematic
coverage o f the net output of virtually all industries in the mining and

60


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

The bls International Price Program produces quarterly export and
import price indexes for nonmilitary goods traded between the United
States and the rest o f the world. The export price index provides a measure
o f price change for all products sold by U .S. residents to foreign buyers.
(“Residents” is defined as in the national income accounts: it includes
corporations, businesses, and individuals but does not require the organiza­
tions to be U .S. owned nor the individuals to have U .S. citizenship.) The
import price index provides a measure of price change for goods purchased
from other countries by U .S. residents. With publication o f an all-import
index in February 1983 and an all-export index in February 1984, all U .S.
merchandise imports and exports now are represented in these indexes. The
reference period for the indexes is 1977 = 100, unless otherwise indicated.
The product universe for both the import and export indexes includes raw
materials, agricultural products, semifinished manufactures, and finished
manufactures, including both capital and consumer goods. Price data for
these items are collected quarterly by mail questionnaire. In nearly all
cases, the data are collected directly from the exporter or importer, al­
though in a few cases, prices are obtained from other sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered refer to prices at the U .S. border
for exports and at either the foreign border or the U .S. border for imports.
For nearly all products, the prices refer to transactions completed during the
first 2 weeks o f the third month o f each calendar quarter— March, June,
September, and December. Survey respondents are asked to indicate all
discounts, allowances, and rebates applicable to the reported prices, so that
the price used in the calculation of the indexes is the actual price for which
the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices for U .S. exports and imports,
indexes are also published for detailed product categories of exports and
imports. These categories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit level o f detail
o f the Standard Industrial Trade Classification System (sitc). The calcula­
tion of indexes by sitc category facilitates the comparison o f U .S. price
trends and sector production with similar data for other countries. Detailed
indexes are also computed and published on a Standard Industrial Classifi­
cation (sic-based) basis, as well as by end-use class.

Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are weighted indexes o f the
Laspeyeres type. Price relatives are assigned equal importance within each
weight category and are then aggregated to the sitc level. The values
assigned to each weight category are based on trade value figures compiled

by the Bureau o f the Census. The trade weights currently used to compute
both indexes relate to 1980.
Because a price index depends on the same items being priced from
period to period, it is necessary to recognize when a product’s specifica­
tions or terms o f transaction have been modified. For this reason, the
Bureau’s quarterly questionnaire requests detailed descriptions o f the phys­
ical and functional characteristics o f the products being priced, as well as
information on the number o f units bought or sold, discounts, credit terms,
packaging, class o f buyer or seller, and so forth. When there are changes
in either the specifications or terms of transaction o f a product, the dollar
value o f each change is deleted from the total price change to obtain the
“pure” change. Once this value is determined, a linking procedure is
employed which allows for the continued repricing o f the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free
alongside ship) U .S . port of exportation. When firms report export prices
f.o .b . (free on board), production point information is collected which
enables the Bureau to calculate a shipment cost to the port of exportation.

An attempt is made to collect two prices for imports. The first is the import
price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation, which is consistent with the
basis for valuation o f imports in the national accounts. The second is the
import price c .i.f. (cost, insurance, and freight) at the U .S. port o f impor­
tation, which also includes the other costs associated with bringing the
product to the U .S. border. It does not, however, include duty charges.

Additional sources o f information
For a discussion of the general method of computing International Price
Indexes, see bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134—1 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 8.
Additional detailed data and analyses of international price develop­
ments are presented in the Bureau’s quarterly publication U .S . I m p o r t a n d
E x p o r t P r ic e I n d e x e s and in occasional M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w articles
prepared by bls analysts. Selected historical data may be found in the
H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta t is tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).

PRODUCTIVITY DATA
(Tables 2; 42-47)
U. S. productivity and related data

Unit profits include corporate profits and the value o f inventory adjust­
ments per unit of output.

Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real physical output to real input. As
such, they encompass a family of measures which include single factor
input measures, such as output per unit of labor input (output per hour) or
output per unit o f capital input, as well as measures o f multifactor produc­
tivity (output per unit o f labor and capital inputs combined). The Bureau
indexes show the change in output relative to changes in the various inputs.
The measures cover the business, nonfarm business, manufacturing, and
nonfinancial corporate sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly compensation, unit labor costs, unit
nonlabor payments, and prices are also provided.

Hours of all persons are the total hours paid of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Capital services is the flow o f services from the capital stock used in
production. It is developed from measures of the net stock o f physical
assets— equipment, structures, land, and inventories— weighted by rental
prices for each type of asset.

Labor and capital inputs combined are derived by combining changes
in labor and capital inputs with weights which represent each component’s
share o f total output. The indexes for capital services and combined units
of labor and capital are based on changing weights which are averages of
the shares in the current and preceding year (the Tomquist index-number
formula).

Notes on the data
Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant prices produced per hour of labor input.
Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant dollars produced per unit of capital services
input.

Multifactor productivity is the ratio output per unit o f labor and capital
inputs combined. Changes in this measure reflect changes in a number of
factors which affect the production process such as changes in technology,
shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in capacity utilization,
research and development, skill and efforts o f the work force, manage­
ment, and so forth. Changes in the output per hour measures reflect the
impact o f these factors as well as the substitution of capital for labor.
Compensation per hour is the wages and salaries o f employees plus
employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans, and
the wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the self-employed
(except for nonfinancial corporations in which there are no selfemployed)— the sum divided by hours paid for. Real compensation per
hour is compensation per hour deflated by the change in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs is the labor compensation costs expended in the produc­
tion o f a unit o f output and is derived by dividing compensation by output.
Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, interest, and indi­
rect taxes per unit o f output. They are computed by subtracting compensa­
tion o f all persons from current dollar value o f output and dividing by
output. Unit nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit nonlabor
payments e x c e p t unit profits.


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

Output measures for the business sector and the nonfarm businesss sector
exclude the constant dollar value o f owner-occupied housing, rest o f world,
households and institutions, and general government output from the con­
stant dollar value o f gross national product. The measures are derived from
data supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U .S. Department of
Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing out­
put indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to annual esti­
mates of output (gross product originating) from the Bureau of Economic
Analysis. Compensation and hours data are developed from data o f the
Bureau o f Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
The productivity and associated cost measures in tables 4 2 -4 4 describe
the relationship between output in real terms and the labor time and capital
services involved in its production. They show the changes from period to
period in the amount of goods and services produced per unit o f input.
Although these measures relate output to hours and capital services, they
do not measure the contributions of labor, capital, or any other specific
factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of many influ­
ences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level o f output;
utilization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization o f produc­
tion; managerial skill; and the characteristics and efforts of the work force.

Additional sources o f information
Descriptions of methodology underlying the measurement o f output per
hour and multifactor productivity are found in the bls H a n d b o o k o f M e th ­
o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 13. His­
torical data for selected industries are provided in the Bureau’s H a n d b o o k
o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s , 1985, Bulletin 2217.

61

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 • Current Labor Statistics

International comparisons

Canadian figures by assuming that their hourly compensation is equal to the
average for wage and salary employees.

Description of the series
Notes on the data
Comparative measures of labor force, employment, and unemployment
(tables 45 and 46) are prepared regularly for the United States, Canada,
Australia, Japan, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands,
and Sweden. Unemployment rates, approximating U .S. concepts, are pre­
pared monthly for most o f the countries; the other measures, annually.
The Bureau o f Labor Statistics also prepares international comparisons
o f manufacturing labor productivity and labor costs (table 47) that cover the
United States and 11 foreign countries— those listed above plus Belgium
and Norway. These measures are limited to trend comparisons; that is,
intercountry series o f changes over time, rather than level comparisons
because reliable international comparisons o f the levels of manufacturing
are unavailable. The U .S. measures are described in the notes on U .S.
productivity measurement; the measures for foreign countries are compiled
from various national and international data sources.

Output measures are constant value output (value added) from the
national accounts o f each country, except for those for Japan prior to 1970
and for the Netherlands for 1969 forward, which are indexes o f industrial

The data for the foreign countries in tables 45 and 46 have been adjusted,
where necessary, for greater comparability with U .S. definitions o f em­
ployment and unemployment. The adjusted statistics have been adapted to
the age at which compulsory schooling ends in each country. Therefore, the
adjusted statistics relate to the civilian population age 16 and over in the
United States, France, and Sweden, and from 1973 forward, Great Britain;
15 and over in Canada, Australia, Japan, Germany, and the Netherlands;
and 14 and over in Italy. Prior to 1973, the data for Great Britain related
to persons age 15 and over. The institutional population is included in the
denominator of the labor force participation rates and employmentpopulation ratios for Japan and Germany.
For most of the countries in table 47, the measures refer to total manu­
facturing as defined by the International Standard Industrial Classification.
However, the measures for France (beginning 1959), Italy (beginning
1970), and the United Kingdom (beginning 1976) refer to manufacturing
and mining less energy-related products. For all countries, manufacturing
includes the activities o f government enterprises.
In addition, for all countries, preliminary estimates for recent years are
generally based on current indicators o f manufacturing output, employment

production. The national accounting m ethods for m easuring real output

and hours, and hourly com pensation until national accounts and other

differ considerably among the 12 countries, but the use o f different proce­
dures does not, in itself, connote lack o f comparability— rather, it reflects
differences among countries in the availability and reliability of underlying
data series.
Hours and compensation measures refer to all employed persons in­
cluding the self-employed in the United States and Canada, and to all wage
and salary employees in the other countries. H o u r s refer to hours p a i d in
the United States, hours w o r k e d in the other countries. C o m p e n s a tio n
( la b o r c o s ts ) includes not only all payments made directly to employees
and employer expenditures for social insurance and private benefit plans,
but changes in significant employment or payroll taxes that are not compen­
sation to employees but are labor costs to employers (France, Sweden, and
the United Kingdom). Self-employed workers are included in the U .S. and

statistics used for the long-term measures become available.

Definitions

Additional sources of information
For further information, 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 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978), Appendix B and

Supplements to Appendix B. Additional detail is also found in the bls
(Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
1982), chapter 16. Additional international comparison statistics are avail­
able in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s Bulletin 2217 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1985). The most recent statistics are presented and analyzed
annually in the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v i e w , typically in the December issue
(for the previous year) and in February.

H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2 1 3 4 -1 ,

OCCUPATIONAL INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA
(Table 48)
Description of the series
The Annual Survey o f Occupational Injuries and Illnesses is designed to
collect data on injuries and illnesses based on records which employers in
the following industries maintain under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act o f 1970: agriculture, forestry, and fishing; oil and gas extraction;
construction; manufacturing; transportation and public utilities; wholesale
and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and services. Excluded
from the survey are self-employed individuals, farmers with fewer than 11
employees, employers regulated by other Federal safety and health laws,
and Federal, State, and local government agencies.
Because the survey is a Federal-State cooperative program and the data
must meet the needs o f participating State agencies, an independent sam­
ple is selected for each State. The sample is selected to represent all pri­
vate industries in the States and territories. The sample size for the
survey is dependent upon (1) the characteristics for which estimates are
needed; (2) the industries for which estimates are desired; (3) the charac­
teristics o f the population being sampled; (4) the target reliability of the
estimates; and (5) the survey design employed.
While there are many characteristics upon which the sample design could
be based, the total recorded case incidence rate is used because it is one of
the most important characteristics and the least variable; therefore, it re­
quires the smallest sample size.
The survey is based on stratified random sampling with a Neyman

62

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

allocation and a ratio estimator. The characteristics used to stratify the
establishments are the Standard Industrial Classification (sic) code and size
o f employment.

Definitions
Recordable occupational injuries and illnesses are: (1) occupational
deaths, regardless o f the time between injury and death, or the length o f the
illness; or (2) nonfatal occupational illnesses; or (3) nonfatal occupational
injuries which involve one or more o f the following: loss of consciousness,
restriction of work or motion, transfer to another job, or medical treatment
(other than first aid).
Occupational injury is any injury such as a cut, fracture, sprain, ampu­
tation, and so forth, which results from a work accident or from exposure
involving a single incident in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal condition or disorder, other than
one resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to environ­
mental factors associated with employment. It includes acute and chronic
illnesses or disease which may be caused by inhalation, absorption, inges­
tion, or direct contact.
Lost workday cases are cases which involve days away from work, or
days o f restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workday cases involving restricted work activity are those cases
which result in restricted work activity only.

Lost workdays away from work are the number of workdays (consec­
utive or not) on which the employee would have worked but could not
because o f occupational injury or illness.

Lost workdays— restricted work activity are the number of workdays
(consecutive or not) on which, because of injury or illness: (1) the em­
ployee was assigned to another job on a temporary basis; or (2) the em­
ployee worked at a permanent job less than full time; or (3) the employee
worked at a permanently assigned job but could not perform all duties
normally connected with it.

Comparable data for individual States are available from the bls Office
o f Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to bls by the Mine Safety and
Health Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration, respec­
tively. Data from these organizations are included in bls and State publica­
tions. Federal employee experience is compiled and published by the Occu­
pational Safety and Health Administration. Data on State and local
government employees are collected by about half o f the States and territo­
ries; these data are not compiled nationally.

The number of days away from work or days of restricted work
activity does not include the day o f injury or onset o f illness or any days
on which the employee would not have worked even though able to work.
Incidence rates represent the number of injuries and/or illnesses or lost

Additional sources of information

workdays per 100 full-time workers.

Estimates are made for industries and employment-size classes and for
severity classification: fatalities, lost workday cases, and nonfatal cases
without lost workdays. Lost workday cases are separated into those where
the employee would have worked but could not and those in which work
activity was restricted. Estimates of the number o f cases and the number of
days lost are made for both categories.
Most o f the estimates are in the form of incidence rates, defined as the
number o f injuries and illnesses, or lost workdays, per 100 full-time em­
ployees. For this purpose, 200,000 employee hours represent 100 em­
ployee years (2,000 hours per employee). Only a few of the available
measures are included in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c 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 s s e s in th e

The Supplementary Data System provides detailed information describ­
ing various factors associated with work-related injuries and illnesses.
These data are obtained from information reported by e m p lo y e r s to State
workers’ compensation agencies. The Work Injury Report program exam­
ines selected types of accidents through an employee survey which focuses
on the circumstances surrounding the injury. These data are not included
in the 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 bls Office
of Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
The definitions of occupational injuries and illnesses and lost workdays
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 . For 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 , annual Bureau o f Labor
Statistics bulletin; BLS H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 17; H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s , Bulletin
2217 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1985), pp. 411-14; annual reports in the
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , and annual U .S. Department of Labor press

U n ite d S ta te s , b y I n d u s tr y .

releases.

Notes on the data


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

63

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R EV IEW
1.

July 1986

•

C u rren t L a b o r S ta tistics:

C o m p a ra tiv e In d ica to rs

Labor market indicators
1984
Selected indicators

1984

1985

1986

1985
II

III

IV

I

II

III

IV

I

E m p lo y m e n t d a ta

Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey)1
Labor force participation rate....................................
Employment-population ratio.....................................
Unemployment rate ....................................
Men ...................................
16 to 24 years ..................................
25 years and over..................................................................
Women ...................................
16 to 24 years ..................................
25 years and over......................................
Unemployment rate, 15 weeks and over.............................

64.4
59.5
7.5
7.4
14.4
5.7
7.6
13.3
6.0
2.4

64.8
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.1
5.3
7.4
13.0
5.9
2.0

64.5
59.6
7.5
7.4
14.3
5.7
7.6
13.5
5.9
2.5

64.4
59.7
7.4
7.3
14.5
5.5
7.6
13.1
6.0
2.3

Total .........................................................
Private sector .................................
Goods-producing................................
Manufacturing.............................
Service-producing ..................................

94,496
78,472
24,727
19,378
69,769

97,614
81,199
24,930
19,314
72,684

94,064
78,096
24,690
19,381
69,374

94,977
78,914
24,891
19,489
70,086

Average hours:
Private sector ..............................
Manufacturing .................................
Overtime...................................

35.2
40.7
3.4

34.9
40.5
3.3

35.2
40.8
3.5

64.5
59.8
7.2
7.1
13.8
5.4
7.5
12.9
5.9
2.1

64.8
60.1
7.3
7.1
14.1
5.4
7.6
13.1
6.0
2.0

64.7
60.0
7.3
7.1
14.2
5.4
7.5
13.0
6.0
2.0

64.7
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.0
5.3
7.4
12.7
5.9
2.0

64.9
60.4
7.0
6.9
14.0
5.2
7.2
13.1
5.5
1.9

65.1
60.5
7.1
6.8
13.3
5.3
7.3
13.2
5.7
1.9

95,907
79,736
24,943
19,486
70,964

96,581
80,341
24,970
19,439
71,611

97,295
80,958
24,947
19,323
72,347

97,897
81,414
24,866
19,241
73,031

98,668
82,069
24,937
19,261
73,731

99,403
82,731
25,028
19,284
74,375

35.1
40.6
3.3

35.1
40.5
3.4

35.0
40.4
3.3

34.9
40.4
3.2

34.9
40.6
3.3

34.9
40.8
3.5

34 9
40 7
3.4

1.3
.8
.9
.7
3.5

1.2
1.3
1.1
1.4
1.0

1.3
1.2
1.5
1.0
1.2

.7
.8
.7
1.0
.2

1.6
1.3
.6
1.8
3.4

.6
.6
.6
.5
.7

1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0

.7
.9

1.1
1.3

.7
1.6

.6
1.0

.8
1.4

.5
.6

1.0
1.2

Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data):1, 2

E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x

Percent change in the ECI, compensation:3
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal workers) .....
Private industry workers .........................................
Goods-producing4 ...........................................
Servicing-producing4 ..................................................
State and local government workers..........................
Workers by bargaining status (private industry)
Union................................................
Nonunion .....................................
' Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
Data for final quarter are preliminary.
Quarterly changes calculated using the last month of each quarter.

64

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

-

-

-

-

-

-

.8
.9
.9
1.0
.4

-

-

.9
1.0

-

_

-

-

4 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Serviceproducing industries include all other private sector industries.
- Data not available.

2.

Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
1984

1985

II
C o m p e n s a t io n d a ta :

1986

1985

1984

Selected measures

III

I

IV

I

IV

III

II

2

Employment Cost Index-Compensation (wages, salaries,
benefits)
Civilian nonfarm ..........................................................................
Private nonfarm .........................................................................
Employment Cost Index-W ages and Salaries
Civilian nonfarm ..........................................................................
Private nonfarm .........................................................................

-

-

0 .8

1.3

1.2

1.3

0 .7

1 .6

0 .6

1.1

.9

.8

1.3

1.2

.8

1.3

.6

1.1

-

-

.8

1.3

1.2

1.2

.9

1.7

.6

1 .0

-

-

.9

.8

1.2

1.2

1.1

1.3

.6

1 .0

4.0

3.8

P r ic e d a t a 1

Consumer Price Index (All urban consumers): All ite m s ......

Producer Price Index
Finished g o o d s ............................................................................
Finished consumer g o o d s ........................................................
Capital equipment .....................................................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ......................
Crude m ate rials...........................................................................

U.S. Export Price In d e x ...............................................................
U.S. Im p ort Price In d e x ...............................................................

1.1

.3

1.2

1.1

1.0

.7

-.4

.9

1.7

1.8

-.2

-.5

.9

.0

.7

-1 .4

2 .5

-3 .1

1.6
1.8
1.3
-1 .6

1.5

-.3

-.5

.8

-.3

.7

-1 .4

2 .5

-4 .0

2.7
-.3
-5.6

.5

-.5

1.1

.4

-1 .4

2 .5

.2

.6

-.4

-.1

-.4

.2

-.5

.4

-3 .0

-1 .2

-3 .1

-2 .1

-4 .5

4 .3

-7.7

_

_

_

_

—

~

“

“

__

“

-

-1 .7

-2 .0

-

_

“

1.3

_

-

“

P r o d u c t iv it y d a t a 1

Output per hour of all persons:
Business s e c to r.........................................................................
Nonfarm business s e c to r.........................................................
Nonfinancial corporations 3 ........... ;.........................................

4 .0

.2

4 .5

1.0

.0

1.3

.7

2.1

- 4 .0

2.7

3 .0

-.6

3 .9

-.5

-.5

- 4 .7

3 .6

-.3

-.2
-1.1

.5

-.8

1.1
-.2

3 .2

- 2 .3

-.2

-.4

4 .2

5 .0

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.
Productivity data are seasonally adjusted.

3.

2 Excludes Federal and private household workers,
3 Output per hour of all employees,
- Data not available.

Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ended in-

Quarterly average
Components

IV
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector..................................................................
All employees, nonfarm business sector..............................................
Hourly earnings Index:2
All private nonfarm................................................................................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 3 ...................................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................................
Union................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
State and local governments..............................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm3 ...................................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................................
Union ................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
State and local governments...............................................................
Total effective wage adjustments4 ...............................................................
From current settlements......................................................................
From prior settlements ..........................................................................
From cost-of-living provision..................................................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements4
First-year adjustments ...........................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:5
First-year adjustment.............................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................

-

“

I

“

II

III

IV

-

-

“

1986

1984

I

IV

~

1986

1985
I

-

-

'

'

I

II

III

IV

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

*

*

-

-

1.2
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.0

1.3
1.2
.7
1.6
1.2

0.7
.8
.6
1.0
.2

1.6
1.3
.8
1.4
3.4

0.6
.6
.5
.6
.7

1.1
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.0

5.2
4.9
4.3
5.2
6.6

4.8
4.4
3.5
4.9
6.3

4.6
4.2
3.1
4.9
6.1

4.9
4.7
3.2
5.4
6.0

4.3
3.9
2.6
4.6
5.7

4.1
3.8
2.9
4.2
5.5

1.2
1.2
.9
1.3
.8
.7
.3
.2
.2

1.2
1.2
.7
1.4
1.0
.7
.1
.6
.1

.9
1.1
1.1
1.1
.2
.8
.2
.5
.1

1.7
1.3
.9
1.5
3.5
1.2
.2
.5
.4

.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.5
.1
.2
.1

1.0
1.0
.7
1.1
1.0
.6
.0
.4
.2

4.5
4.1
3.4
4.5
5.9
3.7
.8
2.0
.9

4.4
4.1
3.0
4.6
5.6
3.6
.7
2.2
.7

4.5
4.3
3.4
4.8
5.5
3.5
.9
1.9
.7

5.0
4.8
3.6
5.4
5.6
3.5
.9
1.8
.8

4.4
4.1
3.1
4.6
5.6
3.3
.7
1.8
.7

4.2
3.9
3.2
4.3
5.5
3.1
.6
1.7
.8

2.3
1.5

3.3
3.2

2.5
2.8

2.0
3.1

2.1
1.9

.8
1.6

2.4
2.4

2.4
2.3

2.4
2.4

2.4
2.5

2.3
2.7

2.0
2.5

3.7
2.0

3.6
2.7

3.5
3.4

2.0
3.0

2.0
1.4

.3
1.2

3.6
2.8

3.4
2.6

3.4
2.7

3.1
2.7

2.6
2.7

2.3
2.6

1 Seasonally adjusted.

2 Production or nonsupervisory workers.
3 Excludes Federal and household workers.
4 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 1,000 workers or more. The


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

1985

1984

most recent data are preliminary.
5 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
- Data not available.

65

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
4.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

Employment status of the total population, by sex, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Numbers in thousands)

Annual average

1985

1986

Employment status
1984

1985

May

June

July

178,080
115,241
64.7
106,702

179,912
117,167
65.1
108,856

179,649
117,044
65.2
108,644

179,798
116,726
64.9
108,303

179,967
116,976
65.0
108,575

180,131
117,069
65.0
108,936

180,304
117,522
65.2
109,251

180,470
117,814
65.3
109,513

180,642
117,832
65.2
109,671

180,810
117,927
65.2
109,904

181,361
118,477
65.3
110,646

181,512
118,779
65.4
110,252

181,678
118,900
65.4
110,481

181,843
118,929
65.4
110,587

181,998
119,351
65.6
110,797

59.9
1,697
105,005
3,321
101,685
8,539
7.4
62,839

60.5
1,706
107,150
3,179
103,971
8,312
7.1
62,744

60.5
1,705
106,939
3,284
103,655
8,400
7.2
62,605

60.2
1,702
106,601
3,140
103,461
8,423
7.2
63,072

60.3
1,704
106,871
3,120
103,751
8,401
7.2
62,991

60.5
1,726
107,210
3,095
104,115
8,133
6.9
63,062

60.6
1,732
107,519
3,017
104,502
8,271
7.0
62,782

60.7
1,700
107,813
3,058
104,755
8,301
7.0
62,656

60.7
1,702
107,969
3,070
104,899
8,161
6.9
62,810

60.8
1,698
108,206
3,151
105,055
8,023
6.8
62,883

61.0
1,691
108,955
3,299
105,655
7,831
6.6
62,885

60.7
1,691
108,561
3,096
105,465
8,527
7.2
62,733

60.8
1,693
108,788
3,285
105,503
8,419
7.1
62,778

60.8
1,695
108,892
3,222
105,670
8,342
7.0
62,914

60.9
1,687
109,110
3,160
105,950
8,554
7.2
62,647

85,156
65,386
76.8
60,642

86,025
65,967
76.7
61,447

85,898
66,012
76.8
61,498

85,970
65,808
76.5
61,175

86,052
65,884
76.6
61,273

86,132
65,945
76.6
61,510

86,217
66,074
76.6
61,629

86,293
66,227
76.7
61,656

86,374
66,176
76.6
61,731

86,459
66,139
76.5
61,793

86,882
66,679
76.7
62,458

86,954
66,838
76.9
62,243

87,035
66,864
76.8
62,288

87,120
66,757
76.6
62,254

87,195
66,943
76.8
62,190

71.2
1,551
59,091
4,744
7.3

71.4
1,556
59,891
4,521
6.9

71.6
1,556
59,942
4,514
6.8

71.2
1,552
59,623
4,633
7.0

71.2
1,554
59,719
4,611
7.0

71.4
1,574
59,936
4,435
6.7

71.5
1,580
60,049
4,445
6.7

71.4
1,551
60,105
4,571
6.9

71.5
1,552
60,179
4,445
6.7

71.5
1,549
60,244
4,346
6.6

71.9
1,539
60,919
4,221
6.3

71.6
1,539
60,704
4,595
6.9

71.6
1,540
60,748
4,577
6.8

71.5
1,541
60,713
4,503
6.7

71.3
1,533
60,657
4,754
7.1

92,924
49,855
53.7
46,061

93,886
51,200
54.5
47,409

93,751
51,032
54.4
47,146

93,828
50,918
54.3
47,128

93,915
51,092
54.4
47,302

93,999
51,124
54.4
47,426

94,087
51,448
54.7
47,622

94,177
51,587
54.8
47,857

94,266
51,655
54.8
47,939

94,351
51,788
54.9
48,111

94,479
51,797
54.8
48,187

94,558
51,941
54.9
48,009

94,643
52,036
55.0
48,194

94,723
52,172
55.1
48,333

94,803
52,408
55.3
48,608

49.6
146
45,915
3,794
7.6

50.5
150
47,259
3,791
7.4

50.3
149
46,997
3,886
7.6

50.2
150
46,978
3,790
7.4

50.4
150
47,152
3,790
7.4

50.5
152
47,274
3,698
7.2

50.6
152
47,470
3,826
7.4

50.8
149
47,708
3,730
7.2

50.9
149
47,790
3,716
7.2

51.0
149
47,962
3,677
7.1

51.0
152
48,035
3,610
7.0

50.8
152
47,857
3,932
7.6

50.9
153
48,041
3,842
7.4

51.0
154
48,179
3,839
7.4

51.3
154
48,454
3,800
7.3

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Apr.

Mar.

May

TOTAL

Noninstitutional population 1, 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 ........................

Men, 16 years and over

Noninstitutional population 2 .......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed 2 .......................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ....................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........

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 ...........

1 The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation.
2 Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
3 Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.

66


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

4 Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including
Forces).

the resident Armed

5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1986

1985

Annual average
June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

1984

1985

May

176,383
113,544
64.4
105,005

178,206
115,461
64.8
107,150

177,944
115,339
64.8
106,939

178,096
115,024
64.6
106,601

178,263
115,272
64.7
106,871

178,405
115,343
64.7
107,210

178,572
115,790
64.8
107,519

178,770
116,114
65.0
107,813

178,940
116,130
64.9
107,969

179,112
116,229
64.9
108,206

179,670
116,786
65.0
108,955

179,821
117,088
65.1
108,561

179,985
117,207
65.1
108,788

180,148
117,234
65.1
108,892

180,311
117,664
65.3
109,110

59.5
8,539
7.5
62,839

60.1
8,312
7.2
62,744

60.1
8,400
7.3
62,605

59.9
8,423
7.3
63,072

60.0
8,401
7.3
62,991

60.1
8,133
7.1
63,062

60.2
8,271
7.1
62,782

60.3
8,301
7.1
62,656

60.3
8,161
7.0
62,810

60.4
8,023
6.9
62,883

60.6
7,831
6.7
62,885

60.4
8,527
7.3
62,733

60.4
8,419
7.2
62,778

60.4
8,342
7.1
62,914

60.5
8,554
7.3
62,647

76,219
59,701
78.3
55,769

77,195
60,277
78.1
56,562

77,068
60,240
78.2
56,544

77,135
60,246
78.1
56,384

77,243
60,158
77.9
56,403

77,306
60,269
78.0
56,636

77,389
60,407
78.1
56,751

77,498
60,526
78.1
56,849

77,566
60,553
78.1
56,897

77,651
60,548
78.0
56,982

78,101
61,212
78.4
57,706

78,171
61,183
78.3
57,384

78,236
61,268
78.3
57,459

78,309
61,053
78.0
57,391

78,387
61,208
78.1
57,312

73.2
2,418
53,351
3,932
6.6

73.3
2,278
54,284
3,715
6.2

73.4
2,352
54,192
3,696
6.1

73.1
2,260
54,124
3,862
6.4

73.0
2,230
54,173
3,755
6.2

73.3
2,231
54,405
3,633
6.0

73.3
2,171
54,580
3,656
6.1

73.4
2,188
54,661
3,677
6.1

73.4
2,210
54,687
3,656
6.0

73.4
2,278
54,704
3,566
5.9

73.9
2,349
55,356
3,507
5.7

73.4
2,258
55,127
3,799
6.2

73.4
2,411
55,048
3,809
6.2

73.3
2,347
55,043
3,663
6.0

73.1
2,278
55,034
3,897
6.4

85,429
45,900
53.7
42,793

86,506
47,283
54.7
44,154

86,380
47,082
54.5
43,883

86,477
47,185
54.6
44,033

86,575
47,190
54.5
44,070

86,652
47,340
54.6
44,197

86,727
47,558
54.8
44,363

86,810
47,663
54.9
44,609

86,901
47,713
54.9
44,656

86,988
47,870
55.0
44,882

87,112
47,895
55.0
44,980

87,185
47,921
55.0
44,710

87,263
47,952
55.0
44,797

87,355
48,107
55.1
45,009

87,444
48,409
55.4
45,284

50.1
595
42,198
3,107
6.8

51.0
596
43,558
3,129
6.6

50.8
600
43,283
3,199
6.8

50.9
572
43,461
3,152
6.7

50.9
596
43,474
3,120
6.6

51.0
581
43,616
3,143
6.6

51.2
557
43,806
3,195
6.7

51.4
609
44,000
3,054
6.4

51.4
591
44,065
3,057
6.4

51.6
597
44,285
2,988
6.2

51.6
696
44,284
2,915
6.1.

51.3
593
44,117
3,211
6.7

51.3
598
44,199
3,155
6.6

51.5
576
44,433
3,097
6.4

51.8
609
44,675
3,125
6.5

14,735
7,943
53.9
6,444

14,506
7,901
54.5
6,434

14,496
8,017
55.3
6,512

14,483
7,593
52.4
6,184

14,445
7,924
54.9
6,398

14,448
7,734
53.5
6,377

14,456
7,825
54.1
6,405

14,463
7,925
54.8
6,355

14,472
7,864
54.3
6,416

14,474
7,811
54.0
6,342

14,458
7,678
53.1
6,269

14,465
7,984
55.2
6,467

14,485
7,987
55.1
6,532

14,484
8,074
55.7
6,492

14,480
8,047
55.6
6,515

43.7
309
6,135
1,499
18.9

44.4
305
6,129
1,468
18.6

44.9
332
6,180
1,505
18.8

42.7
308
5,876
1,409
18.6

44.3
294
6,104
1,526
19.3

44.1
283
6,094
1,357
17.5

44.3
289
6,116
1,420
18.1

43.9
261
6,094
1,570
19.8

44.3
269
6,147
1,448
18.4

43.8
276
6,066
1,469
18.8

43.4
254
6,015
1,409
18.4

44.7
246
6,221
1,517
19.0

45.1
276
6,256
1,455
18.2

44.8
298
6,194
1,582
19.6

45.0
274
6,241
1,532
19.0

152,347
98,492
64.6
92,120

153,679
99,926
65.0
93,736

153,489
99,771
65.0
93,574

153,597
99,527
64.8
93,132

153,717
99,705
64.9
93,378

153,819
99,817
64.9
93,684

153,938
100,179
65.1
94,055

154,082
100,533
65.2
94,369

154,203
100,478
65.2
94,507

154,327
100,533
65.1
94,585

154,784
100,961
65.2
95,165

154,889
101,232
65.4
94,803

155,005
101,248
65.3
94,958

155,122
101,249
65.3
95,081

155,236
101,515
65.4
95,180

60.5
6,372
6.5

61.0
6,191
6.2

61.0
6,197
6.2

60.6
6,395
6.4

60.7
6,327
6.3

60.9
6,133
6.1

61.1
6,124
6.1

61.2
6,164
6.1

61.3
5,971
5.9

61.3
5,948
5.9

61.5
5,796
5.7

61.2
6,429
6.4

61.3
6,290
6.2

61.3
6,168
6.1

61.3
6,335
6.2

19,348
12,033
62.2
10,119

19,664
12,364
62.9
10,501

19,620
12,372
63.1
10,466

19,646
12,317
62.7
10,538

19,675
12,354
62.8
10,499

19,700
12,289
62.4
10,560

19,728
12,378
62.7
10,500

19,761
12,412
62.8
10,566

19,790
12,457
62.9
10,518

19,819
12,522
63.2
10,657

19,837
12,548
63.3
10,737

19,863
12,545
63.2
10,690

19,889
12,656
63.6
10,791

19,916
12,740
64.0
10,856

19,943
12,781
64.1
10,889

52.3
1,914
15.9

53.4
1,864
15.1

53.3
1,906
15.4

53.6
1,779
14.4

53.4
1,855
15.0

53.6
1,729
14.1

53.2
1,878
15.2

53.5
1,846
14.9

53.1
1,939
15.6

53.8
1,865
14.9

54.1
1,810
14.4

53.8
1,855
14.8

54.3
1,865
14.7

54.5
1,884
14.8

54.6
1,892
14.8

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
Not in labor force ........................

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

Black

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............
See footnotes at end of table.


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

67

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

5. Continued— Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1985

Annual average

1986

Employment status
1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

11,478
7,451
64.9
6,651

11,915
7,698
64.6
6,888

11,862
7,616
64.2
6,806

11,897
7,669
64.5
6,856

11,933
7,713
64.6
6,870

11,969
7,781
65.0
6,973

12,004
7,844
65.3
7,026

12,040
7,854
65.2
6,982

12,075
7,782
64.4
6,953

12,111
7,772
64.2
6,962

12,148
7,787
64.1
6,998

12,184
7,943
65.2
6,969

12,219
7,920
64.8
7,105

12,255
7,975
65.1
7,144

12,290
8,002
65.1
7,123

57.9
800
10.7

57.8
811
10.5

57.4
810
10.6

57.6
813
10.6

57.6
843
10.9

58.3
808
10.4

58.5
818
10.4

58.0
872
11.1

57.6
829
10.7

57.5
810
10.4

57.6
789
10.1

57.2
974
12.3

58.2
815
10.3

58.3
832
10.4

58.0
878
11.0

Hispanic origin

Civilian noninstitutional
population'....................................
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

1985

Selected categories

1986

1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

105,005
59,091
45,915
39,056

107,150
59,891
47,259
39,248

106,939
59,942
46,997
39,260

106,601
59,623
46,978
38,966

106,871
59,719
47,152
39,096

107,210
59,936
47,274
39,142

107,519
60,049
47,470
39,103

107,813
60,105
47,708
39,272

107,969
60,179
47,790
39,314

108,206
60,244
47,962
39,278

108,955
60,919
48,035
39,615

108,561
60,704
47,857
39,382

108,788
60,748
48,041
39,365

108,892
60,713
48,179
39,555

109,110
60,657
48,454
39,614

25,636
5,465

26,336
5,597

26,036
5,626

26,174
5,643

26,316
5,607

26,392
5,627

26,531
5,556

26,702
5,514

26,721
5,605

26,804
5,693

26,958
5,702

26,593
5,733

26,656
5,771

26,802
5,812

26,920
5,718

1,555
1,553
213

1,535
1,458
185

1,582
1,498
196

1,530
1,451
159

1,479
1,474
170

1,456
1,444
176

1,438
1,414
179

1,465
1,436
172

1,537
1,361
158

1,572
1,409
164

1,673
1,492
163

1,519
1,444
156

1,689
1,453
172

1,587
1,475
180

1,480
1,486
186

93,565
15,770
77,794
1,238
76,556
7,785
335

95,871
16,031
79,841
1,249
78,592
7,811
289

95,660
15,936
79,724
1,255
78,469
7,711
290

95,391
16,000
79,391
1,228
78,163
7,728
292

95,523
15,949
79,574
1,251
78,323
7,724
277

95,791
16,075
79,716
1,295
78,421
7,874
303

96,546
16,145
80,401
1,266
79,135
7,846
266

96,530
16,213
80,317
1,271
79,046
7,991
248

96,676
16,157
80,519
1,197
79,322
8,013
249

96,921
16,194
80,727
1,131
79,596
7,903
250

97,911
16,418
81,494
1,256
80,238
7,655
273

97,516
16,104
81,412
1,197
80,216
7,669
270

97,698
16,095
81,604
1,213
80,390
7,644
240

97,831
16,187
81,643
1,321
80,322
7,571
253

97,994
16,325
81,669
1,275
80,394
7,757
229

5,744
2,430
2,948
13,169

5,590
2,430
2,819
13,489

5,876
2,607
2,871
13,078

5,544
2,524
2,751
13,439

5,596
2,414
2,766
13,634

5,680
2,480
2,835
13,622

5,554
2,433
2,815
13,496

5,475
2,251
2,897
13,713

5,498
2,306
2,883
13,645

5,494
2,303
2,864
13,556

5,543
2,364
2,883
13,958

5,377
2,369
2,703
13,817

5,538
2,330
2,953
13,754

5,923
2,603
2,974
13,933

5,980
2,659
2,893
13,638

5,512
2,291
2,866
12,704

5,334
2,273
2,730
13,038

5,550
2,418
2,785
12,612

5,278
2,334
2,675
12,995

5,328
2,251
2,686
13,235

5,413
2,319
2,740
13,179

5,299
2,292
2,730
13,053

5,241
2,115
2,801
13,277

5,295
2,196
2,784
13,194

5,294
2,195
2,760
13,122

5,275
2,208
2,776
13,441

5,158
2,224
2,636
13,369

5,301
2,159
2,861
13,285

5,621
2,430
2,849
13,599

5,673
2,523
2,790
13,191

CHARACTERISTIC

Civilian employed, 16 years and
over........................................
M en..........................................
Women ..................................
Married men, spouse present ..
Married women, spouse
present....................................
Women who maintain families .

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

PERSONS AT WORK
PART TIME'

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

Excludes persons with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.

68


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

7.

Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Unemployment rates)
Annual average

1985

1986

Selected categories
1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Total, all civilian w o rke rs ............................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 y e a rs ..................................
Men, 20 years and o v e r ........................................
Women, 20 years and o v e r...................................

7.5
18.9
6.6
6.8

7.2
18.6
6.2
6.6

7.3
18.8
6.1
6.8

7.3
18.6
6.4
6.7

7.3
19.3
6.2
6.6

7.1
17.5
6.0
6.6

7.1
18.1
6.1
6.7

7.1
19.8
6.1
6.4

7.0
18.4
6.0
6.4

6.9
18.8
5.9
6.2

6.7
18.4
5.7
6.1

7.3
19.0
6.2
6.7

7.2
18.2
6.2
6.6

7.1
19.6
6.0
6.4

7.3
19.0
6.4
6.5

White, t o t a l...................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 y e a rs ................................
Men, 16 to 19 years ......................................
Women, 16 to 19 y e a rs ...........................
Men, 20 years and over .....................................
Women, 20 years and o v e r ................................

6.5
16.0
16.8
15.2
5.7
5.8

6.2
15.7
16.5
14.8
5.4
5.7

6.2
16.0
16.7
15.1
5.2
5.8

6.4
16.0
16.7
15.2
5.7
5.8

6.3
16.1
17.1
15.0
5.6
5.7

6.1
15.2
17.2
13.0
5.3
5.7

6.1
15.3
16.2
14.4
5.2
5.7

6.1
17.0
18.5
15.3
5.2
5.5

5.9
15.5
15.8
15.1
5.2
5.4

5.9
15.9
16.2
15.5
5.1
5.4

5.7
14.9
14.7
15.1
5.0
5.3

6.4
16.2
16.5
15.8
5.4
5.9

6.2
14.5
15.3
13.7
5.5
5.8

6.1
16.4
17.2
15.6
5.2
5.5

6.2
16.0
17.3
14.7
5.5
5.5

Black, total ..........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 y e a rs ................................
Men, 16 to 19 years ......................................
Women, 16 to 19 y e a rs.................................
Men, 20 years and over .....................................
Women, 20 years and o v e r................................

15.9
42.7
42.7
42.6
14.3
13.5

15.1
40.2
41.0
39.2
13.2
13.1

15.4
40.4
39.3
41.5
13.4
13.5

14.4
39.5
41.0
37.8
12.5
12.7

15.0
41.2
43.1
39.0
12.8
13.1

14.1
35.3
34.9
35.9
11.9
13.1

15.2
38.8
41.1
36.1
13.3
13.5

14.9
39.7
41.0
38.2
13.7
12.1

15.6
40.8
45.2
36.0
13.7
13.6

14.9
41.6
41.0
42.3
13.1
12.6

14.4
41.9
41.3
42.4
12.7
12.0

14.8
39.1
38.7
39.5
13.3
12.5

14.7
43.7
44.1
43.4
12.6
12.2

14.8
42.6
41.4
43.7
12.6
12.5

14.8
40.8
40.8
40.8
12.7
12.8

Hispanic origin, to ta l...............................................

10.7

10.5

10.6

10.6

10.9

10.4

10.4

11.1

10.7

10.4

10.1

12.3

10.3

10.4

11.0

Married men, spouse p re s e n t...............................
Married women, spouse p re s e n t..........................
Women who maintain fa m ilie s ..............................
Full-time workers ..............................................
Part-time workers ..........................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and o v e r..........................
Labor force time lost1 ............................................

4.6
5.7
10.3
7.2
9.3
2.4
8.6

4.3
5.6
10.4
6.8
9.3
2.0
8.1

4.0
5.7
10.8
6.9
10.0
2.0
8.3

4.6
5.8
9.9
6.9
9.5
2.0
8.2

4.4
5.7
10.3
7.0
9.4
2.0
8.2

4.1
5.4
10.8
6.8
9.0
2.0
8.1

4.3
5.6
11.3
6.8
9.3
2.0
8.1

4.2
5.3
10.4
6.8
9.6
2.0
7.9

4.3
5.5
10.0
6.7
8.8
1.9
7.9

4.3
5.3
9.4
6.6
9.0
1.9
7.8

4.3
5.1
9.9
6.4
8.4
1.8
7.6

4.5
5.5
9.9
6.9
9.4
2.0
8.1

4.5
5.6
10.1
6.9
9.1
1.9
8.1

4.2
5.3
9.4
6.7
9.6
1.8
8.1

4.5
5.4
10.2
7.0
9.2
1.9
8.3

7.4
10.0
14.3
7.5
7.2
7.8
5.5
8.0
5.9
4.5
13.5

7.2
9.5
13.1
7.7
7.6
7.8
5.1
7.6
5.6
3.9
13.2

7.2
7.5
11.0
7.8
7.8
7.8
5.2
7.8
6.1
3.9
11.9

7.3
10.9
13.5
7.7
7.9
7.5
5.3
7.7
5.7
3.9
12.5

7.3
9.9
13.4
7.9
7.9
7.9
5.7
7.6
5.6
4.0
14.0

7.1
8.6
13.1
7.8
7.9
7.6
4.5
7.7
5.5
3.9
14.0

7.2
8.9
13.6
7.7
7.7
7.8
5.3
7.8
5.5
3.8
13.3

7.1
7.7
13.5
7.5
7.3
7.8
5.1
7.7
5.4
3.9
12.9

7.0
7.3
13.4
7.7
7.6
7.8
5.1
7.5
5.4
3.6
12.5

6.9
10.3
12.6
7.3
7.3
7.3
5.0
7.6
5.3
3.8
10.6

6.7
10.9
12.9
7.0
7.0
7.1
4.3
7.2
5.2
3.4
10.9

7.2
9.2
13.2
7.2
7.4
7.0
5.3
7.8
5.9
3.8
14.3

7.2
10.4
13.0
7.2
6.8
7.7
6.1
7.6
5.7
4.0
11.9

7.2
12.8
12.0
6.8
6.8
6.8
5.6
8.1
5.9
3.5
13.4

7.3
13.7
13.3
7.5
7.3
7.7
5.3
8.1
5.5
3.7
15.8

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

IN D U S T R Y

Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ....
M ining.........................................
C o nstruction...............................................
Manufacturing ....................................................
Durable g o o d s ................................................
Nondurable g o o d s ...........................................
Transportation and public utilities ........................
Wholesale and retail tra d e .................................
Finance and service in dustries...........................
Government workers ................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers .......................

Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.


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

69

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
8.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Civilian workers)
Annual
average

Sex and age

1984

1986

1985

1985

June

May

Nov.

Oct.

Sept.

Aug.

July

Jan.

Dec.

Apr.

Mar.

Feb.

May

7.5
13.9
18.9
21.2
17.4
11.5
5.8
6.1
4.5

7.2
13.6
18.6
21.0
17.0
11.1
5.6
5.8
4.1

7.3
14.0
18.8
21.2
17.1
11.6
5.5
5.8
4.3

7.3
13.6
18.6
21.6
16.4
11.2
5.8
6.0
4.3

7.3
13.9
19.3
21.7
17.3
11.2
5.6
5.9
4.4

7.1
13.0
17.5
19.1
16.8
10.8
5.5
5.8
4.1

7.1
13.3
18.1
20.3
16.7
10.9
5.6
5.8
4.1

7.1
13.9
19.8
22.7
17.8
10.9
5.4
5.7
3.9

7.0
13.5
18.4
21.4
16.9
11.0
5.4
5.6
3.8

6.9
13.3
18.8
21.1
17.5
10.6
5.3
5.5
3.9

6.7
13.0
18.4
20.9
16.4
10.4
5.1
5.4
3.9

7.3
13.6
19.0
21.8
17.2
10.8
5.7
5.9
4.4

7.2
13.2
18.2
19.4
17.1
10.6
5.7
5.9
4.3

7.1
13.9
19.6
20.9
18.9
10.9
5.4
5.8
3.9

7.3
14.2
19.0
21.1
17.5
11.7
5.5
5.9
3.6

7.4
14.4
19.6
21.9
18.3
11.9
5.7
5.9
4.6

7.0
14.1
19.5
21.9
17.9
11.4
5.3
5.6
4.1

7.0
14.7
19.4
22.2
17.6
12.3
5.1
5.3
4.1

7.2
14.2
19.2
23.2
16.4
11.7
5.6
5.8
4.4

7.2
14.6
20.5
22.1
18.7
11.6
5.4
5.6
4.6

6.9
13.8
19.6
21.9
18.1
10.9
5.3
5.6
3.8

6.9
13.8
19.3
20.7
18.3
11.0
5.3
5.5
4.0

7.1
14.6
21.5
24.0
19.9
11.1
5.3
5.5
4.1

6.9
13.9
19.4
20.9
18.7
11.2
5.2
5.4
4.0

6.7
13.5
19.3
21.6
18.0
10.6
5.1
5.4
3.9

6.5
12.8
18.2
20.9
16.2
10.3
5.0
5.3
3.9

7.0
13.6
19.3
23.2
16.6
10.7
5.5
5.7
4.4

7.0
13.6
18.9
20.0
17.8
11.0
5.5
5.7
4.3

6.9
14.5
20.2
21.2
19.7
11.6
5.2
5.5
3.9

7.3
15.0
20.4
21.6
19.6
12.2
5.4
5.8
3.8

7.6
13.3
18.0
20.4
16.6
10.9
6.0
6.3
4.2

7.4
13.0
17.6
20.0
16.0
10.7
5.9
6.2
4.1

7.6
13.3
18.1
20.1
16.5
10.8
6.1
6.4
4.4

7.5
12.9
17.8
19.9
16.4
10.6
6.0
6.3
4.1

7.4
13.1
17.9
21.2
15.7
10.7
5.9
6.2
4.2

7.3
12.2
15.3
15.8
15.3
10.7
5.8
6.1
4.5

7.5
12.9
16.9
19.8
14.9
10.9
6.0
6.2
4.2

7.3
13.1
17.9
21.2
15.5
10.7
5.6
5.9
3.7

7.2
13.1
17.4
22.0
15.1
10.8
5.6
5.9
3.6

7.1
13.2
18.3
20.6
16.9
10.6
5.4
5.7
3.9

7.0
13.2
18.5
20.8
16.5
10.5
5.3
5.6
3.8

7.6
13.6
18.6
20.2
17.7
11.0
5.9
6.2
4.4

7.4
12.7
17.5
18.7
16.3
10.1
5.9
6.3
4.4

7.4
13.2
19.0
20.5
18.1
10.0
5.8
6.2
3.8

7.3
13.3
17.6
20.5
15.3
11.1
5.7
6.1
3.4

—

9.

Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Numbers in thousands)
1986

1985

Annual average
Reason for unemployment
1984

1985

June

May

Nov.

Oct.

Sept.

Aug.

July

Apr.

May

3,933
1,132
2,801
876
2,225
1,033

3,776
1,163
2,613
996
2,066
1,025

4,162
1,152
3,010
1,001
2,292
1,097

4,246
1,164
3,082
1,002
2,197
1,000

4,034
1,028
3,006
1,110
2,191
1,059

4,311
1,133
3,178
975
2,217
1,062

Jan.

Dec.

Mar.

Feb.

4,421
1,171
3,250
823
2,184
1,110

4,139
1,157
2,982
877
2,256
1,039

3,994
1,068
2,926
870
2,378
1,142

4,167
1,135
3,032
983
2,233
1,018

4,206
1,134
3,072
894
2,184
1,098

4,144
1,112
3,032
875
2,191
941

4,142
1,167
2,975
852
2,335
918

4,040
1,161
2,879
911
2,237
1,045

4,081
1,175
2,906
808
2,226
1,055

51.8
13.7
38.1
9.6
25.6
13.0

49.8
13.9
35.9
10.6
27.1
12.5

47.6
12.7
34.9
10.4
28.4
13.6

49.6
13.5
36.1
11.7
26.6
12.1

50.2
13.5
36.6
10.7
26.1
13.1

50.8
13.6
37.2
10.7
26.9
11.5

50.2
14.2
36.1
10.3
28.3
11.1

49.1
14.1
35.0
11.1
27.2
12.7

50.0
14.4
35.6
9.9
27.2
12.9

48.8
14.0
34.7
10.9
27.6
12.8

48.0
14.8
33.2
12.7
26.3
13.0

48.7
13.5
35.2
11.7
26.8
12.8

50.3
13.8
36.5
11.9
26.0
11.8

48.1
12.2
35.8
13.2
26.1
12.6

50.3
13.2
37.1
11.4
25.9
12.4

3.9
.7
1.9
1.0

3.6
.8
2.0
.9

3.5
.8
2.1
1.0

3.6
.9
1.9
.9

3.6
.8
1.9
1.0

3.6
.8
1.9
.8

3.6
.7
2.0
.8

3.5
.8
1.9
.9

3.5
.7
1.9
.9

3.4
.8
1.9
.9

3.2
.9
1.8
.9

3.6
.9
2.0
.9

3.6
.9
1.9
.9

3.4
.9
1.9
.9

3.7
.8
1.9
.9

PERCENT OF UNEM PLOYED

PERCENT OF
C IV IL IA N L A B O R F O R C E

10.

Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Numbers in thousands)
1986

1985

Annual average
Weeks of unemployment
•1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

3,562
2,622
2,340
1,149
1,191

3,589
2,640
2,258
1,099
1,159

3,628
2,685
2,135
1,001
1,134

3,705
2,737
2,209
1,072
1,137

15.3
6.9

14.4
6.8

14.3
6.5

14.4
6.6

27 weeks and o v e r ............................................

3,350
2,451
2,737
1,104
1,634

3,498
2,509
2,305
1,025
1,280

3,607
2,594
2,274
1,063
1,211

3,466
2,536
2,328
1,033
1,295

3,525
2,514
2,329
1,078
1,251

3,422
2,508
2,274
1,047
1,227

3,484
2,505
2,307
1,035
1,272

3,430
2,536
2,277
1,057
1,220

3,465
2,448
2,205
894
1,311

3,374
2,460
2,188
973
1,215

3,311
2,441
2,056
969
1,087

Median duration in w e e k s ....................................

18.2
7.9

15.6
6.8

15.0
6.7

15.5
6.8

15.5
7.1

15.5
7.2

15.5
6.9

15.4
7.0

15.7
6.9

15.4
6.9

14.9
6.8

70

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

11.

Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
State

Apr.
1985

Apr.
1986p

Alabama.......................................................
Alaska ..........................................................
Arizona.........................................................
Arkansas ......................................................
California......................................................

8.5
10.7
6.4
8.9
7.3

64
82
6.7

Colorado......................................................
Connecticut ..................................................
Delaware......................................................
District of Columbia.....................................
Florida..........................................................

5.9
4.9
5.6
8.4
6.1

3.6
5.1
6.5
5.4

Georgia........................................................
Hawaii...........................................................
Idaho............................................................
Illinois...........................................................
Indiana .........................................................

6.4
5.6
8.6
9.3
8.1

5.5
5.9
9.0
8.2
6.7

Iowa..............................................................
Kansas .........................................................
Kentucky......................................................
Louisiana......................................................
Maine............................................................

8.4
4.9
9.4
11.5
6.2

74
52
1fi n
13 2
6.3

Apr.
1985

State

fl fi
5.3

81
4.4

- Data not available.
NOTE: Some data in this

12.

table

may

83
52
6.6
3.4

52
6.9

4.7
9.1
6.7
5.1
7.3

Ohio ............................................................

8.9
71
Qfi
R2
5.4

7.9
8.1
9.6
7.0
3.9

South Carolina............................................

6.9
49
8.0

6.8

Utah ................

6.1

5.3

Vermont......................................................

5.4

5.0

New Jersey .................................................

Maryland .......................................................
Massachusetts.............................................
Michigan.......................................................
Minnesota....................................................
Mississippi....................................................
Missouri........................................................

Apr.
1986p

5.9
89
r

fi

4.5

40

*L5

5 2

3.7
10.3
6.2
10.1
6.3

3.8

83

9.1
6.2
10.9
5.3

13 4

78
10 8

7.7

7.3

7.7

10.8

differ from

data

published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the
database.

Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted

(In thousands)
State

A rkansa s............................................................

Apr. 1985
1,423.1
225.3
1,278.7
795.4
10,879.5

Mar

1986

1,428.3
220.6
1,335.0
814.3
11,120.7

Apr. 1986p

State

1,443.6
225.0
1,343.3
820.9
11,155.5
New M e x ic o .....................................................

District of C o lum bia .........................................

1,416.1
1,557.3
289.1
619.2
4,420.3

1,441.1
1,581.1
292.1
639.8
4,569.4

1,445.8
1,597.6
294.2
641.3
4,565.1
O klaho m a.........................................................

Id a h o ..................................................................
Illin o is .................................................................

2,549.1
422.5
333.0
4,757.7
2,159.9

2,607.0
430.0
330.6
4,727.6
2,203.2

2,612.9
428.9
331.5
4,756.0
2,230.6

Rhode Isla n d ...................................................

South D a k o ta ...................................................

Louisiana............................................................

Maryland ............................................................

M in n e so ta ..........................................................

1,078.5
974.4
1,249.2
1,597.6
448.2
1,868.4
2.909.0
3.461.1
1'849.3
834.3
2,081.5
276.4

1,069.6
979.6
1,262.2
1,569.2
456.3
1,892.1
2.937.0
3.530.0
T849.9
846.0
2,109.2
273.2

1,080.0
989.9
1,270.8
1,553.1
462.2

V irg in ia ..............................................................
W ashington......................................................

1,913.4
2,968.5
3,564.2
1,876.1
849.9 W yom ing...........................................................
2,138.3
275.3

p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere


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

Utah ..................................................................

Apr

1985

Mar. 1986

Apr. 1986p

648.8
440.4
453.9

647.7
453.5
473.6

652.9
458.3
480.2

3,384.8
516.1
7,669.9
2,639.7
249.2

3,443.5
520.9
7,793.5
2,698.1
244.7

3,484.7
521.1
7,836.6
2,708.9
247.4

4,347.0
1,185.6
1,014.3
4,713.7
422.8

4,418.5
1,160.7
1,030.5
4,739.1
422.2

4,481.6
1,161.4
1,037.6
4,786.2
424.9

1,295.4
246.1
1,848.8
6,664.4
618.7

1,327.6
244.5
1,898.5
6,718.5
631.9

1,339.6
247.0
1,917.6
6,702.4
634.2

220.2
2,418.2
1,693.5
593.5
1,950.4

229.8
2,496.4
1,731.0
589.4
1,967.2

224.3
2,515.7
1,745.6
594.7
1,993.1

198.8
687.5
37.3

196.5
700.8
37.0

196.3
702.6
36.8

because of the continual updating of the database.

71

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
13.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(In thousands)
1986

1985

Annual average
1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.p

Mayp

94,496
78,472

97,614
81,199

97,338
80,991

97,442
81,082

97,672
81,222

97,890
81,428

98,128
81,592

98,428
81,853

98,666
82,073

98,910
82,281

99,296
82,659

99,429
82,748

99,484
82,785

99,797
83,077

99,946
83,205

24,727
966
607

24,930
930
585

24,949
944
597

24,897
936
590

24,875
928
585

24,880
922
581

24,843
917
577

24,903
913
571

24,931
907
565

24,977
901
560

25,101
897
556

25,038
880
541

24,945
852
518

25,038
821
489

24,988
789
461

4,383
1,161

4,687
1,251

4,682
1,244

4,671
1,241

4,679
1,246

4,702
1,257

4,728
1,267

4,754
1,276

4,765
1,283

4,787
1,287

4,901
1,330

4,864
1,320

4,838
1,298

4,970
1,315

4,991
1,314

19,378
13,285

19,314
13,130

19,323
13,135

19,290
13,105

19,268
13,079

19,256
13,078

19,198
13,029

19,236
13,059

19,259
13,074

19,289
13,100

19,303
13,111

19,294
13,097

19,255
13,061

19,247
13,067

19,208
13,036

11,505
7,739

11,516
7,660

11,542
7,683

11,517
7,654

11,483
7,621

11,473
7,619

11,421
7,572

11,447
7,594

11,453
7,594

11,461
7,595

11,466
7,595

11,455
7,579

11,418
7,545

11,416
7,554

11,385
7,526

704
487
593
857

700
493
591
813

697
490
590
818

696
491
589
814

698
492
589
807

700
495
591
798

702
491
590
795

705
493
591
797

708
493
591
801

710
494
593
803

716
494
596
798

716
494
597
795

715
493
594
787

720
494
600
785

721
497
599
779

334
1,463

305
1,468

308
1,472

307
1,468

305
1,465

302
1,463

304
1,459

304
1,460

302
1,459

303
1,456

300
1,455

299
1,452

293
1,450

292
1,450

288
1,447

Machinery, except e lectrica l.........
Electrical and electronic
equipm ent.......................................
Transportation equipm ent.............
Motor vehicles and equipment ....
Instruments and related products
Miscellaneous manufacturing
in du strie s........................................

2,198

2,182

2,202

2,190

2,176

2,164

2,147

2,146

2,139

2,133

2,137

2,127

2,118

2,108

2,101

2,208
1,901
862
714

2,207
1,971
876
723

2,216
1,965
879
723

2,207
1,970
879
724

2,196
1,970
874
724

2,195
1,977
876
724

2,179
1,970
871
723

2,181
1,987
873
722

2,179
1,993
870
723

2,182
1,998
872
725

2,182
1,996
867
724

2,181
1,998
864
725

2,177
1,989
858
726

2,178
1,988
856
724

2,174
1,974
840
725

382

369

369

368

366

366

365

365

367

367

368

370

369

369

368

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..............................

7,873
5,546

7,798
5,470

7,781
5,452

7,773
5,451

7,785
5,458

7,783
5,459

7,777
5,457

7,789
5,465

7,806
5,480

7,828
5,505

7,837
5,516

7,839
5,518

7,837
5,516

7,831
5,513

7,823
5,510

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts ..........
Tobacco m anufactures.................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts .......................
Apparel and other textile
products..........................................
Paper and allied products ............

1,612
64
746

1,608
65
704

1,604
65
703

1,611
65
700

1,604
64
698

1,608
64
698

1,607
65
697

1,610
64
699

1,612
65
701

1,623
64
702

1,623
64
702

1,631
63
705

1,632
63
707

1,632
63
703

1,634
62
706

1,185
681

1,125
683

1,119
681

1,109
682

1,122
683

1,117
682

1,121
682

1,121
683

1,122
687

1,130
686

1,133
687

1,122
687

1,117
688

1,120
689

1,117
689

Printing and publishing...................
Chemicals and allied products.....
Petroleum and coal p roducts.......
Rubber and misc. plastics
p roducts..........................................
Leather and leather products ......

1,376
1,049
189

1,435
1,046
178

1,429
1,048
181

1,433
1,046
179

1,440
1,045
178

1,442
1,043
177

1,442
1,042
171

1,447
1,040
171

1,454
1,037
170

1,457
1,035
169

1,461
1,034
168

1,467
1,032
167

1,469
1,031
166

1,472
1,028
166

1,474
1,025
165

780
189

790
166

786
165

784
164

784
167

787
165

785
165

790
164

794
164

798
164

802
163

803
162

804
160

801
157

797
154

69,769

72,684

72,389

72,545

72,797

73,010

73,285

73,525

73,735

73,933

74,195

74,391

74,539

74,759

74,958

5,277
3,048

5,280
3,053

5,244
3,019

5,240
3,014

T O T A L ...................................................
P R IV A T E S E C T O R ............................
G O O D S P R O D U C I N G ..........................
M in in g .........................................................

Oil and gas extraction ..................
C o n s t r u c t io n ..........................................

General building contractors.......
M a n u f a c t u r i n g ........................................

Production workers .......................
D u r a b le g o o d s .....................................

Production workers .......................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts .........
Furniture and fix tu re s .....................
Stone, clay, and glass products ...
Primary metal industries ...............
Blast furnaces and basic steel
p roducts..........................................
Fabricated metal products............

Production w o rke rs.........................

S E R V IC E - P R O D U C IN G

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

T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic
u t i l i t i e s .......................................................

Transportation.................................
Communication and public
u tilitie s .............................................
W h o le s a le t r a d e ...................................

Durable g o o d s .................................
Nondurable g o o d s ..........................
R e ta il t r a d e ..............................................

General merchandise s to re s ........
Food s to re s .....................................
Automotive dealers and service
s ta tio n s ...........................................
Eating and drinking p la c e s ...........

5,159
2,917

5,242
3,006

5,241
3,003

5,238
3,001

5,241
3,006

5,219
2,983

5,257
3,023

5,260
3,026

5,272
3,040

5,277
3,046

5,286
3,056

2,242

2,236

2,238

2,237

2,235

2,236

2,234

2,234

2,232

2,231

2,230

2,229

2,227

2,225

2,226

5,555
3,276
2,279

5,740
3,409
2,331

5,721
3,395
2,326

5,736
3,408
2,328

5,740
3,416
2,324

5,762
3,424
2,338

5,777
3,432
2,345

5,796
3,442
2,354

5,796
3,451
2,345

5,809
3,460
2,349

5,830
3,470
2,360

5,843
3,482
2,361

5,841
3,480
2,361

5,857
3,488
2,369

5,868
3,490
2,378

16,545
2,267
2,637

17,360
2,320
2,779

17,329
2,335
2,762

17,379
2,329
2,781

17,404
2,325
2,795

17,464
2,328
2,805

17,489
2,326
2,813

17,543
2,329
2,828

17,589
2,326
2,845

17,622
2,317
2,870

17,734
2,328
2,880

17,795
2,333
2,891

17,828
2,333
2,901

17,853
2,344
2,908

17,897
2,350
2,911

1,799
5,388

1,892
5,715

1,891
5,700

1,894
5,728

1,897
5,734

1,904
5,749

1,910
5,761

1,916
5,772

1,918
5,783

1,922
5,801

1,929
5,831

1,938
5,854

1,939
5,868

1,941
5,859

1,944
5,889

5,689
2,854
1,757
1,078

5,953
2,979
1,830
1,144

5,913
2,957
1,820
1,136

5,939
2,970
1,827
1,142

5,964
2,985
1,832
1,147

5,988
2,998
1,839
1,151

6,014
3,011
1,846
1,157

6,038
3,024
1,852
1,162

6,070
3,039
1,862
1,169

6,095
3,053
1,868
1,174

6,123
3,066
1,878
1,179

6,157
3,082
1,889
1,186

6,184
3,095
1,900
1,189

6,231
3,121
1,911
1,199

6,259
3,134
1,915
1,210

20,797
4,057
6,122

21,974
4,452
6,310

21,838
4,407
6,284

21,893
4,433
6,291

21,998
4,462
6,301

22,115
4,504
6,333

22,212
4,542
6,350

22,313
4,567
6,375

22,415
4,604
6,401

22,501
4,631
6,424

22,585
4,660
6,447

22,638
4,687
6,471

22,707
4,698
6,497

22,854
4,756
6,510

22,953
4,774
6,546

16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482

16,415
2,875
3,848
9,692

16,347
2,869
3,831
9,647

16,360
2,872
3,835
9,653

16,450
2,879
3,851
9,720

16,462
2,886
3,855
9,721

16,536
2,899
3,878
9,759

16,575
2,895
3,895
9,785

16,593
2,904
3,901
9,788

16,629
2,913
3,904
9,812

16,637
2,918
3,916
9,803

16,681
2,918
3,924
9,839

16,699
2,923
3,927
9,849

16,720
2,921
3,938
9,861

16,741
2,923
3,951
9,867

F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d re a l
e s t a t e ........................................................

Finance ...........................................
Real e s ta te .....................................

F e d e ra l............................................
L o c a l................................................

p = preliminary
NOTE: See notes on the data for a description of the most recent benchmark

72

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

revision.

14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted

Industry

Annual
average
1984

1985

1985
May

PRIVATE SECTOR ..............................................

35.2

34.9

35.0

CO NSTRUCTIO N........................................................

37.8

37.7

-

M ANUFACTURING .....................................................
Overtime h o u rs ....................................................

40.7
3.4

40.5
3.3

40.4
3.2

Durable g o o d s ..........................................................
Overtime h o u rs ...................................................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Furniture and fix tu re s ..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ............................
Primary metal industries .........................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel p ro d u c ts ..........
Fabricated metal products .....................................

41.4
3.6
39.9
39.7
42.0
41.7
40.7
41.4

41.2
3.5
39.9
39.4
41.9
41.5
41.1
41.3

Machinery except electrical ...................................
Electrical and electronic equipm ent......................
Transportation equipm ent.......................................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................
Instruments and related p ro d u c ts .........................
Miscellaneous m anufacturing.................................

41.9
41.0
42.7
43.8
41.3
39.4

N ondurable g o o d s ...................................................
Overtime h o u rs ...................................................
Food and kindred pro d u cts....................................
Tobacco m anufactures...........................................
Textile mill p ro d u cts................................................
Apparel and other textile products........................
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ......................................

June

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.p

34.7

34.9

34.9

34.9

34.8

34.9

35.0

34.9

34.9

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

40.5
3.2

40.4
3.2

40.6
3.3

40.7
3.3

40.7
3.4

40.7
3.4

40.9
3.6

40.8
3.5

40.7
3.4

40.7
3.4

40.7
3.4

40.6
3.4

41.1
3.3
39.8
39.0
42.0
41.3
40.8
41.2

41.2
3.4
40.1
39.1
41.9
41.5
41.1
41.4

41.1
3.4
39.8
39.0
41.9
41.4
41.2
41.4

41.3
3.4
40.1
39.3
42.0
41.7
41.5
41.4

41.3
3.5
40.1
39.4
42.0
41.5
41.1
41.5

41.3
3.5
40.2
39.5
42.1
41.8
41.6
41.5

41.3
3.6
39.9
39.4
41.8
41.9
41.9
41.5

41.6
3.7
40.2
39.9
41.8
42.1
41.9
41.6

41.5
3.6
40.4
40.0
42.7
41.9
41.7
41.5

41.4
3.5
40.0
39.7
41.9
42.1
41.8
41.5

41.4
3.6
40.2
39.4
41.9
41.9
41.7
41.4

41.3
3.5
40.3
39.1
42.5
41.2
40.5
41.2

41.2
3.4
40.1
39.3
42.4
41.9
41.7
41.0

41.5
40.6
42.6
43.5
41.0
39.4

41.4
40.4
42.6
43.5
40.9
-

41.6
40.6
42.4
42.9
41.1
-

41.4
40.4
42.6
43.4
40.8
-

41.6
40.7
42.9
43.7
40.9

41.6
40.5
42.9
43.6
40.9
-

41.5
40.6
42.8
43.7
40.9
-

41.6
40.9
42.7
43.6
41.0

41.7
41.1
43.0
44.0
41.6
-

41.6
41.0
42.8
43.6
41.1

41.6
40.9
42.7
43.4
41.2
-

41.6
41.0
42.7
43.3
41.3
-

41.8
41.1
42.1
41.8
41.3
-

41.8
40.8
41.8
41.6
41.0

39.7
3.1
39.8
38.9
39.9
36.4
43.1

39.6
3.1
40.0
37.2
39.7
36.4
43.1

39.5
3.0
40.1
39.2
36.2
43.0

39.5
3.0
39.8
39.5
36.3
42.9

39.4
3.0
40.0
39.2
36.4
42.9

39.6
3.1
40.0
40.0
36.4
43.1

39.8
3.1
40.1
40.5
36.6
43.1

39.8
3.2
40.2
40.7
36.6
43.2

39.8
3.2
40.0
-

40.0
3.4
40.1
-

39.9
3.3
40.1
-

41.0
36.8
43.5

40.8
36.7
43.6

39.8
3.2
39.9
40.7
36.5
43.5

39.9
3.3
40.2
-

40.8
36.8
43.3

39.7
3.2
39.8
40.6
36.3
43.5

41.2
36.9
43.0

39.9
3.4
40.3
41.0
36.5
43.0

Printing and publishing............................................
Chemicals and allied products...............................
Petroleum and coal p roducts.................................
Leather and leather products ................................

37.9
41.9
43.7
36.8

37.8
41.9
43.0
37.2

37.5
41.9
41.9

37.6
41.9
42.7

37.5
41.8
43.0

37.9
41.8
44.2
-

37.9
41.9
43.2
-

38.0
41.9
43.5

38.0
41.8
43.7

38.0
41.9
43.8

-

37.9
41.7
43.3
-

38.1
42.0
43.6

-

37.9
41.9
43.3
-

-

-

-

-

38.0
41.9
43.5
-

38.0
42.2
43.0
-

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T I L I T I E S ....

39.4

39.5

39.5

39.5

39.3

39.5

39.5

39.5

39.4

39.5

39.4

39.5

39.6

39.3

39.3

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

38.5

38.4

38.5

38.5

38.4

38.4

38.4

38.4

38.4

38.4

38.5

38.4

38.5

38.5

38.4

W HOLESALE T R A D E

-

-

-

-

-

-

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

29.8

29.4

29.6

29.5

29.4

29.4

29.4

29.3

29.3

29.2

29.3

29.3

29.3

29.2

29.1

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

32.6

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.4

32.5

32.4

32.5

32.4

32.5

32.6

32.6

32.5

32.5

32.5

R E T A IL T R A D E
S E R V IC E S

-

34.8

MayP

34.8

-

34.9

July

1986

- Data not available.
p = preliminary


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

NOTE: See “Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark adjustment.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry

Industry

P R IV A T E S E C T O R ...............................................................

Seasonally adjusted .............................................

Annual
average

1986

1985

1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.p

M a/

$8.32

$8.57
-

$8.51
8.53

$8.54
8.57

$8.52
8.55

$8.52
8.59

$8.67
8.62

$8.64
8.63

$8.66
8.65

$8.71
8.70

$8.72
8.68

$8.74
8.71

$8.73
8.73

$8.72
8.71

$8.72
8.74

-

M I N I N G ........................................................................................

11.63

11.98

11.88

12.02

11.92

11.99

12.05

12.00

12.07

12.27

12.24

12.32

12.35

12.43

12.41

C O N S T R U C T I O N ...................................................................

12.13

12.31

12.24

12.17

12.21

12.28

12.46

12.42

12.28

12.47

12.34

12.35

12.22

12.28

12.36

M A N U F A C T U R I N G ...............................................................

9.19

9.53

9.49

9.52

9.55

9.49

9.57

9.56

9.63

9.74

9.70

9.70

9.72

9.70

9.71

D u r a b le g o o d s .......................................................................

9.74
8.03
6.84
9.57
11.47
12.98
9.40

10.10
8.22
7.17
9.84
11.68
13.34
9.70

10.05
8.14
7.09
9.81
11.64
13.29
9.66

10.08
8.26
7.17
9.85
11.65
13.28
9.68

10.10
8.22
7.20
9.90
11.78
13.49
9.70

10.06
8.27
7.20
9.87
11.63
13.36
9.64

10.15
8.33
7.27
9.91
11.69
13.43
9.74

10.15
8.30
7.29
9.87
11.61
13.32
9.71

10.22
8.29
7.32
9.91
11.77
13.43
9.76

10.34
8.35
7.38
9.95
11.84
13.44
9.91

10.27
8.30
7.36
9.96
11.81
13.48
9.85

10.29
8.36
7.31
9.94
11.96
13.81
9.85

10.30
8.33
7.35
9.93
11.99
13.80
9.88

10.28
8.33
7.35
10.00
12.00
13.81
9.84

10.28
8.36
7.39
10.04
12.03
13.81
9.82

9.96
Machinery, except electrical ..................................
9.04
Electrical and electronic equipm ent......................
Transportation equipm ent....................................... 12.20
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................ 12.73
8.84
Instruments and related p ro d u c ts .........................
7.05
Miscellaneous m anufacturing.................................

10.29
9.47
12.72
13.42
9.16
7.30

10.22
9.39
12.63
13.35
9.10
7.30

10.28
9.46
12.66
13.36
9.12
7.30

10.31
9.47
12.65
13.35
9.17
7.32

10.26
9.50
12.65
13.31
9.19
7.28

10.38
9.54
12.78
13.48
9.25
7.33

10.41
9.55
12.78
13.44
9.24
7.32

10.48
9.61
12.85
13.52
9.27
7.37

10.55
9.68
13.06
13.81
9.39
7.48

10.50
9.60
12.91
13.66
9.32
7.48

10.53
9.60
12.87
13.59
9.39
7.50

10.58
9.62
12.90
13.66
9.41
7.51

10.55
9.61
12.87
13.59
9.40
7.48

10.55
9.63
12.85
13.58
9.38
7.48

8.38
8.39
Food and kindred pro d u c ts....................................
Tobacco m anufactures........................................... 11.22
6.46
Textile mill p ro d u c ts ................................................
Apparel and other textile products........................
5.55
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ...................................... 10.41

8.71
8.57
11.94
6.71
5.73
10.82

8.67
8.61
12.56
6.68
5.70
10.75

8.69
8.58
12.76
6.68
5.71
10.79

8.75
8.57
12.83
6.69
5.70
10.91

8.70
8.50
12.34
6.72
5.69
10.86

8.73
8.53
11.34
6.75
5.75
10.91

8.72
8.51
11.31
6.76
5.74
10.91

8.79
8.61
11.97
6.79
5.75
10.97

8.87
8.71
11.78
6.83
5.80
11.07

8.86
8.72
11.89
6.85
5.82
11.02

8.86
8.71
12.38
6.83
5.79
10.99

8.88
8.74
12.76
6.86
5.80
11.03

8.88
8.75
12.84
6.88
5.80
11.05

8.90
8.79
13.38
6.90
5.77
11.10

Printing and publishing............................................
Chemicals and allied products...............................
Petroleum and coal p roducts.................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics p ro d u c ts.....
Leather and leather p ro d u c ts ................................

9.41
11.07
13.44
8.29
5.71

9.71
11.56
14.06
8.54
5.82

9.62
11.44
14.02
8.47
5.83

9.63
11.51
13.99
8.51
5.83

9.69
11.59
14.05
8.55
5.84

9.76
11.60
14.02
8.52
5.81

9.81
11.65
14.09
8.56
5.83

9.78
11.70
13.99
8.54
- 5.77

9.83
11.80
14.07
8.63
5.83

9.92
11.85
14.24
8.73
5.83

9.85
11.86
14.26
8.69
5.86

9.86
11.81
14.21
8.69
5.83

9.90
11.78
14.22
8.72
5.86

9.87
11.83
14.15
8.68
5.89

9.90
11.85
13.89
8.77
5.88

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T I L I T I E S .....

11.12

11.40

11.25

11.34

11.37

11.42

11.54

11.48

11.59

11.61

11.59

11.64

11.62

11.58

11.57

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .........................................................

8.89

9.16

9.13

9.16

9.14

9.12

9.22

9.16

9.23

9.33

9.28

9.36

9.33

9.29

9.30

5.98

5.95

5.97

5.99

6.03

6.04

6.03

6.01

6.01

Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Furniture and fix tu re s ..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ............................
Primary metal in d u strie s.........................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel p ro d u c ts ..........
Fabricated metal products .....................................

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..............................................................

R E T A IL T R A D E .....................................................................

5.85

5.94

5.93

5.91

5.90

5.88

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E .....

7.63

7.94

7.85

7.96

7.88

7.91

8.04

8.01

8.06

8.15

8.14

8.28

8.30

8.28

8.29

S E R V IC E S ................................................................................

7.59

7.89

7.82

7.85

7.80

7.82

7.99

7.99

8.05

8.12

8.12

8.17

8.18

8.12

8.10

- Data not available.
p = preliminary

74

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.

16. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
1986

1985

Annual average
Industry
1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Nov.

Oct.

Dec.

Jan.

Mar.

Feb.

Apr.p

May11

P R IV A T E S E C T O R

Current d o lla rs........................................................ $292.86 $299.09 $297.00 $300.61 $299.05 $299.90 $303.45 $301.54 $301.37 $306.59 $302.58 $300.66 $302.93 $302.58 $302.58
298.55 299.09 297.54 299.79 300.84 301.19 301.02 303.63 303.80 303.98 304.68 303.11 303.28
Seasonally adjusted...........................................
“
172.78 170.42 169.62 171.19 170.11 170.30 171.83 170.36 169.59 172.05 169.32 168.82 171.05 171.43
Constant (1977) dollars .......................................
M I N I N G ........................................................................................

503.58

519.93

516.78

525.27

510.18

519.17

526.59

518.40

521.42

537.43

543.46

522.37

522.41

520.82

512.53

C O N S T R U C T I O N ...................................................................

458.51

464.09

466.34

462.46

471.31

471.55

479.71

475.69

450.68

460.14

459.05

434.72

444.81

460.50

468.44

Current d o lla rs .........................................................
Constant (1977) d o lla rs .........................................

374.03
220.67

385.97
219.93

382.45
218.42

387.46
220.65

382.96
217.84

384.35
218.26

390.46
221.10

390.05
220.37

393.87
221.65

406.16
227.92

394.79
220.92

390.91
219.49

395.60
223.38

392.85
222.58

394.23

D u r a b le g o o d s .......................................................................

Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Furniture and fix tu re s ..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ............................
Primary metal in d u strie s .........................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel p ro d u c ts ..........
Fabricated metal products .....................................

403.24
320.40
271.55
401.94
478.30
528.29
389.16

416.12
327.98
282.50
412.30
484.72
548.27
400.61

413.06
326.41
274.38
415.94
480.73
543.56
397.99

417.31
337.01
281.06
418.63
486.97
552.45
402.69

410.06
326.33
275.76
418.77
485.34
558.49
395.76

412.46
334.94
283.68
418.49
480.32
550.43
397.17

420.21
338.20
289.35
421.18
486.30
553.32
405.18

419.20
335.32
291.60
419.48
480.65
544.79
403.94

424.13
327.46
291.34
414.24
491.99
557.35
406.02

439.45
335.67
303.32
414.92
504.38
564.48
422.17

425.18
329.51
289.98
414.34
493.66
556.72
407.79

421.89
328.55
284.36
403.56
503.52
578.64
403.85

426.42
333.20
288.12
412.10
504.78
576.84
409.03

423.54
334.87
285.92
426.00
498.00
568.97
403.44

422.51
336.91
287.47
429.71
504.06
577.26
402.62

Machinery, except electrical ..................................
Electrical and electronic equipm ent......................
Transportation equipm ent.......................................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................
Instruments and related products .........................
Miscellaneous m anufacturing.................................

417.32
370.64
520.94
557.57
365.09
277.77

427.04
384.48
541.87
583.77
375.56
287.62

421.06
377.48
539.30
586.07
370.37
286.16

427.65
385.02
539.32
578.49
374.83
287.62

420.65
376.91
531.30
571.38
369.55
282.55

422.71
383.80
530.04
565.68
373.11
284.65

431.81
387.32
544.43
585.03
380.18
293.20

430.97
387.73
545.71
585.98
376.07
295.00

438.06
396.89
551.27
588.12
382.85
296.27

452.60
408.50
577.25
625.59
400.01
304.44

437.85
394.56
555.13
595.58
383.05
297.70

437.00
389.76
545.69
583.01
384.99
294.75

442.24
395.38
552.12
592.84
389.57
299.65

437.83
392.09
544.40
574.86
385.40
296.96

437.83
390.98
538.42
569.00
382.70
294.71

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..............................................................

332.69
333.92
436.46
257.75
202.02
448.67

344.92
342.80
444.17
266.39
208.57
466.34

340.73
344.40
465.98
261.19
206.34
460.10

344.12
342.34
481.05
266.53
209.56
463.97

343.88
342.80
434.94
258.23
206.34
465.86

345.39
342.55
457.81
270.14
208.25
465.89

349.20
348.02
434.32
275.40
210.45
473.49

347.93
343.80
444.48
276.48
211.23
472.40

351.60
346.12
435.71
279.75
212.75
477.20

359.24
354.50
448.82
283.45
215.18
490.40

352.63
347.93
448.25
278.80
213.01
479.37

347.31
339.69
453.11
274.57
207.28
472.57

352.54
344.36
478.50
278.52
211.70
477.60

351.65
346.50
469.94
278.64
211.12
474.05

354.22
353.36
509.78
282.21
210.61
476.19

356.64
463.83
587.33

367.04
484.36
604.58

358.83
479.34
584.63

359.20
484.57
597.37

361.44
482.14
606.96

370.88
482.56
607.07

374.74
486.97
621.37

371.64
486.72
619.76

375.51
495.60
610.64

384.90
503.63
622.29

371.35
495.75
616.03

370.74
492.48
612.45

377.19
494.76
621.41

374.07
495.68
614.11

374.22
500.07
594.49

345.69
210.13

350.99
216.50

346.42
218.04

350.61
220.96

347.13
219.00

346.76
216.71

351.82
219.21

350.99
216.95

356.42
219.21

366.66
220.96

359.77
217.41

356.29
209.88

360.14
212.72

355.88
214.40

362.20
216.38

U T I L I T I E S ................................................................................

438.13

450.30

442.13

451.33

449.12

454.52

458.14

453.46

457.81

460.92

452.01

456.29

457.83

452.78

452.39

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .........................................................

342.27

351.74

351.51

353.58

352.80

351.12

354.97

351.74

355.36

360.14

355.42

355.68

357.34

355.81

357.12

175.81

173.74

173.73

178.50

173.06

172.74

174.27

173.69

174.29

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Food and kindred pro d u cts ....................................
Tobacco m anufactures...........................................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts ................................................
Apparel and other textile products........................
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ......................................
Printing and publishing............................................
Chemicals and allied products...............................
Petroleum and coal p roducts.................................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics pro d u cts ...................................................
Leather and leather products ................................

“

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC

174.33

174.64

174.94

176.71

177.59

176.99

E S T A T E ....................................................................................

278.50

289.02

285.74

292.13

286.04

287.13

293.46

290.76

291.77

299.11

296.30

304.70

304.61

301.39

300.93

S E R V IC E S ................................................................................

247.43

256.43

253.37

256.70

255.84

256.50

258.88

259.68

260.02

263.90

263.09

264.71

265.03

263.09

262.44

R E T A I L T R A D E .....................................................................
F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L

- Data not available.
p = preliminary

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

May

Mar.

Apr.

May

1985

1986

1986p

1986p

PRIVATE SECTOR (In current d o lla rs ) ............................

164.4

168.5

168.4

168.7

Mining1 .................................................................................
C onstruction........................................................................
Manufacturing .....................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ...................................
Wholesale trade’ ................................................................
Retail trade .........................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te '..............................
S e rvices...............................................................................

177.9
149.8
168.2
164.3
168.5
155.8
170.0
166.8

180.1
148.3
171.9
169.8
171.9
157.7
179.2
174.0

181.0
149.8
172.2
169.4
171.3
157.7
178.6
173.1

180.6
151.0
172.5
169.3
171.6
158.1
178.9
173.1

PRIVATE SECTOR (In constant dollars) ..........................

93.9

95.2

95.4

-

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.


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

May

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

1985

1986

1986

1986

1986

1986p

164.4

167.3

168.2

168.5

168.4

_

.

.

_

150.2
168.2
165.3

149.7
170.7
168.6

149.7
171.3
169.6

149.2
171.8
170.2

150.6
172.0
169.8

151.3
172.4
170.3

168.8

-

-

-

-

-

-

155.2

157.0

157.3

157.4

157.2

157.4

-

-

-

-

-

-

167.0

171.7

173.1

174.0

173.1

173.2

94.1

93.5

94.4

95.1

95.4

-

p = preliminary.
NOTE: See "Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.

75

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
18.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, data seasonally adjusted

(In percent)
Time span and year

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

June

May

Over
1984
1985
1986

1-month span
..............................................................................
..............................................................................
..............................................................................

67.8
52.4
59.7

72.7
47.8
53.5

67.6
53.8
45.1

67.6
49.2
54.6

62.4
51.6
48.9

65.4
47.0

Over
1984
1985
1986

3-month span
..............................................................................
..............................................................................
..............................................................................

76.5
51.1
58.1

75.1
49.7
54.3

75.9
46.2
52.2

71.4
46.2
48.1

71.6
45.1

68.1
51.4

Over
1984
1985
1986

6-month span
..............................................................................
..............................................................................
..............................................................................

78.1
49.2
55.4

76.5
47.8
53.0

77.0
43.0
-

75.1
45.9
“

69.2
44.3

Over
1984
1985
1986

12-month span
..............................................................................
..............................................................................
..............................................................................

81.1
46.2

78.1
45.7

72.2
46.8

72.2
43.8
“

68.9
44.9

- 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

19.

Aug.

July

Oct.

Sept.

62.2
56.2
“

55.9
56.8

63.2
49.7

58.1
51.1

Nov.

50.5
50.8
“

63.0
61.9
”

53.5
57.6
“

57.0
59.5
“

56.8
55.1

53.5
55.9

58.1
61.4

53.0
60.5
“

65.1
44.3

63.2
48.9

58.6
54.1

59.2
50.8

53.2
57.0

-

65.7
47.6
"

67.8
47.3
"

62.7
48.9

59.7
47.3
"

54.6
48.6

49.7
57.0
“

54.9
55.9

51.4
48.9

48.6

spans. See the “ Definitions” in this section. See “ Notes on the data” for a
description of the most recent benchmark revision,

Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population

(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

Noninstitutional pop ulation ........................................

160,689

163,541

166,460

169,349

171,775

173,939

175,891

178,080

179,912

Labor force
Total (num ber)........................................................
Percent of pop ulation...........................................

100,665
62.6

103,882
63.5

106,559
64.0

108,544
64.1

110,315
64.2

111,872
64.3

113,226
64.4

115,241
64.7

117,167
65.1

93,673
58.3
1,656

97,679
59.7
1,631

100,421
60.3
1,597

100,907
59.6
1,604

102,042
59.4
1,645

101,194
58.2
1,668

102,510
58.3
1,676

106,702
59.9
1,697

108,856
60.5
1,706

92,017
3,283
88,734

96,048
3,387
92,661

98,824
3,347
95,477

99,303
3,364
95,938

100,397
3,368
97,030

99,526
3,401
96,125

100,834
3,383
97,450

105,005
3,321
101,685

107,150
3,179
103,971

Unemployed
Total (num ber)................................................
Percent of labor fo r c e ...................................

6,991
6.9

6,202
6.0

6,137
5.8

7,637
7.0

8,273
7.5

10,678
9.5

10,717
9.5

8,539
7.4

8,312
7.1

Not in labor force (number) ...................................

60,025

59,659

59,900

60,806

61,460

62,067

62,665

62,839

62,744

Employed
Total (num ber)..................................................
Percent of population .....................................
Resident Armed F orces...............................
Civilian
Total .............................................................
A g riculture................................................
Nonagricultural industries.......................

20.

Annual data: Employment levels by industry

(Numbers in thousands)
Industry

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

Total em plo ym en t...........................................................................
Private se c to r............................................................
G oods-producing.......................................................................
M in in g .....................................................................
Construction .........................................................................
M anufacturing.......................................................................

82,471
67,344
24,346
813
3,851
19,682

86,697
71,026
25,585
851
4,229
20,505

89,823
73,876
26,461
958
4,463
21,040

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

97,614
81,199
24,930
930
4,687
19,314

Service-producing......................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ......................................
Wholesale trade ....................................................................
Retail trade ............................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ..................................
S e rvices..................................................................................

58,125
4,713
4,708
13,808
4,467
15,303

61,113
4,923
4,969
14,573
4,724
16,252

63,363
5,136
5,204
14,989
4,975
17,112

64,748
5,146
5,275
15,035
5,160
17,890

65,659
5,165
5,358
15,189
5,298
18,619

65,753
5,082
5,278
15,179
5,341
19,036

66,866
4,954
5,268
15,613
5,468
19,694

69,769
5,159
5,555
16,545
5,689
20,797

72,684
5,242
5,740
17,360
5,953
21,974

G overnm ent..........................................................................
F ederal.............................................................................
State .................................................................................
Local .................................................................................

15,127
2,727
3,377
9,023

15,672
2,753
3,474
9,446

15,947
2,773
3,541
9,633

16,241
2,866
3,610
9,765

16,031
2,772
3,640
9,619

15,837
2,739
3,640
9,458

15,869
2,774
3,662
9,434

16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482

16,415
2,875
3,848
9,692

NOTE: Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. See
“ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark

76

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

Dec.

revision.

“

-

21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural
payrolls, by industry
Industry

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

36.0
5.25
189.00

35.8
5.69
203.70

35.7
6.16
219.91

35.3
6.66
235.10

35.2
7.25
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

43.4
6.94
301.20

43.4
7.67
332.88

43.0
8.49
365.07

43.3
9.17
397.06

43.7
10.04
438.75

42.7
10.77
459.88

42.5
11.28
479.40

43.3
11.63
503.58

43.4
11.98
519.93

36.5
8.10
295.65

36.8
8.66
318.69

37.0
9.27
342.99

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
12.31
464.09

40.3
5.68
228.90

40.4
6.17
249.27

40.2
6.70
269.34

39.7
7.27
288.62

39.8
7.99
318.00

38.9
8.49
330.26

40.1
8.83
354.08

40.7
9.19
374.03

40.5
9.53
385.97

39.9
6.99
278.90

40.0
7.57
302.80

39.9
8.16
325.58

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

38.8
5.39
209.13

38.8
5.88
228.14

38.8
6.39
247.93

38.5
6.96
267.96

38.5
7.56
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

31.6
3.85
121.66

31.0
4.20
130.20

30.6
4.53
138.62

30.2
4.88
147.38

30.1
5.25
158.03

29.9
5.48
163.85

29.8
5.74
171.05

29.8
5.85
174.33

29.4
5.94
174.64

36.4
4.54
165.26

36.4
4.89
178.00

36.2
5.27
190.77

36.2
5.79
209.60

36.3
6.31
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

33.0
4.65
153.45

32.8
4.99
163.67

32.7
5.36
175.27

32.6
5.85
190.71

32.6
6.41
208.97

32.6
6.92
225.59

32.7
7.31
239.04

32.6
7.59
247.43

32.5
7.89
256.43

P r iv a t e s e c t o r

Average weekly h o u rs .................................................................
Average hourly e a rn in g s .............................................................
Average weekly ea rn in g s ............................................................
M in in g

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................
C o n s t r u c t io n

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................
M a n u f a c t u r in g

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly earnings ......................................................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................
W h o le s a le t r a d e

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly earnings ......................................................
R e ta il t r a d e

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................
F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d r e a l e s t a t e

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................
S e r v ic e s

Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings........................................................
Average weekly e a rn in g s ......................................................


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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
22.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation and Industrial Relations Data

Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group

(June 1981=100)
1984

1985

1986

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3
months
ended

12
months
ended

Mar. 1986
C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 2 .........................................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rk e rs .................................................................
Blue-collar w o rkers....................................................................
Service w o rk e rs .........................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Manufacturing ............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing .....................................................................
Services ........................................................................
Public administration 3 ...........................................................

119.8

120.8

122.4

123.9

125.5

126.4

128.4

129.2

130.6

1.1

4.1

120.9
117.7
122.0

122.1
118.6
122.1

124.0
119.6
124.6

125.5
120.9
126.8

127.3
122.2
127.8

128.3
123.1
128.0

130.7
124.4
130.9

131.6
124.9
131.8

133.1
126.2
133.1

1.1
1.0
1.0

4.6
3.3
4.1

117.9
120.7
125.0
122.9

119.1
121.6
125.5
123.7

120.4
123.3
128.8
126.9

122.0
124.8
130.9
128.6

123.9
126.2
131.9
130.1

124.6
127.2
132.6
130.3

125.5
129.7
136.4
134.2

126.0
130.6
137.1
134.8

127.7
131.9
138.8
136.8

1.3
1.0
1.2
1.5

3.1
4.5
5.2
5.1

119.0

120.1

121.1

122.7

124.2

125.2

126.8

127.5

128.9

1.1

3.8

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers...............................................................
Blue-collar w o rke rs .................................................................
Service w o rk e rs ......................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
M anufacturing..........................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..................................................................

119.9
117.5
121.5

121.4
118.4
121.2

122.4
119.3
123.2

123.9
120.6
125.7

125.8
121.9
126.3

127.1
122.8
126.5

128.8
124.0
128.8

129.8
124.4
129.5

131.3
125.7
130.9

1.2
1.0
1.1

4.4
3.1
3.6

117.9
119.6

119.1
120.7

120.4
121.6

122.0
123.1

123.9
124.4

124.6
125.6

125.5
127.6

126.0
128.4

127.7
129.7

1.3
1.0

3.1
4.3

S t a t e a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s .........................................

123.9

124.4

128.8

130.1

131.7

132.0

136.5

137.5

138.9

1.0

5.5

124.5
121.9

125.0
122.3

129.7
125.0

131.1
125.9

132.5
128.1

132.9
128.5

137.6
131.9

138.6
132.7

140.0
134.7

1.0
1.5

5.7
5.2

124.5
124.5
125.4
124.4
122.9

125.0
124.7
125.7
125.7
123.7

129.9
130.6
132.1
127.9
126.9

131.3
132.0
133.5
129.2
128.6

132.8
133.4
134.4
131.1
130.1

133.2
133.7
134.6
131.5
130.3

137.9
139.1
140.9
134.1
134.2

139.1
140.3
142.0
135.2
134.8

140.4
141.5
143.0
136.8
136.8

.9
.9
.7
1.2
1.5

5.7
6.1
6.4
4.3
5.1

P r iv a t e in d u s t r y w o r k e r s .....................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers...............................................................
Blue-collar w o rke rs .................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
S e rv ic e s ..................................................................................
Schools ............ .....................................................................
Elementary and secon dary.............................................
Hospitals and other services4 ...........................................
Public administration3 .............................................................

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)

78

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

and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
3 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.

23.

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group

(June 1981=100)
1986

1985

1984

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3
months
ended

12
months
ended

Mar., 1986

C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 1 .........................................................................................

117.9

118.8

120.3

121.7

123.1

124.2

126.3

127.0

128.3

1.0

4.2

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rk e rs .................................................................
Blue-collar w o rkers....................................................................
Service w o rk e rs .........................................................................

119.3
115.3
120.0

120.4
116.1
119.8

122.2
117.0
122.3

123.5
118.2
124.3

125.2
119.3
124.8

126.4
120.5
125.3

128.8
122.0
128.0

129.8
122.3
128.6

131.2
123.4
129.8

1.1
.9
.9

4.8
3.4
4.0

Workers, by industry division
M anufacturing............................................................................
N onm anufacturing.....................................................................
S e rv ic e s ...................................................................................
Public administration 2 ...........................................................

115.7
118.9
123.3
120.4

116.8
119.7
123.8
121.3

118.0
121.3
127.2
124.4

119.5
122.6
128.9
125.7

121.0
123.9
129.7
127.0

122.3
125.0
130.5
127.2

123.2
127.6
134.2
131.4

123.8
128.4
134.8
132.0

125.3
129.6
136.4
133.8

1.2
.9
1.2
1.4

3.6
4.6
5.2
5.4

P r iv a t e in d u s t r y w o r k e r s ..................................................................

117.2

118.2

119.2

120.6

122.0

123.3

124.9

125.6

126.8

1.0

3.9

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rke rs............................................... - ..........
Professional and te chnical..............................................
Managers and adm inistrators.........................................
Salesworkers .....................................................................
Clerical w o rke rs.................................................................

118.5
122.2
118.0
110.2
119.8

119.9
123.8
119.2
111.9
120.7

120.9
125.2
121.0
110.5
122.0

122.3
127.3
122.2
111.6
122.9

124.0
127.7
123.8
116.3
124.7

125.5
128.7
126.5
117.4
125.6

127.3
131.2
127.7
119.3
127.1

128.3
131.5
128.4
122.5
127.9

129.6
132.7
130.5
122.4
129.6

1.0
.9
1.6
-.1
1.3

4.5
3.9
5.4
5.2
3.9

Blue-collar w o rke rs..............................................................
Craft and kindred w o rk e rs ..............................................
Operatives, except tra n s p o rt..........................................
Transport equipment ope ra tiv e s....................................
Nonfarm la b o re rs ..............................................................
Service workers ...................................................................

115.1
116.5
114.9
111.7
112.9
119.8

115.9
117.3
115.8
112.7
114.1
119.3

116.7
118.0
116.6
113.4
114.7
121.2

118.0
119.4
117.9
114.0
115.9
123.7

119.1
120.8
118.9
114.5
116.7
123.8

120.3
122.0
120.1
115.7
118.5
124.4

121.7
123.7
121.1
117.7
118.6
126.3

122.0
123.8
121.6
117.8
119.8
126.6

123.1
125.3
122.6
118.0
120.0
128.0

.9
1.2
.8
.2
.2
1.1

3.4
3.7
3.1
3.1
2.8
3.4

Workers, by industry division:
M anufacturing.......................................................................
D u rab les.............................................................................
Nondurables.......................................................................

115.7
115.7
115.8

116.8
116.6
117.1

118.0
117.7
118.6

119.5
119.1
120.2

121.0
120.6
121.6

122.3
122.0
122.6

123.2
122.7
124.0

123.8
123.4
124.6

125.3
124.8
126.1

1.2
1.1
1.2

3.6
3.5
3.7

Nonmanufacturing................................................................
C onstruction.......................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ..................................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ..............................................
Wholesale t r a d e .............................................................
Retail tra d e ......................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ..............................
S e rvices..............................................................................

118.0
113.3
118.5
114.3
118.2
112.8
116.1
124.2

119.0
114.0
119.3
116.0
120.0
114.4
116.9
124.7

119.9
114.3
119.9
116.5
120.7
114.9
115.3
127.1

121.2
114.4
120.7
118.1
122.9
116.2
115.8
129.5

122.6
115.5
121.7
118.8
123.7
116.9
122.0
129.9

123.9
116.6
122.8
121.1
126.8
118.9
121.7
131.0

125.9
117.3
124.8
122.7
127.7
120.8
124.1
133.9

126.6
117.9
125.2
123.7
128.3
121.9
126.5
134.1

127.7
118.3
126.3
124.5
129.7
122.5
126.6
136.2

.9
.3
.9
.6
1.1
.5
.1
1.6

4.2
2.4
3.8
4.8
4.9
4.8
3.8
4.8

S t a t e a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s ......................................

121.6

122.0

126.1

127.1

128.4

128.7

133.2

134.2

135.5

1.0

5.5

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar w o rke rs............................................................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs ..............................................................
Workers, by industry division
Services ................................................................................
S ch ools...............................................................................
Elementary and seco n d a ry..........................................
Hospitals and other services 3 .......................................
Public administration 2 .........................................................

122.2
119.1

122.5
119.6

127.1
121.9

128.0
122.5

129.3
124.2

129.6
124.5

134.3
127.9

135.3
128.4

136.6
130.4

1.0
1.6

5.6
5.0

122.2
122.2
122.9
121.9
120.4

122.5
122.3
123.0
123.1
121.3

127.2
127.8
129.3
125.1
124.4

128.1
128.7
130.2
125.9
125.7

129.4
129.9
130.8
127.7
127.0

129.7
130.2
131.1
128.0
127.2

134.5
135.8
137.5
130.2
131.4

135.6
137.0
138.5
130.9
132.0

136.8
138.0
139.4
132.4
133.8

.9
.7
.6
1.1
1.4

5.7
6.2
6.6
3.7
5.4

1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.


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

2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities,
3 Includes, for example, library, social and health services.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
24.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation and Industrial Relations Data

Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size

(June 1981=100)
1984

1985

1986

3
months
ended

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Percent change

Mar.

12
months
ended

Mar. 1986
C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta tu s 1

Union .......................................................................
Manufacturing ............................................................................
Nonm anufacturing.....................................................................

120.6
119.3
121.9

121.7
120.5
122.8

122.6
121.6
123.6

123.9
123.2
124.5

124.8
124.2
125.3

125.5
124.2
126.6

126.5
125.0
127.8

127.1
125.5
128.6

128.4
127.0
129.7

1.0
1.2
.9

2.9
2.3
3.5

N o nunion........................................................................
Manufacturing ............................................................................
Nonm anufacturing.....................................................................

118.0
116.6
118.6

119.2
117.9
119.8

120.3
119.3
120.7

121.9
120.8
122.4

123.8
123.6
123.9

125.0
124.8
125.1

126.8
125.7
127.3

127.5
126.3
128.1

129.0
128.1
129.5

1.2
1.4
1.1

4.2
3.6
4.5

118.9
119.7
117.2
121.0

120.7
120.7
117.9
122.2

122.4
120.7
119.7
122.5

123.8
122.2
120.8
124.9

125.1
124.2
122.0
126.8

126.4
125.2
122.7
127.9

128.8
126.5
124.2
129.1

129.9
127.2
124.6
129.8

131.6
128.7
125.9
130.8

1.3
1.2
1.0
.8

5.2
3.6
3.2
3.2

119.4
116.7

120.6
117.4

121.5
119.0

123.2
119.8

124.7
121.4

125.7
122.5

127.3
123.9

128.1
123.9

129.5
125.5

1.1
1.3

3.8
3.4

Union ......................................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
N onm anufacturing.....................................................................

118.1
116.1
120.1

119.0
117.1
120.7

119.8
118.1
121.3

120.9
119.5
122.1

121.7
120.4
122.8

123.0
121.7
124.1

124.1
122.8
125.3

124.7
123.3
125.9

125.6
124.2
126.9

.7
.7
.8

3.2
3.2
3.3

N o nunion.......................................................................................
Manufacturing ........................................................................
Nonmanufacturing .....................................................................

116.7
115.4
117.2

117.8
116.5
118.3

118.8
117.9
119.2

120.4
119.5
120.7

122.1
121.5
122.3

123.4
122.8
123.6

125.2
123.7
125.9

125.9
124.4
126.6

127.3
126.1
127.8

1.1
1.4
.9

4.3
3.8
4.5

117.4
117.9
115.5
118.8

118.9
T19.0
116.0
119.6

120.5
119.0
117.8
120.0

121.9
120.2
118.7
122.5

123.0
122.3
119.6
124.0

124.6
123.4
121.1
125.1

126.8
124.8
122.5
126.6

128.1
125.4
122.9
127.1

129.2
126.8
124.2
128.1

.9
1.1
1.1
.8

5.0
3.7
3.8
3.3

117.6
115.1

118.6
116.0

119.5
117.5

121.0
118.3

122.4
119.6

123.8
120.6

125.5
121.9

126.3
122.0

127.4
123.6

.9
1.3

4.1
3.3

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

N ortheast.......................................................................................
South ............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..............................................
W e s t................................................................................................
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan a re a s .......................................................................
Other a re a s ................................................................................

W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta tu s 1

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

N ortheast................................................................................
South .............................................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..............................................
W e s t..............................................................
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan a re a s ....................................................................
Other a re a s ......................................................................

1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and
industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the

80

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

Monthly 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

1985

1984

1986

1985

1984

Measure
II

III

IV

I

II

|p

IV

Ill

S p e c if ie d a d ju s tm e n ts :

Total compensation 1 adjustm ents,2 settlements
covering 5,000 workers or more:
3.6
2.8

2.6
2.7

3.5
3.2

2.7
3.1

3.7
2.0

3.6
2.7

3.5
3.4

2.0
3.0

2.0
1.4

0.3
1.2

2.4
2.4

2.3
2.7

2.6
2.7

2.1
2.6

2.3
1.5

3.3
3.2

2.5
2.8

2.0
3.1

2.1
1.9

.8
1.6

3.7
.8

3.3
.7

.9
.1

1.2
.2

.7
.3

.7
.1

.8
.2

1.2
.2

.5
.1

.6
.0

2.0
.9

1.8
.7

.7
.2

.7
.3

.2
.2

.6
.1

.5
.1

.5
.4

.2
.1

.4
.2

Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000
workers or more:

E f f e c t i v e a d ju s tm e n ts :

Deferred from settlements reached in earlier

I

—

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

compensation or wages.
3 Because of rounding total may not equal sum of parts.
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 ending--

F

IV

III

II

I

IV

III

II

1986

1985

1984

Measure

Specified total compensation adjustments, settlements covering 5,000
workers or more, all industries:
First year of c o n tra c t....................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t................................................................

4.7
3.5

4.2
3.2

3.6
2.8

3.4
2.6

3.4
2.7

3.1
2.7

2.6
2.7

2.3
2.6

3.5
4.6
2.7
3.1
2.9
3.2

3.2
4.5
2.3
2.8
2.8
2.8

2.4
2.9
2.1
2.4
1.8
2.7

2.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
1.3
2.8

2.4
2.3
2.4
2.4
1.5
2.8

2.4
1.9
2.7
2.5
1.8
3.0

2.3
1.6
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.8

2.0
1.6
2.2
2.5
2.6
2.5

3.0
3.2
2.8
3.1
2.8
3.6

2.6
1.5
3.7
2.8
1.8
3.8

2.3
2.1
2.9
1.5
1.0
3.3

2.1
2.0
2.5
1.4
.9
3.2

2.0
1.9
2.2
1.5
1.0
3.0

1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.4
2.4

.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.6

.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.5

3.7
5.2
2.6
3.0
3.0
3.0

3.3
5.4
2.1
2.8
3.1
2.6

2.5
5.5
2.0
2.9
4.8
2.6

2.6
5.1
2.4
2.8
4.0
2.7

2.7
4.3
2.5
2.9
3.8
2.8

3.2
4.0
3.0
3.3
3.9
3.2

3.3
3.6
3.3
3.3
3.6
3.3

2.8
3.5
2.7
3.0
3.6
2.9

.8
-.4
.9
1.7
.0
1.8

.9
4.0
.9
1.4
1.4
1.4

.5
4.0
.4
1.0
1.4
1.0

.9
4.6
.8
1.4
1.7
1.4

1.1
9.2
1.0
1.7
4.6
1.7

Specified wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or
more:
All industries
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of contract .............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Manufacturing
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Nonmanufacturing
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Construction
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA cla u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of contract .............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Data do not meet publication standards.


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

p

= preliminary.

(1)
(’ )

O
(1)

2.2

2.1

1.7
(1)
(1)

1.7

1.5

1.0
(’ )
(1)

(’ )
0

(’ )
(1)

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation and Industrial Relations Data

27. Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
Average for four quarters ending-Effective wage adjustment

1984

1986

1985
III

IV

I»

3.5
.9
1.9
.7

3.5
.9
1.8
.8

3.3
.7
1.8
.7

3.1
.6
1.7
.8

4.2
2.9
3.9
2.3

4.3
2.8
3.7
2.8

4.1
3.4
3.7
2.2

4.0
2.9
3.5
2.5

III

IV

I

II

4.2
1.0
2.1
1.2

3.7
.8
2.0
.9

3.6
.7
2.2
.7

5.0
3.7
4.2
3.2

4.4
3.0
4.0
2.7

4.5
2.9
4.2
2.3

F o r a ll w o r k e r s : 1

T o ta l................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period ......................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier p e rio d ..........................
From cost-of-living-adjustments c la u s e s ...............................................

F o r w o r k e r s r e c e iv in g c h a n g e s :

T o ta l................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period ......................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier p e rio d ..........................
From cost-of-living-adjustments c la u s e s ................................................
1 Because of rounding total may not equal sum of parts.

»

= 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

Second 6 months
1985»

Measure
1984

1985

First year of contract ...............................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t...............................................................................................................................................

52
5.4

42
5.1

38
5.3

Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or more:
First year of contract ...................................................................................................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t................................................................................................................................................

4.8
5.1

4.6
5.4

4.4
5.6

5.0
1.9
3.1
(4)

5.7
4.1
1.6
(«)

4.1
3.2
.9
(«)

Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments, 2 settlements covering 5,000 workers or more:

Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustm ent3 ...............................................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in p erio d.........................................................................................................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier periods ...................................

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
compensation or wages.

29.

3 Because of rounding total may not equal sum of parts.
4 Less than 0.05 percent.
p = preliminary.

Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
Annual totals

1985

1986

Measure
1984
Number of stoppages:
Beginning in p e rio d .......................
In effect during p e rio d ..................

Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in
thousands)....................................
In effect during period (in
thousands)....................................

Days idle:
Number (in thousands)................
Percent of estimated working
tim e1 ..............................................

82

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Jan.p

Dec.

Mar.p

Feb.p

Apr.»

Mayp

62
68

54
61

2
8

2
8

9
13

6
18

11
20

6
20

3
13

2
9

4
7

3
7

3
9

4
9

5
10

376.0

323.9

6.9

15.7

50.1

15.3

69.5

76.6

26.2

8.2

7.6

24.0

12.3

7.2

26.7

391.0

584.1

15.1

28.5

56.9

66.8

93.9

119.3

47.0

38.0

120

284

397

187

393

8,499.0

7,079.0

203.3

454.3

500.2

869.7

931.4

1,433.0

651.2

665.4

1,700

3,095

3,906

3,215

3,646

.04

.03

.01

.02

.02

.04

.04

.06

.04

.03

1

2

2

2

2

1 Agricultural and government employees
working time: private household, forestry,
explanation of the measurement of Idleness
found in "T o ta l economy' measure of strike


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

1985

are included in the total employed and total
and fishery employees are excluded. An
as a percentage of the total time worked is
idleness,” Monthly Labor Review, October

1968, pp. 54-56.
p = preliminary

30. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
1986

1985

Ann ual
aver age

Series

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

324.5
377.4

325.5
378.5

326.6
379.9

327.4
380.8

328.4
381.9

327.5
380.8

326.0
379.1

325.3
378.3

326.3
379.5

301.8
309.7
295.9
318.5
259.7
257.4
326.3
361.7
401.8
297.1
449.6
295.8
348.4
228.9

302.1
309.9
295.6
319.2
260.6
258.0
319.9
362.6
401.1
294.8
452.8
296.3
349.9
229.3

302.5
309.8
295.3
318.9
261.1
257.1
317.1
363.0
402.6
291.2
454.1
296.8
350.3
236.4

303.6
311.0
296.6
319.9
266.1
257.1
314.3
362.2
401.4
292.1
451.7
296.8
351.3
236.2

305.6
313.2
299.3
321.9
269.9
256.9
323.9
361.3
402.2
290.3
448.8
297.3
352.1
236.2

307.9
315.6
302.5
322.0
271.5
257.2
334.4
365.7
405.1
292.1
459.7
298.0
353.1
237.5

307.7
315.3
301.5
322.5
268.4
257.3
320.7
375.1
408.6
291.4
485.3
299.5
354.2
238.3

307.8
315.4
301.2
322.7
267.7
256.8
319.2
375.7
408.4
290.2
488.0
299.3
355.5
238.8

308.5
316.1
301.5
322.5
264.2
256.8
329.5
376.1
411.4
288.5
487.4
300.2
357.0
239.5

309.4
317.0
302.1
323.8
263.4
257.1
336.5
374.6
411.2
287.2
481.9
301.4
358.8
239.4

351.6
383.2
115.8
265.0
405.1
113.5
113.5
112.7
367.8
421.1
267.8
399.9
497.3
601.9
467.1
242.8
246.5
198.8
313.1
339.8

352.9
385.9
116.6
266.6
409.9
114.3
114.3
113.0
370.6
425.1
269.2
398.9
494.4
594.6
465.1
244.2
247.0
199.1
313.5
340.7

353.8
386.9
117.0
267.7
410.7
114.6
114.6
113.7
368.7
421.9
268.6
400.5
496.8
601.7
466.5
244.6
247.1
199.0
313.9
341.5

354.4
389.1
117.9
269.9
412.5
115.1
115.1
114.6
368.5
422.2
268.0
395.6
488.4
615.3
453.9
244.7
248.4
200.3
315.7
342.2

355.0
391.3
118.4
271.7
408.7
115.8
115.9
114.5
372.7
426.4
271.5
392.1
481.5
641.6
440.5
245.9
248.9
200.8
316.4
342.7

355.8
392.3
118.3
272.4
398.1
116.3
116.3
115.0
373.7
426.2
273.3
393.3
483.6
657.3
439.9
245.8
248.8
200.1
317.7
343.2

356.8
393.8
118.8
273.4
401.1
116.7
116.7
115.7
379.1
432.6
277.1
394.6
484.7
650.3
442.6
247.3
248.8
199.8
318.3
343.9

356.5
394.8
119.0
273.7
404.1
117.0
117.0
117.4
379.6
432.8
277.8
390.0
476.3
591.2
444.5
247.9
249.0
199.7
318.6
344.5

357.0
397.0
119.6
275.0
405.5
117.9
117.9
118.0
367.5
422.4
266.1
385.5
467.6
549.9
442.3
249.0
249.8

358.0
400.1
120.9
277.9
410.8
118.7
118.7
118.3
367.6
424.6
264.5
381.8
459.6
518.3
439.2
251.3
249.6
200.4
318.5
345.4

358.5
400.9

204.6
190.2
196.4
166.5
300.7
213.9
216.3
319.9

202.8
188.0
194.5
163.4
294.5
211.4
216.7
321.4

205.3
190.6
197.2
167.7
300.6
210.3
217.5
322.9

209.6
195.3
201.5
176.1
302.0
210.9
215.2
324.1

211.1
196.7
203.2
177.9
302.1
212.3
214.9
325.7

211.2
196.8
203.6
176.5
307.0
215.5
214.9
326.3

209.0
194.2
202.0
172.6
304.1
213.1
214.6
326.9

205.0
189.5
198.6
164.4
313.9
209.1
215.5
329.8

204.1
188.5
196.8
163.4
311.6
207.9
216.1
330.7

206.3
190.8
198.3
167.6
313.1
214.6
331.5

207.3
191.7
199.7
168.0
316.6
211.4
215.3
332.9

206.4
190.7
200.2
164.9
318.5
211.5
215.4
333.6

321.4
316.0
214.2
214.5
384.2
381.6
381.4
349.6
285.6
201.3
310.7
398.4

321.8
316.3
214.3
214.7
380.3
384.7
384.5
350.4
286.6
203.9
311.3
399.3

321.8
316.1
214.3
214.7
376.7
385.5
385.3
351.1
287.6
202.2
313.0
402.4

320.7
314.9
214.2
214.6
374.0
381.9
381.8
351.9
287.7
202.8
313.0
403.7

319.7
313.6
214.2
214.5
374.3
377.7
377.4
353.5
285.8
203.4
310.4
408.0

320.9
314.7
215.9
216.2
375.3
374.6
374.2
355.7
289.6
202.8
315.4
411.5

323.2
317.0
218.2
218.4
376.4
376.7
376.1
355.8
293.9
201.6
321.2
412.8

324.0
317.8
219.2
219.4
375.6
377.5
376.8
357.5
295.2
202.1
322.7
412.9

323.9
317.3
219.7
219.9
374.1
373.3
372.5
357.9
297.7
203.4
325.5
419.6

319.2
312.2

309.6
302.1

303.3
295.3

220.2

220.1

220.4
370.7
351.5
350.8
358.9
299.2
202.9
327.6
422.2

220.3
367.2
308.5
307.7
359.3
301.5
203.6
330.3
421.2

221.0
221.2
364.8
279.5
278.6
360.6
301.6
202.2
330.9
422.2

305.7
297.8
222.8
223.0
363.6
289.3
288.7
361.3
301.3
202.4
330.4
423.7

403.1
256.7
435.1
367.3
517.0

399.5
255.2
430.9
364.5
511.2

401.7
257.0
433.0
366.4
513.6

404.0
257.8
435.8
368.1
517.6

406.6
259.3
438.6
370.0
521.6

408.3
260.2
440.5
371.7
523.9

410.5
261.3
443.0
373.2
527.4

413.0
262.7
445.8
375.5
530.8

414.7
262.9
448.0
377.1
533.6

418.2
264.5
451.9
378.9
540.3

422.3
267.4
456.2
381.6
546.4

425.8
269.4
460.1
385.0
550.8

428.0
271.3
462.3
386.9
553.5

429.7
272.3
464.2
388.3
555.9

255.1
253.3
258.3

265.0
260.6
271.8

263.6
259.5
269.9

264.8
260.1
272.0

265.7
260.8
273.3

265.7
260.5
273.6

266.8
262.5
273.3

268.4
264.0
275.2

269.0
264.0
276.6

268.3
262.5
277.1

270.8
264.7
279.9

272.0
265.2
282.1

271.9
265.0
282.2

272.3
264.8
283.5

272.9
265.3
284.2

307.7
310.0
271.4
269.6
274.1
365.7
322.8
375.6

326.6
328.5
281.9
278.5
286.0
397.1
350.8
407.7

322.3
324.1
280.9
277.5
285.0
388.5
344.5
398.8

323.0
324.8
281.7
277.9
286.1
389.1
344.9
399.4

325.0
330.0
282.3
278.9
286.3
390.1
345.5
400.4

326.0
331.5
283.3
279.4
287.7
390.7
346.1
401.1

333.3
332.8
284.1
280.6
288.2
412.5
362.1
423.9

334.9
334.4
285.0
281.4
289.2
414.7
364.5
426.2

335.3
334.7
285.4
281.1
290.2
415.4
364.7
426.9

336.5
337.4
286.3
282.5
290.6
415.5
364.7
427.0

339.1
342.7
288.1
285.3
291.8
416.8
371.0
427.6

340.3
344.7
289.1
286.0
293.0
417.7
373.8
428.1

341.1
345.6
290.3
287.3
294.0
417.9
374.3
428.3

341.8
346.5
290.5
287.7
294.1
418.9
374.4
429.5

342.1
346.5
290.9
287.9
294.7
419.5
374.5
430.2

May

June

July

Aug.

322.2
374.7

321.3
373.7

322.3
374.8

322.8
375.5

323.5
376.2

295.1
302.9
292.6
305.3
266.6
253.2
317.4
352.2
389.1
288.0
443.0
284.9
333.4
222.1

302.0
309.8
296.8
317.0
263.4
258.0
325.7
361.1
398.8
294.4
451.7
294.2
346.6
229.5

301.0
308.9
296.2
315.9
259.8
258.4
330.3
361.3
397.6
294.0
454.1
293.4
345.1
227.7

301.4
309.3
296.0
317.3
259.8
257.8
329.0
360.8
398.3
296.0
451.5
293.4
346.9
227.8

301.6
309.5
296.2
317.3
260.5
257.8
328.9
360.6
400.2
297.8
448.2
294.5
347.3
227.8

Housing .............................................................................................
S h e lte r...........................................................................................
Renters’ costs ( 1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ).................................................
Rent, residential......................................................................
Other renters’ costs ..............................................................
Homeowners’ costs (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent ( 1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................
Household insurance (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )...................................
Maintenance and re p a irs .........................................................
Maintenance and repair services .......................................
Maintenance and repair com m odities................................
Fuel and other u tilitie s ................................................................
Fuels ...........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ............................................
Gas (piped) and e le c tric ity ...................................................
Other utilities and public s e rv ic e s .........................................
Household furnishings and o p e ratio ns....................................
H ousefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supp lie s............................................................
Housekeeping services............................................................

336.5
361.7
108.6
249.3
373.4
107.3
107.3
107.5
359.2
409.7
262.7
387.3
485.5
641.8
445.2
230.2
242.5
199.1
303.2
327.5

349.9
382.0
115.4
264.6
398.4
113.1
113.2
112.4
368.9
421.1
269.6
393.6
488.1
619.5
452.7
240.7
247.2
200.1
313.6
338.9

348.5
379.5
114.5
262.6
396.5
112.4
112.5
112.0
366.2
416.0
269.2
393.0
490.0
620.8
454.7
236.8
247.6
201.2
312.9
338.0

350.4
381.0
115.1
263.6
401.6
112.8
112.8
112.7
367.6
423.2
265.7
399.4
497.7
612.0
465.6
241.1
247.1
200.0
313.6
338.3

Apparel and u p k e e p ......................................................................
Apparel com m o dities..................................................................
Men’s and boys’ a p p a re l.........................................................
Women’s and girls' apparel ...................................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ a p p a re l................................................
F ootw ear.....................................................................................
Other apparel com m odities.....................................................
Apparel se rvice s..........................................................................

200.2
187.0
192.4
163.6
287.0
209.5
216.4
305.0

206.0
191.6
197.9
169.5
299.7
212.1
215.5
320.9

205.3
191.0
197.8
168.0
298.3
213.2
215.1
319.4

Transportation ................................................................................
Private transportation..................................................................
New ve h icle s.............................................................................
New c a rs .................................................................................
Used c a r s ..................................................................................
Motor f u e l..................................................................................
G aso lin e ..................................................................................
Maintenance and re p a ir..........................................................
Other private transportation...................................................
Other private transportation com m o dities........................
Other private transportation se rvice s................................
Public tran sportation..................................................................

.

311.7
306.6
208.0
208.5
375.7
370.7
370.2
341.5
273.3
201.5
295.0
385.2

319.9
314.2
214.9
215.2
379.7
373.8
373.3
351.4
287.6
202.6
312.8
402.8

Medical c a r e ...................................................................................
Medical care com m o dities........................................................
Medical care se rvice s................................................................
Professional se rv ic e s ..............................................................
Other medical care se rvice s..................................................

.
.
.
.
.

379.5
239.7
410.3
346.1
488.0

Entertainment .................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ......................................................
Entertainment se rvice s..............................................................

.
.
.

Other goods and services ...........................................................
Tobacco products ......................................................................
Personal c a re ..............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances........................
Personal care s e rv ic e s ...........................................................
Personal and educational expenses.......................................
School books and su pp lie s...................................................
Personal and educational s e rv ic e s ......................................

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1984

1985

All ite m s ...............................................................................................
All items (1 9 5 7 -5 9 = 1 0 0 )..................................................................

311.1
361.9

Food and beverages ......................................................................
F o o d ................................................................................................
Food at h o m e ............................................................................
Cereals and bakery p ro d u cts...............................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and e g g s ..............................................
Dairy p ro d u c ts .........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at h o m e ..............................................................
Sugar and s w e e ts ................................................................
Fats and o ils .........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared fo o d s ..........................................................
Food away from home .............................................................
Alcoholic beverages.....................................................................

Sept.

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R A L L U R B A N C O N S U M E R S :

See footnotes at end of table.


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

201.0
317.9
345.1

210.1

121.1
278.4
411.3
118.9
118.9
118.8
367.1
425.5
262.9
382.5
460.6
496.8
444.6
251.5
249.9
200.8
318.3
345.8

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

30. Continued
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Annual

1985

1986

Series

All ite m s .....................
C om m odities...........................
Food and beverages.............
Commodities less food and beverages......
Nondurables less food and beverages .......
Apparel com m odities.................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ...
D urables............................

1984

1985

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

311.1
280.7
295.1

322.2
286.7
302.0

321.3
287.0
301.0

322.3
286.9
301.4

322.8
286.5
301.6

323.5
286.5
301.8

324.5
287.1
302.1

325.5
287.9
302.5

326.6
289.2
303.6

327.4
289.9
305.6

328.4
290.1
307.9

327.5
287.4
307.7

326.0
283.7
307.8

325.3
281.2
308.5

326.3
282.1
309.4

_

_

-

-

275.7
187.0
325.8
266.5

282.1
191.6
333.3
270.7

283.1
191.0
335.1
271.6

283.5
190.2
336.2
270.4

282.9
188.0
336.4
269.3

283.1
190.6
335.4
268.6

284.6
195.3
335.3
268.7

285.3
196.7
335.6
270.2

286.8
196.8
337.8
271.5

286.8
194.2
339.1
271.4

284.9
189.5
338.7
271.4

278.6
188.5
329.5
270.5

268.9
190.8
313.6
269.7

262.0
191.7
302.6
269.2

263.3
190.7
305.2
269.6

363.0
107.7
108.1
321.1
410.3
296.0

381.5
113.9
111.2
337.0
435.1
314.1

378.9
113.2
110.9
334.5
430.9
310.7

381.3
113.6
112.7
335.3
433.0
312.0

383.3
114.3
113.2
337.0
435.8
313.0

384.9
115.1
113.2
337.4
438.6
313.8

386.5
115.4
113.5
337.1
440.5
319.7

387.7
116.1
112.1
341.1
443.0
321.4

388.7
116.7
110.8
344.7
445.8
322.5

389.5
117.0
110.8
346.1
448.0
322.9

391.7
117.4
111.4
349.0
451.9
324.8

393.3
117.7
111.8
351.0
456.2
326.1

394.9
118.5
111.6
352.4
460.1
326.6

396.8
119.4
111.6
353.2
462.3
327.6

397.9
119.7
112.3
353.4
464.2
328.2

311.3
295.1
106.3
307.3
267.0
270.8
311.9
286.6
108.5
355.6
423.6
302.9
301.2
253.1
409.8
356.4

323.3
303.9
109.7
317.7
272.5
277.2
319.2
293.2
113.5
373.3
426.5
314.8
314.4
259.7
409.9
375.9

322.4
303.4
109.5
317.0
273.4
278.0
320.7
293.3
112.8
370.9
431.7
313.3
312.8
259.6
417.0
372.9

323.6
304.3
109.8
317.9
273.1
278.4
321.7
293.7
113.7
373.3
436.8
313.9
313.4
259.0
418.7
374.6

324.2
304.4
109.9
318.4
272.4
277.9
321.9
293.5
114.2
375.2
437.1
314.5
314.1
258.2
418.1
376.6

325.0
304.6
110.1
318.9
272.3
278.1
321.1
293.7
114.5
376.7
433.8
315.6
315.3
258.8
414.0
378.6

326.2
305.7
110.4
319.9
273.1
279.6
321.0
294.6
115.0
378.3
432.6
316.8
316.9
260.2
411.2
380.2

327.4
306.3
110.7
320.8
274.4
280.7
322.0
295.1
115.1
379.3
427.1
318.4
318.9
262.0
410.1
382.5

328.5
307.2
111.1
321.9
275.7
282.0
324.0
296.4
115.2
380.1
425.1
319.8
320.4
262.7
415.2
384.8

328.9
307.9
111.3
322.6
275.7
282.0
325.1
297.4
115.4
380.8
426.5
320.5
320.7
262.2
417.9
385.8

329.5
308.8
111.6
323.4
274.7
280.4
324.9
297.7
116.2
382.7
424.7
321.8
321.6
261.8
413.2
387.9

328.5
307.4
111.2
322.2
270.9
274.5
316.8
294.3
116.8
384.0
408.9
322.3
322.3
261.6
386.5
389.4

326.6
305.2
110.5
320.5
265.2
265.6
302.7
289.5
117.1
385.4
381.3
323.3
323.6
262.0
343.0
391.5

325.7
303.6
110.1
319.7
261.2
259.2
292.9
286.3
117.4
387.2
361.8
324.4
324.8
262.1
313.3
393.8

326.7
304.7
110.4
320.6
262.1
260 5
295.2
287 4
117.8
388.3
367.6
325.0
325.3
262.2
319.3
394.5

32.1
27.6

31.0
26.7

31.1
26.8

31.0
26.7

31.0
26.6

30.9
26.6

30.8
26.5

30.7
26.4

30.6
26.3

30.5
26.3

30.5
26.2

30.5
26.3

30.7
26.4

30.7
26.4

30.6
26.4

All items .................................

307.6
357.7

318.5
370.4

317.8
369.6

318.7
370.6

319.1
371.2

319.6
371.8

320.5
372.7

321.3
373.7

322.6
375.1

323.4
376.1

324.3
377.1

323.2
375.8

321.4
373.7

320.4
372.6

321.4
373.7

Food and beverages ............
F o o d .........................................

295.2
302.7
291.2
303.7
266.0
252.2
312.5
352.7
388.6
287.5
444.4
286.4
336.7
225.3

301.8
309.3
295.3
315.4
262.7
256.9
320.3
361.5
398.3
293.9
453.2
295.7
349.7
232.6

300.8
308.4
294.6
314.1
259.2
257.3
324.8
361.6
396.9
293.6
455.4
294.9
348.4
230.8

301.2
308.8
294.5
315.7
259.3
256.7
323.5
361.3
398.0
295.6
453.0
295.0
350.1
231.0

301.4
309.0
294.6
315.7
259.7
256.6
323.9
361.1
399.8
297.3
449.8
296.1
350.4
231.0

301.6
309.1
294.3
316.8
259.0
256.3
320.6
362.2
401.4
296.5
451.2
297.3
351.5
232.2

301.8
309.3
294.0
317.6
259.9
256.8
313.6
362.9
400.8
294.1
454.1
297.7
353.0
232.6

302.2
309.3
293.7
317.3
260.4
255.9
311.2
363.4
402.2
290.6
455.6
298.3
353.4
239.1

303.4
310.6
295.2
318.2
265.4
255.9
309.4
362.5
400.9
291.8
453.1
298.3
354.4
238.8

305.4
312.8
297.9
320.4
269.2
255.7
319.3
361.6
401.8
289.6
450.4
298.7
355.2
239.1

307.7
315.1
300.9
320.4
270.7
256.0
329.7
366.1
404.7
291.6
461.0
299.4
356.2
240.1

307.5
314.9
300.1
320.9
267.7
256.0
316.0
375.2
408.1
290.8
485.5
300.9
357.3
240.9

307.6
315.0
299.7
321.1
267.2
255.5
314.6
375.6
407.8
289.7
487.4
300.7
358.6
241.4

308.3
315.6
299.9
320.9
263.5
255.5
325.0
376.0
410.9
287.8
487.0
301.6
360.2
242.3

309.0
316.4
300.4
322.1
262.6
255.8
331.6
374.3
410.6
286.6
481.2
302.7
362.0
242.2

329.2
350.0

343.3
370.4

342.1
368.1

344.0
369.5

345.0
371.5

346.2
374.0

347.2
375.0

347.5
377.1

348.3
379.3

349.1
380.4

350.1
381.8

349.7
382.9

350.1
385.0

351.1
388.1

351.6
388.8

248.6
372.4

261.8
396.7
102.5
102.4
102.8
361.8
410.1
260.7
393.8
488.9
623.2
453.0
237.7
244.0
198.9
310.0
339.2

262.7
401.0
102.8
102.8
103.4
362.9
417.0
258.4
400.9
497.7
614.3
465.1
242.0
243.3
197.6
310.8
339.5

264.1
405.2
103.4
103.4
103.5
363.4
415.3
260.0
401.2
497.0
604.2
466.3
243.7
242.6
196.2
310.3
341.0

265.7
409.6
104.1
104.1
103.7
365.6
419.6
260.6
400.1
494.0
596.9
464.2
245.1
243.1
196.6
310.4
342.2

266.8
409.8
104.3
104.3
104.3
364.4
416.8
260.5
401.9
496.7
604.3
465.9
245.6
243.2
196.5
311.0
342.9

268.9
411.6
104.8
104.8
105.2
364.6
417.4
260.5
396.3
487.2
618.1
452.0
245.7
244.5
197.7
312.7
343.9

270.7
408.0
105.5
105.5
105.2
367.7
420.9
262.7
393.2
481.0
644.3
439.5
246.8
245.1
198.3
313.5
344.5

271.5
397.5
105.9
105.9
105.7
368.5
420.1
264.2
394.3
483.1
659.9
438.8
246.7
245.2
197.8
315.0
345.0

272.5
400.8
106.3
106.3
106.3
373.2
426.2
267.2
395.6
484.1
652.7
441.4
248.3
245.1
197.3
315.8
345.6

272.8
403.5
106.6
106.6
107.8
374.0
426.5
268.1
390.9
475.7
593.6
443.2
248.8
245.3
197.2
316.4
346.3

274.1
405.4
107.4
107.3
108.2
364.7
416.6
261.1
386.3
467.1
552.8
441.2
249.9
246.0
198.5
315.5
346.6

277.0
411.6
108.1
108.1
108.5
364.6
419.2
259.4
382.6
459.1
521.5
438.0
252.1
246.0
198.1
316.3
347.1

277.5
411.3
108 3
108.3
109.0
363.8
420.0
258.0
383.0
459.7
499.9
443.0
252 2
246.1
198.4
315.7
347.4

204.2

203.7

201.8

204.3

208.7

210.2

210.2

208.1

204.1

203.1

205.2

206.1

205.1

S e rvices..............................
Rent of sh e lte r.............................
Household services less rent of shelter .
Transportation se rvice s ....................
Medical care se rvice s..................
Other services ..................
Special indexes:
All items less food ...................
All items less s h e lte r.........................
All items less homeowners’ costs ...........
All items less medical c a re ..........

Commodities less fo o d ..........
Nondurables less food .........
Nondurables less food and apparel ...............................................
Services less rent of s h e lte r.............................................................
Services less medical c a r e ...............................................................
All items less energy .........................................................................
All items less food and energy ........................................................
Commodities less food and e n e rg y ................................................
Energy commodities ..........................
Services less ene rgy..................
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1 9 6 7 = $ 1 .0 0 ......................
1957-59 = $ 1 .0 0 .............

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R U R B A N W A G E E A R N E R S
A N D C L E R IC A L W O R K E R S :

Cereals and bakery pro d u c ts ......................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and e g g s .....................................................
Fruits and vegetables...........
Other foods at h o m e .......................
Sugar and sw e e ts .............................
Fats and o ils ............................
Nonalcoholic beverages............................................................
Other prepared fo o d s ..............
Food away from home ................

Housing ................................
Shelter .......................
Renters’ costs (12/84 = 10 0 )................
Rent, reside ntial...................
Other renters' costs ........
Homeowners’ costs (1 2 /8 4 = 1 0 0 )...............................................
Owners' equivalent rent (12/84 = 100) .....................................
Household insurance (12/84 = 1 0 0 )..........................................
Maintenance and re p a irs.............
Maintenance and repair services ..............................................
Maintenance and repair com m odities.......................................
Fuel and other u tilitie s ............
Fuels ...............................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ....................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ..........................................................
Other utilities and public services ............
Household furnishings and operations
H ousefurnishings..........................
Housekeeping supp lie s.................
Housekeeping services.............

356.3
403.5
257.2
388.6
485.0
644.3
444.1
231.2
239.1
197.0
300.2
328.0

263.7
397.9
103.1
103.0
103.2
364.1
415.0
261.1
394.7
487.5
622.0
451.6
241.6
243.4
197.6
310.7
340.2

Apparel and upkeep ...................................

199.1

205.0

84

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

-

-

30. Continued— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)

Series

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

195.1
201.8
178.2
314.9
211.0
202.5
321.6

196.6
203.5
180.0
314.8
212.6
202.4
323.2

196.5
203.7
178.3
320.7
215.9
202.5
323.6

194.1
202.2
174.5
317.3
213.6
202.4
324.4

189.4
198.8
166.1
332.7
209.9
203.5
327.2

188.2
196.8
165.2
328.6
208.4
204.2
328.1

190.4
198.0
169.0
329.6
210.7
203.5
329.0

191.2
199.3
169.3
331.3

190.1
200.0
165.9
334.3

212.1

212.0

204.1
330.2

203.8
330.9

322.3
318.0
213.5
213.9
374.0
383.8
383.7
352.9
287.6
204.9
312.1
393.5

321.1
316.6
213.5
213.8
374.3
379.5
379.2
354.5
285.2
205.6
308.9
396.8

322.2
317.6
215.3
215.5
375.3
376.3
375.8
356.9
289.2
205.0
314.1
399.3

324.6
320.1
217.5
217.8
376.4
378.7
378.1
357.2
293.7
203.7
320.2
400.1

325.3
320.8
218.6
218.8
375.6
379.6
378.9
359.0
294.7
204.3
321.3
400.2

325.1
320.2
219.0
219.2
374.1
375.3
374.6
359.4
296.9
205.6
323.7
408.6

320.1
314.8
219.4
219.7
370.7
353.0
352.3
360.4
298.4
205.4
325.7
412.6

310.3
304.5
219.4
219.5
367.2
309.6
308.8
360.9
300.6
206.0
328.3
412.0

303.5
297.4
220.2
220.4
364.8
280.1
279.1
362.2
300.4
204.6
328.5
413.0

305.9
299.9

402.0
257.4
433.3
368.5
514.4

404.5
259.0
436.1
370.4
518.4

406.3
259.8
438.1
372.1
520.7

408.5
260.9
440.6
373.7
524.4

410.9
262.2
443.2
375.8
527.5

412.6
262.3
445.4
377.6
530.4

416.0
264.1
449.2
379.3
536.9

420.0
267.0
453.5
382.2
543.0

423.5
268.8
457.3
385.6
547.3

425.7
270.7
459.5
387.4
550.0

427.3
271.7
461.3
388.8
552.3

260.1
253.9
272.0

260.9
254.5
273.2

260.8
254.3
273.3

261.6
256.0
272.6

263.0
257.1
274.6

263.7
257.2
276.3

263.0
255.7
276.8

265.4
257.8
280.0

266.5
258.3
282.0

266.5
258.3
282.1

266.9
258.4
283.0

267.3
258.7
283.6

318.8
323.6
278.6
277.8
279.7
390.9
349.5
401.2

319.5
324.4
279.2
278.2
280.7
391.6
349.9
401.9

321.8
329.7
279.9
279.2
280.9
392.5
350.6
402.9

322.9
331.1
280.9
280.0
282.2
393.2
351.2
403.6

328.7
332.4
281.8
281.1
282.8
414.5
366.9
426.1

330.1
334.0
282.7
282.0
283.7
416.5
369.2
428.1

330.5
334.3
283.1
281.9
284.8
417.3
369.3
428.9

331.9
337.1
284.0
283.3
285.2
417.4
369.4
429.1

334.9
342.4
285.9
285.9
286.4
418.9
375.6
429.7

336.1
344.4
286.8
286.7
287.4
419.9
378.4
430.3

337.0
345.2
288.0
288.1
288.4
420.1
379.0
430.5

337.6
346.0
288.2
288.4
288.4
421.2
379.1
431.8

338.0
346.0
288.6
288.6
289.0
422.0
379.1
432.8

318.7
286.8
301.2
277.7
285.4
190.0
337.2
265.1

319.1
286.4
301.4

319.6
286.3
301.6

320.5
286.8
301.8

321.3
287.6
302.2

321.4
283.1
307.6

320.4
280.4
308.3

321.4
281.3
309.0

-

-

-

-

285.1
190.4
336.6
263.1

286.5
195.1
336.4
263.1

287.0
196.6
336.5
264.5

288.7
194.1
340.1
265.7

324.3
289.8
307.7
“
286.9
189.4
339.6
265.6

323.2
287.0
307.5

285.0
187.8
337.6
263.8

322.6
288.9
303.4
288.5
196.5
338.8
265.7

323.4
289.7
305.4

283.8
191.3
334.2
265.2

317.8
286.8
300.8
277.5
284.9
190.7
336.0
266.3

280.1
188.2
330.1
264.6

269.6
190.4
313.2
263.7

262.0
191.2
301.6
263.3

263.6
190.1
304.5
263.5

377.3
103.2
102.6
332.2
432.7
310.1

374.9
102.6
102.2
329.9
428.7
307.2

377.4
102.9
104.2
330.6
430.7
308.4

379.2
103.5
104.5
332.2
433.3
309.3

380.7
104.3
104.6
332.4
436.1
310.1

382.0
104.5
104.8
331.4
438.1
315.0

383.0
105.1
103.3
335.5
440.6
316.7

384.2
105.8
102.1
339.3
443.2
317.8

385.1
106.1
102.0
340.5
445.4
318.3

387.2
106.4
102.6
343.3
449.2
320.4

388.8
106.7
103.0
345.4
453.5
321.6

390.5
107.4
102.8
347.0
457.3
322.1

392.2
108.3
102.7
347.5
459.5
322.9

393.2
108.5
103.4
347.3
461.3
323.6

320.3
304.0
102.0
314.9
272.8
280.0
323.2
294.3
103.C
371.1
437.2
309.E
308.9
255.8
419.8
371.

320.9
304.0
102.1
315.3
272.7
280.2
322.4
294.5
103.5
372.5
433.9
310.4
309.4
255.8
415.'
373.'

321.9
304.8
102.4
316.1
273.4
281.5
322.C
295.2
103.8
373.8
432.E
311.
310.'
257.2
412.8
37 4 /

322.9
305.4
102.6
316.9
274.5
282.4
323.1
295.7
103.9
374.5
426.8
313.C
312.7
258.8
411.2
377.2

324.2
306.4
103.0
318.1
275.9
283.8
325.0
297.1
103.9
375.5
425.4
314.5
314.2
259.E
416.C
379.8

324.6
307.2
103.2
318.9
275.9
283.9
326.C
298.2
104.2
376.2
426.8
315.:
314.8
259.2
418.E
380.i

325.1
307.9
103.5
319.6
275.0
282.3
325.9
298.4
104.9
378.2
424.7
316.5
315.4
258.8
414.1
382.9

323.8
306.4
103.0
318.3
270.9
276.1
317.5
295.0
105.5
379.5
408.1
316.9
316.1
258.5
387.3
384.5

321.5
303.8
102.3
316.2
264.9
266.4
302.6
289.8
105.7
381.0
379.0
317.8
317.2
258.7
343.3
386.5

320.2
302.1
101.8
315.2
260.7
259.4
292.2
286.3
105.9
382.7
358.4
318.8
318.3
258.8
312.9
388.8

321.2
303.0

31.:
26.<

31.
26.8

31.
26.8

31.
26.'

30.8
26.5

30.9
26.6

31.1
26.8

31.2
26.8

31.1
26.8

June

July

Aug.

191.3
198.2
171.3
311.7
212.5
203.1
318.5

190.7
198.2
169.7
310.6
213.3
202.7
317.0

190.0
196.6
168.4
313.5
214.1
204.0
317.6

187.8
194.8
165.5
306.4
211.6
204.5
319.0

190.4
197.3
169.9
311.2
210.5
205.2
320.5

313.9
310.1
207.3
207.9
375.7
372.2
371.8
342.2
274.2
203.9
295.4
376.8

321.6
317.4
214.2
214.5
379.7
375.4
375.0
352.6
287.7
204.7
312.3
391.7

323.3
319.4
213.5
213.8
384.2
383.0
382.7
350.6
285.9
203.5
310.4
387.6

323.6
319.6
213.6
214.0
380.3
386.2
386.0
351.5
286.9
205.9
310.9
388.4

323.5
319.3
213.6
214.0
376.7
387.2
387.0
352.2
287.7
204.3
312.4
392.1

Medical c a r e ...........................................................
Medical care com m o dities................................
Medical care se rvice s........................................
Professional se rvice s.....................................
Other medical care se rvic e s.........................

377.7
239.7
407.9
346.5
484.7

401.2
256.3
432.7
367.7
513.9

397.7
254.8
428.7
365.0
508.2

399.8
256.7
430.7
366.8
510.5

E n tertainm ent........................................................
Entertainment commodities .............................
Entertainment se rvice s.....................................

251.2
247.7
258.5

260.1
254.2
271.6

258.9
253.1
270.0

Other goods and services ..................................
Tobacco products .............................................
Personal c a re ......................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances
Personal care s e rv ic e s ..................................
Personal and educational expe nses..............
School books and supp lie s...........................
Personal and educational s e rv ic e s .............

304.9
309.7
269.4
270.3
268.8
368.2
327.5
378.2

322.7
328.1
279.6
279.0
280.5
399.3
355.7
410.1

All ite m s .....................................................................................
C om m odities..........................................................................
Food and beverages..........................................................
Commodities less food and beverages..........................
Nondurables less food and beverages .......................
Apparel com m odities...................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ....
Durables ...............- ..........................................................

307.6
280.4
295.2
269.3
277.5
186.6
327.0
261.1

318.5
286.5
301.8

S e rvices.................................................................................
Rent of shelter (12/84 = 1 0 0 ).........................................
Household services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 100)
Transportation se rvice s....................................................
Medical care se rvices.......................................................
Other services ...................................................................

358.0

1985

Apparel co m m o dities..........................................
Men’s and boys’ a p p a re l.................................
W omen’s and girls’ apparel ............................
Infants’ and toddlers’ a p p a re l........................
F ootw ear............................................................
Other apparel com m odities............................
Apparel se rvice s..................................................

186.6
192.9
165.0
297.6
210.0
204.5
302.9

Transportation ........................................................
Private transportation.........................................
New ve h icle s.....................................................
New c a rs .........................................................
Used c a r s ..........................................................
Motor f u e l..........................................................
G asoline..........................................................
Maintenance and re p a ir..................................
Other private tran sportation...........................
Other private transportation commodities .
Other private transportation services........
Public tran sportation..........................................

Special indexes:
All items less food ........................................ ...................
All items less s h e lte r........................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (1 2 /8 4 = 1 0 0 )........
All items less medical c a r e .............................................
Commodities less fo o d ....................................................
Nondurables less food ....................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel .............................
N ondurables......................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 1 0 0 ).................
Services less medical c a r e ............................................
E n erg y................................................................................
All items less energy .......................................................
All items less food and energy .....................................
Commodities less food and e n e rg y ..............................
Energy commodities ........................................................
Services less ene rgy........................................................
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1 9 6 7 = $ 1 .0 0 ......................................................................
1 9 5 7 -5 9 = $ 1 .0 0 ................................................................

_

_

319.4
303.4
101.8
304.0 314.3
272.8
267.1
272.Ê 279.C
313.2 320.C
287.4
293.9
102.8
369.C
350.E
423.C 426.:
309.Î
298.2
308.'
295.8
256.Î
250.Î
410.
410.'
371.
350.f

307.5
295.1

_

32.
28. 3

May

Oct.

May

1984

317.2
407.9
292.9

1986

1985

Annual
average

31. t
27. D

318.7 319.8
303.0 303.9
101.7 102.0
313.7 314.6
273.8 273.6
279.8 280.4
321.8 322.9
294.C 294.4
102.8
101.9
369.C
366.8
436.9
431.
309.1
308.8
307.C 307.8
256.2
256.8
419.8
418.C
369.9
368.<

31.<
27.(

31.
27.

31.:
26.

Sept.

30.
26.

222.0
222.3
363.6
290.3
289.6
362.8
299.8
204.9
327.7
413.8

102.1
316.1
261.6
260.9
294.9
287.5
106.2
383.6
364.6
319.2
318.6
258.8
319.8
389.4

_

-

Data not available.


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

85

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
31.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items

(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
All Urban Consumers
Area1

Pricing
sche­
dule2

U.S. city a ve ra g e .....................

1985

1986

May

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

May

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

321.3

322.3

328.4

327.5

326.0

325.3

32o.3

317.8

318.7

324.3

323.2

321.4

320.4

321.4

-

319.8
316.1

324.1
317.0

326.3
323.1

326.4
322.9

323.9
320.0

323.7
318.8

324.2
321.7

306.9
306.6

310.9
307.4

312.9
313.4

312.8
312.3

309.7
309.3

309.1
308.1

309.6
311.0

319.1

319.3

326.8

326.6

328.2

326.8

329.4

314.1

314.1

320.9

320.4

321.6

320.2

322.7

_

312.6
314.2

313.2
314.2

323.1
320.3

322.3
320.1

322.4
319.1

321.4
317.8

320.6
318.9

305.8
317.2

306.3
317.2

315.8
323.0

314.7
322.8

314.5
321.4

313.2
319.7

312.3
320.8

-

-

291.2
331.1
324.9
329.4
355.7
174.5
329.1
309.3
315.0
319.2
379.2
325.0
329.1

_
_
-

288.9
329.1
322.6
332.0
356.3
173.0
332.0
309.2
314.6
318.6
382.8
323.5
329.6

271.9
322.3
313.2
324.0
351.9
172.2
350.2
305.2
301.2
313.0
336.5
308.4
323.0

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_

280.2
331.1
324.5
326.0
359.1
175.7
353.0
310.6
311.0
319.1
344.7
313.5
332.6

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_

284.4
329.5
322.3
321.8
350.1
175.1
347.2
308.3
304.3
315.0
341.9
311.4
330.5

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_

-

287.1
332.0
327.1
333.2
364.4
174.6
333.9
311.6
321.3
322.4
381.9
327.0
331.1

281.8
326.8
319.3
324.8
350.3
173.4
350.6
308.1
303.2
314.2
345.2
309.4
330.2

_

_
_
_
_
_
_
_

326.0
293.7
325.3
333.5
300.4
335.0
310.5

_

334.3
295.8
328.3
340.4
308.5
334.3
310.1

332.3
308.3
328.7

Anchorage, Alaska
(10/67 = 100) ........................
Baltimore, Md............................
Boston, Mass..............................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind............
Denver-Boulder, Colo................
Miami, Fla. (11/77 = 100 ).....
Milwaukee, Wis..........................
Northeast, Pa.............................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash................
St. Louis, Mo.-lll.........................
San Diego, Calif.........................
Seattle-Everett, Wash...............
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.........

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

10/67
11/77
-

278.8
323.1
315.2
330.4
356.3
171.0
330.9
306.0
310.4
315.9
372.1
321.0
319.8
_
-

328.0
307.3
346.4
339.6
293.5
337.6
320.1

_
-

336.9
310.1
350.2
347.0
301.2
337.2
321.1

336.7
325.9
333.2

-

339.9
330.1
341.1

-

M

-

Alanta, Ga...................................
Buffalo, N.Y.................................
Cleveland, Ohio ........................
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex................
Honolulu, H a w a ii.......................
Houston, Tex..............................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas .......
Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Minn.-Wis...................................
Pittsburgh, Pa.............................
San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.

2
2
2
2
2
2
2

_
-

2
2
2

.

-

-

-

-

Region3
N o rth e a st................................
North C e n tra l..........................
S o u th .......................................
West ........................................

2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77

-

Population size class3
A-1 ...........................................
A - 2 ...........................................
B ...............................................
C ...............................................
D ..............................................

2
2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77

-

Region/population size class
cross classification3
Class A:
Northeast .............................
North C e n tra l.......................
South ....................................
W e s t......................................

2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
11/77

Class B:
Northeast .............................
North C e n tra l.......................
South ....................................
W e s t......................................

2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77


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

1985

-

M
M

M
M

Urban Wage Earners

1986

Chicago, lll.-Northwestern
Ind...............................................
Detroit, Mich...............................
Los Angeles-Long Beach,
Anaheim, Calif...........................
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern
N.J...............................................
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J.................

See footnotes at end of table.

86

Other
index
base

-

-

-

-

-

170.4
174.2
173.8
174.6

_
-

170.9
176.0
174.7
172.3
171.9

-

167.5
177.6
174.1
176.1

173.5
172.6
175.3
176.2

-

-

_
-

-

_
_

334.9
308.0
346.9
341.4
299.0
330.0
320.7

_
_
_
_
_
_

_

338.4
328.1
339.3

_

_

-

-

173.7
173.9
175.1
176.8

_
-

_
_

-

-

173.9
177.4
175.6
173.4
172.7

_
-

_
-

-

-

171.0
177.8
175.5
179.6

_

_
_

-

-

174.7
172.1
177.0
176.7

_

_

-

_
_

174.5
175.4
176.6
177.5

_
-

174.7
178.7
176.9
174.7
174.0

-

171.8
179.2
177.3
179.8

176.4
173.7
178.2
177.6

-

-

-

_
_
"

-

-

_
_
_
_
_

_

_
-

168.4
171.0
173.7
172.8

_
_
-

167.2
173.2
172.3
172.9
173.5

_
-

-

-

164.2
172.8
174.2
172.2

_
_

170.5
169.0
172.2
176.8

_
_

-

_
-

_
-

_

_
_

_
_
_

334.9
311.4
336.0

_

172.3
171.8
176.1
175.4

_
_
_

170.5
175.5
174.2
175.0
175.2

_
-

168.1
174.0
177.0
175.5

173.4
169.7
174.6
178.2

-

-

-

_

_
-

_
_
_
-

_
331.7
292.7
324.4
334.1
306.0
327.7
308.9
332.3
307.8
333.2

171.1
170.0
174.1
174.5

_
_
_

_
_
_

_

-

_
_
_
-

169.3
173.8
172.7
173.4
173.6

_
_
_

166.9
172.1
174.9
174.9

_
_

171.7
167.7
173.2
177.1

-

-

_
_
_
-

31. Continued— Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Urban Wage Earners

All Urban Consumers
Area1

Pricing
sche­
dule2

Other
index
base

May

June

Jan.

Mar.

Feb.

1986

1985

1986

1985

Apr.

May

May

Jan.

June

Feb.

Mar.

Class C:
2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77

2
2
2
2

12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77

_

179.0
169.6
172.8
168.4

_
_

183.1
170.4
175.3
171.1

173.7
170.4
172.2
172.5

_
_

178.9
170.7
174.7
174.8

_

_
_
_

183.0
168.5
173.6
170.5

_

183.7
166.7
174.5
167.2

_

_

_

_

_

-

187.8
167.1
176.6
169.6

-

Class D:

_
_

_

_
_
_

_

_

_

_

_

_

173.8
172.5
174.0
174.2

-

178.6
172.4
176.0
176.3

-

May

187.4
165.1
174.3
168.9

177.2
171.4
174.0
173.9

Annual data: Consumer Price Index all items and major groups
Series

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

181.5
6.5

195.4
7.7

217.4
11.3

246.8
13.5

272.4
10.4

289.1
6.1

298.4
3.2

311.1
4.3

322.2
3.6

188.0
6.0

206.3
9.7

228.5
10.8

248.0
8.5

267.3
7.8

278.2
4.1

284.4
2.2

295.1
3.8

302.0
2.3

186.5
6.8

202.8
8.7

227.6
12.2

263.3
15.7

293.5
11.5

314.7
7.2

323.1
2.7

336.5
4.1

349.9
4.0

154.2
4.5

159.6
3.5

166.6
4.4

178.4
7.1

186.9
4.8

191.8
2.6

196.5
2.5

200.2
1.9

206.0
2.9

177.2
7.1

185.5
4.7

212.0
14.3

249.7
17.8

280.0
12.1

291.5
4.1

298.4
2.4

311.7
4.5

319.9
2.6

202.4
9.6

219.4
8.4

239.7
9.3

265.9
10.9

294.5
10.8

328.7
11.6

357.3
8.7

379.5
6.2

403.1
6.2

167.7
4.9

176.6
5.3

188.5
6.7

205.3
8.9

221.4
7.8

235.8
6.5

246.0
4.3

255.1
3.7

265.0
3.9

172.2
5.8

183.3
6.4

196.7
7.3

214.5
9.0

235.7
9.9

259.9
10.3

288.3
10.9

307.7
6.7

326.6
6.1

181.5
6.5

195.3
7.6

217.7
11.5

247.0
13.5

272.3
10.2

288.6
6.0

297.4
3.0

307.6
3.4

318.5
3.5

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

-

-

-

A-2 - 1,250,000 to 4,000,000.
B - 385,000 to 1,250,000
C
- 75,000 to 385,000.
D
- Less than 75,000.
Population size class A is the aggregation of population size classes A-1
and A-2.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI
program. 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
Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average
CPI for use in escalator clauses.

1 Area is generally the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA),
exclusive of farms. L.A.-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif, is a combination of
two SMSA’s, and N.Y., N.Y.-Northeastern N.J. and Chicago, III.Northwestern Ind. are the more extensive Standard Consolidated Areas.
Area definitions are those established by the Office of Management and
Budget in 1973, except for Denver-Boulder, Colo, which does not include
Douglas County. Definitions do not include revisions made since 1973.
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.
3 Regions are defined as the four Census regions.
The population size classes are aggregations of areas which have urban
population as defined:
A-1 - More than 4,000,000.

32.

177.9
170.0
173.2
172.6

Apr.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
33.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

(1967 = 100)
Annual average

1985

1986

G r o u p in g

1984

1985

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

291.1
290.3
273.3

293.7
291.8
271.2

294.0
292.2
268.7

294.8
293.1
271.2

293.5
291.4
268.7

290.0
288.2
265.7

294.7
292.3
268.2

296.4
294.4
271.8

297.2
295.4
275.0

296.0
293.8
275.0

292.3
288.9
272.3

288.1
283.5
272.2

286.9
281.6
272.4

289.0
284.2
274.9

294.1
337.3
236.8
294.0

297.3
339.3
241.5
300.5

299.0
342.1
241.9
300.5

299.2
342.4
241.9
300.8

297.8
340.0
241.8
301.0

294.7
340.3
234.5
296.3

299.4
340.3
244.9
303.5

300.7
342.6
245.0
303.8

300.7
343.2
244.3
303.7

298.3
339.6
243.5
303.9

292.5
329.3
243.6
304.2

284.4
315.0
243.9
304.3

281.4
308.6
245.4
305.6

284.1
312.9
245.8
305.8

320.0

318.7

319.3

318.6

317.9

317.7

317.6

318.1

318.9

317.4

313.5

309.4

307.0

306.8

301.8
271.1
290.5
325.1
287.5

299.5
258.8
285.9
320.2
291.5

300.3
262.0
286.4
322.3
291.3

299.8
260.3
285.8
320.9
291.6

299.1
253.0
285.8
320.3
291.9

298.4
249.9
285.1
319.2
292.1

298.0
252.3
283.3
318.6
292.3

297.7
254.0
282.8
317.5
292.3

297.9
254.3
283.1
317.6
292.4

297.1
252.8
283.8
313.4
293.1

296.5
248.9
283.0
313.0
293.3

296.4
246.3
281.9
313.6
294.2

295.2
244.6
279.0
313.1
294.1

295.3
248.6
278.0
313.2
294.1

310.3
566.2
302.3
283.4

315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2

317.3
549.1
312.0
283.3

316.9
544.0
311.4
283.6

316.5
539.8
310.3
284.1

315.6
542.4
309.9
284.5

315.5
542.6
310.4
285.1

315.0
550.5
309.8
285.6

315.7
557.2
310.6
285.7

316.2
540.8
311.2
286.6

316.6
500.7
310.6
286.3

316.8
453.9
311.2
286.7

318.0
430.2
312.5
287.0

318.3
425.7
313.9
287.2

330.8
259.5
380.5

306.1
235.0
355.3

305.6
233.7
354.0

303.9
231.6
353.5

295.3
221.0
351.2

291.8
215.4
352.2

297.8
224.6
352.8

304.7
236.6
352.0

304.3
236.8
351.6

301.0
231.7
352.4

290.5
226.9
321.7

280.9
224.0
293.2

272.8
220.1
280.8

278.9
228.9
278.8

294.8
750.3
265.1
257.8
262.3

299.0
720.9
269.2
261.3
268.7

300.2
741.4
268.4
260.3
268.6

300.5
733.8
269.7
261.9
269.4

299.5
719.9
269.0
260.9
269.4

295.9
718.2
265.5
257.7
265.7

301.3
716.5
270.5
262.1
271.6

302.4
729.5
271.6
263.4
271.8

302.4
733.8
272.2
264.3
271.4

300.7
700.9
272.7
264.8
272.1

296.7
636.8
272.2
264.1
272.4

291.1
551.1
272.3
264.2
272.6

289.4
511.3
273.2
265.0
273.7

291.3
532.7
274.2
266.2
274.2

245.9

252.1

252.0

252.9

252.9

249.6

254.9

255.0

254.6

255.5

255.9

256.1

257.1

257.7

239.0

246.2

245.6

247.4

247.3

247.9

248.3

248.5

248.3

250.5

251.1

251.3

251.8

252.5

Intermediate materials less foods and
fe e d s ...................................
Intermediate foods and fe e d s ...............
Intermediate energy goods .......................
Intermediate goods less e n e rg y ................
Intermediate materials less foods and
e n e rg y ........................................

325.0
253.1
545.0
303.8

325.0
232.8
528.3
304.0

325.7
232.2
528.6
304.6

325.0
231.7
523.8
304.3

324.5
227.1
519.8
303.9

324.4
225.4
522.3
303.4

324.1
228.6
522.2
303.4

324.5
231.4
529.3
303.2

325.3
232.7
536.2
303.5

323.6
232.6
520.0
303.4

319.7
228.6
481.9
303.0

315.5
227.6
437.4
303.2

312.9
226.8
414.9
302.8

312.5
229.4
410.5
303.0

303.6

305.2

306.0

305.6

305.5

305.0

304.6

304.2

304.5

304.3

304.2

304.4

304.0

304.0

Crude energy m aterials..................................
Crude materials less energy ..............
Crude nonfood materials less e n e rg y..........

785.2
255.5
266.1

748.1
233.2
249.7

754.5
231.7
247.4

752.6
230.1
247.2

742.9
221.8
245.8

743.2
217.9
246.7

743.1
224.7
246.5

737.1
233.2
244.6

735.6
233.0
242.9

732.8
229.8
245.8

679.0
225.9
244.6

618.4
224.0
245.6

570.7
221.8
249.1

571.6
228.5
249.3

F in is h e d g o o d s ...........................

Finished consumer goods .................
Finished consumer fo o d s .........................
Finished consumer goods excluding
foods ...................................................
Nondurable goods less food .........
Durable goods ......................
Capital e qu ipm ent....................................
In t e r m e d i a t e m a t e r ia ls , s u p p lie s , a n d
c o m p o n e n t s ...............................................

Materials and components for
manufacturing ..................................
Materials for food m anufacturing............
Materials for nondurable manufacturing .
Materials for durable m anufacturing.......
Components for m anufacturing...............
Materials and components for
construction........................................
Processed fuels and lu bricants..................
Containers...................................
Supplies...................................
C r u d e m a t e r ia ls f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e s s in g ...

Foodstuffs and feedstuffs ......................
Nonfood materials1 .................................
S p e c ia l g r o u p in g s

Finished goods, excluding fo o d s ..................
Finished energy goods ............................
Finished goods less e n e rg y .......................
Finished consumer goods less e n e rg y ........
Finished goods less food and energy .........
Finished consumer goods less food and
e n e rg y .............................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and
e n e rg y ..................................................

1 Crude nonfood materials except fuel.

88


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

34.

Producer Price indexes, by durability of product

(1967 = 100)
1986

1985

Annual average
Grouping
1984

1985

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Total durable g o o d s ........................................
Total nondurable g o o d s ..................................

293.6
323.3

297.3
317.2

297.8
317.5

297.8
317.3

297.8
314.1

295.2
313.0

298.8
314.3

298.5
317.6

298.5
318.8

298.1
316.8

298.3
309.0

298.7
300.6

299.5
295.7

299.7
297.9

Total m anufactures..........................................

302.9
293.9
312.3

304.3
298.1
310.5

304.8
298.7
311.0

304.6
298.7
310.6

303.8
298.6
309.0

302.2
296.0
308.4

304.4
299.7
309.2

305.4
299.5
311.4

306.0
299.5
312.5

304.8
299.0
310.6

301.0
299.2
302.7

297.3
299.5
294.7

296.0
300.3
291.2

296.9
300.5
292.8

346.6
266.7
351.4

327.9
252.2
332.4

327.3
247.3
332.1

327.5
247.6
332.3

320.2
249.7
324.4

317.6
249.7
321.6

320.6
248.1
324.9

326.2
245.2
331.2

327.6
244.3
332.7

326.0
248.2
330.6

319.0
250.6
323.1

310.4
251.5
313.8

302.0
252.7
304.7

305.6
252.0
308.7

N o ndurable.....................................................

Total raw or slightly processed goods ........
N o ndurable.....................................................

35.

Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

(1967 = 100)
Index
Finished goods:
Total ...........................................................................
Consumer g o o d s ..................................................
Capital equipment ...............................................

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

181.7
180.7
184.6

195.9
194.9
199.2

217.7
217.9
216.5

247.0
248.9
239.8

269.8
271.3
264.3

280.7
281.0
279.4

285.2
284.6
287.2

291.1
290.3
294.0

293.7
291.8
300.5

Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components:
Total ...........................................................................
Materials and components for
m anufacturing......................................................
Materials and components for construction ....
Processed fuels and lubricants .........................
C o nta iners.............................................................
S u p p lie s.................................................................

201.5

215.6

243.2

280.3

306.0

310.4

312.3

320.0

318.7

195.4
203.4
282.5
188.3
188.7

208.7
224.7
295.3
202.8
198.5

234.4
247.4
364.8
226.8
218.2

265.7
268.3
503.0
254.5
244.5

286.1
287.6
595.4
276.1
263.8

289.8
293.7
591.7
285.6
272.1

293.4
301.8
564.8
286.6
277.1

301.8
310.3
566.2
302.3
283.4

299.5
315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2

Crude materials for further processing:
T o t a l...........................................................................
Foodstuffs and fe e d s tu ffs ..................................
Nonfood materials except fuel ..........................
Fuel ........................................................................

209.2
192.1
212.2
372.1

234.4
216.2
233.1
426.8

274.3
247.9
284.5
507.6

304.6
259.2
346.1
615.0

329.0
257.4
413.7
751.2

319.5
247.8
376.8
886.1

323.6
252.2
372.2
931.5

330.8
259.5
380.5
931.3

306.1
235.0
355.3
909.6


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

89

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
36.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

(June 1977 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o r y

1974
SITC

A L L C O M M O D IT IE S ( 9 / 8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................

1983
Sept.

1984
Dec.

Mar.

June

1985

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

1986

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

100.0

99.5

100.2

101.5

99.3

98.1

97.5

97.5

96.5

96.7

97.0

0
01
03
04
05
08
09

113.1
100.8
97.7
111.5
114.8
121.4
102.8

108.8
101.2
100.4
105.6
116.1
117.4
101.7

106.2
108.9
99.8
102.7
116.2
106.9
104.9

109.6
108.7
98.7
107.4
126.8
98.8
110.6

103.5
105.6
98.0
101.2
125.5
83.5
109.5

96.5
104.4
98.7
92.9
114.6
82.4
108.4

95.8
103.9
101.0
92.4
119.4
72.8
110.6

94.0
104.7
103.6
90.3
120.1
68.6
109.2

90.2
106.1
102.6
82.6
126.8
75.7
108.1

93.6
112.2
101.8
87.1
118.8
83.4
107.7

90.5
111.5
102.2
82.1
115.2
88.5
106.0

1
11
12

100.0
100.0
100.0

101.5
103.3
101.4

101.6
102.3
101.6

101.9
102.9
101.8

102.8
103.3
102.7

101.3
103.7
101.1

99.9
104.0
99.5

100.1
105.3
99.6

99.7
101.8
99.5

98.6
100.9
98.4

95.6
101.9
95.1

2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

114.6
129.2
105.6
100.0
128.7
103.5
117.3
144.8
100.0

112.2
135.2
96.8
102.2
129.8
106.0
123.1
144.8
96.7

112.5
145.6
93.9
103.3
131.1
112.5
120.5
146.6
100.2

118.3
154.7
104.3
106.0
129.4
122.1
125.6
147.7
98.5

105.2
153.7
79.9
104.1
123.8
120.8
109.4
163.0
93.2

101.4
133.6
74.8
104.0
125.4
114.2
106.7
163.2
92.4

97.5
121.0
71.0
106.4
128.7
100.5
102.4
165.6
89.2

96.8
126.2
71.2
106.3
125.7
96.1
105.8
167.9
82.0

93.3
129.0
64.2
107.1
124.5
93.8
103.6
169.4
80.1

92.5
139.9
63.9
106.0
128.1
92.7
97.7
165.5
78.7

95.8
138.9
66.9
106.0
128.7
99.3
101.6
168.0
83.4

3

100.0

99.2

99.1

99.7

99.7

99.7

100.1

99.2

97.6

96.6

91.9

4
42

125.6
138.2

122.0
129.3

129.8
133.2

164.5
176.4

145.7
159.0

147.9
156.7

142.0
152.9

144.5
164.8

114.5
128.8

101.4
108.7

90.8
95.4

5
51
56

97.0

Organic chemicals ( 1 2 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
Fertilizers, manufactured (3 /8 3 —1 0 0 )................................

89.8

98.6
100.0
96.8

101.4
100.2
108.3

99.7
101.0
96.9

98.3
97.4
97.4

97.7
94.7
94.8

97.0
93.8
92.5

96.8
96.5
87.9

97.1
97.1
89.8

96.6
95.4
90.0

96.5
93.5
88.6

(9 /8 1 —1 0 0 )..........
Leather and furskins ( 9 /7 9 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................
Rubber manufactures .........................................
Paper and paperboard products ( 6 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................
Iron and steel (3/82 = 100) ................................
Nonferrous metals (9 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ....................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s. (3 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................

6
61
62
64

100.8
70.1
145.0
139.7
96.6
102.3
101.9

100.0
75.8
145.0
145.5
96.3
93.8
102.1

101.0
83.5
146.7
150.2
95.9
94.2
103.1

101.3
81.2
147.5
154.7
96.1
92.9
104.5

102.0
80.8
148.9
160.0
96.8
90.4
105.1

100.4
79.0
148.5
159.5
96.5
82.5
105.0

99.4
82.5
150.2
155.0
95.5
79.7
105.4

99.2
79.2
149.0
151.6
95.3
79.6
105.2

99.2
75.9
148.3
149.6
95.9
79.8
105.4

99.1
78.5
148.7
148.2
98.2
78.2
104.4

100.3
77.8
151.0
152.2
98.4
80.2
105.3

67
68
69
7
71
72
73
74
75
76

135.9
152.3
149.1
148.3
145.4
103.2
132.2
109.4
127.5
176.4

137.0
154.4
151.1
148.7
145.9
102.5
132.1
109.8
128.8
179.3

138.5
158.4
152.3
150.8
148.6
101.4
133.0
110.2
130.2
183.1

139.4
156.9
152.8
151.2
149.0
101.5
132.3
112.6
131.2
187.7

140.1
160.6
153.7
151.7
149.3
99.8
134.4
113.8
131.0
189.6

141.5
167.5
153.4
151.9
150.2
101.4
134.3
114.6
131.8
191.7

142.3
165.3
155.0
153.4
152.4
100.9
133.3
114.9
133.1
195.5

142.9
167.4
155.7
155.1
152.0
100.0
133.3
116.1
133.9
196.6

143.1
167.1
156.0
156.3
152.4
99.9
134.1
115.3
133.8
199.3

143.3
167.5
156.1
158.4
152.2
99.4
134.5
113.8
135.0
200.7

144.0
169.1
155.4
159.0
152.3
99.9
136.5
115.1
135.5
203.3

77
78
79

100.0
100.0
169.0

100.2
100.8
171.5

100.6
101.9
171.8

100.4
102.1
172.0

100.7
103.9
175.8

99.3
103.4
171.7

99.5
104.7
175.5

100.4
104.7
178.3

100.3
105.0
178.7

100.3
105.3
178.8

182.2

8

130.0

132.0

132.0

131.3

132.7

130.3

128.0

129.1

127.5

128.5

131.6

84

100.0

98.2

98.5

97.9

95.2

94.1

92.4

93.1

93.1

92.4

95.6

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

F o o d ( 3 / 8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ..........................................................

Meat ( 3 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................
Fish (3/83 = 100) .....................................
Grain and grain preparations (3 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................
Vegetables and fruit (3 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................
Feedstuffs for animals ( 3 /8 3 = 1 0 0 )........................................
Misc. food products (3 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................
B e v e r a g e s a n d t o b a c c o ( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................

Beverages (9/83 = 1 0 0 )..................................
Tobacco and tobacco products (6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .........................
C r u d e m a t e r ia ls ( 6 / 8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................

Raw hides and skins ( 6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................
Oilseeds and oleaginous fruit ( 9 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaimed) ( 9 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .................
W o o d .......................................................
Pulp and waste paper (6/83 = 100) ................................................................
Textile fib e rs .............................................
Crude fertilizers and m inerals.....................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap ....................................

M in e r a l f u e l s ..............................................................................

A n im a l a n d v e g e t a b l e s o ils , fa ts , a n d w a x e s ................................................

Fixed vegetable oils and fats (6 /8 3 —1 0 0 ).....................................

C h e m ic a ls ( 3 / 8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................

In t e r m e d i a t e m a n u f a c t u r e d p r o d u c ts

-

-

-

M a c h in e r y a n d t r a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t , e x c lu d in g m ilit a r y
a n d c o m m e r c ia l a ir c r a f t ( 1 2 / 7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ......................

Power generating machinery and equipment (12/7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ...................
Machinery specialized for particular industries (9 /7 8 —100) .......
Metalworking machinery (6 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) .....
General industrial machines and parts n.e.s. 9 /7 8 = 1 0 0 )
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment ........
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing equipment
Electrical machinery and equipm ent....................
Road vehicles and parts ( 3 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ..........
Other transport equipment, excl. military and commercial aviation ........

O t h e r m a n u f a c t u r e d a r t i c l e s .........................

Apparel (9 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and apparatus
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches and
clocks ( 1 2 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ).....................................

Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s...........................

G o ld , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .........................

-

90

Data not available.


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

971

-

-

102.6

_

-

37.

U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

(June 1977=100, unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o r y

1974
SITC

Mar.

June

1986

1985

1984
Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.
88.5

98.0

98.3

96.7

95.7

93.5

93.0

92.9

94.2

0
01
02
03

102.5
133.4
100.8
132.7

103.5
133.8
99.8
134.2

102.0
135.4
98.9
134.2

98.1
132.3
98.4
133.9

98.5
130.4
98.3
132.9

96.8
118.2
97.9
129.4

94.9
120.6
99.1
129.7

102.8
131.2
100.5
132.7

113.5
122.7
106.8
139.3

04
05
06
07

136.5
136.1
117.1
61.4

134.8
135.8
120.3
62.4

132.9
135.4
119.0
60.3

132.8
117.2
118.5
58.4

131.8
127.1
118.4
57.0

132.3
129.4
122.6
56.0

136.3
120.2
123.1
54.4

141.9
131.3
111.9
64.6

146.9
119.4
124.6
85.9

1
11

155.3
152.6

156.3
153.6

157.1
153.5

156.5
152.8

156.2
154.2

157.1
154.3

158.0
156.0

162.1
159.1

163.2
161.8

Crude rubber (inc. synthetic & reclaimed) (3 /8 4 —1 0 0 )..............................
Wood (9 /8 1 -1 0 0 ) .............................................................................................
Pulp and waste paper (1 2 /8 1 —1 0 0 )..............................................................
Crude fertilizers and crude minerals (12/83 = 100) .....................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap ( 3 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) .........................................
Crude vegetable and animal materials, n.e.s.................................................

2
23
24
25
27
28
29

103.2
100.0
114.8
87.6
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.6
93.7
103.2
96.1
96.2
102.8
100.8

100.6
90.7
99.6
96.3
98.0
100.1
101.1

98.9
83.8
104.0
93.2
98.6
95.6
106.4

94.0
77.6
100.7
84.0
100.3
90.4
104.3

93.6
76.4
106.9
80.4
101.7
87.6
104.9

91.5
68.9
101.6
76.8
102.7
89.5
102.5

91.2
73.2
99.4
75.8
102.1
90.1
102.5

94.7
78.8
104.3
74.9
101.5
96.2
103.6

( 6 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products (6 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ..........................................

3
33

88.3
88.2

88.0
88.1

86.9
87.0

85.2
85.2

82.9
83.8

80.9
81.6

79.8
80.3

79.1
80.1

55.3
54.7

( 9 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................
Vegetable oils (9 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................................................

4
42

117.4
118.1

141.8
143.1

124.4
125.3

114.9
115.3

89.9
89.5

76.7
75.9

57.6
56.2

50.6
48.9

41.4
39.3

( 9 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products (3 /8 4 —100) .................................
Manufactured fertilizers (3 /8 4 —1 0 0 )..............................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s. ( 9 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) .................................

5
54
56
59

101.1
100.0
100.0

100.6
98.5
101.7

-

-

98.8
96.4
98.5
100.0

97.1
94.6
92.9
97.5

95.7
91.6
94.2
96.1

94.9
95.1
82.0
95.6

94.5
95.3
80.8
96.9

94.2
96.7
78.5
97.8

94.6
102.9
79.2
99.9

(1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) .................................
Leather and fu rs k in s ..........................................................................................
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s...............................................................................
Cork and wood manufactures .........................................................................
Paper and paperboard products .....................................................................
T extiles.................................................................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s........................................................
Iron and steel (9 /7 8 —100) ..............................................................................
Nonferrous metals (1 2 /8 1 —100) ....................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s..................................................................................

6
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69

137.6
141.6
141.8
130.1
148.0
130.8
168.4
118.5
95.0
119.7

139.6
145.3
140.8
131.0
150.4
130.1
166.6
123.8
96.3
120.5

137.2
144.0
139.6
126.4
156.1
131.6
156.6
124.7
90.2
119.3

136.8
140.4
140.5
126.1
157.5
132.9
159.4
123.7
87.3
119.3

133.1
135.3
139.5
121.3
157.6
130.4
154.3
121.0
81.9
117.4

132.4
133.3
138.6
121.2
157.2
127.5
151.8
120.1
82.3
117.8

133.6
137.0
137.3
123.4
157.8
126.5
157.6
119.1
83.7
119.5

133.4
141.3
138.1
124.0
156.5
128.1
162.3
118.3
80.4
121.6

134.0
141.6
136.5
130.8
157.1
131.2
164.2
117.3
79.4
124.4

M a c h in e r y a n d tr a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t ( 6 / 8 1 - 1 0 0 ) ...........................................

7
72
73
74

104.0
100.4
94.3
93.7

104.1
100.0
93.8
94.4

102.6
98.8
92.1
92.4

102.9
98.0
89.9
91.3

101.6
96.2
86.3
89.2

102.6
97.0
90.5
91.1

103.5
101.4
94.2
94.3

107.2
104.9
98.1
98.0

111.5
112.1
105.0
103.8

75

97.8

96.7

94.1

92.2

89.6

89.4

90.3

93.7

96.9

A L L C O M M O D IT IE S

( 9 /8 2 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................

( 9 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................................
M e a t.....................................................................................................................
Dairy products and eggs (6/81 —100) ..........................................................

Food

Bakery goods, pasta products, grain and grain preparations
(9 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) .......................................................................................................
Fruits and vegetables ........................................................................................
Sugar, sugar preparations, and honey ( 3 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................
Coffee, tea, c o c o a ..............................................................................................
B e v e r a g e s a n d t o b a c c o ....................................................................................................

Beverages ...........................................................................................................
C r u d e m a t e r i a l s .......................................................................................................................

F u e ls a n d r e la t e d p r o d u c ts

F a t s a n d o ils

C h e m ic a ls

In t e r m e d i a t e m a n u fa c t u r e d p r o d u c ts

Machinery specialized for particular industries (9 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ......................
Metalworking machinery (3 /8 0 -1 0 0 ) ............................................................
General industrial machinery and parts, n.e.s. (6/81 = 100) ......................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment
( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................................................................................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing apparatus
( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................................................................................
Electrical machinery and equipment (1 2 /8 1 —100) .....................................
Road vehicles and parts (6/81 — 1 0 0 )............................................................
( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................................
Plumbing, heating, and lighting fixtures (6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................
Furniture and parts (6/80 = 100) .....................................................................
Clothing (9 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) .........................................................................................
F ootw ear..............................................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
apparatus (1 2 /7 9 —1 0 0 )..................................................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
clocks ( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................................................
Mise, manufactured articles, n.e.s. (6 /8 2 —1 0 0 )..........................................

M is e , m a n u f a c t u r e d a r tic le s

G o ld , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................

-

76
77
78

94.2
94.2
109.0

94.8
91.2
110.4

93.6
87.0
109.8

91.3
86.4
111.3

90.0
82.1
111.5

88.8
83.9
112.1

88.3
81.4
112.7

88.6
83.1
117.8

89.4
84.3
123.4

8
81
82
84
85

100.6
109.5
136.8
130.2
136.8

101.5
112.0
140.8
132.5
140.8

99.7
110.7
138.4
135.4
138.4

100.0
111.6
142.5
138.5
142.5

97.0
113.9
137.4
136.7
137.4

98.0
114.1
136.7
133.9
136.7

99.6
117.8
142.1
134.5
142.1

100.8
115.0
142.7
134.5
142.7

103.3
120.1
147.0
133.4
147.0

87

98.7

97.8

95.6

92.9

89.2

92.3

98.8

102.4

106.4

91.2
98.3

91.3
96.3

88.9
91.2

89.5
95.2

91.1
96.4

94.5
97.9

99.3
102.1

88
89

971

89.6
105.2

92.8
104.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Data not available.


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

91

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
38.

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

U.S. export price indexes by end-use category

(September 1983 = 100 unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o ry

Foods, feeds, and beverages .........................................
Raw m aterials...................................................................
Raw materials, non durable..............................................................
Raw materials, d u ra b le .....................................................................
Capital goods (12/82 = 1 0 0 ).........................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ..................
Consumer g o o d s ..............................................
Durables ...........................................................................
N ondurables........................................................................

39.

Percentage
of 1980
Trade
Value
16.294
30.696
21.327
9.368
30.186
7.483
7.467
3.965
3.501

1984

Mar.

June

92.8
102.2
103.6
98.8
103.2
104.5
100.9
100.1
101.8

1985

Sept.

98.5
102.5
104.4
97.7
103.9
105.3
100.9
99.6
102.1

88.8
100.5
102.8
95.0
104.6
105.3
101.3
99.4
103.0

Dec.

Mar.

83.0
99.1
101.4
93.3
105.6
105.7
100.8
99.3
102.3

June

81.5
97.6
99.6
92.6
106.2
106.7
100.9
99.1
102.7

1986

Sept.

80.9
97.2
99.5
91.6
106.6
108.0
101.1
99.2
103.0

Mar.

Dec.

76.2
96.5
98.7
91.1
106.6
108.1
101.9
100.4
103.3

77.5
95.9
97.9
91.0
106.6
109.2
101.4
99.5
103.3

75.5
96.0
97.5
92.5
107.4
109.5
103.7
101.8
105.5

U.S. import price indexes by end-use category

(December 1982 = 100)

C a te g o ry

Foods, feeds, and beverages .............................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products, excl. natural g a s ....................
Raw materials, excluding petroleum .................................................
Raw materials, non durable...............................................................
Raw materials, d urable......................................................................
Capital g o o d s..........................................................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and e n g in e s ...........................................
Consumer g o o d s ....................................................................................
D u ra b le ..........................................................................................
Nondurable...........................................................................................

40.

Percentage
of 1980
Trade
Value
7.477
31.108
19.205
9.391
9.814
13.164
11.750
14.250
5.507
8.743

1984

Mar.

June

106.0
88.8
103.5
100.7
106.5
100.8
103.6
101.0
101.1
100.9

1985

Sept.

107.2
88.5
104.3
102.1
106.7
99.8
104.9
101.9
101.4
102.5

Mar.

Dec.

105.6
87.5
102.5
101.7
103.3
98.0
104.0
100.6
98.8
103.0

101.8
85.7
101.1
100.7
101.6
97.8
105.2
101.1
98.5
104.6

Dec.

Mar.

June

102.1
84.4
96.3
95.0
97.7
94.8
105.4
99.5
97.0
103.0

1986

Sept.

100.4
82.1
95.8
93.9
97.8
96.3
.105.9
99.4
97.0
102.5

99.0
80.9
95.4
93.5
97.4
97.6
106.4
101.0
98.9
103.9

Sept.

Dec.

106.0
80.5
93.9
91.8
96.2
100.0
111.4
102.4
100.7
104.7

U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
1984

1985

1986

In d u s tr y g r o u p

Mar.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products (6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 )
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
(6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ...................
Furniture and fixtures (9/83 = 100 ) .
Paper and allied products (3/81 = 1 0 0 ) ........
Chemicals and allied products (1 2/84= 100 )
Petroleum and coal products (12/83= 100 )
Primary metal products (3 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )
Machinery, except electrical (9 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) ...
Electrical machinery (1 2/80= 100 )
Transportation equipment (1 2/78= 100 ) ...
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
(6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .............................

1 SIC - based classification.

92

Mar.

Dec.


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

June

' Sept.

June

Mar.

109.0

112.7

105.6

103.3

99.5

99.5

96.7

98.1

97.0

101.5
101.8
98.6
103.3
101.6
105.1
137.4
108.0
155.7

100.1
103.1
104.3
102.3
102.1
104.0
137.9
109.5
157.2

97.0
103.5
106.2
101.3
100.7
100.0
138.0
110.7
157.8

97.9
104.9
103.6
100.7
100.4
95.8
139.9
111.1
158.9

99.9
105.2
97.1
100.3
101.3
91.2
140.4
111.3
160.5

99.5
106.5
94.7
99.6
102.7
92.7
140.5
112.4
161.9

98.3
107.1
93.2
99.7
102.0
93.6
140.6
111.9
162.8

101.2
108.4
92.1
99.2
99.1
93.6
140.5
111.2
164.3

101.5
109.2
95.7
98.9
93.5
96.4
140.6
112.6
165.2

153.1

153.2

156.0

153.0

154.9

156.6

156.2

156.7

159.7

115.8
55.4
94.5
91.1
98.0
102.8
115.6
104.5
103.4
106.0

41.

U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification
1986

1985

1984
In d u s tr y g r o u p

June

Mar.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products (6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................
Textile mill products (9 /8 2 —1 0 0 )..................................................
Apparel and related products (6 /7 7 —1 0 0 ).................................
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
(6 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) ...................................................................................
Furniture and fixtures (6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
Paper and allied products (6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................
Chemicals and allied products (9/82 = 1 0 0 )...............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products
( 1 2 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................
Leather and leather products ........................................................
Primary metal products (6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................
Fabricated metal products (12/84 = 1 0 0 )....................................
Machinery, except electrical (3/80 = 100) ...................................
Electrical machinery (9 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................
Transportation equipment ( 6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
( 1 2 / 7 9 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................
Miscellaneous manufactured commodities
( 9 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ....................................................................................

Sept.

June

Mar.

122.3
104.4
128.1

126.6
103.8
129.6

124.1
104.3
133.9

122.6
104.7
138.2

118.8
102.8
135.6

115.0
101.0
133.0

114.2
100.4
133.9

115.1
101.8
134.4

117.7
104.7
133.4

129.4
95.7
136.5
101.8

121.1
96.9
141.9
101.8

117.3
96.2
146.0
99.8

120.0
95.6
145.5
98.2

116.3
93.9
141.5
95.3

120.6
96.1
139.8
93.9

117.5
97.7
138.7
93.3

115.8
98.2
137.4
95.8

122.1
101.2
137.6
98.6

98.1
140.3
90.1

98.5
143.7
91.9

97.8
141.6
88.3

-

-

-

95.5
100.0
110.7

98.0
144.2
86.6
100.0
94.1
98.6
112.9

96.9
139.1
82.2
99.0
91.8
95.1
113.1

96.7
138.9
83.0
99.1
93.4
95.8
114.2

96.6
142.3
83.4
101.0
96.6
94.5
114.8

97.5
144.0
81.9
102.6
100.0
95.8
119.6

100.9
145.8
82.0
104.9
105.5
96.8
123.9

97.8

97.1

110.6

111.6

94.0

95.5

94.4

93.2

90.7

91.7

94.6

98.8

103.9

99.1

95.8

96.4

95.1

95.1

96.6

98.7

100.0

-

99.8

1 SIC - based classification.

42.

Mar.

Dec.

Sept.

Dec.

-

Data not available.

Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted

(1977=100)
Annual
average

Quarterly Indexes

Item

1986

1985

1984

1983
1984

III

IV

105.5
174.3
98.5
165.2
158.2
162.7

105.9
176.1
98.9
166.3
158.6
163.5

104.9
177.6
98.7
169.3
156.2
164.6

105.5
178.2
98.7
168.9
159.1
165.4

104.1
172.1
98.3
165.3
158.8
163.0

104.2
173.7
98.2
166.8
160.2
164.5

104.3
175.0
98.3
167.8
161.4
165.5

103.2
176.4
98.0
170.9
157.7
166.3

104.1
177.3
98.2
170.3
161.9
167.4

105.8
167.9
96.7
163.6
158.7
177.9
135.9
163.2
160.3

105.8
169.4
96.7
164.4
160.0
177.6
138.3
163.8
161.3

105.8
170.8
96.6
165.8
161.5
178.6
139.1
164.8
162.6

106.5
172.0
96.6
165.5
161.5
177.2
150.2
167.7
163.6

105.9
173.3
96.3
167.2
163.7
177.8
143.1
165.7
164.4

105.8
173.9
96.3
168.0
164.3
179.0
146.1
167.5
165.4

119.5
171.8
98.9
143.7

120.0
174.3
99.5
145.3

121.8
176.1
99.5
144.5

122.8
177.3
99.6
144.4

122.4
178.8
99.4
146.0

123.1
179.2
99.3
145.6

I

111

IV

105.5
167.5
98.2
158.7
156.8
158.0

105.3
169.1
98.2
160.6
157.3
159.4

105.0
170.4
98.1
162.3
158.0
160.8

105.3
172.4
98.5
163.8
157.6
161.6

104.0
165.9
98.1
159.6
152.5
157.1

104.5
167.4
98.1
160.1
156.3
158.8

104.2
168.8
98.0
162.0
157.6
160.5

103.8
170.1
97.9
163.9
158.4
161.9

105.0
162.4
97.3
159.5
154.8
173.7
124.0
156.3
155.3

106.2
164.2
97.1
159.1
154.7
172.3
132.9
158.5
156.0

106.7
165.6
97.1
159.9
155.1
174.0
139.1
161.8
157.4

106.1
166.8
96.9
162.2
157.2
177.0
134.3
162.1
158.9

114.7
164.4
98.5
143.4

116.7
166.7
98.6
142.8

117.8
168.1
98.6
142.7

119.8
169.9
98.7
141.9

III

IV

I

105.2
168.2
98.2
159.9
156.5
158.7

103.5
162.1
98.1
156.6
146.8
153.1

103.6
164.1
98.3
158.4
148.6
154.9

104.9
166.1
98.3
158.4
153.4
156.6

104.1
168.0
98.0
161.4
156.3
159.6

103.3
162.3
98.2
157.1
148.9
154.2

103.0
164.0
98.2
159.1
150.7
156.1

106.2
166.1
96.9
161.2
156.4
175.3
135.6
161.4
158.1

104.6
160.8
97.3
159.6
153.8
176.7
114.4
154.9
154.2

118.5
169.1
98.7
142.8

114.5
163.3
98.8
142.6

II

II

I

B u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor c o s ts ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price d e fla to r................................................

N o n f a r m b u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all p e rs o n s................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor c o s ts ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor pa ym e n ts...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................

N o n f in a n c ia l c o r p o r a t io n s :

Output per hour of all em plo yees...........................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Total unit c o s ts ...........................................................
Unit labor costs .......................................................
Unit nonlabor c o s ts ................................................
Unit p ro fits ...................................................................
Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................

M a n u fa c tu r in g :

Output per hour of all p e rs o n s................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor c o s ts ..........................................................


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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Productivity Data

43. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item

1960

1970

1974

1973

1978

1976

1980

1979

1982

1981

1984

1983

Private business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services .......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................

64.8
98.4
75.4
53.3

86.1
98.5
90.2
78.3

94.8
103.0
97.5
91.8

92.5
96.5
93.8
89.9

97.6
96.1
97.1
93.7

100.5
101.8
101.0
105.5

99.3
100.3
99.7
107.9

98.7
95.6
97.6
106.4

100.6
94.1
98.3
109.2

100.8
89.5
96.8
106.3

103.7
92.3
99.6
111.1

107.1
97.4
103.7
121.0

82.2
54.1
70.7
65.9

90.8
79.4
86.7
87.4

96.8
89.1
94.1
92.0

97.2
93.1
95.8
95.9

95.9
97.5
96.5
101.6

105.0
103.6
104.5
98.7

108.6
107.5
108.2
98.9

107.8
111.4
109.0
103.3

108.5
116.0
111.0
106.9

105.4
118.8
109.9
112.7

107.2
120.4
111.6
112.3

113.0
124.3
116.8
109.9

68.0
98.4
77.6
52.3

86.8
98.6
90.7
77.8

95.3
103.2
97.9
91.7

92.9
96.5
94.1
89.7

97.8
96.1
97.2
93.6

100.6
101.9
101.0
105.7

99.0
100.1
99.4
108.0

98.2
95.2
97.2
106.4

99.6
93.2
97.4
108.7

99.9
88.7
95.9
105.9

103.5
91.9
99.4
111.3

106.3
96.6
102.9
121.0

77.0
53.2
67.4
69.1

89.7
78.9
85.9
88.0

96.2
88.8
93.6
92.4

96.5
93.0
95.3
96.3

95.7
97.4
96.3
101.8

105.1
103.7
104.6
98.7

109.1
107.9
108.7
98.9

108.4
111.7
109.5
103.1

109.1
116.6
111.6
106.8

106.0
119.4
110.4
112.6

107.6
121.1
112.0
112.6

113.8
125.2
117.5
110.1

60.0
87.9
67.0
50.7

79.2
91.8
82.3
77.0

93.0
108.2
96.8
95.9

90.8
99.6
93.1
91.9

97.6
96.1
97.1
93.6

100.9
101.5
101.1
105.3

101.6
99.5
101.0
108.2

101.7
90.7
98.8
103.5

104.9
89.9
100.8
106.1

107.1
82.9
100.3
99.3

111.6
87.6
104.9
104.4

115.6
96.0
110.4
115.3

84.4
57.6
75.6
68.3

97.3
83.9
93.5
86.2

103.1
88.6
99.0
85.9

101.2
92.2
98.7
91.1

95.9
97.4
96.3
101.6

104.4
103.8
104.2
99.4

106.5
108.8
107.1
102.1

101.7
114.1
104.8
112.2

101.1
118.0
105.2
116.7

92.7
119.8
99.0
129.2

93.5
119.2
99.5
127.5

99.8
120.2
104.5
120.4

Private nonfarm business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services .......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................

Manufacturing
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital s e rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services ......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u ts .......
Capital per hour of all persons................................

44. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item

1960

1970

1973

1974

1976

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

Business:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor c o s ts ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................

67.5
33.6
68.8
49.8
46.3
48.5

88.3
57.7
90.1
65.4
59.4
63.2

95.9
70.9
96.7
73.9
72.5
73.4

93.9
77.6
95.4
82.7
76.4
80.5

98.3
92.8
98.7
94.3
93.4
94.0

100.8
108.5
100.8
107.7
106.7
107.3

99.6
119.1
99.4
119.6
112.5
117.0

99.2
131.5
96.7
132.6
118.8
127.6

100.7
143.7
95.7
142.7
134.7
139.8

100.3
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.8
148.1

103.2
161.9
98.5
157.0
145.4
152.8

105.2
168.2
98.2
159.9
156.5
158.7

105.3
175.0
98.6
166.2
157.7
163.1

Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor costs ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor p a ym e n ts...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................

70.9
35.3
72.2
49.8
46.2
48.5

89.1
58.1
90.7
65.2
60.0
63.4

96.4
71.2
97.1
73.9
69.4
72.3

94.3
78.0
95.9
82.7
74.0
79.7

98.5
92.8
98.8
94.2
93.1
93.8

100.8
108.6
100.9
107.7
105.6
107.0

99.2
118.9
99.2
119.8
110.5
116.5

98.8
131.3
96.6
132.9
118.5
127.8

99.8
143.6
95.7
144.0
133.5
140.3

99.2
154.8
97.2
156.0
136.6
149.2

102.6
162.1
98.6
158.0
147.0
154.1

104.1
168.0
98.0
161.4
156.3
159.6

103.9
174.2
98.1
167.7
159.5
164.8

Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all em plo yees...........................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor costs .........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price d e fla to r................................................

73.4
36.9
75.5
50.2
51.5
50.7

91.1
59.2
92.4
65.0
60.1
63.3

97.5
71.6
97.6
73.4
68.9
71.9

94.6
78.2
96.1
82.6
73.1
79.4

98.4
92.9
98.9
94.3
93.8
94.2

100.6
108.4
100.7
107.8
104.4
106.6

99.8
118.7
99.1
119.0
108.4
115.4

99.1
131.1
96.4
132.3
118.6
127.6

99.6
143.3
95.5
143.8
137.8
141.7

100.4
154.3
96.9
153.8
142.1
149.8

104.0
160.6
97.7
154.5
152.2
153.7

106.2
166.1
96.9
156.4
161.4
158.1

105.9
171.3
96.5
161.7
165.5
163.0

Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor c o s ts ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor paym e n ts ...........................................
Implicit price deflator .................................................

62.2
36.5
74.7
58.7
60.2
59.1

80.8
57.3
89.4
70.9
64.3
69.0

93.4
68.8
93.8
73.7
70.7
72.8

90.6
76.2
93.6
84.1
67.7
79.3

97.1
92.1
98.1
94.9
93.5
94.5

101.5
108.2
100.5
106.6
101.9
105.2

101.4
118.6
99.1
117.0
98.9
111.7

101.4
132.4
97.4
130.6
97.8
121.0

103.6
145.2
96.7
140.1
111.8
131.8

105.9
157.5
98.9
148.7
114.0
138.6

112.9
163.2
99.3
144.5
132.4
141.0

118.5
169.1
98.7
142.8
140.5
142.1

121.8
176.6
99.5
145.0
138.9
143.3

94

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

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

45. Unemployment rates in nine countries, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
Annual average

1986

1985

1984

Country
1984

1985

III

IV

I

III

II

IV

I

T o t a l la b o r f o r c e b a s is

United S ta te s ........................................
Canada ..................................................
Australia ................................................
Japan ......................................................

7.4
11.2
8.9
2.7

7.1
10.4
8.2
2.6

7.3
11.2
8.7
2.8

7.1
11.1
8.6
2.7

7.2
11.0
8.5
2.6

7.2
10.5
8.4
2.5

7.1
10.2
8.1
2.6

6.9
10.1
7.8
2.9

7.0
9.7
7.9
2.6

France ....................................................
G erm any................................................
Great Britain .........................................
Italy \ 2 ...................................................
Sweden .................................................

9.7
7.7
12.8
5.8
3.1

10.1
7.7
13.0
5.9
2.8

9.9
7.8
13.0
5.8
3.0

10.0
7.7
12.8
5.7
3.0

10.2
7.8
12.9
5.8
3.0

10.1
7.8
13.0
5.7
2.9

10.2
7.7
13.2
5.9
2.7

9.9
7.7
12.8
6.2
2.7

10.0
7.7
13.0
6.2
2.8

United S ta te s ........................................
Canada ..................................................
Australia ................................................
Japan ......................................................

7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8

7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6

7.4
11.3
8.8
2.8

7.2
11.1
8.6
2.7

7.3
11.1
8.6
2.6

7.3
10.6
8.5
2.6

7.2
10.2
8.2
2.7

7.0
10.1
7.9
2.9

7.1
9.7
8.0
2.7

France ...................................................
G erm any................................................
Great Britain .........................................
Ita ly .........................................................
Sweden .................................................

9.9
7.8
12.9
5.9
3.1

10.3
7.9
13.2
6.0
2.8

10.1
7.9
13.2
5.9
3.1

10.3
7.8
13.0
5.8
3.0

10.5
7.9
13.1
5.9
3.0

10.4
8.0
13.2
5.8
2.9

10.4
7.9
13.4
6.0
2.8

10.1
7.8
13.0
6.3
2.7

10.2
7.8
13.1
6.3
2.8

C iv ilia n la b o r f o r c e b a s is

1 Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
2 Major changes in the Italian labor force survey,
introduced in 1977, resulted in a large increase in persons
enumerated as unemployed. However, many persons
reported that they had not actively sought work in the past
30 days, and they have been provisionally excluded for
comparability with U.S. concepts. Inclusion of such persons

would more than double the Italian unemployment rate
shown.
NOTE: Quarterly and monthly figures for France,
Germany, and Great Britain are calculated by applying
annual adjustment factors to current published data and
therefore should be viewed as less precise indicators of
unemployment under U.S. concepts than the annual figures.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

International Comparisons Data

46. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, ten countries
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status and country

1976

1977

96,158
10,203
6,244
53,100
22,000
25,900
25,290
20,300
4,890
4,149

1978

1979

1980

99,009
10,500
6,358
53,820
22,300
25,870
25,430
20,530
4,950
4,168

102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,470
26,000
25,620
20,630
5,010
4,203

104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,670
26,240
25,710
20,910
5,100
4,262

106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,790
26,500
25,870
21,210
5,290
4,312

61.6
61.1
62.7
62.4
57.3
53.8
63.2
47.8
49.1
66.0

62.3
61.6
62.7
62.5
57.6
53.4
63.2
48.0
49.0
65.9

63.2
62.7
62.0
62.8
57.5
53.3
63.3
47.7
48.8
66.1

63.7
63.4
61.7
62.7
57.5
53.3
63.2
47.8
49.0
66.6

88,752
9,477
5,946
52,020
21,010
25,010
23,810
19,600
4,630
4,083

92,017
9,651
6,000
52,720
21,180
24,970
23,840
19,800
4,700
4,093

96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
21,260
25,130
24,040
19,870
4,750
4,109

56.8
56.7
59.7
61.1
54.8
52.0
59.5
46.1
46.5
64.9

57.9
56.6
59.2
61.2
54.7
51.6
59.3
46.3
46.5
64.8

7,406
726
298
1,080
990
890
1,480
700
260
66

7.7
7.1
4.8
2.0
4.5
3.4
5.9
3.4
5.3
1.6

1981

1982

1983

1984

108,670
11,904
6,810
56,320
22,930
26,610
25,870
21,410
5,500
4,326

110,204
11,958
6,910
56,980
23,150
26,640
25,880
21,450
5,560
4,350

111,550
12,183
6,997
58,110
23,110
26,640
26,010
21,610
5,720
4,369

113,544
12,399
7,133
58,480
23,250
26,700
26,530
21,680
5,740
4,385

63.8
64.1
62.2
62.6
57.2
53.2
63.2
48.0
50.0
67.0

63.9
64.8
62.0
62.6
57.1
52.9
62.2
48.0
51.3
66.8

64.0
64.1
61.8
62.7
57.1
52.5
61.9
47.4
51.2
66.8

64.0
64.4
61.5
63.1
56.5
52.3
61.9
47.2
52.1
66.7

64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.7
62.7
47.3
52.0
66.8

98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,460
24,360
20,100
4,830
4,174

99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,320
25,730
24,100
20,380
4,960
4,226

100,397
11,006
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,520
23,190
20,480
4,990
4,218

99,526
10,644
6,415
55,620
21,230
25,060
22,820
20,430
4,930
4,213

100,834
10,734
6,300
56,550
21,150
24,650
22,680
20,470
4,890
4,218

105,005
11,000
6,490
56,870
20,940
24,610
23,100
20,390
4,880
4,249

59.3
57.5
58.1
61.3
54.4
51.5
59.4
45.9
46.3
64.6

59.9
58.7
57.9
61.4
54.0
51.7
59.8
45.9
46.4
65.3

59.2
59.3
58.4
61.3
53.5
51.6
58.9
46.1
46.9
65.6

59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.7
55.8
45.9
46.5
65.1

57.8
57.0
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.4
54.6
45.2
45.4
64.7

57.9
56.7
55.4
61.4
51.7
48.4
54.0
44.7
44.5
64.4

59.5
57.4
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.6
54.6
44.5
44.2
64.7

6,991
849
358
1,100
1,120
900
1,590
740
250
75

6,202
908
405
1,240
1,210
870
1,580
760
260
94

6,137
836
408
1,170
1,370
780
1,350
810
270
88

7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
1,770
830
330
86

8,273
898
394
1,260
1,730
1,090
2,680
920
510
108

10,678
1,314
495
1,360
1,920
1,580
3,060
1,020
630
137

10,717
1,448
697
1,560
1,960
1,990
3,330
1,140
830
151

8,539
1,399
642
1,610
2,310
2,090
3,430
1,280
860
136

7.1
8.1
5.6
2.0
5.0
3.5
6.3
3.6
5.0
1.8

6.1
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.4
3.4
6.2
3.7
5.2
2.2

5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
5.3
3.9
5.3
2.1

7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
6.8
3.9
6.2
2.0

7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.5
4.1
10.4
4.3
9.3
2.5

9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.9
11.8
4.8
11.3
3.1

9.6
11.9
10.0
2.7
8.5
7.5
12.8
5.3
14.5
3.5

7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8
9.9
7.8
12.9
5.9
15.0
3.1

Labor force
United S ta te s .....................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
F ra n ce ..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly ...........................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w eden........................................................................

Participation rate
United States .............................................................
Canada ...................................................................
A u stralia.............................................................
Japan ...............................................................
F ra n ce ..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly .................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n ........................................................................

Employed
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia .......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Great B ritain................................................................
Ita ly ..............................................................................
N etherlands................................................
S w e d e n ..................................................................

Employment-population ratio
United S ta te s .................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
G erm any..................................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly ....................................................
N etherlands..........................................
S w e d e n ..........................................

Unemployed
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
G erm any................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly ..................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n .............................................

Unemployment rate
United S ta te s .................................
Canada .................................................
A u stralia........................................
Japan ....................................................................
F ra n ce ..........................................................................
G erm any..................................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................
N etherlands..............................................
S w e d e n ...........................................

96

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

47. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures, twelve countries
(1977 = 100)

1960

1970

1973

1974

1976

1977

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

62.2
50.3
23.2
32.8
37.2
36.4
40.3
36.5
32.4
54.6
42.3
53.8

80.8
76.8
64.8
60.0
65.5
69.6
71.2
72.7
64.3
81.7
80.7
77.6

93.4
91.3
83.1
78.7
83.2
82.2
84.0
90.9
81.5
94.6
94.8
92.9

90.6
93.4
86.5
83.2
86.0
85.2
87.4
95.3
88.1
97.7
98.8
95.2

97.1
96.2
94.3
95.3
98.2
95.0
96.5
98.9
95.8
99.7
101.7
99.1

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.4
104.2
114.8
111.8
106.5
110.3
108.2
110.5
112.3
107.1
110.9
102.2

101.4
101.9
122.7
119.3
112.3
112.0
108.6
116.9
113.9
109.3
112.7
101.2

103.6
104.0
127.2
127.2
114.2
116.4
111.0
121.0
116.9
109.7
113.2
107.9

105.9
101.0
135.0
132.8
114.6
123.5
112.6
123.4
119.4
112.6
116.5
112.7

112.9
107.6
142.3
141.0
117.3
129.3
119.0
126.6
126.1
119.2
125.5
121.2

118.5
111.5
152.2
145.5
118.3
135.0
124.7
135.0
139.3
122.3
132.6
126.2

121.8
115.1
159.9
118.4
140.2
131.9
139.1

52.5
41.5
19.2
41.7
49.2
35.4
50.0
37.4
44.8
55.1
52.6
71.0

78.6
75.1
69.9
78.1
82.0
73.3
86.6
78.0
84.4
87.0
92.5
94.7

96.3
94.6
91.9
95.8
95.9
88.6
96.1
90.5
95.8
99.5
100.3
104.7

91.7
98.0
91.7
99.6
97.4
91.8
95.4
96.3
100.0
104.0
105.7
103.5

93.1
98.1
94.8
99.5
99.6
96.1
98.0
97.9
99.0
101.4
106.1
98.2

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

108.1
110.9
113.9
104.2
105.4
106.1
106.6
108.6
106.1
100.3
103.6
100.5

103.2
107.7
124.1
107.2
110.1
106.6
106.6
115.4
106.6
101.3
104.0
91.7

104.8
108.8
129.8
105.9
106.6
105.9
104.9
114.3
106.7
100.1
100.6
86.2

98.4
96.4
137.3
109.1
108.3
106.0
102.4
111.6
105.0
99.8
100.1
86.4

105.6
101.7
148.2
110.7
112.2
107.4
103.5
109.2
105.3
98.8
105.2
88.9

117.9
110.1
165.2
112.8
118.6
108.4
107.4
113.2
110.8
101.3
112.4
92.4

121.0
115.2
175.8

84.4
82.6
82.7
127.0
132.4
97.2
123.8
102.3
138.4
101.0
124.4
131.9

97.3
97.7
107.9
130.1
125.1
105.3
121.7
107.4
131.2
106.4
114.6
122.1

103.1
103.6
110.7
121.8
115.2
107.8
114.4
99.6
117.6
105.1
105.7
112.7

101.2
105.0
106.1
119.7
113.2
107.8
109.2
101.0
113.5
106.5
107.0
108.7

95.9
102.0
100.6
104.4
101.4
101.2
101.6
99.0
103.3
101.7
104.3
99.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

106.5
106.4
99.3
93.2
99.0
96.2
98.5
98.2
94.4
93.6
93.4
98.3

101.7
105.7
101.2
89.9
98.1
95.2
98.1
98.7
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.7

101.1
104.6
102.0
83.3
93.4
91.0
94.6
94.5
91.2
91.3
88.9
79.9

92.9
95.4
101.7
82.1
94.5
85.9
91.0
90.4
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.7

93.5
94.6
104.2
78.5
95.7
83.0
87.0
86.2
83.5
82.9
83.9
73.3

99.5
98.7
108.5
77.5
100.2
80.3
86.2
83.9
79.5
82.8
84.8
73.2

99.3
100.1
110.0

United S ta te s ...............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lg iu m .................................................................................................
Denmark .......................................................................................................
France ...........................................................................................................
G erm any...................................................................................................
Ita ly ................................................................................................................
N etherlands......................................................................................
Nonway..........................................................................................................
S w e d e n ...................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ...........................................................................................

36.5
27.1
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.1
18.8
8.3
12.5
15.8
14.7
14.8

57.3
46.5
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.6
48.0
26.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
30.8

68.8
59.2
55.1
53.5
56.1
52.3
67.5
43.7
60.5
54.5
54.2
44.8

76.2
68.5
72.3
65.2
67.9
62.0
76.9
54.5
71.9
63.6
63.8
56.9

92.1
89.9
90.7
89.5
90.4
88.9
91.3
84.2
91.9
88.8
91.5
88.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

118.6
118.3
113.4
117.6
123.1
129.3
116.1
134.7
117.0
116.0
120.1
137.7

132.4
130.6
120.7
130.4
135.9
147.5
125.6
160.2
123.6
128.0
133.6
165.8

145.2
151.5
129.8
144.6
149.6
170.3
134.5
197.1
129.1
142.8
148.1
188.9

157.5
167.1
136.6
152.0
162.9
200.8
141.0
237.3
137.5
156.0
158.9
206.4

163.2
179.3
140.7
163.7
174.3
226.2
148.4
276.4
144.7
173.5
173.3
222.4

169.1
182.1
144.8
176.6
183.9
246.5
155.3
303.0
152.8
188.3
190.7
237.2

National currency basis:
United S ta te s ..............................................................................................
Canada .......................................................................................
Japan .........................................................................................................
B e lg iu m .......................................................................................
D e n m a rk.......................................................................................................
France ...........................................................................................................
G e rm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ..............................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N o rw ay......................................................................................
Sweden ...............................................................
United K ingdo m ...........................................................................

58.7
53.9
38.4
42.0
33.8
41.6
46.6
22.8
38.5
29.0
34.8
27.6

70.9
60.6
52.3
58.1
55.4
52.6
67.4
36.0
60.7
46.4
47.7
39.7

73.7
64.8
66.4
68.0
67.4
63.6
80.3
48.1
74.3
57.6
57.2
48.2

84.1
73.3
83.6
78.3
79.0
72.8
88.0
57.2
81.6
65.2
64.6
59.7

94.9
93.5
96.2
93.9
92.1
93.6
94.6
85.1
96.0
89.1
90.0
89.2

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

117.0
113.5
98.8
105.2
115.7
117.3
107.3
121.9
104.1
108.2
108.3
134.7

130.6
128.1
98.4
109.3
121.0
131.7
115.7
137.0
108.5
117.0
118.6
163.8

140.1
145.7
102.0
113.6
131.1
146.3
121.2
162.9
110.4
130.2
130.9
175.1

148.7
165.4
101.2
114.4
142.2
162.6
125.2
192.4
115.2
138.6
136.3
183.1

144.5
166.7
98.9
116.1
148.6
175.0
124.7
218.3
114.7
145.5
138.1
183.5

142.8
163.2
95.1
121.4
155.5
182.5
124.6
224.5
109.7
154.0
143.8
187.9

U.S. dollar basis:
United States ............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e n m a rk.......................................................................................................
F ra n ce ................................................................................................
G e rm a n y.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N o rw ay.........................................................................................................
S w e d e n .........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................................................

58.7
59.0
28.5
30.2
29.5
41.7
25.9
32.5
25.1
21.7
30.1
44.4

70.9
61.7
39.1
42.0
44.4
46.8
42.9
50.6
41.2
34.5
41.1
54.4

73.7
68.8
65.6
62.8
67.2
70.4
70.4
73.1
65.6
53.4
58.7
67.7

84.1
79.7
76.8
72.1
77.9
74.5
79.1
77.6
74.6
62.8
65.1
80.1

94.9
100.7
86.9
87.2
91.5
96.3
87.3
90.5
89.1
86.9
92.3
92.3

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

117.0
103.0
121.3
128.5
132.0
135.5
135.9
129.5
127.4
113.8
112.9
163.9

130.6
116.4
116.8
134.1
129.0
153.4
147.9
141.4
134.2
126.2
125.3
218.3

140.1
129.1
123.8
109.9
110.3
132.2
124.9
126.3
108.9
120.6
115.4
203.1

148.7
142.3
108.8
89.5
102.3
121.5
119.7
125.4
105.8
114.2
96.9
183.5

144.5
143.7
111.5
81.3
97.5
112.9
113.4
126.8
98.6
106.1
80.4
159.4

142.8
133.9
107.2
75.3
90.1
102.7
101.6
112.8
83.9
100.4
77.7
143.9

Item and country
O u tp u t p e r h o u r

United S ta te s ...............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk.......................................................................................................
F rance...........................................................................................................
G e rm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ................................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N o rw ay..........................................................................................................
S w e d e n .........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ...........................................................................................

-

125.0
135.2
129.7

O u tp u t

United S ta te s ...............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk.......................................................................................................
F rance...........................................................................................................
G erm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ................................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N o rw ay..........................................................................................................
S w e d e n .........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ...........................................................................................

-

122.3
109.0
113.0
115.3
-

103.7
114.6
95.0

T o ta l h o u rs

United S ta te s ...............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e n m a rk.......................................................................................................
F ra n ce ...........................................................................................................
G e rm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ................................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N o rw ay..........................................................................................................
S w e d e n .........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ...........................................................................................

-

103.3
77.8
85.7
82.9
-

83.0
84.8
73.3

C o m p e n s a t io n p e r h o u r

176.6
191.4
148.3
-

195.5
262.7
164.7
334.0
-

205.2
205.8
257.0

U n it la b o r c o s t s :

145.0
166.3
92.7
-

165.1
187.4
124.9
240.1
-

164.2
152.2
198.1

U n it l a b o r c o s t s :

- Data not available.


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

97

145.0
129.4
104.2
-

93.5
102.6
98.6
111.1
-

101.7
79.1
147.3

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

July 1986 •

Current Labor Statistics:

Injury and Illness Data

48. Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case1
1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

P R IV A T E S E C T O R 3

Total c a s e s ..........................................
Lost workday cases ....................................
Lost w o rkda ys.........................................

9.3
3.8
61.6

9.4
4.1
63.5

9.5
4.3
67.7

8.7
4.0
65.2

8.3
3.8
61.7

7.7
3.5
58.7

7.6
3.4
58.5

8.0
3.7
63.4

11.5
5.1
81.1

11.6
5.4
80.7

11.7
5.7
83.7

11.9
5.8
82.7

12.3
5.9
82.8

11.8
5.9
86.0

11.9
6.1
90.8

12.0
6.1
90.7

10.9
6.0
128.8

11.5
6.4
143.2

11.4
6.8
150.5

11.2
6.5
163.6

11.6
6.2
146.4

10.5
5.4
137.3

8.4
4.5
125.1

9.7
5.3
160.2

15.5
5.9
111.5

16.0
6.4
109.4

16.2
6.8
120.4

15.7
6.5
117.0

15.1
6.3
113.1

14.6
6.0
115.7

14.8
6.3
118.2

15.5
6.9
128.1

15.0
5.7
100.2

15.9
6.3
105.3

16.3
6.8
111.2

15.5
6.5
113.0

15.1
6.1
107.1

14.1
5.9
112.0

14.4
6.2
113.0

15.4
6.9
121.3

16.0
5.7
116.7

16.6
6.2
110.9

16.6
6.7
123.1

16.3
6.3
117.6

14.9
6.0
106.0

15.1
5.8
113.1

15.4
6.2
122.4

14.9
6.4
131.7

15.6
6.1
115.5

15.8
6.6
111.0

16.0
6.9
124.3

15.5
6.7
118.9

15.2
6.6
119.3

14.7
6.2
118.6

14.8
6.4
119.0

15.8
7.1
130.1

13.1
5.1
82.3

13.2
5.6
84.9

13.3
5.9
90.2

12.2
5.4
86.7

11.5
5.1
82.0

10.2
4.4
75.0

10.0
4.3
73.5

10.6
4.7
77.9

22.3
10.4
178.0

22.6
11.1
178.8

20.7
10.8
175.9

18.6
9.5
171.8

17.6
9.0
158.4

16.9
8.3
153.3

18.3
9.2
163.5

19.6
9.9
172.0

17.2
6.0
92.0

17.5
6.9
95.9

17.6
7.1
99.6

16.0
6.6
97.6

15.1
6.2
91.9

13.9
5.5
85.6

14.1
5.7
83.0

15.3
6.4
101.5

16.9
6.9
120.4

16.8
7.8
126.3

16.8
8.0
133.7

15.0
7.1
128.1

14.1
6.9
122.2

13.0
6.1
112.2

13.1
6.0
112.0

13.6
6.6
120.8

16.2
6.8
119.4

17.0
7.5
123.6

17.3
8.1
134.7

15.2
7.1
128.3

14.4
6.7
121.3

12.4
5.4
101.6

12.4
5.4
103.4

13.3
6.1
115.3

19.1
7.2
109.0

19.3
8.0
112.4

19.9
8.7
124.2

18.5
8.0
118.4

17.5
7.5
109.9

15.3
6.4
102.5

15.1
6.1
96.5

16.1
6.7
104.9

14.0
4.7
69.9

14.4
5.4
75.1

14.7
5.9
83.6

13.7
5.5
81.3

12.9
5.1
74.9

10.7
4.2
66.0

9.8
3.6
58.1

10.7
4.1
65.8

8.6
3.0
46.7

8.7
3.3
50.3

8.6
3.4
51.9

8.0
3.3
51.8

7.4
3.1
48.4

6.5
2.7
42.2

6.3
2.6
41.4

6.8
2.8
45.0

11.8
5.0
79.3

11.5
5.1
78.0

11.6
5.5
85.9

10.6
4.9
82.4

9.8
4.6
78.1

9.2
4.0
72.2

8.4
3.6
64.5

9.3
4.2
68.8

7.0
2.4
37.4

6.9
2.6
37.0

7.2
2.8
40.0

6.8
2.7
41.8

6.5
2.7
39.2

5.6
2.3
37.0

5.2
2.1
35.6

5.4
2.2
37.5

11.5
4.0
58.7

11.8
4.5
66.4

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

A g r ic u lt u r e , f o r e s t r y , a n d fis h in g 3

Total c a s e s .............................................
Lost workday c a s e s .................................
Lost w o rkda ys..................................

M in in g

Total c a s e s .....................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................

C o n s tr u c tio n

Total c a s e s ............................................
Lost workday c a s e s .........................................
Lost w o rkda ys....................................
General building contractors:
Total c a s e s ............................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ....................................
Lost w o rkda ys.........................................
Heavy construction contractors:
Total c a s e s .....................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ........................................
Lost w o rkda ys.................................
Special trade contractors:
Total c a s e s .............................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................

M a n u fa c tu r in g

Total c a s e s ................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..............................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................

D u r a b le g o o d s

Lumber and wood products:
Total c a s e s .................................
Lost workday c a s e s .....................
Lost w o rkda ys...................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total c a s e s .....................................
Lost workday c a s e s ......................
Lost w o rkda ys...........................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total c a s e s .........................................
Lost workday cases ..............
Lost w o rkdays................................
Primary metal industries:
Total c a s e s ...................................
Lost workday c a s e s ........................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total c a s e s .................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..............................
Lost w o rkda ys............................
Machinery, except electrical:
Total c a s e s .......................................
Lost workday cases ......................
Lost w o rkda ys................................
Electric and electronic equipment:
Total c a s e s ............................................
Lost workday c a s e s ......................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.................................
Transportation equipment:
Total c a s e s ..........................................
Lost workday c a s e s .....................
Lost w o rkdays...................................
Instruments and related products:
Total c a s e s ...............................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkdays......................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
Total c a s e s ............................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys...............................................

See footnotes at end of table.

98

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

48. Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
industry ana type ot case1
1977

1978

1980

1979

1981

1982

1983

1984

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s

Food and kindred products:
Total c a s e s ................................................. ........................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Tobacco manufacturing:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Textile mill products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Apparel and other textile products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Paper and allied products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Printing and publishing:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
Chemicals and allied products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
Petroleum and coal products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Leather and leather products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................

19.5
8.5
130.1

19.4
8.9
132.2

19.9
9.5
141.8

18.7
9.0
136.8

17.8
8.6
130.7

16.7
8.0
129.3

16.5
7.9
131.2

16.7
8.1
131.6

9.1
3.8
66.7

8.7
4.0
58.6

9.3
4.2
64.8

8.1
3.8
45.8

8.2
3.9
56.8

7.2
3.2
44.6

6.5
3.0
42.8

7.7
3.2
51.7

10.2
2.9
57.4

10.2
3.4
61.5

9.7
3.4
61.3

9.1
3.3
62.8

8.8
3.2
59.2

7.6
2.8
53.8

7.4
2.8
51.4

8.0
3.0
54.0

6.7
2.0
31.7

6.5
2.2
32.4

6.5
2.2
34.1

6.4
2.2
34.9

6.3
2.2
35.0

6.0
2.1
36.4

6.4
2.4
40.6

6.7
2.5
40.9

13.6
5.0
101.6

13.5
5.7
103.3

13.5
6.0
108.4

12.7
5.8
112.3

11.6
5.4
103.6

10.6
4.9
99.1

10.0
4.5
90.3

10.4
4.7
93.8

6.8
2.7
41.7

7.0
2.9
43.8

7.1
3.1
45.1

6.9
3.1
46.5

6.7
3.0
47.4

6.6
2.8
45.7

6.6
2.9
44.6

6.5
2.9
46.0

8.0
3.1
51.4

7.8
3.3
50.9

7.7
3.5
54.9

6.8
3.1
50.3

6.6
3.0
48.1

5.7
2.5
39.4

5.5
2.5
42.3

5.3
2.4
40.8

8.1
3.3
59.2

7.9
3.4
58.3

7.7
3.6
62.0

7.2
3.5
59.1

6.7
2.9
51.2

5.3
2.5
46.4

5.5
2.4
46.8

5.1
2.4
53.5

16.8
7.6
118.1

17.1
8.1
125.5

17.1
8.2
127.1

15.5
7.4
118.6

14.6
7.2
117.4

12.7
6.0
100.9

13.0
6.2
101.4

13.6
6.4
104.3

11.5
4.4
68.9

11.7
4.7
72.5

11.5
4.9
76.2

11.7
5.0
82.7

11.5
5.1
82.6

9.9
4.5
86.5

10.0
4.4
87.3

10.5
4.7
94.4

9.7
5.3
95.9

10.1
5.7
102.3

10.0
5.9
107.0

9.4
5.5
104.5

9.0
5.3
100.6

8.5
4.9
96.7

8.2
4.7
94.9

8.8
5.2
105.1

7.7
2.9
44.0

7.9
3.2
44.9

8.0
3.4
49.0

7.4
3.2
48.7

7.3
3.1
45.3

7.2
3.1
45.5

7.2
3.1
47.8

7.4
3.3
50.5

8.5
3.6
52.5

8.9
3.9
57.5

8.8
4.1
59.1

8.2
3.9
58.2

7.7
3.6
54.7

7.1
3.4
52.1

7.0
3.2
50.6

7.2
3.5
55.5

7.4
2.7
40.5

7.5
2.8
39.7

7.7
3.1
44.7

7.1
2.9
44.5

7.1
2.9
41.1

7.2
2.9
42.6

7.3
3.0
46.7

7.5
3.2
48.4

2.0
.8
10.4

2.1
.8
12.5

2.1
.9
13.3

2.0
.8
12.2

1.9
.8
11.6

2.0
.9
13.2

2.0
.9
12.8

1.9
.9
13.6

5.5
2.2
35.4

5.5
2.4
36.2

5.5
2.5
38.1

5.2
2.3
35.8

5.0
2.3
35.9

4.9
2.3
35.8

5.1
2.4
37.0

5.2
2.5
41.1

T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s

Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost workdays ...................................................................................................

W h o le s a le a n d r e ta il tr a d e

Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Wholesale trade:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Retail trade:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................

F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , a n d r e a l e s t a t e

Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................

S e r v ic e s

Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
1 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

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.

99
* U . S. G O V E R N M E N T P R IN T IN G O F F IC E : 1 986

4 9 1 -5 3 7 /4 0 0 0 5

NEW FROM BLS
SALES PUBLICATIONS
BLS Bulletins

Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by In­
dustry, 1984. Bulletin 2259, 80 pp., $4.25 (GPO Stock
No. 029-001-02900-4). Contains 1983 and 1984 data by industry
on occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities in private sector
establishments.
Occupational Outlook Handbook, 1986-87 Edition. Bulletin 2250,
523 pp., $20 paper cover (GPO Stock No. 029-001-02863-6); $23
cloth cover (GPO Stock No. 029-001-02864-4). An encyclopedia
of careers covering more than 200 occupations. For each oc­
cupation, information is included on what the work is like, 1984
employment, educational and training requirements, ad­
vancement possibilities, job prospects through the mid-1990’s,
earnings, related occupations, and where to find additional in­
formation.
Area Wage Surveys

These bulletins cover office, professional, technical, maintenance,
custodial, and material movement jobs in major metropolitan
areas. The annual series of 70 is available by subscription for
$102 per year. Individual area bulletins are also available
separately.
St. Louis, Missouri—Illinois, Metropolitan Area, March 1986.
Bulletin 3035-10, 38 pp., $2.25 (GPO Stock No.
829-001-00082-9).
San Franciso—Oakland, California, Metropolitan Area, March
1986. Bulletin 3035-12, 38 pp., $2.25 (GPO Stock No.
829-001-00084-5).
San Jose, California, Metropolitan Area, March 1986. Bulletin
3035-11, 34 pp., $2 (GPO Stock No. 829-001-00083-7).
Periodicals

CPI Detailed Report. Each issue provides a comprehensive report
on price movements for the month, plus statistical tables,
charts, and technical notes. $4 ($25 per year). May issue includes
a reconcilation of two measures of consumer price change for
the fourth quarter of 1985.
Current Wage Developments. Each issue includes selected wage
and benefit changes, work stoppages, and statistics on compen­
sation changes. $2 ($21 per year). May issue features Employ­
ment Cost Index historical tables; major collective bargaining
settlements in private industry, first 3 months of 1986; and State
and local government collective bargaining settlements in 1985.
Employment and Earnings. Each issue covers employment and
unemployment developments in the month plus regular
statistical tables on national, State, and area employment,
hours, and earnings. $4.50 ($31 per year). May issue features
1985 annual averages for States and areas.
Occupational Outlook Quarterly. Each issue helps people planning
careers, guidance counselors, and others keep informed of
changing career opportunities. $3 ($11 per year). Spring issue
features articles on the job outlook in brief, new projections to
1995, and the occupation of nurse-midwife.


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

Producer Price Indexes. Each issue includes a comprehensive
report on price movements for the month, plus regular tables
and technical notes. $4.25 ($29 per year).
U.S. Department of State Indexes of Living Costs Abroad,
Quarters Allowances, and Hardship Differentials, April 1986.
Tabulations computed quarterly by the Department of State for
use in establishing allowances to compensate American civilian
government employees for costs and hardships related to
assignments abroad. The information is also used by many
business firms and private organizations to assist in establishing
private compensation systems. $2.75 ($10 per year).
OTHER PUBLICATIONS

(Single copies available upon request while supplies last.)
Area Wage Summaries

Asheville, NC, May 1986. 3 pp.
Birmingham, AL, April 1986, 3 pp.
Montgomery, AL, April 1986. 6 pp.
Shreveport, LA, April 1986. 6 pp.
Tacoma, WA, April 1986. 6 pp.
Western and Northern Massachusetts, March 1986. 3 pp.
BLS Reports

Employment in Perspective: Minority Workers, First Quarter
1986. Report 728. 3 pp. Describes improved procedures incor­
porated into the Current Population Survey which have had a
pronounced effect on estimates of the Hispanic population and
labor force. Also discusses trends and recent developments for
Hispanics and blacks.
Employment in Perspective: Women in the Labor Force, First
Quarter 1986. Report 729. 3 pp. Summarizes the employment
status of women in the first quarter of 1986 and the latest pro­
jections of female labor force participation in 1995.
BLS Summaries

Occupational Earnings in All Metropolitan Areas, 1985. Sum­
mary 86-4, 6 pp.
Occupational Earnings in Selected Areas, 1985. Summary 86-3,
(No. 3 of 3).
To Order:

Order bulletins by title, bulletin number, and
GPO stock number from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, or from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Publications Sales Center, P.O.
Box 2145, Chicago, IL 60690. Subscriptions, including microfiche
subscriptions, are available only from the Superintendent of
Documents. All checks—including those that go to the Chicago
Regional Office—should be made payable to the Superintendent
of Documents.
S a le P u b l i c a t i o n s :

O th e r P u b l i c a t i o n s : Request from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
U.S. Department of Labor, Room 2421, 441 G Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20212, or from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Chicago Regional Office, P.O. Box 2145, Chicago, IL 60690.

IN THE MAZE
OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL STATISTICS,
do you sometimes feel like Stanley hunting for Livingstone?
If so, your search for a single source of reliable and comprehensive statistics and
analysis is over. Subscribe to the MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, the oldest government
journal providing up-to-date information on economic and social statistics.
PUBLISHED CONTINUOUSLY SINCE 1915, the REVIEW provides a 40-page section
of current statistics covering employment and unemployment; wages, and strike activity;
worker and capital productivity; unit labor costs and output; consumer, industrial, and
international prices; economic growth; and related topics. Each month, the REVIEW also
contains articles and informative reports. Some recent titles are:
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■

Job Training Partnership Act
Older workers in the labor market
Japan’s low unemployment
Employee-owned firms
The labor force in 1995
Multifactor productivity
Import prices for petroleum
The employment cost index
Work injuries from falls

■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■

Youth joblessness
Men’s and women's earnings
Occupational winners and losers
Black workers’ gains
Shortage of machinists?
Price inflation remains low
Employment in energy industries
Collective bargaining
Fatal injuries

TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE REVIEW, please fill out the following coupon and send to the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
O rd er fo rm

Please send the M O NTHLY LA B O R R E V IE W for 1 year at $24 (Foreign Subscribers add $6)

□ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents.
□ Charge to GPO Deposit Account No.
Order No.
□ Credit Card Orders □ MasterCard □ VISA, on orders to
Credit Card and No.
Superintendent of Documents only.
Expiration Date
Total charges $_________
Month/Year
Name__________________________________________
Organization (if appropriate)___________________________________________________________
Address
City, State, Zip Code_____________________________________________ _ _______________

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

U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, D.C. 20212
O fficial Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300

Second-Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
ISSN 0098-1818

RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED


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

MLR
LIBRA442L ISSDUE009R
1
LIBRARY
FED R E S E RV E BANK OF ST LOUIS
PO BOX 442
S A I N T LO UI S
M0
63166