The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
ml
/
1
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
June 1983
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In this Issue:
Major medical plans for workers,
fifty years of the Job Service
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner
The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, D.C. 20212.
Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year —
$26 domestic; $32.50 foreign.
S ingle copy $5, d om estic; $6.25, 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.
ISSN 0098-1818
Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I — Boston: Anthony J. Ferrara
1603 JFK Federal Building, Government Center,
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II — New York: Sam uel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region III — Philadelphia: A lvin I. M argulls
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: D onald M. Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 30367
Phone: (404) 881-4418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V — Chicago: W illiam E Rice
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street,
Chicago, III. 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI — Dallas: Bryan Richey
Second Floor, 555 Griffin Square Building, Dallas, Tex. 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
June 1983 cover:
“ The Surgeon, Dr. Theodore Erickson,”
a 1944 drawing in red chalk and pencil
by John Steuart Curry,
Collection of Mrs. John Steuart Curry.
Cover design by Richard L. Mathews,
Division of Audio-Visual Communications,
U.S. Department of Labor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Regions VII and VIII — Kansas City: E llio tt A. Brow ar
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, Mo. 64106
Phone: (816) 374-2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Regions IX and X — San Francisco: D. Bruce H anchett
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017,
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
//?(?
?;/ .
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
JUNE 1983
VOLUME 106, NUMBER 6
L IB R A R Y
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor
JUN 2 9 7983
Robert W. Bednarzik
Short workweeks during economic downturns
By far the most common economic reasons for part-time employment during recessions
are cutbacks in weekly hours due to slack work and failure to find full-time positions
Henry P. Guzda
12
The U.S. Employment Service at 50: it too had to wait its turn
On June 6, 1933, the U.S. Employment Service was bom under the Wagner-Peyser Act;
prior attempts to establish labor exchanges had proved controversial and short-lived
S.E. Haber and others
20
A new method for estimating job separation rates by sex and age
The employee separation rate of women is slightly higher than that of men,
while the rate of blacks is lower than that for whites, irrespective of sex
Allan Blostin, William Marclay
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28
HMOs and other health plans: coverage and employee premiums
Health maintenance organizations represent a small portion of employee health plans;
benefits are more comprehensive, worker premiums higher than for traditional insurance
REPORTS
John L. Finch
Shirley J. Smith
William R. Bailey
W orklife estimates should be consistent with labor force rates
Labor force participation rates are not the relevant factor
Compensation cost increases: slowdown continues in 1982
DEPARTMENTS
Labor month in review
Communications
Research summaries
Research notes
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics
Labor M onth
In Review
KLEIN AWARDS. The annual
Lawrence R. Klein award for the best
original article published during 1982 in
the Monthly Labor Review and written
by a Bureau of Labor Statistics author is
shared by:
Paul O. Flaim, Office of Employment
and Unemployment Statistics, for “ The
spendable earnings series: has it outlived
its usefulness?” in the January issue,
and Norman Bowers, Office of Employ
ment and Unemployment Statistics, for
“ Tracking youth joblessness: persistent
or fleeting?” in the February issue.
The award for the best original article
written by an author outside of b l s goes
to Paul S. Adler for “ The productivity
puzzle: numbers alone won’t solve it,”
in the October issue.
The winners received their awards at
the annual b l s awards ceremony, April
28, from Ben Burdetsky, secretarytreasurer of the Klein fund. Flaim
previously won for an article published
during 1979 and Bowers for an article
published during 1980. The two are the
first repeat winners in the 14-year history
of the award.
The Flaim article investigates the
usefulness of the spendable earnings
series, which was discontinued in
January 1982. He explains that the series
began in 1939 and approximated earn
ings trends in its early years but that by
the early 1970’s some economists were
already arguing that “ because of the
change in the composition of the la
bor force and other developments, the
spendable earnings series no longer pro
vided a reliable indication of the true
trend in earnings.”
After analyzing the series’ accuracy,
2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
relevance, and concepts, Flaim con
cludes that “ statistical evidence proves
that because of the gradual change in the
mix of workers, the spendable earnings
series has become severely downward
biased. Crucial questions also emerge
regarding the formula used to translate
gross earnings into spendable earnings.
The fact that deductions for State and
local taxes have been ignored in the com
putation process looms as an omission
of growing importance. . . . In other
words, enough questions can be raised
about the series to conclude that it has
probably outlived its usefulness.” With
publication of the data for December
1981, b l s discontinued the series.
The Bowers article gives reasons for
high unemployment among young per
sons such as high turnover, seasonality,
and work-school transitions and further
explores youth joblessness by showing
the results of a new study of matched
data from the Current Population
Survey. The study examines the
unemployment experience of selected in
dividuals in the course of a year, and
over 2 consecutive years. Bowers says
that the study’s findings suggest:
• “ Prolonged
joblessness
is
somewhat concentrated among a
relatively small group of workers
but is also strongly affected by
the business cycle.
• A clear association exists between
the extent of past joblessness and
the likelihood of subsequent
unemployment.
• Two or more spells of joblessness in
1 year do not necessarily presage
similar unemployment the next
year.
• Recurrent unemployment is no
respecter of age, striking all labor
force groups.”
Adler’s article is a review essay of four
books published in 1981 which grapple
with the problem of the major decline in
the rate of growth in productivity over
the last two decades. The authors’ van
tage points are in management, labor,
academia, and government. Adler uses
the books to address the question of
whether the productivity slowdown is
basically a cause or an effect of current
economic problems. He notes that
economic theory is of little help in solv
ing the puzzle.
Origin of the award. The Klein Award
Fund was established by Lawrence R.
Klein, editor-in-chief of the Review for
22 years until his retirement in 1968. In
stead of accepting a retirement gift,
Klein donated contributions and match
ed the amount collected to initiate the
fund. Since then, he has contributed
regularly, as have others. The purpose
of the fund is to encourage Review ar
ticles that (1) exhibit originality of ideas
or method of analysis, (2) adhere to the
principles of scientific inquiry, and (3)
are well written. Since 1969, fund
trustees have presented awards to
authors of 27 Review articles. Awards
carry cash prizes of $200 for each win
ning article.
Tax-deductible contributions to the
Klein Fund may be sent to Ben Burdet
sky, Secretary-Treasurer, Lawrence R.
Klein Fund, c/o School of Government
and Business Adm inistration, The
George W ashington University,
Washington, D.C. 20052.
□
Short workweeks
during economic downturns
By fa r the most common economic reasons for
part-time employment during recessions
are cutbacks in weekly hours due to slack work
and failure to find full-time positions;
each is characteristically distinct and illustrates
different underlying labor-market problems
R obert W. Bed na r zik
Often overshadowed in the current recession by the rise
in the jobless rate, the number of persons involuntarily
working part time reached record levels in 1982. As the
unemployment level passed 11 million persons, the
number of “economic part-timers” neared the 7 million
mark. Many of these persons had their workweeks re
duced, with accompanying pay cuts, while others ac
cepted part-time jobs only after unsuccessful searches
for full-time work. Unlike the unemployed, those sub
ject to a reduction in hours are not usually entitled to
draw unemployment insurance benefits for their lost
work time.1
During an economic downturn, the number of invol
untary part-timers typically rises before unemployment
begins to increase, mainly because employers tend to re
duce hours of work when possible before laying off em
ployees to minimize the cost of turnover. In recovery
periods, when new orders pick up and inventories are
rebuilt, firms usually restore the hours of those on
Robert W. Bednarzik is an economist in the Office of Employment
and Unemployment Statistics. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
shortened workweeks before expanding their work
forces. Thus, over the business cycle, changes in the
number of persons involuntarily working part time are
generally just a few steps ahead of changes in overall
unemployment.
In 1982, the distribution (annual averages) of invol
untary part-timers by reason for part-time work was:
Reason
T o tal...............................
Slack workloads ...................
Material shortages or repairs
to plant and equipment . . .
New job started during the
survey reference week.........
Job ended during the reference
w e e k ...................................
Could only find a part-time
job ......................................
Number
(thousands)
6,170
3,264
Percent
100.0
52.9
53
0.9
168
2.7
85
1.4
2,600
42.1
“Slack work” and “could find only part-time work,”
which together account for more than 90 percent of the
total, will be the main focal points of this analysis.
3
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Short Workweeks During Recessions
D ata for these two subgroups, along with the number
of persons involuntarily working part time have been
seasonally adjusted specifically for this study.2
This article examines the type and extent of the rela
tionship of the “slack work” and “could find only parttime work” components to changes in economic condi
tions. Given that, by definition, one group had been
successful in finding full-time employment while the
other had not, it is expected that they may differ with
respect to demographic and employment characteristics,
and thus behave differently over the business cycle. The
cyclical analysis is based on monthly Current Popula
tion Survey ( c p s ) data from 1955 to 1982, a period that
includes five complete business cycles and the most re
cent economic downturn.
To better understand observed labor market patterns,
a detailed discussion of who involuntary part-time
workers are, how the two main “reason” groups differ,
and why some could find only part-time work will be
presented. An analysis of the influence of occupation
and industry attachment on involuntary part-time
worker status concludes the study.
Link with the business cycle
Over the period for which data have been collected,
there has been a direct and fairly stable relationship
among the incidence of involuntary part-time work, the
unemployment rate, and the business cycle.3 (See chart
1.) On average, the number of involuntary part-timers
as a percent of the total at work reaches its cyclical low
and begins to rise about 11 months prior to the busi
ness cycle peak designated by the National Bureau of
Economic Research ( n b e r ) and about 7 months before
the unemployment rate low point. It tends to turn
Chart 1. U nem ploym ent rate and percent of persons at work em ployed part tim e fo r econom ic reasons, w ith peaks
and troug hs in the business cycle, 1955-82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
PERCENT
11 . 0
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1 .0
0.0
Table 1. Highs and lows in involuntary part-time employment and months from unemployment rate and business cycle
peaks and troughs, selected recessionary periods, 1955-83, seasonally adjusted
Lows1
Highs1
Period and type of
involuntary part-time work
As a percent of
total at work
Date
occurred
1957-58:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
6.5
3.8
2.2
1960-61:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
Months from2
Months from2
As a percent of
total at work
Date
occurred
Unemployment
rate low
Business
cycle peak
May 1959
Sept. 1959
Mar. 1960
-9
-5
+1
-11
-7
-1
2.6
1.3
0.9
Jan. 1969
July 1969
May 1969
-4
+2
0
-11
-5
-7
+5
+4
+21
2.8
1.3
1.1
Jan. 1973
Jan. 1973
Nov. 1973
-9
-9
+1
-1 0
-1 0
0
-1
-1
+20
+1
+1
+22
3.6
1.6
1.5
Dec. 1978
Nov. 1978
Jan. 1980
-7
-8
+6
-1 3
-1 4
0
( 3)
June 1980
( 3)
-1
( 3)
-1
( 3)
2.3
( 3)
June 1981
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)
( 3)
-1
( 3)
( 3)
-1
( 3)
07.5
4.1
p3.4
Jan. 1983
Sept. 1982
Jan. 1983
+1
-3
+1
H
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
( 4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
Unemployment
rate high
Business
cycle trough
Mar. 1958
Apr. 1958
Mar. 1959
-4
-3
+8
-1
0
+ 11
3.8
1.6
1.6
5.6
3.1
2.3
Feb. 1961
Feb. 1961
June 1961
-3
-3
+1
0
0
+4
1969-70:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
3.8
2.0
1.5
Apr. 1971
Mar. 1971
Aug. 1972
-4
-5
+ 12
1973-75:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
5.2
3.0
2.0
Apr. 1975
Apr. 1975
Jan. 1977
( 3)
2.8
1980:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
1981-82:
Total ...................................................
Slack w o r k ..........................................
Could find only part-time work ...........
1Ascertained in accordance with the standard rules for determining turning points in data
series over time. See Arthur F. Burns and Wesley C. Mitchell, Measuring Business Cycles
(New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1946).
2 Measured as lead ( - ) and lag (+).
downward around the time the business cycle bottoms
out but a few months before overall joblessness begins
to decline. (See table 1.)
The percentage of persons at work who are on parttime schedules because of slack work (“workweek re
duction” rate) and the percentage who could find only
part-time work (“failure to find full-time work” rate) do
not necessarily follow the same pattern. However, the
cyclical behavior of each provides valuable insights into
the operation of the labor market. During economic
contractions, for example, the reduction rate rises soon
er and more rapidly than the failure-to-find rate.
In the recovery phase, the reduction rate begins to
decline sooner than the failure-to-find rate, as employ
ees’ hours are restored before economic conditions im
prove enough to allow employers to hire additional full
time workers. Thus, the cyclical flavor of involuntary
part-time employment comes from the ebb and flow in
the length of the workweek as reflected in the workweekreduction component more than from fluctuations in
the availability of full-time jobs as reflected in the failure-to-find component. Because of its “length of work
week” orientation, the timing of the turning points in
the reduction rate series parallels that of “hours of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Series showed no discernible turning point during this period,
4 Data are not available.
p = preliminary.
work” series; it leads at business cycle peaks but is co
incident at troughs.4 By contrast, the cyclical timing of
the failure-to-find rate series does not exactly parallel
any other labor market series. Like movements in em
ployment, it is coincident at business cycle peaks, but,
unlike employment, it lags at troughs.5 In this latter re
gard, it behaves more like unemployment. However, the
failure-to-find series does not turn downward (show im
provement) until well after unemployment has fallen.
The cyclical pattern in the incidence of involuntary
part-time work during the recent recession differed
somewhat from that of earlier postwar downturns,
largely because the latest recession followed an unusual
ly brief and weak recovery. The incidence of part-time
work never really declined between the 1980 and 1981—
82 recessions; it simply leveled before increasing further.
That is, there were no discernible turning points except
for a slight dip in the workweek-reduction rate, which
occurred only a month before the 1981 business cycle
peak, not the usual lead of several months. This seems
to lend credence to the argument advanced by some an
alysts that the 1980 economic contraction was not real
ly a separate downturn, but part of a lengthy recession
spanning the entire 1980-82 period.6
5
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Short Workweeks During Recessions
The previous high point for the percentage of workers
employed part time involuntarily— 6.5 percent, reached
in 1958— was equaled in May 1982. By October 1982,
the rate had passed 7 percent. Interestingly, the distri
bution of workers by reason for involuntary part-time
work differed from that of the earlier period. In 1958,
the failure-to-find component accounted for less than 30
percent of the total, whereas it made up more than 40
percent in 1982. The cyclical rise in the failure-to-find
rate during the recent recession was uncharacteristically
sharp. (See chart 1.) Perhaps this reflects the failure of
the full-time job market to recover fully from the 1980
downturn. Thus, more would-be full-time workers than
is typical have had to settle for less remunerative parttime employment in recent years. Because past trends
indicate that the failure-to-find rate, which was still ris
ing at the end of 1982 while the workweek-reduction
rate appears to have peaked in September, does not
turn downward until several months after workweek
levels are restored, involuntary part-time workers as a
percent of those, at work may not soon return to
pre-1980 recession levels. Following the 1973-75 reces
sion, for example, the proportion of persons at work on
short schedules did not fall below its prerecession low
for the first time in the postwar period.
Clearly, changes in the overall incidence of involun
tary part-time work hide important differences in the
behavior of the major components over the business cy
cle. The pattern in each component series stems from
and illustrates different economic phenomena, and thus
may imply different policy prescriptions. The more cy
clical workweek-reduction series reflects firms’ short-run
adjustments in number of weekly hours worked to mini
mize costs in the face of unstable market conditions.
The failure-to-find series is related both to the general
state of the economy and to the hiring policies of indi
vidual firms. For example, because of depressed eco
nomic conditions, employers may hire part-time, rather
than full-time, workers. During recessionary periods,
the number of part-time jobs often continues to grow,
albeit at a slower pace than in nonrecessionary times,
while the number of full-time jobs decreases. Thus, for
some workers, part-time work may represent a stopgap
measure until a full-time job can be found. For others,
failure to find full-time work may stem from inadequate
job experience, skills, education, and training; in a weak
job market, the lack of these qualities is magnified as
employers can be more choosy in their hiring practices.
The more cyclical workweek-reduction rate is identi
fied with changes in hours, while the failure-to-find rate
is identified with changes in employment. The question
that remains is how much the demographic and em
ployment characteristics of workers in each category
have contributed to the cyclical nature of their employ
ment status.
6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Who are the involuntary part-timers?
Just as the burden of unemployment falls more heavi
ly on certain worker groups, the incidence of economic
part-time employment also varies significantly. Teenag
ers, blacks,7 and women were disproportionately repre
sented among those working part time involuntarily in
1982. The disparity for teenagers was the most striking,
as their 16-percent share of involuntary part-time em
ployment was twice their share of the labor force.
The following tabulation of 1982 annual averages
shows that the incidence of those at work on short-time
schedules also varies by reason within major demo
graphic groups:
Persons
(thousands)
Men . . . .
Women . .
White . . .
Black and
other . . .
Slack
work
1,881
1,381
2,749
514
Percent of
total employment
Could
find
only
part-time
962
1,639
2,118
482
Slack
work
3.5
3.4
3.3
Could
find
only
part-time
1.8
4.1
2.6
4.7
4.4
As noted earlier, a greater percentage of all workers
were on short schedules in 1982 because of workweek
cutbacks (52.9 percent) than because of an unsuccessful
search for a full-time job (42.1 percent). This was not
true for women, however. And men were nearly twice
as likely to be on shortened schedules as a result of a
reduction in weekly hours than because they failed to
find full-time jobs.
Although women were more likely than men to have
reported that they could only find a part-time job, there
was little difference in the percentages of men and wom
en at work who suffered workweek cutbacks. Blacks
were more likely than whites to be economic part-timers
in both categories under study.
Why do they work part-time?
The cause-and-effect relationship between workweek
cutbacks and the incidence of involuntary part-time
work is fairly straightforward. Hours reductions can oc
cur from time to time in any business or industry and,
for the most part, are beyond the control of the individ
ual worker. The situation is not as clearcut for those
who failed to find a full-time job and accepted parttime work instead, particularly during the 1980-82 peri
od when back-to-back recessions curtailed the number
of full-time jobs available.
It is to be expected that some people will work part
time during recessions rather than remain “fully” unem
ployed. There is some evidence from gross flow data8 to
Table 2. Involuntary part-time workers in current month
who were unemployed in the previous month, 1968-82
annual averages
Percent of
Year1
Thousands
of
persons
Unemployed
in prior
month
Involuntary
part-time workers in
current month
1968 .............
19692 ...........
19702 ...........
184
167
222
6.1
5.7
5.8
9.7
8.4
9.3
1971 .............
1972 .............
19732 ...........
19742 ...........
19752 ...........
275
262
255
277
405
5.6
5.5
6.0
5.9
5.4
10.5
10.2
10.4
9.7
11.0
1976 .............
1977 .............
1978 .............
1979 .............
19802 ...........
393
401
353
325
430
5.6
5.9
6.0
5.6
6.0
11.3
11.6
10.6
9.6
10.4
19812 ...........
19812 ...........
19822 ...........
463
475
632
6.0
6.0
6.2
10.1
10.2
10.4
1For the years 1968 to 1980, the weights applied to the sample estimates to represent
the Nation are based upon the 1970 Decennial Census population figures. The first 1981 fig
ure is based on the 1970 census while the second and the 1982 figure are based on the
1980 census.
2 Recession year as designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
support this view. The data pertaining to the flow of
workers to involuntary part-time work from unemploy
ment in table 2 show that, on average over the 1968-82
period, about 1 of 10 involuntary part-timers in a given
month had been unemployed the previous month.9 Al
though there was a cyclical aspect to this flow, it never
exceeded a half million workers until 1982 when an av
erage of 632,000 persons, or 6.2 percent of the unem
ployed total, in one m onth were employed part time
involuntarily in the next month.
Movements in the failure-to-find series do not appear
to be as cyclical as those in the workweek reduction se
ries, especially prior to 1980. (See chart 1.) A detailed
regression analysis of these two series using quarterly
Current Population Survey data from 1955 to 1974 re
vealed that the reduction rate was clearly the more sen
sitive during economic downturns; in upturns both
series responded fairly evenly.10 Because the personal
characteristics of the workers in each category differ
widely, the types of jobs held by each also stand apart,
and further discussion of the extent of these differences
and their possible role in the observed cyclical dispari
ties is warranted.
There are many reasons in addition to a depressed
job market why some workers may be able to find only
part-time jobs. They may lack the skills or experience
required for many full-time jobs or they may be viewed
by employers as too high a turnover risk because their
nonwork responsibilities appear to permit only a mar
ginal attachment to the labor force. Conversely, workers
may find themselves in this predicament because their
outside activities restrict the number of full-time job op
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
portunities open to them to only those offering less tra
ditional schedules; and, they might not always be free
to relocate geographically to a more opportune job
market. In any case, they probably settle for a part-time
worker’s paycheck because some income is better than
none, or is higher than unemployment benefits. Many of
the reasons for failure to find full-time work are, of
course, overlapping. For example, a person may be only
marginally attached to the labor force and may also be
geographically immobile because of nonwork activities.
Unfortunately, data are not available to address each
combination of factors directly.
Work experience. Just as individuals move into and out
of the work force over the course of a year, they also
move into and out of part-time employment. Thus,
many more people experience part-time work during the
year than is indicated by the number of such workers
for an average month in the year. Data from the CPS
retrospective annual survey of work experience11 of the
population can provide some additional insights into in
voluntary part-time work not available from the regular
monthly data, including more detailed characteristics of
involuntary part-timers.
Also, the number of weeks worked during the year in
part-time status, which is available from this data base,
provides a very useful measure of an individual’s labor
market attachment. The data analyzed below are for
persons who worked one or more weeks part time in
1981, and whose main reason for doing so was either
slack work12or failure to find full-time work.
The distribution of persons with some involuntary
part-time work experience in 1981 by reason for part-
Table 3. Distribution of involuntary part-time workers by
reason for part-time status and selected demographic
characteristics, 1981
Reason for part-time employment
Characteristic
Slack work
Could find only
part-time work
100.0
6.3
18.2
49.1
24.4
2.0
100.0
21.9
26.9
35.7
14.4
1.1
T o ta l..............................................
Husbands ...................................................
W ives.........................................................
Others in married couple fam ilies.............
100.0
37.1
20.2
11.3
100.0
9.7
24.6
27.7
Women who maintain families a lo n e .........
Others in such families .............................
5.5
5.2
7.8
11.5
Men who maintain families alone .............
Others in such families .............................
1.8
1.9
.6
2.3
Unrelated individuals.................................
17.0
15.8
Age
T o ta l..............................................
16 to 19 years ..........................................
20 to 24 years ..........................................
25 to 44 years ..........................................
45 to 64 years ..........................................
65 and over ..............................................
Marital and family status
7
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Short Workweeks During Recessions
time employment and by age and family and household
status is shown in table 3. According to these data, per
sons who could find only part-time work tended to be
young and to live in a family with other working mem
bers. This implies that they may have lacked experience
or were geographically immobile. Half of those who
could find only part-time work were under 25 years of
age, and a fourth each were wives or someone in a fami
ly other than a husband or wife. Besides the lack of job
experience, youth are further hindered in finding full
time work by school attendance. Wives or youth could
also be hampered by a husband’s or other family mem
ber’s employment because it would limit their job pros
pects to nearby labor markets. In contrast, workers on
reduced schedules because of slack work were more
likely to be in the prime working age groups and to be
husbands.
Persons who could find only part-time work generally
had a looser attachment to the labor market than per
sons whose workweeks had been reduced. Persons
whose main reason for involuntary part-time employ
ment was slack work worked substantially more weeks
total (49) during 1981 than those who could find only
part-time work (30 weeks). Also, the length of time that
those reporting slack work actually had to stay on
shortened schedules during 1981 was very brief— only 6
weeks. In contrast, those who reported having difficulty
finding full-time jobs worked more weeks part time
than full tim e— 17 compared with 13 weeks. It appears
that full-time status for those who also worked parttime in 1981 because that was all they could find at the
time was very tenuous.
The activity of involuntary part-time workers when
they were not in the labor force in 1981 was also reveal
ing:
Slack Could only find
work
part-time
Number of involuntary
part-timers (in thousands) . . . .
9,876
4,752
Percent who worked only
part year .................................
Ill or disabled........................
Taking care of home or family
Going to school.....................
Retired...................................
O th er......................................
25.6
4.4
6.3
4.0
.7
10.1
45.2
3.0
12.9
19.3
.1
9.8
Among workers who could find only part-time jobs
during 1981, the largest identifiable reason for weeks
spent outside the labor force was school attendance
followed by home or family responsibilities. The not-inthe-labor-force activities of those on short schedules be
cause of slack work were much more varied. Clearly,
the reasons behind a person’s inability to find a full
time job and his or her decision to accept part-time em
ployment instead go beyond the simple explanation of a
8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
recessionary decrease in the number of full-time jobs.
This would help to account for the fact that the failureto-find series is not as cyclically sensitive as the percent
age of workers on part-time schedules because of slack
workloads.
Occupation and industry
To further develop insight into the cyclical sensitivity
of the slack-work and could find only part-time work
series, the distribution of workers by occupation and in
dustry in each category was analyzed.
The relationship among occupation, industry, and
slack work is fairly straightforward. If slack work is
concentrated in those occupations and industries which
are most affected by recession, a worker’s status could
be said to be influenced by his or her occupation or in
dustry affiliation. However, this is not the case for those
workers who could only find part-time employment, be
cause their short-time status is determined simulta
neously with their occupation and industry status; that
is, they had no occupation and industry attachment im
mediately prior to their securing employment. Unlike
most workers reporting slack work, those who failed to
find full-time employment were not, for example, craft
or factory workers before they became involuntary parttime workers. It is, of course, expected that, once
employed, most workers who could find only part-time
positions would be in occupations and industries in
which a lot of part-time employment normally occurs.
Blue-collar workers, the most cyclical component of
the major occupational groups, were twice as likely as
white-collar workers to have experienced a workweek
reduction in 1982. A little more than half of all workers
who encountered slack workloads were blue-collar in
1982, down from 60 percent a decade earlier. The 1982
distribution of part-timers for reasons of slack work and
failure to find full-time jobs by major occupation was:
T o tal............................
White-collar workers .........
Blue-collar workers ............
Service w orkers...................
Farmworkers .....................
___
___
___
___
___
Slack
work
100.0
24.7
53.5
16.7
5.1
Could find only
part-time
100.0
36.6
22.0
38.9
2.5
More than a fifth of workers who could find only a
part-time job were also blue-collar, but most were ser
vice workers or white-collar employees, particularly
clerical workers. The percentage of workers on parttime schedules because that was all they could find has
been increasing gradually since the late 1960’s.
Although the workweek-reduction rate has remained
relatively flat secularly, the distribution of workers on
short schedules because of slack workloads has changed
to reflect the economy’s shift away from goods produc
tion to services. Interestingly, the blue-collar share of
Table 4. Distribution of over-the-year changes in parttime employment for economic reasons due to slack
workloads, by occupation and industry, selected periods,
1970-82
Period
Occupation and Industry
Mar. 1970
to
Mar. 1971’
Apr. 1974
to
Apr. 1975’
June 1979
to
June 1980’
Sept. 1981
to
Sept. 19822
Total change..................
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Percent of total change
attributable to:
White-collar w o rke rs.............
Blue-collar w o rkers...............
Service workers ....................
Farmworkers ........................
28.9
61.7
23.8
—
16.4
69.1
11.3
3.2
23.7
60.8
11.5
4.1
24.5
63.4
10.0
2.1
Goods-producing industries ..
Service-producing industries .
40.9
59.1
66.0
34.0
60.2
39.8
47.9
52.1
1National Bureau of Economic Research designated trough, business cycle month.
2 Month in which the highest level of slack work in the current economic downturn oc
curred.
the increase in slack work did not change significantly
over the four most recent postwar recessions, remaining
near two-thirds of the total difference between the peak
of the slack work series and the level observed a year
earlier. (See table 4.) As a result, the percentage in
crease in slack work accounted for by blue-collar work
ers during the recent recessions has become dispropor
tionately large, whereas in the 1970-71 period, their
share of the increase in slack work was approximately
equal to their share of the number of workers whose
workweeks were cut back.
The data in table 4 also show that slightly more than
half of the increase in slack work between September of
1981 and 1982 was in the service-producing sector, a re
versal from the previous two recessions when most
slack work occurred in the goods-producing sector. For
example, only about a third of the increase in the inci
dence of slack work in the year preceding the 1975 peak
was in the service sector. These developments are not
that surprising when the percent distribution of slack
work by major sector is examined, along with the inci
dence of failure to find full-time work and the distribu
tion of total part-time work for economic reasons, for
selected recessionary years:
1970
1975
In 1982, the service-producing sector accounted for 70
percent of the part-time for economic reasons total and
for over half of slack work, up substantially since 1970.
A question arises about the effect of the changing oc
cupational and industry composition of the slack-work
series on its degree of cyclical sensitivity. As we have
seen, blue-collar workers, whose employment pattern is
highly cyclical, accounted for a smaller proportion of
slack work in 1982 than previously, and more than half
of all workers reporting slack work are now found in
the less cyclical service sector. A hint that the effect on
the series’ cyclical sensitivity might be marginal was
provided by the fact that blue-collar workers, even
though a smaller part of the whole, maintained their
share of the increase in slack work in recent recession
ary periods.
Table 5, which shows the increase in slack work dur
ing periods of economic contraction, provides further
evidence that the effect may be slight. Although the per
centage rise in slack work was lower in the current re
cession than in the 1973-75 episode, it was higher than
during other postwar downturns for which data are
available. Moreover, if the percentage change in slack
work were computed over the back-to-back recessions
in the 1980-82 period, it would easily surpass that of
the 1973-75 recession. Apparently, the service-produc
ing sector is becoming more cyclically sensitive with re
gard to the likelihood of workweek cutbacks.
When the 1982 industry distribution of persons who
could only find part-time work is examined, an appar
ent paradox is observed. At the same time that the ser
vice sector provides part-time jobs in recessionary
periods for those unable to find full-time work (recall
that more than 90 percent of those who could find only
part-time employment were in service-producing indus
tries in 1982), many other workers in that sector had
their workweeks reduced. This is attributable to the di
verse types of industries making up the sector, some of
Table 5. Changes in part time for economic reasons due
to slack workloads, business cycle peaks to troughs,
selected recessionary periods, 1955-82, seasonally
adjusted
Persons encountering slack work
1982
Period
T otal part-tim e for
econom ic r e a s o n s .................. . . . .
G o o d s -p r o d u c in g ............... . . . .
Service-producing ............ ____
Slack work ................................. . . . .
G o o d s -p r o d u c in g ............... ____
Service-producing ............ . . . .
C ould only find
part-tim e work ..................... ____
G o o d s -p r o d u c in g ............... . . . .
Service-producing ............ . . . .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100.0
46.8
53.2
100.0
61.5
38.5
100.0
15.9
84.0
100.0
37.5
62.5
100.0
54.4
45.6
100.0
10.6
89.4
100.0
29.6
70.4
100.0
45.6
54.4
100.0
8.6
91.4
Actual change
(thousands)
Percent change
Aug. 1957 to Apr. 1958 ......................
858
61.0
Apr. 1960 to Feb. 1961 ......................
747
59.6
Dec. 1969 to Nov. 1970 ......................
289
26.5
Nov. 1973 to Mar. 1975 ......................
1,030
78.4
Jan. 1980 to July 1980 ......................
584
29.6
July 1981 to Sept. 1 9 8 2 '....................
1,491
64.0
1Month in which the highest level of slack work in the current economic downturn oc
curred.
9
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Short Workweeks During Recessions
Table 6. Nonagricultural wage and salary workers on
part-time schedules because of slack workloads and
failure to find full-time work, by industry, 1982 annual
averages
Could find only
part-time work
Slack work
Industry
Percent
distribution
Percent
of total
at work
Percent
distribution
Percent
of total
at work
T o ta l...........................
100.0
2.9
100.0
2.7
M ining....................................
Construction...........................
Manufacturing ......................
Durable ........................
Nondurable....................
1.4
12.3
33.5
16.3
17.1
3.6
6.8
4.3
3.6
5.4
0.1
3.2
5.3
1.6
3.7
0.2
1.6
0.6
0.3
1.1
Transportation and public
utilitie s...............................
Transportation...............
Public utilities ...............
5.5
5.0
0.5
2.3
4.0
0.5
4.0
3.3
0.7
1.5
2.4
0.6
Trade ....................................
Wholesale......................
R e ta il.............................
24.1
2.9
21.2
3.3
1.9
3.6
45.9
1.6
44.3
5.7
1.0
6.9
Finance, insurance, and
real estate ........................
2.6
1.1
3.1
1.2
Miscellaneous services.........
Business........................
Personal........................
Entertainment and
recreation ..................
Medical, except hospital .
Hospital ........................
Education......................
O th e r.............................
19.7
4.5
6.0
2.0
3.3
7.9
35.4
5.6
4.1
3.3
3.7
4.9
1.6
1.9
1.3
2.3
2.1
4.3
1.5
0.8
0.8
1.3
3.2
4.6
3.2
10.2
4.6
7.6
3.4
1.7
3.2
2.6
Public administration.............
1.1
0.5
2.9
1.3
standardizing for different work force sizes across indus
tries. The largest incidences of workweek reductions in
1982 were in construction (6.8 percent), nondurable
manufacturing (5.4 percent), and personal services (7.9
percent). This latter figure affords an excellent example
of the fact that service-producing industries are not im
mune to recession as belt-tightening consumers cut back
their use of personal services such as laundry, dry clean
ing, portrait photography, and beauty and barber shops
in hard times. Also, this same industry provided a dis
proportionately large number of part-time jobs to per
sons unable to find a full-time one. The greatest shares
of failure to find full-time work were found in retail
trade and in the entertainment and recreation service in
dustries.
which is
highly cyclical and leads the national unemployment
rate and business cycle turning points during the onset
of a recession, is composed principally of two subseries
that are quite distinct. Increases in the level of each
mean different things in terms of how well labor m ar
kets are operating and suggest different policy
precriptions. An increase in the workweek reduction
rate, the more cyclical of the two, is really a reduction
in hours worked, an indication of a demand deficient
economy. Although a rise in the failure-to-find rate is
also symptomatic of an economy gone sour, it reflects
more structural employment issues such as skill levels,
job experience, rigid work schedules, job mobility, and
personal preferences.
Future changes in the make-up of the two groups
could further alter the composition of involuntary parttime employment and thus influence the extent of its cy
clical nature. For example, a continued decline in the
labor force participation rate of youth, a large compo
nent of persons who could find only part-time work, or
the continued shift towards a service-oriented economy,
might eventually render the total less cyclical. In con
trast, if national or State policies were enacted whereby
benefits now accruing primarily to unemployed workers
were also paid to workers whose hours were cut back—
as is the case in many other industrialized countries—
workweek reductions might become more prevalent.
Based on the experience through the current recession,
this could lead to an even closer tracking of the inci
dence of economic part-time work with the overall job
less rate.
□
THE INVOLUNTARY PART-TIME WORK SERIES,
which show considerable variation over the business cy
cle.13Table 6 presents a detailed look at the incidence of
slack work and failure to find full-time work by indus
try. Large concentrations of slack work were found in
manufacturing, retail trade, and miscellaneous services.
The latter two industries also furnished jobs for the
vast majority of workers who could find only part-time
jobs. The retail trade and services industries are also di
verse with regard to size, product or service provided,
and geographic location, which could account for their
exhibiting both cyclical and countercyclical tendencies
at the same time. For example, Edward F. Denison’s
study of the miscellaneous services industry found that
the behavior of its two largest components, health ser
vices and business services, was illustrative of the dif
ferences within the division: “Health services display al
most no cyclical sensitivity while business services show
a high degree.” 14
The data in table 6 also show the percentage of
workers in each industry on short schedules— a way of
FOOTNOTES
ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The author thanks Sylvia L. Terry, an
economist in the Division of Data Development and User’s Services,
for the development of the special work experience tabulations, and
Stella Cromartie, an economic assistant in the Division of Employ
ment and Unemployment Analysis, for providing technical assistance
in the preparation of this article.
10
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
The availability of pro rata unemployment insurance (UI) benefits
for partial work time lost is discussed in Daniel Hamermesh, “Unem
ployment Insurance, Short-Time Compensation and the Workweek,”
W ork T im e a n d E m ploym en t, Special Report No. 28 (Washington,
National Commission for Employment Policy, 1978), pp. 233-38. Of
course, many of the unemployed do not collect UI benefits either. In
1982, the number of persons claiming such benefits averaged about 40
percent of the total number unemployed. A detailed discussion of UI
data can be found in Saul J. Blaustein, “Insured Unemployment
Data” in D a ta Collection, Processing a n d Presentation: N ation al a n d
L o c a l (Washington, National Commission on Employment and Un
employment Statistics, Vol. II, 1979), pp. 198-258.
2On a regular monthly basis, seasonally adjusted data for involun
tary part-timers are limited to nonagricultural workers plus a division
of this total into those who usually work full time and those usually
working part time.
3 Robert W. Bednarzik, “Involuntary part time work: a cyclical
analysis,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , September 1975, pp. 12-18.
4 Philip L. Rones, “Response to recession: reduce hours or jobs?”
M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , October 1981, pp. 3-11.
5The employment series referred to here is nonagricultural payroll
employment, collected by State agencies from employer reports of
payroll records.
6Alfred L. Malabre, Jr., “Some Analysts say Recession Began in
1980, Dispute Official Finding of Onset Last July,” W all S treet Jour
nal, July 8, 1982, p. 40.
7 Data in this article are for black and other minorities throughout
and are referred to as black.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8
Gross flow data are a by-product of the CPS, which shows the la
bor force status of persons not only for the current month, but also
for the previous month. The data thus permit the identification and
measurement of the number of persons who enter involuntary parttime work from one month to the next.
’ The numbers are somewhat inflated because they also reflect the
movement from unemployment to full-time employment for those
who began a job after the start of the survey week.
10Bednarzik, “Involuntary part-time work.”
" Data are collected in March of each year for work performed in
the previous calendar year. See, for example, Sylvia Lazos Terry, “In
voluntary part-time work: new information from the CPS,” M on th ly
L a b o r R eview , February 1981, pp. 70-74.
12The slack work component in the work experience data includes a
small number of workers on shortened workweek because of material
shortages. Based on regular monthly data from the CPS, material
shortages accounted for less than 3 percent of the slack work-material
shortage total.
13 Michael Urquhart, “The service industry: is it recession-proof?”
M on th ly L a b o r R eview , October 1981, pp. 12-15.
14Edward F. Denison, “Shift to Services and the Rate of Productiv
ity Change,” S u rvey o f C u rren t Business, October 1973, pp. 20-35.
Birth of the unemployment survey
. . . The Current Population Survey conducted each month by the
Census Bureau and analyzed and released by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics . . . was originally the brainchild of the New Deal’s Works
Progress Administration. In the late 1930’s, there still were no regu
lar, accurate estimates of unemployment. Such estimates as existed
usually were derived indirectly, by subtracting counts of those at
work from estimates of the available labor force.
The lack of better information was keenly felt at the WPA, and
young mathematical statisticians on the agency’s staff— later recog
nized as among the most eminent in their profession— developed pro
posals for applying the new science of survey sampling to the
measurement of unemployment.
The w p a ’s new approach— collecting direct survey evidence of indi
viduals’ activities in looking for work— was controversial, and the
quality of the data obtained in early test surveys was hotly disputed.
By 1942, however, support had built up for continuing the survey on
a monthly basis, and with WPA on the way out, a permanent home
was needed. After some bureaucratic skirmishing among competing
agencies, the survey was assigned to the Census Bureau, where it has
since remained, although responsibilities for program planning and for
analyzing and publishing the data were shifted to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics in 1959.
— C o u r t e n a y Sl a t e r
“Forty Years and Counting,”
American Demographics,
March 1983, pp. 42-45.
11
The U.S. Employment Service at 50:
it too had to wait its turn
On June 6, 1933, the U.S. Employment Service
was bom with passage o f the Wagner-Peyser Act;
earlier attempts to establish labor exchanges
had been controversial and short-lived,
but the legislation was virtually unopposed
in recognition o f depression-era problems
H
enry
P. G u z d a
Like Tom Joad and his family, in John Steinbeck’s clas
sic narration of migrant life during the Great Depres
sion, The Grapes o f Wrath, thousands of Americans
searched desperately for employment in the parched ag
ricultural valleys of the southern and western United
States of the 1930’s. They crossed paths with other itin
erant and poverty stricken families, who were also
searching for work, and exchanged job information via
the “grapevine.” Usually the information was inaccu
rate. Consequently, many families arrived at prospective
job sites and found little or no work. Similar tragedies
haunted the industrial sector as well, as factories with
few jobs to offer found a multitude of people outside
their gates who were seeking work. A nationwide cry
went out for the government to help the estimated 12.8
to 15 million unemployed find some remunerative work.
In an attem pt to answer those pleas, the Wagner-Peyser
Act of June 6, 1933, created a nationwide system of free
public employment services.
Over the years, the employment service has evolved
from a simple labor exchange to an extensive delivery
service. There were only 42 offices in the Federal-State
cooperative venture when it began in 1933, and, in the
early years, the Federal half of that partnership as
sumed more responsibility than originally intended. The
employment service’s primary responsibility was to con
nect the jobless with jobs, especially in many of the
Henry P. Guzda is a historian in the U.S. Department of Labor.
12
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
public service programs created by the “New Deal.”
Last year, the 2,400 offices of the service placed almost
5 million people, including 50,000 former participants in
public jobs programs who were placed in private sector
jobs. In 1982, the service also administered the unem
ployment compensation program, work incentive pro
grams, and veterans placement operations. A recent
addition to its responsibilities was the certification of
placements under the targeted Job Tax Credit Program
for hiring the disadvantaged.1
The Federal-State cooperative venture has had its ups
and downs, but throughout its history critics and pro
ponents alike have considered the employment service
to be a vital government function. In fact, early argu
ments to create a national labor exchange received very
little opposition. Republican Secretary of Labor William
N. Doak, referring in 1931 to a proposed service, said,
“Employment is the human keystone of all who desire
or need work . . . our goal, indeed, is to obtain employ
ment for all.” His successor, Democratic Labor Secre
tary Frances Perkins, agreed wholeheartedly and
supported passage of the Wagner-Peyser Act. In the
years following the establishment of the first localized
employment service systems in the United States during
the 1890’s, it was the organizational framework that
created controversy and debate, not the issue of public
labor exchanges itself. This should not be surprising, for
the Wagner-Peyser Act was in essence a renaissance of
ideas and philosophies that had been around even be
fore the founding of our republic.2
E pluribus unum
The modern concept of free public employment serv
ices originated in Europe. Some historians trace the na
scency to medieval times, but most experts place the
origins in the 16th century. By 1563, the British govern
ment of Queen Elizabeth I had passed legislation pre
scribing that guilds place apprentices in jobs for at least
1 year following their training. The Poor Law of 1601
consigned job placement of the poor to local parishes;
this law remained in effect until 1834, and was used in
staffing the textile factories of England during her in
dustrial revolution. By the late 1800’s, many of the
great states of Europe had experimented with different
types of employment services, and the basic idea had
emigrated to America. The German-American Printers’
Union, for example, had established a free employment
agency for its members in New York and other towns
by 1888.3
But the first real link between free public agencies in
America and those in Europe was forged during the
Paris International Exposition of 1889. The Scripps
League of Newspapers, interested in the industrial rela
tions of the Old World, sent several prominent labor
experts to the exposition. Ohio Commissioner of Labor
W.T. Lewis took particular interest in the French sys
tem of “Intelligence Offices” which provided job infor
mation to the unemployed. He returned home and
advocated that the individual States create similar sys
tems. The Municipal Labor Congress of Cincinnati,
composed of all the trade and labor unions of the city,
drafted this idea into a bill which passed the State Leg
islature on April 28, 1890, with only one dissenting
vote.4
The “Ohio Idea,” as it was called, established the
Nation’s first permanent public employment exchanges
in the five largest cities of the State. (See table 1.) Gov
ernor, and soon-to-be U.S. President, William McKin
ley appointed Lewis as the first administrator of the
program. Within 6 months of operation, more than
5,000 men and 3,000 women had found jobs through
the service, and the cost-effectiveness of the overall pro
gram, compared with private employment agencies, ob
viated any other justification. During each of the first 3
years, the efficiency of the exchanges improved marked
ly, and the appropriations for operations never exceeded
$5,000 in any year.
Other State commissioners of labor praised the “Ohio
Idea,” and wanted to emulate it in their own territories.
L.G. Powers of Minnesota pointed out that in his State
men paid $2 and women 25 cents just to apply for jobs
at private agencies, and if a worker was hired the em
ployer paid the agency an additional $1. Compared
with Ohio’s system, he stated, the private agencies in
Minnesota cost the working people of the State over
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1. The placement record of public employment
exchanges in Ohio, by city, 1890 and 1891
1890
Help
wanted
Situations
wanted
Largest
cities
Positions
secured
Men
Women
Men
Women
Men
Women
Cincinnati.........
Dayton.............
T oledo.............
Cleveland.........
Columbus.........
1,662
1,232
1,687
2,097
1,118
1,383
670
729
857
746
1,076
582
783
390
475
1,429
944
1,327
2,650
1,134
867
422
712
471
357
839
546
639
1,385
558
Total . . .
7,796
4,385
3,306
7,484
2,829
3,958
1891
Cincinnati.........
Cleveland.........
Columbus.........
Dayton.............
T ole d o .............
4,841
6,308
3,128
3,351
3,859
3,428
3,830
1,739
2,118
1,799
3,369
925
1,534
1,386
2,481
8,291
3,471
2,268
2,004
2,479
2,312
886
915
790
2,064
2,429
2,508
1,481
1,119
1,391
Total . . .
21,457
12,914
9,659
13,513
6,967
8,628
S ource :
Annual Report, Ohio Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1981.
$20,000 a year. In reference to the “Ohio Idea,” Willard
Hall of Missouri agreed that “the best argument in fa
vor of the free-employment offices is the self-evident
practicability of the system.” 5
One practical aspect of free employment agencies was
to stop the illicit, inimical, and immoral methods used
by many private agencies. Ohio Commissioner Lewis
denounced private employment agencies, except those
run by such philanthropic organizations as the Red
Cross and YMCA, as frauds. Their existence, he added
was for one purpose: “to fleece the jobless.” Lewis
based his assertion on a report from the Ohio Secretary
of State that uncovered myriad cases of abuse and cor
ruption, and concluded that the practices of most agen
cies were “downright swindles.”6
Problem touches many States
The problem was not isolated to Ohio. J.R. Sov
ereign, Iowa’s Commissioner of Labor, complained that
employment agents in his State were the “most un
scrupulous, despicable, double-dyed villains that ever
lived. . . . ” He compared the agent-client relationship to
that of the “spider and the fly.” Other States experi
enced similar situations and at the nationwide confer
ence of State labor bureaus in 1892, the commissioners
of New York, Kansas, California, Missouri, and 16 oth
er States publicly condemned the private employment
agency system.7
Probably the most heinous practice engaged in by
private firms was the procurement of young girls for
prostitution. Reformers had for many years denounced
the operations of private “intelligence offices” that
existed for the sole purpose of supplying houses of ill
repute with innocent and naive servant girls. Minnesota
Labor Commissioner Powers, in his annual report of
13
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • U.S. Employment Service at 50
1891, assailed employment agents who “led country
girls into lives of shame.” The obvious benefits and se
curities of sending female applicants to properly moni
tored public offices, he said, was reason enough for
establishing those offices at any cost.8
Yet despite the cost advantages and redeeming social
value of public offices, the States and municipalities
were less than enthusiastic about funding them. Most
State legislatures extolled the many virtues of public
employment offices during periods of high unemploy
ment, but lost interest during times of prosperity. Even
the States that promoted public employment systems
often scrimped on appropriations. When some State em
ployment offices failed to provide adequate services, the
U.S. Commissioner of Labor, Carroll D. Wright, said,
“the blame properly belongs to the legislatures which
create the offices and then starve them.”9
Exemplifying this problem was the public employ
ment office at San Francisco, Calif. In 1895, an office
opened in a poorly accessible location because of a nig
gardly rental allowance of $50 a month. Job seekers
created chaos as they congested the sidewalks outside
the building and the stairs going to the second-floor of
fice. Police intervened, but the situation remained seri
ous. Finally, a committee of local trades unions
petitioned bankers, merchants, and other employers to
help supplement the rental allotment, and the office
moved to larger, more accessible quarters. An embar
rassed State legislature increased funds the following
year.10
Problems such as space, appropriations, personnel,
and other administrative difficulties were commonplace,
but the major drawback of the “Ohio Idea” was the pa
rochialism of the State functions. They were limited to
local job markets, but as John Andrews, Secretary of
the American Association for Labor Legislation, ex
plained, the labor market was becoming nationwide and
the chain of State and municipal offices needed a third
link for strength— the Federal Government. However,
few people at either the State or national level expected
the linkage to occur as it did.
The huddled masses
By the turn of the century, many Americans looked
upon immigration as the Nation’s chief problem, espe
cially in its effects on the labor market and employ
ment. Between 1890 and 1920, the largest influx of
immigrants in our history occurred, reaching a high of
1.4 million in 1907. These “new immigrants” — people
from eastern and southern Europe as opposed to older
stock from northern and western parts of the continent
— often were willing to work and live under conditions
most American workers considered subpar. Organized
labor, in particular, believed that unrestricted immigra
tion was a bane, and that employers divided labor’s
14
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
house against itself by using the lower-paid immigrant
workers to break strikes and unions. For example, in
1906, Samuel Gompers demanded that President Theo
dore Roosevelt restrict the immigration of “undesirable
classes.” 11
But a small segment of labor’s friends believed there
was a way of preventing employer exploitation of the
“huddled masses” without debarment. Secretary of
Commerce and Labor Oscar Straus, who had emigrated
from Germany as a young boy, thought that relocation
of immigrants away from urban and industrial areas (85
percent of all immigrants during this period landed in
New York) would solve the problem. His Commission
er of Immigration, Terrence V. Powderly, was a willing,
if unlikely, advocate of the redistribution idea. Pow
derly, former Grand Master Workman of the Knights
of Labor, unlike his labor colleagues, believed that
relocating thousands of “Poles, Bohemians, Hungarians,
and Italians” in their natural agricultural environment
would both “Americanize” them and prevent their ex
ploitation in antiunion activities.12
The Division of Information, created by the Immigra
tion Act of 1907, helped relocate immigrants. In that
same year, the division also set up the first Federal em
ployment office on Ellis Island in New York harbor.
The office sent job placement inquiries and manpower
statistics through the mails, getting valuable assistance
from more than 3,500 receiving stations: Department of
Agriculture substations, post offices, State bureaus of la
bor, chambers of commerce, and private organizations
such as the Red Cross and the YMCA. More than
806,000 questionnaires were sent out inquiring about
jobs, wages, community environment, transportation,
and the class of labor desired. The division emphatically
stressed that no information would be sent to firms en
gaged in strikes or lockouts. Powderly felt that the divi
sion’s success hinged on preventing the use of its
services for strikebreaking.13
The commissioner’s former colleagues in the labor
movement, however, decided from the outset that the
process was ripe for abuse. Powderly’s own Knights of
Labor called the distribution plan a “hoax,” and assur
ances that it would not result in strikebreaking, “tom
my-rot gabble.” Samuel Gompers argued that reloca
tion of immigrants to rural areas would not work
because they would eventually gravitate to the better
paying jobs in the urban areas. Commissioner of Labor
Charles Neill, part of the same Department of Com
merce and Labor as Powderly, contended that redistri
bution would only create problems where none existed.
“It is useless,” he said, “to talk about any plan to dis
tribute immigrants.” 14
Critics of the Division of Information had good rea
son for concern. Without a nationwide staffing opera
tion, Powderly and his assistants could not monitor
local placements very well. Consequently, some employ
ers circumvented the rules and used the division to re
cruit strikebreakers. In one instance, a Bureau of
Immigration inspector visited a cigar plant in Colum
bia, Penna., and reported that the Division of Informa
tion had unintentionally but unequivocally aided in
strikebreaking.15
To recoup some lost credibility after this widely pub
licized embarrassment, Powderly invited labor leaders,
employers, and government officials to a conference on
immigrant redistribution held in Washington. It started
poorly and the atmosphere never improved as labor
leaders hurled a litany of complaints against Powderly
and the division. Joseph Valentine of the Iron Molders
Union accused Powderly of colluding with “Wall
Street.” Labor Commissioner Neill, although defending
his departmental colleague’s integrity, once again criti
cized redistribution of immigration. “I am not trying to
skin anyone’s skunk” (that is, make Powderly look
bad), he said, “but the facts are irrefutable.” 16
The conference, and needless to say, the Division of
Information had failed in their collective purpose. When
Congress, in 1913, separated the Department of Com
merce and Labor into two Cabinet-level agencies, the
Division of Information remained in name only.
New Department of Labor’s views
The first Secretary of the new Department of Labor,
William B. Wilson, was not ready to abandon the divi
sion. He viewed it as a means of providing employment
information not only to immigrants, but to any and all
jobseekers in a way the fragmented State and local of
fices could not. Wilson’s Assistant Secretary, Louis F.
Post, even published a series of articles heralding the di
vision’s potential value as a national labor exchange.
But Secretary Wilson’s friends in the labor movement
(he had been Secretary-Treasurer of the United Mine
Workers’ Union) still had the scars from earlier experi
ences with the Division of Information. John Walker,
president of the Illinois State Federation of Labor, said,
“Beware of the Greeks when they come bringing gifts
. . . you know that we have been double-crossed so of
ten that when anything is held out to us the first thing
we look for is to see when we are going to get the worst
of it.” The official position of the American Federation
of Labor was that the individual trade unions, not the
Federal Government, should place union members.17
Despite labor’s reluctance to accept a national em
ployment service, officials in the Labor Department
joined a groundswell of support for such a system.
Royal Meeker and Ethelbert Stewart of BLS attended
and participated in the annual meeting of the American
Association of Public Employment Offices, in June
1915, in Detroit. Then, at a conference held in San
Francisco in August 1915, Stewart called for a “con
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
nected network of public employment exchanges.”
Meeker, Commissioner of the Bureau, had a series of
pamphlets on occupational classification and standards
published for the use of prospective employers. Secre
tary Wilson lobbied his friends in Congress to pass leg
islation creating a national labor exchange system.18
The department’s advocacy of public employment
exchanges received considerable support. Representative
Victor Murdock of Kansas repeatedly introduced legis
lation to create a national system. Congress apparently
liked the idea, but felt that such a service would be ex
travagant during times of prosperity. M urdock’s cam
paign got a considerable boost when President Woodrow Wilson called for “the creation of a great Federal
employment bureau” at a Jackson Day commemorative
dinner in 1915. But before any positive action could be
taken on the matter, another pressing problem grabbed
the nation’s attention.19
Winds of war
In April 1917, the United States entered World War
I, and the country faced the immediate task of mobi
lizing the civilian work force. Demand for factory out
put soared, agricultural produce needed harvesting, and
the labor shortage became even more critical because of
enlistments into the armed forces and the cessation of
immigration. Employers turned to nontraditional labor
reserves, blacks, women, and in some instances schoolchildren, to fill the void. The need for an employment
service to prevent industrial paralysis by labor shortages
was obvious. As in peacetime, the private agencies im
mediately proved they could not fill the demand, as evi
denced by complaints that such agencies incited strikes
in key defense plants to siphon manpower to other
firms for fees. Frustrated by such problems, Grosvenor
Clarkson, Director of the Council of National Defense,
joined with other wartime directors in calling on the
Labor Department to handle placements.20
Secretary Wilson was equal to the task. As early as
1916, he foresaw the need for a nationwide service if
America went to war. He asked Congress for $750,000
additional appropriations for the Division of Informa
tion, but received only about one-third of that. After
the declaration of war, President Wilson provided his
labor secretary with an additional $825,000 in an illus
tration of the importance he placed on an employment
service.
Secretary Wilson, under wartime emergency powers,
changed the name of the Division of Information to the
U.S. Employment Service, effective January 3, 1918.
Even before that date, the division had begun to cen
tralize employment functions to parallel the network of
13 zones of the Federal Reserve System. Wilson chose
an old friend, John Densmore, to organize the system
and by July 1, 1918, there were more than 350 field
15
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • U.S. Employment Service at 50
agents and a staff of 1,700, not including so-called “dollar-a-year” volunteers. The U.S. Employment Service
established Federal-State cooperative offices in all but
eight States, and placed a phenomenal 65 percent of job
applicants in the first month of operation; its total num
ber of placements increased each month thereafter. (See
table 2.)21
The service also handled special work problems
through the various divisions in its infrastructure. When
the wheat crop of 1918 was in jeopardy because of in
sufficient labor, Densmore received permission to fill the
need by importing Mexican and Bahamian labor. The
labor commissioners of Oklahoma and Kansas sent the
Secretary of Labor a joint expression of gratitude stat
ing, “not a bushel of wheat was lost through the lack of
labor.” The Women in Industry Division, created to
place women in defense-related work, found employ
ment for 368,000 women in 1918, amounting to 13 per
cent of all U.S. Employment Service placements during
the war. In Washington State, the Boys Working Re
serve arm of the service recruited hundreds of high
school students and saved the apple crop.22
The U.S. Employment Service also cooperated with
other wartime agencies. The need for efficient transfer of
material from ship to shore in New York harbor result
ed in the service administering an elastic labor pool to
shift labor around to various worksites. Labor produc
tivity increased by more than 30 percent in the harbor,
and the concept spread to more than 14 other port cit
ies. In many State offices of the service, facilities were
shared and cooperative work was done with the Divi
sion of Negro Economics to place black workers in
jobs, find suitable housing for them, and prevent racial
disharmony in the workplace.23
Postwar battles
Historian John
cess of the service
continuance after
become the most
Table 2.
1918
Lombardi hypothesized that the suc
built a strong and varied basis for its
the war. The service, he stated, had
important subdivision of the Labor
Job placements of U.S. Employment Service,
Month
January...............................
February .............................
March .................................
April ...................................
M a y ......................................
June ....................................
J u ly ......................................
August.................................
September...........................
O ctober...............................
November ...........................
T o ta l........................
Source:
Registrations Help wanted
Referred
82,353
92,452
144,156
195,578
206,181
246,664
282,294
555,505
531,226
594,737
744,712
80,002
92,594
177,831
320,328
328,587
394,395
484,033
1,227,705
1,476,282
1,588,975
1,724,973
62,642
70,369
118,079
171,306
179,821
221,946
250,152
500,510
513,662
606,672
748,934
51,183
58,844
100,446
149,415
156,284
192,798
217,291
395,530
362,696
455,931
558,469
3,675,858
7,895,675
3,444,093
2,698,887
Annual Report o f the Secretary o f Labor, 1918, p. 285.
16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Placed
Department. But antiunion employers wanted the ser
vice eliminated, for they feared it would spread the la
bor credo. Secretary Wilson’s son reported to his father
that in Buffalo, N.Y., the manager of the Pierce Arrow
M otor Co., although a prominent member of several la
bor boards, was secretly doing everything he could to
destroy the agency in the State because he feared it
would promote unionism after the war.24
But a battle loomed ominously as supporters of the
service formed ranks. The New York World said, “main
tain the service at all costs.” The New York Tribune
called it, “a work that should go on.” And, the New
Orleans Item stated, “the country needs it.” Mississippi
Governor Theodore Bilbo supported continuation of the
service as did his northern counterpart, James Cox of
Ohio. Even some chambers of commerce backed the
employment service. The Cleveland Press editorialized
“opposition to the employment service arises mainly
from three sources: private employment agencies, pri
vate detective agencies, and big employers who are bit
terly anti-union.” 25
Unfortunately, the 66th Congress wanted a return to
“normalcy.” All emergency agencies in the U.S. Depart
ment of Labor, except for the Women’s Division of the
U.S. Employment Service, the U.S. Housing Corpora
tion, and the Division of Negro Economics, ceased to
exist on June 30, 1919. Although some appropriations
for continuance of a skeleton office of the service were
later voted by Congress, most of the service’s offices
had to be closed and the employees furloughed. Em
ployees remaining at the service had to resort to the
“ghost of mail order placements,” because appropria
tions between 1920 and 1930 averaged only about
$200,000 a year, compared with the $5.5 million re
ceived in 1918. The service could not function efficiently
on a shoestring budget.26
Other problems haunted the service during the next
decade. President Harding issued an executive order
allowing politicization of the agency and the entire staff
was replaced. In one instance, a woman with meritori
ous service lost her job to a personal friend of Senator
Joseph Frelinghuysen of New Jersey. The problem got
so bad that South Carolina and Kentucky threatened to
withdraw from the system if they could not appoint
their own people to the remaining branch offices.27
But probably the worst black mark against the U.S.
Employment Service during this period involved the is
suance of unemployment figures. Francis Jones, who re
placed John Densmore as director of the service in
1921, had been publishing statistics on the national
unemployment picture, much to BLS’ irritation. Com
missioner of the Bureau Ethelbert Stewart complained
to James Davis that the figures published by Jones were
erroneous and embarrassing, but the problem contin
ued.28
The duplication of functions finally resulted in a ma
jor embarrassment for the Labor Department and Presi
dent Herbert Hoover. On January 22, 1930, Hoover
stated that Labor Department figures showed that em
ployment was on the rise and prosperity was just
around the corner— that the economic downturn which
had symbolically begun with the stock market crash of
October 29, 1929, was coming to an end. Secretary Da
vis agreed, and predicted that recovery would be com
plete in a year.
The Industrial Commissioner of the State of New
York, Frances Perkins, took issue with the “rosy” out
look. She knew the statistics came from the U.S. Em
ployment Service, not from BLS, and had proof from
her own efficient statistical operation that the unem
ployment situation was worsening, not improving. She
publicly debunked Hoover’s statements and cited the
service’s report in particular as “cruel and irresponsible
at a time when the unemployed are reaching the end of
their resources. . . . ” The depression did continue far
longer than Hoover predicted, and Perkins’ stand
marked the beginning of her political ascendancy while
Jones’ frivolous methods of data compilation hastened
his departure.29
Jones’ dismissal did not benefit the service. William
Doak, replacing James Davis on December 9, 1930, as
Labor Secretary, simply replaced Jones’ political ap
pointments with his own from the labor movement.
Scandals increased, and Jones’ replacement, John Al
pine, was accused of creating seven sinecures at $3,500
a year to open mail, a job previously done by clerks at
$600 per annum.30
Road to reform
The service became the obvious target of reform.
“There was no doubt,” said one pioneer in the
revamping of the U.S. Employment Service, “at the be
ginning of the depression where the responsibility for
dealing with unemployment rested [within the States] . .
. . unfortunately, the States took little effective action.”
Senator Robert Wagner of New York sponsored legisla
tion to force the States to play a greater role by abol
ishing the existing service and creating from those ashes
a Federal-State system of efficiency and competency.31
Wagner’s bill called for matching Federal funds to be
given to the States for the purpose of administering em
ployment programs. The concept was based on the effi
cient labor exchange system of Great Britain, a system
Ethelbert Stewart had cited as a vital reason the allies
won World War I. In 1919, Senator William Kenyon of
Ohio and Congressman John Nolan of California had
introduced the same legislation, but it died of postwar
“normalcy.” With the depression causing socioeconomic
havoc, it appeared that Wagner’s revival of the idea
would pass easily and become law.32
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Secretary of Labor Doak disliked Wagner’s propos
als. He tried to prevent their implementation by submit
ting a substitute proposal to strengthen the U.S.
Employment Service through increased appropriations.
Congress had already appropriated $500,000 to upgrade
the service in the event Wagner’s bill failed, and Doak
hoped to get more. However, Congress opted for Wag
ner’s legislation and sent it to President Hoover for his
signature. Doak urged the President not to sign because
the appropriated $500,000 would be lost, and because
immediate problems would go unattended while the
States set up their new systems. Hoover’s pocket veto
message clearly reflected Doak’s influence: “It is not
only changing horses while crossing a stream, but the
other horse would not arrive for many months.” 33
With the Wagner bill vetoed, Doak acted fast to reor
ganize the service and silence his critics: he failed. Most
of the Wagner bill proponents cited his job placement
figures as ludicrous. One person cited as tragic, “the
lack of performance, the waste of public money, the in
efficiency, and even the bad faith in these offices [of the
employment service].”
In New York, a Report to the Governor on Stabiliza
tion of Industry for the Prevention of Unemployment
concluded the following: “The public conscience is not
comfortable when good men [and women] anxious to
work are unable to find employment.” The chairperson
of that committee was Frances Perkins, who had reor
ganized the State’s employment service and increased
real placements during a period of rising unemploy
ment. She would later leave the State to become Presi
dent Franklin Roosevelt’s Secretary of Labor and
would reorganize the national employment service to fit
a changing and more mobile work force.34
Men and trees: making Wagner-Peyser
The employment service, not to mention the entire
nation, was in serious trouble when Perkins took over
the labor portfolio in 1933. She hoped to remedy the
situation by changing the employment system in accor
dance with the provisions of Senator Wagner’s bill
which had been reintroduced in the 73rd Congress.
Only at the State level, with Federal guidance and re
sources, she thought, could the spiraling unemployment
rate be brought under control. And, she was willing to
wait for the Wagner Bill’s provisions to take shape,
hoping that the transition of power from the Federal to
the State governments would be quick.
Yet, even as the Wagner Bill sped through the Capi
tol, the Roosevelt Administration was working on
something that would change Perkins’ plans. The idea
of the Civilian Conservation Corps was being discussed
among the President’s advisers. Roosevelt envisioned
thousands of city-dwelling young men escaping to the
great outdoors and helping to reclaim erroded land by
17
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • US. Employment Service at 50
planting trees. Perkins suggested that the U.S. Army re
cruit the men and administer the camps, with overall
responsibility entrusted to the Forestry Division of the
Agriculture Department. Labor leaders expressed
doubts about allowing the military to recruit the m en—
residual effects of the days when the army broke strikes
and union gatherings, often by force. Roosevelt then
stated, “I ’ll tell you what, the Department of Labor will
recruit these men.” Aghast, Perkins explained that the
U.S. Employment Service existed, in actuality, on a sta
tionery letterhead only. Roosevelt’s reply was, “resur
rect the Employment Service right away.”35
Almost simultaneously, Congress passed the compro
mise Wagner-Peyser Bill; freshman Congressman Theo
dore Peyser had sponsored the same legislation in the
House of Representatives that Wagner submitted to the
Senate. Roosevelt signed the bill into law on June 6,
1933. Under this legislation, the Department of Labor
was responsible for setting standards for operations,
providing statistical research, and promulgating employ
ment policies. The States were charged with administer
ing the offices and placement operations. Washington
would match the funds appropriated by the States, with
the minimum Federal allotment set at $5,000 per State.
A total of $1.5 million was appropriated by the Federal
and State governments for the first year, with incre
ments of $400,000 for each year until 1938.36
The basic flaw in the Wagner-Peyser Act, and the
reason President Hoover vetoed it, was that after abol
ishing the existing service there would be a period dur
ing which the States would have to establish new
offices. Roosevelt’s creation of the Civilian Conserva
tion Corp exposed that flaw. Consequently, on June 22,
1933, Perkins created a National Reemployment Service
to give special attention to the placement of workers on
public works projects. This interim agency filled the
transitional void created by Wagner-Peyser’s enactment,
but did not compete with the State offices; many times
its offices closed within days after the States assumed
jurisdiction of an area.37
With Roosevelt’s approval, Perkins brought in W.
Frank Persons to administer the new employment serv
ice and reemployment adjunct. Persons, former orga
nizer of the civilian relief effort for the Red Cross, put
together almost overnight a coordinated effort that pro
duced immediate results.
By July 1, 1933, the public employment system con
sisted of 192 offices in 120 cities and 23 States, with the
National Re-employment Service filling in where the
States had no facilities. By June 1, 1934, the new U.S.
Employment Service had registered 12.5 million people
for work, and before the United States entered World
War II it placed over 26 million. During the war, it mo
bilized the American work force for the domestic effort
and received compliments for its performance, as had
the earlier agency following the first global conflict.38
T H E STORY OF t h e U.S. Employment Service since the
enactment of the Wagner-Peyser Act has been one of
evolution. In 1935, the Social Security Act mandated
the responsibility for administering unemployment com
pensation to the service, and other compensation pro
grams were added through the years. The service was
transferred from the Labor Department in 1939, back
to it in 1945, out again in 1948, and finally in to stay in
1949. The service placed veterans from both World War
II and the Korean conflict, and played an integral role
in the administration of the Manpower Training and
Development Act of 1962 and the Area Redevelopment
Act of 1961. During the 1970’s, it administered pro
grams under the Comprehensive Employment and
Training Act. Even now this evolution continues, as the
Job Training and Partnership Act of 1982 (PL 97-300),
under title V, amends the Wagner-Peyser Act to give
the U.S. Employment Service responsibility for “a new
program and delivery system to train economically dis
advantaged persons and others for private sector em
ployment.” 39
On the 50th anniversary of the Wagner-Peyser Act, it
is im portant to look at that legislation’s formation and
development. Juanita Kreps, then vice president of
Duke University and later Secretary of Commerce, told
a bipartisan symposium honoring the 40th anniversary
of the act that we should always remember the lessons
history teaches us. Following her remarks, heavy debate
occurred over the merits and flaws in the current na
tional employment service system. Yet even the harshest
critic of the U.S. Employment Service agreed that its
basic function was necessary for the promotion of the
Nation’s general welfare. Upon reflection, it is interest
ing that the same philosophy led to the creation of the
first public employment offices in 1890 in Ohio.40
□
FOOTNOTES
1U.S. Department of Labor, A n n u a l R ep o rt o f the S ecreta ry f o r 1981
(Washington, Government Printing Office, 1982), pp. 4-11.
2William N. Doak, Secretary of Labor, Address at the Pawtuxet
Valley Fair, West Warwick, R.I., Sept. 25, 1931; Interview with Ge
rard Reilly, former Solicitor of Labor, by Dr. Jonathan Grossman,
Oct. 22, 1965.
3State of Minnesota, T hird B ien n ia l R e p o rt o f the B ureau o f L a b o r
Statistics, 1 8 9 1 -9 2 (Minneapolis, Harrison and Smith, 1893), pp. 27078; Great Britain, Home Department, R e p o rt o f the P oor L a w C om -
18
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
m issioners on the T raining o f P auper C hildren (London, W. Clowes
and Sons, 1841), pp. 135 and 171; W. Jocelyn Dunlop, English A p
prenticeship a n d C h ild L a b o r (London, T. Fisher Unwin, 1912), pp.
248-52.
4 State of Ohio, S ixteen th A n n u a l R e p o rt o f the Bureau o f L a b o r S ta
tistics (Norwalk, Clanning Printing Co., 1893), pp. 11-15; State of
California, Seventh B ien n ial R e port o f the Bureau o f L a b o r Statistics,
1 8 9 5 -9 6 (Sacramento, A.J. Johnson, 1896), pp. 11-34.
5State of Minnesota, T h ird B ien n ial R eport, pp. 20-32; State of
Missouri, Thirteenth A n n u a l R e p o rt o f the B ureau o f L ab o r Statistics,
1891 (Jefferson City, Tribune Printing Co., 1891), pp. 32-60; State of
California, Seventh B ien n ial R eport, p. 12.
6 Proceedings o f the 9th N a tio n a l Convention o f O fficials o f B ureaus
o f L a b o r Statistics, May 24-28, 1892, Denver, Colorado, pp. 59-66;
State of Iowa, Fourth B ien n ial R e p o rt o f the B ureau o f L a b o r Statistics,
1 8 9 0 -9 1 (Des Moines, G.H. Ragsdale, 1891), pp. 217-40.
7Proceedings o f the 9th N a tio n a l Convention, pp. 59-66; State of
California, Seventh B ien n ial R eport, p. 60; State of Ohio, Sixteenth A n
n u a l R eport, pp. 12-13.
8State of Minnesota, T hird B ien n ial R eport, p. 28; Proceedings o f the
9th N a tio n a l Convention, pp. 63-65; William W. Sanger, The H istory
o f P rostitution: Its E xtent, Causes a n d E ffects Throughout the W orld
(New York, Harper and Bros. Publishers, 1876), p. 517.
9U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “P ublic E m p lo ym en t Offices in the
U n ited S tates, Bulletin 241, July 1918, p. 17.
'“State of California, Seventh B ien n ial R eport, p. 19.
" Samuel Gompers, President, American Federation of Labor, to
President Theodore Roosevelt, “Political Demands of the AFL,” Mar.
21, 1906, p. 3.
12Oscar Straus to Robert Watchom, Commissioner of Ellis Island,
May 26, 1906, file 43/2, National Archives Record Group 174; O ffi
c ia l D ia ry o f O scar Straus, Vol. II, p. 18, Oscar Straus Papers, Library
of Congress Manuscript Division; Terrence V. Powderly to C. Owens,
Feb. 19, 1912, Terrence V. Powderly Papers, The Catholic University
of America.
13Terrence V. Powderly to John Joyce, International Association Of
Longshoremen, July 5, 1907, Powderly Papers, Catholic University;
U.S. Department of Commerce and Labor, Fourth A n n u a l R eport o f
the S ecretary, 190 8 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1909),
p. 173.
14K n ig h ts o f L a b o r Journal, Jan. 9, 1909, pp. 4,8; U.S. Congress,
House, H earings before the C o m m ittee on Im m ig ra tio n a n d N atu ra liza
tion, 61st Cong., 1st sess., Mar. 8, 1910, pp. 239-40; Charles P. Neill,
“Distribution of Immigration,” N a tio n a l Civic Federation R eview ,
1907, p. 10.
I5C.L. Green to Terrence Powderly, Jan. 16, 1908, Powderly Pa
pers; U.S. Bureau of Immigration, S econ d A n n u a l R e p ort o f the D ivi
sion o f Inform ation, 190 9 (Washington, 1910), p. 112.
16P roceedings o f the C onference on Im m ig ra tio n D istribution, Feb.
11-12, 1909, Washington, D.C., pp. 24, 80, 83, and 104.
17 Proceedings o f the 3 2 n d A n n u a l Convention o f Illinois S ta te
F ederation o f L abor, Oct. 20-24, 1914, pp. 13-15; F irst A n n u a l R eport
o f the S ecreta ry o f L abor, 1913, p. 42.
18Proceedings o f the A m erican A ssociation o f P ublic E m p lo ym en t O f
fices, 1916, p. 92; U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Education and
Labor, H earings on the Creation o f a N a tio n a l E m p lo ym en t S ystem ,
66th Cong., 1st sess., 1919, pp. 326, 333.
19U.S. Commission on Industrial Relations, T entative Proposals f o r
C onsideration on the Q uestion o f P ublic a n d P rivate E m p lo ym en t O f
fices, May 5, 1914; speech by Victor Murdock in the House of Repre
sentatives, May 1, 1914; U.S. Congress, House, R ep rin t # 1 4 2 9 ,
P roposal to C reate a N a tio n a l E m p lo ym en t B ureau, 66th Cong., 3rd
sess., Feb. 20, 1915, pp. 2-8; Woodrow Wilson, address of the Presi
dent at Indianapolis, Ind., Jan. 8, 1915, p. 8.
20Grosvenor Clarkson, Council on National Defense, to Secretary
Wilson, July 25, 1917, file 20/72, and Jan. 5, 1918, file 20/39, Nation
al Archives Record Group 174.
21 William B. Wilson to Terrence Powderly, Oct. 10, 1919, file
129/14-H, National Archives Record Group 174; U.S. Department of
Labor, Fifth A n n u a l R e p o rt o f the Secretary, 1918 (Washington, Gov
ernment Printing Office, 1919), pp. 20-25.
22U.S. Employment Service, F irst A n n u a l R e p o rt o f the Director,
1918 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1919), pp. 17-39; As
sistant Director C.T. Clayton (U.S. Employment Service) to Louis
Post, Aug. 30, 1917, file 20/60; Louis F. Post to William B. Wilson,
June 14, 1917, file 129/14-1, National Archives Record Group 174.
23 Minutes of Conference: Agreement between U.S. Employment
Service and U.S. Shipping Board, Sept. 5, 1917, file 129/14-C; Circu
lar letter # 18, Emergency Fleet Corporation to all Shipyards, Sept. 5,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1917, file 129/14, National Archives Record Group 174; U.S. Depart
ment of Labor, S ixth A n n u a l R eport, 1919, pp. 276-85; Henry P.
Guzda, “Labor Department’s first program to assist black workers,”
M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , June 1982, pp. 39-43.
“ William B. Wilson, Jr. to Louis F. Post, Mar. 3, 1919, file
19/3-A; William Wilson to Senator C.L. McNary, June 19, 1919, file
129/14-1, National Archives Record Group 174.
25 Editorial Excerpts from Representative Newspapers in the Con
tinuance of the U.S. Employment Service, undated, 1920, in U.S. De
partment of Labor Library.
26 Ruth Kellog, The U.S. E m p lo ym en t Service (Chicago, University
of Chicago Press, 1933), pp. 26-27; Shelly Harrison, P ublic E m p lo y
m e n t Offices (New York, 1929), p. 129; John Lombardi, L abor's Voice
in the C abin et (New York, Columbia University Press, 1942), p. 155.
27 Francis Jones (U.S. Employment Service), to Secretary James J.
Davis (confidential), Dec. 19, 1921, file 129/14-J; Secretary of Labor
Davis to Senator N.B. Dial (S.C.), Mar. 4, 1924, file 129/14-M; Secre
tary of Labor Davis to Hon. M.H. Thatcher (KY), Sept. 14, 1924, file
129/14-N, National Archives Record Group 174; Edward Seiller,
Chief Labor Inspector for Kentucky, Address before the International
Association of Employment Services on “Development of Public Em
ployment Services in the South,” Sept. 22, 1931.
“ James J. Davis to Frances Jones, Jan. 27, 1923, file 129/14-K;
Ethelbert Stewart to Secretary Davis, Aug. 12, 1921, file 20/145, Na
tional Archives Record Group 174.
29 Frances Perkins, The R oosevelt I K n e w (New York, Viking Press,
1946), pp. 96-97; George Martin, M a d a m S ecretary (Boston,
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1976), pp. 218-19; Gordon Berg,
“Champion of Labor in a Tricorn Hat,” Two H u n d re d Years o f A m e r
ican W orklife (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1976), pp.
167-71.
30 The B altim ore Sun, Sept. 1, 1931; U.S. Employment Service News
Release, Sept. 2, 1931.
31 Interview with William Papier, Ohio State Advisory Council for
Employment Security, by Evangaline Cooper for the Arthur Altmeyer
Collection on Unemployment Insurance, Mar. 20, 1981, in U.S. De
partment of Labor Historical Office.
32 Congressman J. Nolan to William B. Wilson, Dec. 28, 1917 (also
attached is copy of Nolan Bill to create National Employment Bu
reau, Apr. 2, 1917), file 20/39; William B. Wilson to Senator William
Kenyon, Jan. 28, 1919, file 129/10-B, National Archives Record
Group 174.
33 William Nuckles Doak to Senator Hiram Johnson, Feb. 28, 1931,
file 16/285, National Archives Record Group 174; Herbert Hoover,
“Statement on the Disapproval of a Bill to Provide for the Establish
ment of a National Employment System,” Mar. 8, 1931 (also has
Doak letter to Hoover recommending veto), P ublic Papers o f the Presi
d en ts (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1976), pp. 132-38.
“ For further information, see Joseph P. Goldberg, “Frances Per
kins, Isador Lubin, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R eview , April 1980, pp. 22-30.
35Perkins, The R oosevelt I K new , p. 178.
36 U.S. Department of Labor, “Twelve-and-a-half Million Regis
tered,” F irst A n n u a l R eport o f the E m p lo ym en t Service, 1934 (Wash
ington, Goverment Printing Office, 1934), pp. 5-10; U.S. Congress,
“Debate on the Wagner Employment Bill” (Sen 510), Congressional
R ecord, 73rd Cong., 1st sess., June 1, 1933, pp. 4767-83.
37U.S. Employment Service, National Reemployment Service, G uide
to the O rganization o f R e e m p lo y m e n t Offices, July 22, 1933, pp. 1-16;
Frances Perkins, “The U.S. Employment Service,” Conference B oard
Service L etter, July 30, 1933, p. 49.
38U.S. Department of Labor, “Twelve-and-a-half Million Regis
tered,” pp. 1-20.
39U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Adminis
tration, “A Symposium Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the
U.S. Employment Service,” June 6, 1973.
40 U.S. Department of Labor, “Implementing Regulations for Pro
grams Under the Jobs Training and Partnership Act of 1982,” F ederal
Register, Jan. 18, 1983, p. 2292.
19
A new method for estimating
job separations by sex and race
Computations using data from the CPS
show that the separation rate of women
is the same as or lower than that o f men
when wage rates are taken into account;
for blacks, the separation rate is lower
than that for whites, irrespective o f sex
S h e l d o n E . H a b e r , E n r i q u e J. L a m a s ,
Gordon G
and
reen
With the development of human capital theory, increas
ing attention has been given to specific training and its
impact on employer hiring decisions with respect to sex
and race.1 The traditionally weaker labor force attach
ment among women in comparison with men, for exam
ple, has given rise to the perception that the risk of loss
of a firm’s investment in specific training is greater for
the former than the latter.2 This perception is one basis
for statistical discrimination in which class information,
for example, that pertaining to sex, is used as a criterion
for hiring men rather than women, although both may
be equally qualified for a given job.3
The view that women are much more likely to sepa
rate from an employer has several bases, among them
are casual observation, economic theory, and empirical
data. Casual observation suggests that in married
households responsibilities for home production have
been delegated to the woman. The reasonableness of
this inference is augmented by the economic theory of
marriage in which the main inducement to marriage is
seen as the advantages of specialization of labor, the
Sheldon E. Haber is a professor of economics at The George Wash
ington University; Enrique J. Lamas is an economic statistician at the
U.S. Bureau of Census; and Gordon Green is an assistant division
chief of Socioeconomic Statistics Programs, Population Division, U.S.
Bureau of Census. Robin M. Boatman of the R eview staff provided
special editorial assistance. Views expressed in this article are those of
the authors, not of their respective employers.
Digitized for 20
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
most important of which is procreation.4 Not only may
a married woman leave an employer to rear children,
she may also leave if her spouse finds a better job else
where,5 or when a temporary condition which has im
pelled her to find work ameliorates so that she may
resume nonmarket activities. While information on
worker turnover by sex and race is sparse,6the data that
are most accessible, that is, work experience and job
tenure data, imply that women are more apt to leave an
employer than are men. For example, 26 percent more
women had work experience in 1977 as were, on aver
age, employed during any given month in that year; the
corresponding figure for men was 13 percent.7 Likewise,
the median years of job tenure among women employed
in January 1978 were 2.6 compared with 4.5 for men.8
The same perception of higher than average turnover
may also prevail with respect to blacks, particularly
black men whose labor force attachment is weaker than
their white counterparts. Additionally, blacks have
more spells of unemployment than whites, suggesting a
lower success rate in finding stable employment.9 Some
evidence in support of the supposition of weaker em
ployer attachment by blacks, particularly for black men
and during the early 1960’s for blacks of both sexes, is
also suggested by work experience and job tenure data.10
Despite the utility of work experience and job tenure
data, they provide only indirect information about em
ployee separation rates because the former only reflect
inter-labor force mobility11 and the latter are sensitive to
accessions as well as terminations. More direct informa
tion on separation rates can be derived from the Cur
rent Population Survey ( c p s ), and it is data from this
source which are examined here.
Because of data limitations, the earlier turnover liter
ature, which focused primarily on quits rather than sep
arations, could only link turnover in an industry with
other variables (for example, the percentage that women
and blacks comprised of employees) similarly aggregat
ed to an industry level. Some of the studies indicate
that quit rates are higher in industries where women
and blacks account for a large percentage of the work
force; however, sometimes the regression coefficients for
the sex and race variables are insignificant or they indi
cate that the quit rate is lower in industries with a large
percentage of female and black workers.12
With the advent of survey data for individuals, it has
been possible to directly ascertain the relationship be
tween the quit rate and personal and job characteristics.
W. Kip Viscusi, using a sample of more than 5,000 in
dividuals from the 1976 University of Michigan Panel
Study of Income Dynamics, found that the overall quit
rate of women was approximately twice that of men.13
However, were women to have the same types of jobs,
for example, jobs in which the mean wage and occupa
tional distribution were the same as for men, the ob
served differences in quit rates would be eliminated.
Similar results were obtained by Francine D. Blau and
Lawrence M. Kahn in their study of young wage and
salary workers who were no longer in school.14 Their
sample was drawn from National Longitudinal Surveys
covering 1969 to 1972. While the overall quit rate of
young women was considerably higher than that of
young men, the relationship was reversed when personal
and job differences were taken into account. Likewise,
holding personal and job-related characteristics con
stant, the predicted quit rate of young blacks was found
to be lower than that of young whites, even though
overall rates were nearly identical.
The turnover figures in our study also pertain to indi
viduals, but instead of limiting turnover to quits, other
separations, mainly permanent layoffs, are included.
One reason for this is that some quits are a response to
an imminent layoff but, more importantly, both quits
and permanent layoffs result in unrecouped specific
training outlays. Even though employers may be behav
ing optimally by laying off workers, they must evaluate
all ex post outcomes in light of ex ante expectations.
Any separation may represent an event which dimin
ishes anticipated profits. Hence, inclusion of separa
tions, other than quits, provides a more comprehensive
measure of the turnover risk faced by employers when
choosing employees.
The goals of the study are 1) to indicate how separa
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tion rates by demographic and socioeconomic groupings
can be derived from CPS files15 and 2) using such data,
to focus on several questions relating to employer at
tachment. One question is whether the overall separa
tion rate, as distinct from the overall quit rate, is
substantially higher for females than males. A second
question pertains to the relationship between the sepa
ration rate and marital status and the presence of chil
dren because, as noted, these are the core factors
underlying the premise that employer attachment is
markedly less for women than for men. Another issue
dealt with is whether there are substantial differences in
the overall separation rate between races. In the analy
sis, these questions are first examined neglecting differ
ences in wage rates among jobs and then taking wage
rates into account because employers hire for specific
jobs which pay a given wage. The data are also com
pared with those of an earlier BLS study to ascertain
whether employer attachment has changed over time.
The data set
The data are for approximately 21,000 workers in
both the January and March 1978 CPS surveys. The
March survey contained information regarding labor
force status in that month as well as information on
earnings, work experience, and number of employers
worked for during 1977. The January survey also con
tains labor force status information as well as job ten
ure information. The January and March surveys were
matched together in order to link information for per
sons in both surveys. The matching operation was car
ried out in two steps. First, the households in the four
common rotation groups (out of the total of eight
groups) were matched; the household match rate was
90.1 percent. Second, persons within matching house
holds were also matched; the match rate for these indi
viduals was 88.0 percent. In both cases, the match was
less than perfect because, for example, some households
and individuals moved between January and March and
could not be reinterviewed. The sample weights were
then adjusted on the basis of age, race, and sex to inde
pendent national population controls.
Included in the sample are wage and salary workers
age 18 to 59 years with 1 or more weeks of work expe
rience in 1977, except those in the military, school, agri
culture, or private household work. In limiting the
sample in this manner, attention is restricted to the
main determinants of turnover, that is, job dissatisfac
tion and lack of work, among wage and salary workers
in nonagricultural establishments where specific training
is generally provided.
While all persons who change employers, that is, job
changers,16 are job separators, not all those who sepa
rate from a job are job changers. In particular, individ
uals who separate from their only employer during a
21
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Estimating Employee Separation Rates
year are not counted in job changer statistics. For this
reason, job changer statistics understate employee turn
over, especially among women, because they are more
likely than men to leave the labor force.
In this study, job separators are defined as 1) job
changers in 1977 plus 2) one-employer-only individuals17
who worked less than 52 weeks in 1977, were not
employed or started a new job in January 1978, and
were not working for their 1977 employer as of March
1978.18,19 In 1977, the latter group accounted for 5.8
percent of male job separators, 28.0 percent of female
job separators, and 16.5 percent of all job separators.
One-employer-only individuals with less than 52 weeks
work experience who were not employed (or started a
new job) in January 1978, but who in March 1978 were
working for the same employer as in 1977 were exclud
ed from the count of job separators.20 This group con
tains individuals who were recalled from layoff by their
employer or who returned to their employer after with
drawing from the labor force for personal reasons, for
instance, pregnancy; hence only minimal loss of specific
training expenditures to employers can be presumed.
It is im portant to emphasize that while layoffs and
quits cannot be distinguished in the CPS data, individu
als who were temporarily laid off in 1977 and subse
quently rehired in 1977 or the first quarter of 1978, are
not counted as job separators; put another way, our
count of job separators includes permanent layoffs but
not temporary layoffs. This is seen from the following
classification of workers who were on layoff in 1977
(but cannot be identified as being in this status in the
CPS). Members of this group were:
1. reemployed by another employer during the year; or
2. reemployed by the same employer during the year
and
a. were still employed by that employer in January
1978
b. were not employed or started a new job in Janu
ary 1978; or
3. not reemployed during the year and
a. worked for the same employer in January 1978
b. were not employed or started a new job in Janu
ary 1978.
Individuals in category 1 (defined above) are counted as
job separators. Likewise, persons in subgroups 2b or 3b
who also were not employed by their 1977 employer as
of March 1978 are counted as job separators. Persons
on layoff in these subsets either found work with anoth
er employer or were on layoff for the first 3 months of
1978, that is, they were on permanent layoff. (As indi
cated, the analysis is confined to individuals age 18 to
59, thereby excluding most job separators who retired.)
Also, it should be noted that our definition refers to
job separators rather than job separations, thereby
22
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
understating the turnover risk faced by employers.
Some evidence that this deficiency is probably not seri
ous is suggested by multiple job changer data derived
from the CPS sample which indicate that women and
blacks are less likely to have three employers or more
(implying separation from two employers or more) than
men and whites.21
Separation rates by sex
Economic theory suggests that the decision to hire
one individual rather than another for jobs in which
specific training is provided depends on the likelihood
that training costs will be recovered; this likelihood, in
turn, is negatively related to the probability that an in
dividual will permanently separate from a firm. In some
studies the overall quit rate of women has been found to
be substantially higher than that for men. However, as
indicated in table 1, among women with work experi
ence in 1977, the overall separation rate (including per
manent layoffs) was 19.7; the corresponding figure for
men was 17.3.22 While inter-labor force mobility is
greater among women, as noted below, intra-labor force
mobility is greater among men. On balance, the overall
separation rate is not much different between the sexes.
Table 1 also shows that there is little or no difference
in separation rates when age is taken into account. Of
importance, more than one-third of young persons age
18 to 24 permanently separate from their employer dur
ing a year, indicating that much of the specific training
provided to this group is lost by employers. But as
young women are no more likely to separate than
young men, these losses are not sex related.
In addition, table 1 reveals that part-time workers are
more prone to separation than full-time workers and
their age-separation profile is flatter, suggesting that the
factors influencing their turnover are different from
those affecting full-time workers. Moreover, employers
are not likely to provide substantial amounts of specific
training to workers in part-time jobs in which marginal
productivity is low and, hence, training costs are diffi
cult to recover. This being the case, the economic signif-
Table 1. Separation rates by sex for persons with work
experience in 1977
Men
Age (in years)
Total, 18 and o v e r......................
18 to 1 9 ..........................................
20 to 2 4 ..........................................
25 to 3 4 ..........................................
35 to 4 4 ..........................................
45 to 5 4 ..........................................
55 to 5 9 ..........................................
Women
Total
Full
time
Part
time
17.3
48.4
34.7
18.6
12.2
8.2
8.9
16.4
48.8
34.5
18.3
11.8
7.6
8.6
36.7
47.5
36.9
30.7
(’ )
35.1
n
Total
Full
time
Part
time
19.7
44.0
33.0
20.2
15.0
11.8
9.7
18.0
45.0
31.9
18.5
13.6
8.9
6.9
24.8
42.2
37.5
26.1
18.6
19.6
19.1
1Less than 50 sample observations.
S ource:
Matched January-March 1978 Current Population Survey file.
Table 2. Separation rates by sex and wage rate, full-time
workers with work experience in 1977
men
en
W CI
$5.00 $10.00
$5.00 $10.00
Under
Under
Total
and
to
to
and Total $5.00
$5.00
$9.99 over
$9.99 over
Characteristic
18.0
20.6
10.8
14.2
11.3
6.2
33.8
16.6
8.3
35.1
18.8
9.4
23.5
11.3
6.2
21.0
11.2
12.3
11.4
7.1
18.3
16.3
20.6
20.9
10.1
12.5
35.7
23.0
28.9
18.2
10.4
12.7
15.3
9.0
12.8
22.6
16.7
17.4
26.3
20.3
20.3
11.7
10.3
12.0
13.8
20.9
15.4
23.9
33.2
20.7
10.9
14.9
12.7
7.9
12.1
14.9
17.4
25.2
18.2
19.6
27.6
19.7
9.9
14.1
10.8
10.7
19.1
9.0
6.2
13.9
16.0
8.4
15.0
23.3
11.3
11.4
16.4
18.8
10.7
16.4
27.8
11.4
9.5
36.4
15.6
7.9
40.7
25.3
13.5
26.1
11.9
6.3
Education (in years):
Less than 16 ..................
16 or m o re ......................
17.1
13.5
27.5
30.2
Marital status:
Single, never married . . .
Married, spouse present .
Other ...............................
29.0
13.3
19.7
T o ta l........................
Age (in years):
18 to 2 4 ...........................
25 to 4 4 ...........................
45 to 5 9 ...........................
Families with both
spouses present and
both worked in 1977:
Children present.............
All under 6 years.........
Some under 6 years ..
All between 6 and 17
years ......................
No child present
under 17 y e a r s ...........
(’ >
( ’ )'
(')
13.2
(')
<1 )
(')
( 1)
(')
( 1)
(’)
n
(')
1Less than 50 sample observations.
S ource :
Matched January-March 1978 CPS tile.
icance of the separation rate is most pronounced for
jobs which are filled by full-time workers. When only
full-time workers are considered,23 the overall separation
rate differential is reduced by one-third.24 Given our fo
cus on jobs in which specific training is most likely to
be offered, in the remainder of this section and the next
one, the data are restricted to full-time workers.
The separation behavior of full-time workers is shown
in table 2. The separation rates in the first and fifth col
umns reflect worker characteristics without regard to
the wage that individuals can obtain in the labor mar
ket. Implicit in these figures is the assumption that all
jobs are alike. This assumption may also underlie em
ployer perceptions of male and female separation rates.
The remaining columns control for the wage of workers
with given personal characteristics.
The percentage of full-time workers in each of the
three wage groups was as follows:
W age
T o t a l ............................................................
U nder $5 per h o u r ................................................
Between $5 and $9.99 per hour .....................
$10 and over per hour .................................
M en
100.0
32.7
51.8
15.5
Women
100.0
72.5
26.1
1.4
The second wage category, $5 to $9.99 per hour, con
taining approximately one-half of the male workers but
only one-quarter of the female workers, is referred to
below as the “typical” male wage.
From table 2 we can see that, as expected, the sepa
ration rate and wage rate are negatively related, other
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
factors held constant. The separation rate differentials
also conform to expectations with regard to marital sta
tus and presence of children. For both sexes, the separa
tion rate of single persons, who are most likely to
engage in job search and least likely to have job seniori
ty, is greater than that of married persons with their
spouse present. Additionally, the separation rate of
married women (16.7 percent) is higher than that of
married men (13.3 percent), but it is higher for single
men (29.0 percent) than for single women (22.6 per
cent). Also, the separation rate of married women with
young children all under 6 years (25.2 percent) is higher
than that of women with only older children between 6
and 17 years (13.9 percent). In part, this is because
women with young children are themselves young as
much as because of the constraints on employer attach
ment imposed by the need to care for offspring. This
age effect is seen in the higher separation rate of mar
ried men with only young children (20.9 percent) visà-vis those with only older ones (10.7 percent). Never
theless, when children are present, the separation rate of
married women (17.4 percent) is higher than that of
married men (13.8 percent).
Further examination of table 2 reveals that the afore
mentioned separation patterns are quite different from
the ones that are found to prevail when the wage rate is
taken into consideration. For wage rates below $5 per
hour, the separation rate of women, 20.6 percent, is
lower than that of men, 27.8 percent. Women have a
lower separation rate among all age groups; single and
married persons; and families with and without children
where both spouses are present and working; as well as
other groups. For wage rates between $5 and $9.99,
that is, the typical male wage, the separation rates for
women and men are similar (approximately 11 percent
for all full-time workers) except for single persons
where the separation rate is higher for men than women
(18.2 versus 11.7 percent).25 At the higher wage range of
$10 or more per hour, the differences between the fe
male and male separation rates are not statistically sig
nificant. Given the very small proportion of women
who earn such a high wage, we observe that the higher
overall separation rate for women is due to their con
centration in low-paying jobs. Indeed, if women who
worked full time were distributed among the three wage
groups in the same manner as men, their separation
rate, instead of being 1.6 percentage points higher than
the overall male rate, would have been smaller by 1.9
percentage points.
These findings suggest that a major factor influencing
turnover among men and women is the ratio of their
wage relative to that paid to a typical male worker.
When the wage is less than this amount, men are likely
to seek better job opportunities with employers other
than their current one. In contrast, women, who be23
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Estimating Employee Separation Rates
cause of family responsibilities often work close to
home, may be reluctant to give up a low-paying job be
cause the likelihood of finding a better-paying one,
which is also close to home, is small. When the female
wage equals or exceeds the typical male wage, the sepa
ration rate of women is no different from that of men.
Thus, when the wage rate is taken into account, women
do not exhibit higher separation rates than men despite
women’s lesser job tenure, home responsibilities, and
tendency to relocate when husbands find employment
elsewhere.
Among all the variables examined, education had the
weakest impact on separations. Here again, however,
holding education constant, men have a higher separa
tion rate than women when the wage rate is less than
that earned by a typical male. At wage rates earned by
most men, the separation rates are similar.
Separation rates by race
As in the case of women, the weaker labor force at
tachment of black men and the high unemployment rate
of blacks, irrespective of sex, suggest that the overall
black separation rate may be higher than that of whites.
Although the small number of observations for blacks,
approximately 1,900 full-time workers, prevents detailed
examination of their separation behavior, the broad out
lines are clearly visible and indicate that the black sepa
ration rate is lower than that of whites.
The basis of this conclusion are the data in tables 3
and 4. The former compares black and white separation
rates by personal characteristics unadjusted for wage
rates; the latter compares black and white separation
rates by wage category unadjusted for personal charac
Table 3. Separation rates by sex and race, full-time
workers with work experience in 1977
Men
Characteristic
Black
White
Black
T o ta l............................................
16.8
14.1
18.9
11.7
Age (in years):
18 to 24 ..........................................
25 to 44 ..........................................
45 to 59 ..........................................
37.5
15.9
7.8
27.4
13.4
8.1
34.7
17.7
8.7
26.1
9.7
4.7
Education (in years):
Less than 1 6 ...................................
16 or m o re ......................................
17.6
13.4
13.6
20.1
19.2
17.1
11.6
12.7
Marital status:
Single, never married......................
Married, spouse present ...............
O th e r..............................................
30.6
13.4
20.8
20.4
11.3
15.7
24.3
17.3
18.6
13.9
11.4
10.3
Families with both spouses present
and both worked in 1977:
Children present .............................
All under 6 y e a rs ........................
Some under 6 years ..................
All between 6 and 17 years . . . .
No child present under 17 years . . .
14.1
21.7
15.4
10.9
15.1
10.8
10.9
15.5
8.6
13.8
18.1
25.0
20.2
14.8
17.0
11.9
24.7
8.8
8.0
10.0
24
Matched January-March 1978 Current Population Survey file.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Wage rate
Sex and race
Total
Under
$5.00
$5.00 to
$9.99
$10.00
and over
T o ta l.........
M e n ......................
W h ite ...............
B la c k ...............
Women ...............
W h ite ...............
B la c k ...............
17.1
16.4
16.8
14.1
18.0
18.9
11.7
23.6
27.8
29.3
19.3
20.6
21.8
12.6
11.2
11.4
11.8
7.6
10.8
11.1
8.8
9.8
9.5
9.4
12.7
14.2
14.4
W hite....................
B la c k ....................
17.6
12.9
24.8
15.6
11.6
8.0
9.7
13.3
n
1Less than 50 sample observations.
S ource :
Matched January-March 1978 Current Population Survey file.
teristics. We notice from table 4 that the overall separa
tion rate among blacks, 12.9 percent, is smaller than the
corresponding figure for whites, 17.6 percent.26 From ta
ble 3, the largest race differentials are found among
women, young men, and single men. The lower separa
tion rate of black men, particularly younger ones, is im
portant to note because, as indicated, these groups have
low labor force participation and high unemployment
rates. From the tables, we see that the factors that in
fluence separations among whites impact in a similar
manner on blacks. In particular, at wage rates below
the typical male wage, black men have a higher separa
tion rate then black women, but at wage rates typical of
male workers the two groups have similar separation
rates.27
i
While the data are not as complete as one would like,
it is clear that the overall black separation rate would be
even lower than that shown if the distribution of blacks
by wage category were the same as that of whites. Were
this the case, the separation rate of black men would be
12.0 percent, black women, 11.2 percent28 and all full
time black workers, 12.1 percent.
Women
White
S ource :
Table 4. Separation rates by sex, race, and wage rate,
full-time workers with work experience in 1977
Employer attachment over time
Labor turnover is desirable to maintain efficient allo
cation of labor resources. But a rapid rise in labor turn
over could result in large losses in specific training
expenditures and reduced worker productivity. Whether
such large losses have been incurred is not readily ascer
tainable. An easier question is whether employer attach
ment has changed over time. The increased proportion
of women and young persons in the labor force, many
of whom are in low-paying jobs, suggests that the over
all separation rate may have risen in recent years. On
the other hand, the growth of private pension plans and
internalization of labor markets may have had a suffi
ciently large offsetting effect as to decrease the overall
separation rate.
Some insight into this question can be obtained from
job changer rates, as distinct from job separation rates,
which can be derived also from the January-M arch
1978 CPS file and compared to similar rates from a 1961
BLS study.29 From table 5, we see that the overall job
changer rate has risen during the past two decades. The
rise was most pronounced among white women and
white men and least pronounced among black men.30,31
A part of this increase is because of differences in
coverage. Assuming individuals under age 18 and over
age 59, the self-employed, unpaid family workers, and
agricultural and private household workers are mutually
exclusive, their omission from the 1961 data would raise
the overall job changer rate at that date from 10.1 to
12.3 percent. Thus, the overall job changer rate was at
least 3.0 percentage points lower in 1961 than in 1977.32
Some of the increase is also due to the changing sexage mix of persons with work experience between 1961
and 1977. Standardizing the 1961 job changer rates by
the sex and age composition of all persons with work
experience in 1977 would raise the 1961 overall figure
by 1.1 percentage points; still, the larger portion of the
increase, due to changes in age-specific rates, remains to
be explained.33
One explanation for the increase may be the growth
of two-worker families. Job dissatisfaction may also be
rising. Whatever the reason, it appears that the job
changer rate has increased, and that further study of the
causes and consequences of this trend is warranted.
Conclusion
In this article, a methodology is developed for com
puting separation rates from household data collected
by the Bureau of the Census in the Current Population
Survey. This methodology is illustrated using data from
the January and March 1978 files to estimate separation
rates by sex and race, as well as other personal charac
teristics. Previously, separation rate data have only been
available for manufacturing industries based on estab
lishment reports; however, these data are no longer col
lected. With this methodology, separation rates can now
be estimated not only for manufacturing but for all in
dustries and by race, sex, and other demographic char
acteristics.
One need for separation data arises from the negative
relationship between returns to employers from specific
training and worker turnover. For a number of reasons,
it is commonly believed that the overall separation rate
of women and blacks is much higher than that of men
and whites. However, as shown in this study, the over
all separation rate of women is not much higher than
that of men. Although women do exhibit greater inter
labor force mobility, intra-labor force mobility is greater
among men; on balance their overall separation rates
are not much different. As to race, the overall separa
tion rate of blacks is found to be lower than that for
whites, irrespective of sex.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 5. Separation rates and job changer rates by sex
and race for persons with work experience
1961
1977
Sex and race
Separation
rate1
Job changer
rate1
Job changer
rate2
T o ta l........................
M e n .....................................
W h ite ...............................
Black3 .............................
Women ...............................
W h ite ...............................
Black3 .............................
18.3
17.3
17.6
15.3
19.7
20.4
14.1
15.3
16.3
16.6
13.5
14.2
14.8
9.9
10.1 (11.3)
11.1 (12.3)
10.9
12.8
8.6 (9.5)
8.8
7.0
W hite ...................................
Black3 .................................
18.8
14.9
15.8
11.7
10.1
10.2
1Age 18 to 59 years.
2Age 14 years and over; figures in parentheses for persons age 18 to 59 years where
available.
3 Nonwhite in 1961.
N ote :
For definitions of the separation and job changer rates, see text and footnotes 16
and 18.
These findings fail to take into account the fact that
the wage rate differs among jobs. Among full-time
workers, we find that at wage rates below $5 per hour
(the wage received by almost three-fourths of the wom
en in our sample) the female separation rate is lower
than that of men irrespective of age, education, marital
status, and presence or absence of children. At higher
wage rates received by the typical man, the separation
rate is the same for both sexes among each subgroup
except for single, never-married persons where it is low
er for women. Thus, the somewhat higher overall sepa
ration rate for women stems from their greater
concentration in low-paying jobs. Likewise, the overall
separation rate of blacks, which is less than that of
whites, would be even lower if the two groups had the
same wage distribution.
The major component of the separation rate is the
job changer rate. It is possible to compare job changer
rates based on our sample with similar figures from a
1961 BLS study. Although there are differences in cover
age and concept between the two, it appears that the
job changer rate has increased over the last two de
cades. This increase in turnover may indicate why pro
ductivity gains have tapered off in recent years.
In assessing the extent to which employer attachment
among women differs from that of men, attention is pri
marily focused on full-time workers because specific
training is most likely to be given to this group. How
ever, women hired into full-time positions may seek
part-time employment when they marry or have chil
dren. This aspect of turnover behavior is not captured
by the data for full-time workers. But it is important to
note that the separation rate figures for all persons with
work experience cited in the text and footnotes are con
sistent with those for full-time workers.
As mentioned, permanent layoffs are included in our
count of separations. Thus, it can be argued that the
data overstate the separation rate of men whose layoff
25
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Estimating Employee Separation Rates
rate rises, more so than that of women, during periods
of high unemployment such as in 1977. On the other
hand, the unemployment rate in 1977 was midway be
tween its most recent peak in 1975 and trough in 1979
and was less than one-half percentage point higher than
the average unemployment rate during 1972-81. More
over, during this period the absolute differential be
tween the female and male unemployment rates was
greater in 1977 than in any other year (in 1977 the fe-
male unemployment rate was 1.9 percentage points
higher than the male rate).34 Nonetheless, if only be
cause of the sensitivity of the layoff rate to the level of
unemployment, additional research is needed to deter
mine the empirical parameters which enter into employ
er decisions as to whom to hire and train. As this study
indicates, the common perceptions regarding employer
attachment of women and blacks are, in im portant re
spects, incorrect.
□
FOOTNOTES
1Gary S. Becker, H u m a n Capital: A Theoretical a n d E m p irical A n a l
y sis with S p ecial R eferen ce to E ducation (Columbia University Press,
1964).
2Specific training is training which raises a worker’s productivity in
the firm providing such training and is generally paid for by the firm.
3Edmund S. Phelps, “The Statistical Theory of Racism and Sex
ism,” A m erican E conom ic R eview , September 1972, pp. 659-61; and
Lester G. Thurow, G enerating In eq u a lity (Basic Books, Inc., 1975).
4 Gary S. Becker, A Treatise on the F a m ily (Harvard University
Press, 1981).
5Jacob Mincer, “Family Migration Decisions,” J o u rn al o f P olitical
E conom y, October 1978, pp. 749-73; and Robert H. Frank, “Why
Women Earn Less: The Theory and Estimation of Differential
Overqualification,” A m erican E conom ic R eview , June 1978, pp. 34960.
6 Separation rates for manufacturing industries were reported by sex
until 1968. As of that date, the quit rate was 16 percent higher for
women than men. See W. Kip Viscusi, “Sex Differences in Worker
Quitting,” The R eview o f E conom ics a n d Statistics, August 1980, pp.
388-98.
7 W ork E xperience o f the Population in 1977, Special Labor Force
Report 224 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1979), and E m p lo ym en t a n d
Earnings, March 1982 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982).
8Job Tenure D eclines as W ork Force Changes, Special Labor Force
Report 235 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1979).
’ James E. Hall, “Turnover in the Labor Force,” B rookings Papers
on E conom ic A ctivity, No. 2, 1973, pp. 709-56.
10See references in footnotes 7 and 8. Also, see W ork E xperience o f
the P opulation in 1961, Special Labor Force Report 25 (Bureau of La
bor Statistics, 1962); and Job Tenure o f A m erican Workers, Jan u ary
1963, Special Labor Force Report 36 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1963).
" Inter- labor force mobility refers to movements into and out of the
labor force in contrast to /«tra-labor force mobility which pertains to
movements among jobs and between employment and unemployment.
12John F. Burton, Jr. and John E. Parker, “Interindustry Variations
in Voluntary Labor Mobility,” In d u stria l a n d L a b o r R ela tio n s Review ,
January 1969, pp. 179-98; Donald O. Parsons, “Specific Human Cap
ital: An Application to Quit Rates and Layoff Rates,” J o u rn al o f Po
litica l E conom y, November /December 1972, pp. 1120-44; John
Pencavel, A n A n a lysis o f the Q u it R a te in A m erican M a n u fa ctu rin g In
d u stry (Princeton University Press, 1970); and Vladimir Stoikov and
Robert L. Raimon, “Determinants of Differences in the Quit Rate
among Industries,” A m erican E conom ic R eview , December 1968, pp.
1283-98.
13W. Kip Viscusi, “Sex Differences.”
14Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, “Race and Sex Dif
ferences in Quits by Young Workers,” In d u stria l a n d L a b o r R elation s
R eview , July 1981, pp. 563-77.
15For a discussion of the need for such information, see Robert E.
Hall and David Lilien, “The Measurement and Significance of Labor
Turnover,” C oncepts a n d D a ta N eeds: C ounting the L a b o r Force, Ap
pendix Volume 1, National Commission on Employment and Unem
ployment, Washington, D.C., 1979. This need is enhanced because
26
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
turnover data for manufacturing industries are no longer being col
lected. Currently, the only source for turnover information is State
unemployment insurance data collected by the individual States. See
Carol M. Utter, “Labor turnover in manufacturing: the survey in ret
rospect,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , June 1982, pp. 15-18. Social Security
Administration data can also be used to derive turnover rates. Also,
see Malcomb Cohen and Arthur Schwartz, “U.S. labor turnover:
analysis of a new measure,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , November 1980,
pp. 9-13. However, because both unemployment and social security
data can only be disaggregated by age, sex, race, and industry, neither
is as rich in detail as the Current Population Survey.
16Job changers are individuals with two employers or more in a giv
en year. Current Population Survey enumerators are instructed to
report persons who during the year work at different establishments
of the same company (or different agencies if the worker is in govern
ment) as having a different employer if the establishments (or agen
cies) maintain separate payrolls. For this reason, we count some
individuals as separating from their employer when they should be
considered as stayers. We believe this problem is a minor one. In the
private sector only professional and managerial workers are likely to
be affected, and in many occupations within these broad groupings,
for example, accountants and managers of retail trade stores, one
would expect few persons to be misclassified. In government, the most
likely groups to be affected are clerical workers and blue-collar work
ers, because their skills are less agency specific than those of profes
sionals and managers. Indeed, in the government when professionals
and managers change agencies, they often do different things in their
new job leading to a loss of specific training so that one would want
to classify them as job separators even though they do not change
their class of worker status. Moreover, when workers do change es
tablishments or agencies but not employers, they may be carried on
the same payroll. Thus, only a very small proportion of workers may
be misclassified, including groups besides white men.
17 In the Current Population Survey survey, only one employer is
counted where an individual worked for two employers or more at the
same time.
18The separation rate is defined as the proportion of individuals
with work experience in 1977 who were job separators. The job
changer rate is the proportion of individuals with work experience in
1977 who were job changers.
14Persons with one employer in 1977 who started a new job in Jan
uary 1978, as determined from the job tenure data, had a break in
employment prior to the survey week. For these individuals (as well
as those not employed in January 1978), it is also possible to deter
mine whether their March 1978 employer was the same as their 1977
employer. Where the employer was different, it is assumed that the
person was a job separator; otherwise, the person is assumed to be a
job stayer.
“ Among individuals with work experience in 1977 who were on
temporary or indefinite layoff in January 1978, 39 percent were re
employed with their longest employer in 1977 as of March 1978. This
figure contrasts with Lilien’s estimate of a 68-percent recall rate with
in 6 months in manufacturing. See David M. Lilien, “The Cyclical
Pattern of Temporary Layoffs in U.S. Manufacturing,” Ph.D. disserta
tion, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977. The higher figure
reported by Lilien is due, in part, to the longer time span used in his
computation of the recall rate and to unrequited demands being more
easily postponed in the case of goods than services.
21 The percentage of job changers (those with two employers or
more) who were multiple job changers (those with three employers or
more) was 28.7 for men, 20.1 for women, 25.4 for whites, and 21.9 for
blacks. However, because these figures do not include individuals who
separated from the last of exactly two employers by becoming unem
ployed or leaving the labor force, they provide only partial informa
tion about multiple job separators.
22 Except as indicated, all differences noted in the text are
statistically significant at the 0.10 level. Where relevant to the analy
sis, the figures in the footnotes have also been tested for statistical
significance. The results of these tests can be obtained from the au
thors upon request.
23 In our sample, full-time workers accounted for 96.0 of the men
and 75.7 percent of the women with work experience in 1977.
24 Among workers who were in the labor force year round (50 to 52
weeks) and usually worked full time (35 hours or more per week), the
separation rate was 12.6 percent for women and 15.0 percent for men.
The separation rate of year-round workers who usually worked part
time was 13.8 percent for women and 38.0 percent for men.
25As in the case of full-time workers, for all persons with work ex
perience in 1977 who earned less than $5 per hour the separation rate
of women (21.6 percent) was lower than that of men (28.5 percent).
Likewise, for a ll persons with work experience in 1977 with wage
rates between $5 and $9.99 the difference in separation rates between
the sexes was not statistically different (the separation rate was 13.1
percent for women, 11.8 percent for men). The findings cited in the
text for specific groups of low-wage workers and workers earning the
typical male wage also hold for the same subgroups among all per
sons with work experience in 1977. The only exception is among mar
ried persons, where the separation rate is higher for women (13.0
percent versus 10.5 percent for men).
26Separation rates by race and sex for a ll workers with work experi
ence in 1977 were as follows: whites, 18.8; blacks, 14.7; white men,
17.6; black men, 15.3; white women, 20.4; and black women, 14.1. As
in the case of full-time workers, for all workers with work experience
in 1977, black separation rates were lower than those of whites for
men as well as women.
27The same finding holds for all black workers with work experi
ence in 1977.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28 Because of sample size, no separation rate could be calculated for
black women earning $10 or more per hour in 1977. The standardized
estimate of 11.2 percent assumes the maximum separation rate of
100.0 percent for this group. As shown in table 5, only 1.4 percent of
full-time female workers earned as much as $10 per hour.
29Job M o b ility in 1961, Special Labor Force Report 35 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1963).
30 Because of differences in coverage, no tests of statistical signifi
cance could be made in comparing the job changer rates in the BLS
study and this one.
31 It is also noticed from table 5 that, as expected, the disparity be
tween the job changer and separation rates is larger for women than
men and for black men than white men, reflecting differences among
these groups in inter-labor force mobility. The job changer data also
indicate that intra-labor force mobility is greater among men than
women and greater among whites than blacks irrespective of sex.
2The difference would be even larger if students were also omitted
from the 1961 job changer data; however, information for this group
is lacking. Furthermore, with the surge of women and young people
into the labor force in recent years, groups for whom inter-labor force
mobility is higher than average, the job changer data may understate
the secular rise in the overall separation rate.
33 Some indication of how age-specific job turnover changed over
time can be inferred from the following figures:
___________ A ge (in yea rsj ___________
18 to 5 9
1961 job changer
rate, m e n .............
1977 separation rate,
men .....................
18 to 2 4
2 5 to 44
45 to 59
12.3
24.1
12.5
6.3
17.3
37.0
16.0
8.4
As indicated by table 5, the difference between the separation and job
changer rates is small for men. (See also Mincer, “Family Migration,”
where small differences are noted between the two rates when job ten
ure, which is related to age, is controlled for.) The decline in employer
attachment among young persons is noteworthy in view of the inclu
sion of students in the 1961 data.
34 Based on data provided by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bu
reau of Labor Statistics.
27
HMOs and other health plans:
coverage and employee premiums
Ten years after the passage o f the HMO Act,
health maintenance organizations represent
a small proportion o f employee health plans;
benefits are more comprehensive and worker premiums
higher than for traditional insurance,
but other variables make comparisons difficult
A
llan
B l o s t in
and
W il l ia m M a r c l a y
How do Health Maintenance Organizations ( h m o s )
compare with traditional health insurers— such as Blue
Cross and Blue Shield organizations and commercial
carriers— in terms of benefits provided and premiums
required of employees? Although HMOs account for a
small portion of the individuals with health insurance
protection, interest in them has grown in recent years,
particularly since the passage of the Health Mainte
nance Organization Act of 1973.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual surveys of the
incidence and characteristics of employee benefit plans
in medium and large firms shed considerable light on
the comparative coverages provided by HMOs and other
sources of health insurance protection. Data from the
1981 study demonstrate that HMOs as a rule provide
unlimited hospital-related care for physical ailments—
such as room and board, surgical care, and doctors’ vis
its to the hospital— with no charges over subscriber
premiums; other health insurers typically curb such
benefits through deductible or coinsurance provisions,
ceilings on dollar payments, and limits on the maximum
number of days of hospitalization coverage.
Differences were also found between HMOs and the
traditional health insurers in other areas of health care
— visits to physicians’ offices, diagnostic X-ray and lab
oratory work, mental health care in and out of the hos
pital, care at home and in nursing facilities, prescription
drugs, and dental and vision care. In these areas, how
ever, even HMOs may limit the number of days of cover
age or include copayment requirements, thereby impos
ing out-of-pocket charges on subscribers.
Allan Blostin and William Marclay are labor economists in the Office
of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
28
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
These patterns partly reflect a principal requirement
of the HMO Act: Federally qualified HMOs must provide
comprehensive care. However, the more extensive bene
fit schedules generally offered by HMOs commonly re
sult in higher premium payments by employees. It must
be emphasized that this review contrasts only plan pro
visions offered by h m o s and other health insurers and
the employee premiums required for each. Overall eval
uation of the two approaches to health care must also
consider such factors as quality of care and total costs.
The HMO concept
A health maintenance organization provides a wide
range of comprehensive health care services to a volun
tarily enrolled population. Covered individuals receive
care from specified providers for a fixed, prepaid fee,
rather than on a fee-for-service basis.1There are two ba
sic types of HMOs— the group/staff arrangement and
the individual practice association ( i p a ). The group/
staff HMO delivers health services at one or more facili
ties through groups of physicians working on a salaried
or contractual basis. The IPA contracts with physicians
in the community, who maintain their own offices and
usually are paid by the HMO on an agreed fee-for-service
schedule.2
Health maintenance organizations differ from tradi
tional insurers in the following key respects:
• HMOs serve both as health care insurers as well as
providers of health services to subscribers. Tradition
al insurers concentrate on financing health care, while
insured individuals seek out their own providers.
• HMOs encourage preventive health care by paying for
periodic physical examinations. Other health plans
typically do not pay for routine physical examina
tions.
HMO grow th
Although the term “health maintenance organiza
tion” was not coined until 1970,3 the concept goes back
to a much earlier time. During the latter part of the
19th century and early in the 20th century, prepaid
medical care programs for employees, and usually for
their dependents, were established in a number of in
dustries, including mining, lumbering, and the railroads.4
The Nation’s largest prepaid group practice— the Kaiser
Foundation Health Plan— originated in 1938, when a
health care program was established for Kaiser construc
tion workers building the Grand Coulee Dam, in a re
mote location in Washington. This led to a companysponsored plan covering Kaiser shipyard workers and
their families in 1942 and to a plan open to the communi
ty at large in 1945.5
The further establishment of HMOs was slowed by a
variety of forces, including initial opposition by the
medical profession, competition from other health insur
ers, the costs of establishing an HMO, and reluctance of
employees to limit their choice of physicians to a partic
ular group. In the past decade, however, Federal legisla
tion provided the catalyst for individual employers and
traditional health insurers, among others, to encourage
HMO growth.6 The Health Maintenance Organization
Act of 1973, as amended, greatly stimulated formation
of comprehensive prepaid health care programs by:
• Providing grants, loans, and loan guarantees to HMOs.
• Preempting State laws and practices impeding the de
velopment and operation of qualified HMOs.
• Requiring an employer to include the option of mem
bership in a qualified HMO in any employee health
benefit package— dual-choice— if the employer (1) is
covered by the minimum wage provisions of the Fair
Labor Standards Act, (2) has at least 25 employees
residing within an h m o ’ s service area, (3) has an em
ployee health benefit plan to which the employer con
tributes, and (4) has received a written request from a
qualified HMO for inclusion in the employer’s health
benefits program.7
As described later in this article, requirements for Fed
eral qualification include provision for a comprehensive
range of “basic health services.”
Enrollment almost doubles
The June 1981 enrollment in HMOs (subscribers and
covered dependents) totaled 10.3 million, nearly double
the enrollment 7 years earlier. About half of all the
HMOs functioning that m onth were Federally qualified,
but they covered 7.3 million subscribers and depen
dents.8 Despite this impressive growth, HMO coverage is
still quite limited. The 1981 BLS survey of employee
benefit plans found 21 million workers under health in
surance plans. Three percent participated in HMOs.9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1. Percent of health insurance plans1by extent of
coverage for selected categories of health care, medium
and large firms, 1981
Covered with
limitations
Covered
in full2
Category of health care
HMO
Hospital room and board . .
Hospitalization— miscella
neous services...............
Extended care3 ..................
Surgical c a r e ......................
Physician visits — in-hospital
Physician visits— office. . . .
Diagnostic X-ray and labora
tory6 ...............................
Hospital outpatient care . . .
Prescription drugs— non
hospital ...........................
Private duty nursing ...........
Mental health c a r e .............
In-hospital6 ..................
Non-hospital6 .............
Dental.................................
Vision9 .................................
Other
HMO
Other
Other
_
_
_
4
—
—
—
43
—
( 4)
3
84
93
_
_
—
—
95
96
99
38
5
4
13
5
887
25
3
4
1
95
4
5
96
95
40
95
99
59
4
1
28
6
2
5
56
5
1
41
96
56
72
94
95
84
57
16
7
16
43
10
89
—
7
3
4
37
2
( 4)
—
52
6
96
80
92
8
38
( 7)
( 7)
1
2
Not covered
HMO
( 7)
( 7)
50
18
_
( 7)
( 7)
49
80
1Excludes plans restricted to dental benefits. Two plans combining non-HMO hospitaliza
tion care with HMO coverage of other health care categories are treated here as non-HMO
plans.
2 All needed coverage for a specific service is provided at no cost to the subscriber above
the regular prepayment fee, that is, there are no copayment, deductible, or coinsurance fea
tures or limits on maximum days of coverage. Coverage need not extend to all aspects of a
health care category; for example, vision care may be limited to eye examinations and ex
clude the cost of eyeglasses.
3 Care provided by a nursing facility or home health care agency.
4 Less than 0.5 percent.
5 Charges incurred in the outpatient department of a hospital and outside of the hospital.
6 Charges for room and board and for physicians’ visits.
7 Separate data were not available for non-HMO coverage of mental health care in and
outside of the hospital.
8 Employer-funded dental care plans frequently supplement these HMOs. Separate dental
plans are not in the tabulations.
9 Excludes care for children only.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dash indicates
no plans in this category.
Although the HMO Act requires many employers to
offer a dual choice of health insurance plans, indications
are that relatively few workers having the option actual
ly select these prepaid arrangements. BLS Area Wage
Surveys conducted during 1980 and 1981 yielded this
finding on HMO availability and selection in 51 areas.10
Typically, office workers were offered and selected HMO
coverage to a greater degree than production workers.
Moreover, HMOs were more popular in the Western
States than in other parts of the country. The following
tabulation shows the percent of full-time workers of
fered coverage and participating in HMO plans (asterisks
indicate below 0.5 percent) in eight of the largest areas
studied:11
A rea
B oston ...............
N ew Y ork . . . .
A t l a n t a ...............
W ashington . . .
C hicago ............
M inneapolisSt. Paul . . . .
L os A ngelesLong Beach .
San FranciscoOakland . . . .
Production workers
Office workers
O ffered P articipating O ffered Participating
4
1
65
42
8
65
38
8
3
1
9
4
46
13
64
19
53
18
60
14
66
28
62
25
41
16
7
35
22
2
♦
*
29
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Health Maintenance Organizations
BLS benefit survey
The Bureau’s annual survey of employee benefit plans
in medium and large firms— those with at least 50, 100,
or 250 workers, depending on the industry— provides a
rich data base for comparing HMOs and traditional
health insurance plans. Industrial coverage comprises
mining; construction; manufacturing; transportation,
communications, electric, gas, and sanitary services;
wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real
estate; and selected services. An estimated 21.5 million
full-time employees were within the scope of the 1981
survey.12 Because the detailed information collected on
health insurance plan provisions includes data on type
of insurer, it is possible to contrast benefit coverages
provided by HMOs and other insurers.
Approximately 1,300 establishments, employing 4.1
million workers, provided information for the survey.
The data in this article relate to the number of HMO
and other health plans reported by these establishments.
In counting these plans, each HMO in an establishment
was treated as a separate “plan.” When several estab
lishments in the survey offered the same HMO, each off
ering was counted as an independent plan. To reduce
the effect of such duplication in counting HMOs, data in
the accompanying tables show the proportion of HMO
plans, rather than the absolute number of HMOs.13 Par
ticipants in other forms of health insurance frequently
are covered under basic hospital, surgical, and medical
plans, supplemented with a major medical benefit poli
cy. The combined coverages were treated here as single
plans.14
Coverage patterns
All health insurance plans reported for full-time work
ers in the 1981 survey had provisions for inpatient and
outpatient hospital care and surgical, X-ray, and labora
tory benefits (table 1). Provisions for physician care—
both in the hospital and in the office— were always in
cluded by HMOs and nearly always by other health in
surance plans. Similarly, nearly universal inclusion of
some private duty nursing and mental health care was
found for both HMOs and the traditional insurers.
Significant differences, however, did exist. Extended
care in a licensed nursing facility or through home
health care services was provided in virtually all of the
HMOs, compared with almost three-fifths of the other
plans. This largely reflects a requirement of the HMO
Act that qualified organizations provide home health
care services as part of a package of basic health ser
vices.15 Approximately 86 percent of the HMO plans re
ported in the 1981 survey were Federally qualified.
Both dental care and prescription drugs— which are
not included in the Act’s definition of basic health ser
vices— are covered more frequently by other insurers.
Only 1 out o f 8 HMO plans surveyed in 1981 included
30
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
dental coverage. HMO sponsored dental care— where it
exists— is almost always limited to the preventive ser
vices of examinations and X-rays. Traditional insurers
provide a wider range of coverage, including restorative
procedures such as fillings, periodontal care, inlays, and
crowns. Quite often HMOs are supplemented by separate
employer-financed dental insurance.16
Non-HMO health insurance almost always covers at
least part of the costs of prescription drugs, commonly
under the major medical portion of the plan. In con
trast, three-fifths of the HMO plans provided this benefit
in 1981. This includes coverage accepted by the employ
er as an optional, additional premium benefit in the em
ployee health package.
Three-fourths of the HMOs included vision care
benefits, compared with one-fifth of the other plans.
Generally, however, HMOs with vision care provided
only eye examinations, while the traditional insurers
usually included eyeglasses and contact lenses, as well
as examinations.17
Limits to coverage
Table 1 also shows significant differences in the ex
tent of health coverage provided. For many key catego
ries, HMOs usually furnish full coverage; that is,
monthly premiums cover the full cost of providing all
needed care. In contrast, traditional insurance plans
commonly limit the extent of benefits paid by periodic
premiums; employees must pay the balance of the bill.
Where HMOs limit coverage, it is usually by a restric
tion on the number of days for which benefits are provid
ed— either on an annual or per illness basis— or through
a requirement for copayments. A copayment is a nomi
nal fee that the HMO subscriber pays when a service is
rendered. Copayments serve to reduce premiums and
they may tend to discourage overuse of HMO facilities.
As already described, non-HMO health insurance pack
ages commonly combine basic health and major medical
insurance. Basic health benefits usually have limits on
the number of days of covered services or on the maxi
mum dollar amount payable. Major medical insurance
covers expenses which exceed basic benefit limitations
and also covers types of expenses not paid for by the ba
sic plan. M ajor medical insurance almost always in
cludes a deductible— an amount the insured individual
must pay before the policy will cover any expenses. The
deductible was most commonly $100 a year in 1981,
usually with a family limit of $200 or $300.18 In addi
tion, expenses are shared under major medical insurance
(coinsurance), with the insurer commonly paying 80 per
cent of the total (50 percent for non-hospital mental
health care). Usually, there is a lifetime ceiling on insur
er payments— generally $250,000 or less.
Except for mental health care, HMOs in 1981 usually
provided unlimited coverage of hospital-related care,
T a b le 2 .
P e r c e n t o f h e a lt h m a in te n a n c e o r g a n iz a t io n
p la n s w it h lim it a t io n s o n d a y s o f c o v e r a g e p e r y e a r a n d
p e r c o n f in e m e n t f o r s e le c t e d c a t e g o r ie s o f h e a lt h c a r e ,
m e d iu m a n d la r g e fir m s , 1 9 8 1
Care in
nursing
facility
Mental health
care —
in-hospital1
Mental health
care —
non-hospital2
All H M O s ....................................
Benefit not covered........................
Covered with no limitations ...........
Covered with limitations..................
Limits days per year ......................
Less than 20 days......................
20 ...............................................
21 2 9 ..........................................
30 ...............................................
31 4 4 ..........................................
45 ...............................................
46-59 ..........................................
60 ...............................................
61-99 ..........................................
100 .............................................
Greater than 1 0 0 ........................
100
22
32
47
33
—
—
—
2
—
5
1
21
4
100
13
12
76
67
1
2
( 3)
34
4
14
—
11
1
—
1
100
5
13
82
80
1
65
8
3
—
2
1
—
1
—
—
Limits days per confinement...........
Less than 20 days......................
20 ...............................................
30 ...............................................
45 ...............................................
60 ...............................................
100 .............................................
120 ............................................
125 .............................................
Greater than 1 2 5 ........................
14
—
2
1
—
2
6
1
1
1
8
1
—
3
1
1
—
2
—
1
2
1
1
—
—
—
—
Limit on days of coverage
( 3)
—
—
—
1Charges for room and board and for physicians’ visits.
2 Charges incurred in the outpatient department of a hospital and outside of the hospital.
3 Less than 0.5 percent.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of Individual items may not equal totals. Dash indi
cates no plans in this category.
of health care for which HMOs limit the days of cover
age. (See table 2.) Three-fifths of the HMO plans limited
mental health coverage in the hospital to 30, 45, or 60
days per year. Outside the hospital, the limit was 20
visits a year in nearly two-thirds of the plans.
As for extended care in nursing homes, three-fifths of
the HMO plans providing this benefit limited the length
of the stay, expressed on an annual, rather than on a
confinement, basis. The most frequent restriction was
100 days.
HMO copayment requirements
As indicated, HMOs may charge subscribers a stated
dollar amount per visit— copayment— for services out
side the hospital. Table 3 shows the relative frequency
and amounts of such copayments in five areas of health
care where they are commonly found.
Even in each of these five areas, less than half of the
plans in 1981 required copayments. Copayments typi
cally were $1, $2, or $3 for visits to physicians’ offices,
laboratory tests and X-rays, and vision care. This was
also true for such services in the outpatient department
of a hospital as physical therapy or chemotherapy.
However, outpatient services covering accidents and
sickness performed in the emergency room of a hospital
or an HMO facility may require a copayment of $10 or
$15.19
su ch as room an d b oard ch arges, su rgical care, d o c to r s’
v isits to th e h osp ita l, an d m iscella n eo u s services (in clu d
in g d ia g n o stic X -ra y s, d ru gs, an d la b o ra to ry w ork ). E x
cep t for surgical care, th ese h o sp ita l services w ere
covered in full b y less than on e-ten th o f th e non-HMO
p lans. Non-H M O p lan s often lim ited co v erage o f h o sp i
tal ch arges to 120 or 365 d ays per con finem ent. S lig h tly
m ore than a fourth o f th e trad ition al in surance p lans
paid in full th e usual, cu stom ary, an d reason ab le ch arg
es for surgical care. T h e m o st frequ en t non-HMO lim ita
tion on coverage for surgical care w a s a sch ed u le o f
m axim u m p aym en ts for in d ivid u al p rocedures.
HMOs and traditional insurance plans in varying de
grees limited coverage of non-hospital services, includ
ing visits to physicians’ offices, prescription drugs,
extended care in a nursing facility, care in a hospital’s
outpatient department, and mental health care (both in
and out of a hospital). As already observed, HMO limi
tations often take the form of ceilings on the number of
days of coverage or copayment provisions. The tradi
tional plans typically cover non-hospital benefits under
major medical provisions only; thus, they are subject to
deductible and coinsurance features.
HMO limitations on days of coverage
Mental health care (in and out of the hospital) and
extended care in a nursing facility are the major types
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 3. Percent of health maintenance organization
plans with copayment provisions for selected categories
of health care, medium and large firms, 1981
Copayment limits
All HMOs .............
Category not covered ..
Covered with no copayment provision...........
Covered with copay
ment provision
(per visit) ..................
$ 1.00 ..................
$ 1.50 ..................
$ 2.00 ..................
$ 2.50 ..................
$ 3.00 ..................
$ 4.00 ..................
$ 5.00 ..................
$ 7.50 ..................
$10.00 ..................
$15.00 ..................
$20.00 ..................
Greater than
$20.00 ...............
Other ........................
Diagnostic
Mental
Hospital
Physicians’ X-ray and
health
Vision
outpatient
visits —
laboratory —
care—
care2
care
office
non-hospital1 non-hospital1
100
—
100
5
100
—
100
25
59
84
50
68
45
41
7
( 3)
20
—
8
4
2
—
16
4
—
6
—
2
1
1
—
( 3)
( 3)
32
6
—
8
—
2
1
3
—
4
6
( 3)
29
7
( 3)
9
( 3)
2
2
5
1
1
1
( 3)
1
—
—
—
100
—
—
—
45
4
—
5
—
1
2
7
—
5
5
7
—
—
41
1
57
—
1Charges incurred in the outpatient department of a hospital and outside of the hospital.
2 Excludes care for children only.
3 Less than 0.5 percent.
4 Plans calling for a copayment of $6.00 for each laboratory and diagnostic procedure and
$5.25 for each X-ray.
5 Plans varying the copayment based on the number of visits.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dash Indicates
no plans in this category.
31
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Health Maintenance Organizations
Both copayment requirements for doctors’ visits and
limitations on the number of visits applied frequently to
mental health care outside the hospital. These copay
ments were often greater than those required for other
non-hospital services; charges of $5 or greater per visit
were found in one-fourth of the plans. In 7 percent of
the plans, the amount of the copayment varied by the
number of visits. For example, a subscriber might not
be charged for the first 10 visits but was charged $10
for each subsequent visit.
HMO prescription drug plans often require a copay
ment per prescription, most commonly $1 or $2. How
ever, as the following tabulation shows, coinsurance
provisions also applied for 10 percent of the HMO plans
(asterisk indicates under 0.5 percent):
P ercen t
T otal ................................................
D rugs not c o v e r e d ....................................
D rugs covered w ith no lim itations
o f HMO plans
100
38
. .
10
D rug coverage subject to copaym ent
per prescription ....................................
Less than $ 1 .0 0 .......................................
37
2
$ 1.00 ......................................................................
11
$ 2 . 0 0 ............................................................
$ 2 . 5 0 ............................................................
$ 3 . 0 0 ............................................................
$ 3 . 5 0 ............................................................
D rug coverage subject to coinsur
ance provision .......................................
Other li m i t a t i o n s .......................................
15
5
5
*
32
Because benefits are more likely to be covered in full
by health maintenance organizations, their premium
charges may exceed those of traditional insurers. The
Health Maintenance Organization Act does not require
an employer offering a dual choice of health plans to
contribute more toward HMO coverage than toward oth
er health insurance. Consequently, when an h m o ’s pre
mium exceeds that of a traditional insurance plan, an
employee may be required to pay the additional cost of
the HMO plan.
A lth o u g h th e b l s em p lo y ee benefit su rveys d o n ot
o b tain d ata on em p lo y er exp en d itu res, they d o co llect
in form ation on th e exten t of w orker co n trib u tion s to
w ard th e c o st o f p rem ium s. T h e 1981 survey fo u n d that
n early three-fourth s o f all non-HMO p lan s w ere fully
paid for b y em p lo y ers for em p lo y ee coverage, and ju st
over o n e-h a lf w ere n o n co n trib u to ry for d ep en d ent c o v
erage. In con trast, a b o u t on e-th ird o f th e HMO plans
w ere n o n co n trib u to ry for em p lo y ee coverage, and onefourth for d ep en d en ts (tab le 4).
M oreover, w hen em p lo y ee co n trib u tio n s w ere re
quired, th ey w ere higher, on th e average, for HMO ser
vices. M o n th ly em p lo y ee prem iu m s in con trib utory
HMO p lan s averaged $ 1 2 .7 7 for em p lo y ee coverage and
$27.21 for d ep en d en t coverage. C orresp on d in g figures
for non-HMO p lan s w ere $7.21 and $ 1 8 .9 6 . A m on th ly
10
4
Prescription drugs were the major category of HMO
coverage for which coinsurance provisions applied. The
insurer virtually always paid 80 percent of the charge,
with the subscriber paying the balance. Other limita
tions shown above for 4 percent of the plans consisted
mainly of annual deductibles of $50 or $100.
Fewer than 10 percent of the HMOs limited coverage
through coinsurance features, yearly deductibles, or
maximum dollar payments in each of the following ben
efit areas: extended care in a nursing facility; diagnostic
X-ray and laboratory tests outside the hospital; mental
health care; outpatient care; and vision care.
Coinsurance provisions, where found, were commonly
at the 50-percent level for non-hospital mental health
care and at the 80-percent level for in-hospital mental
health care and for hospital outpatient services. The few
coinsurance requirements for outpatient services usually
were accompanied by a $50 or $100 yearly deductible
and a ceiling on maximum dollar benefits. These limita
tions on coverage of outpatient services were generally
in HMO plans which did not fully cover hospital room
and board. Nine percent of the plans limited vision care
by a specified maximum dollar benefit or by a sched
uled dollar amount per examination or prescription for
eyeglasses.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Employee premiums
Table 4. Percent of health insurance plans1by amount of
employee premium, medium and large firms, 1981
HMO plans2
Employee premiums
Total plans
Other plans3
Employee Dependent Employee Dependent
coverage coverage coverage coverage
..........................
100
100
100
100
Noncontributory p la n s ......................
35
25
72
51
Contributory plans.............................
Dollar amount of monthly employee
premium:
Less than $5.00........................
$ 5.00-$ 9 .9 9 ...........................
$10.00 $ M .9 9 ...........................
$15.00—
$19.99...........................
$20.00 $29.99 ..........................
$30.00 $39.99 ..........................
$40.00-$49.99 ...........................
$50.00 or greater......................
Other5 ......................................
Amount not determinable6 . . . .
Contributory status not available . ..
62
72
28
49
10
19
13
7
9
3
1
6
6
9
8
15
12
6
8
( 4)
( 4)
3
11
9
5
1
1
( 4)
1
7
10
7
5
7
5
2
3
( 4)
3
<4)
<4)
—
—
( 4)
3
( 4)
—
1Excludes plans restricted to dental benefits. Two plans combining non-HMO hospitaliza
tion care with HMO coverage of other health care categories are treated here as non-HMO
plans.
2Average monthly employee premium in contributory plans was $12.77 for employee cov
erage and $27.21 for dependent coverage.
3Average monthly employee premium in contributory plans was $7.21 for employee cov
erage and $18.96 for dependent coverage.
4 Less than 0.5 percent.
5 Contributions based on percent of employee earnings.
6 Employee contribution is specified only as a percent of the total premium.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dash
indicates no plans in this category.
employee premium of $20 or more for individual cover
age was found in 13 percent of the HMO plans and in 1
percent of other plans. Similarly, $30 or more for de
pendent coverage was required in more than one-fourth
of the HMO plans and in one-tenth of the other plans.
Consideration of employee premiums focuses on just
one aspect of total health care costs borne by employ-
ees. It ignores out-of-pocket employee expenses at the
time services are rendered. The BLS survey, however, fo
cuses on benefit provisions and not on usage or its full
cost. As noted, full comparison of HMOs and traditional
insurers must consider more than cost factors, including
quality of care and intangibles such as doctor-patient
relations, and the health of the insured.
□
FOOTNOTES
1For a comprehensive discussion of hmos, see Robert G. Shouldice
and Katherine H. Shouldice, M e d ic a l Group P ractice a n d H ealth
M a in ten a n ce O rganizations (Washington, Information Resources Press,
1978). For a briefer introduction, see A S tu d en t's G uide to H ealth
M a in ten a n ce O rganizations, dhew Publication No. (hra) 79-3 (U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Ser
vice, 1978).
2A 1981 National hmo Census, covering 243 plans, found that only
15 percent of all participants were enrolled in individual practice asso
ciation prepayment plans. N a tio n a l hmo Census 1981, dhhs Publica
tion No. 82-50177 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Public Health Service, 1982), p. 5.
3Credit for the term goes to Dr. Paul M. Ellwood, Jr., president of
InterStudy, a research institute on prepaid health plans.
4 Margaret C. Klem and Margaret F. McKiever, M an agem en t a n d
Union H ea lth a n d M e d ic a l Program s, Public Health Service Publica
tion 329 (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service, 1953), pp. 3-5.
5For a more detailed history, see Herman M. Somers and Anne R.
Somers, Doctors, Patients, a n d H ealth Insurance (Washington, The
Brookings Institution, 1961), Chapter 17.
6The employer viewpoint is presented in Ruth H. Stack, hmos fro m
the M a n a g em e n t Perspective (New York, amacom, 1979). Labor
unions, at the national level, usually support hmos but, because of
possible requirements for employee contributions, local union officials
at times have reacted negatively. The overall union viewpoint is in
Bert Seidman, “ hmos and Health Care for All Americans,” afl-cio
A m erica n F ederationist, June 1979, pp. 10-11.
7Employers must offer at least one group or staff hmo and at least
one ipa if both are qualified and request inclusion in a health benefit
program. Where employees are organized, the hmo offer must be
made to the union; the employer’s obligation ends if the union rejects
the offer.
8N a tio n a l hmo Census 1981, pp. 1, 5.
° E m p lo yee B enefits in M e d iu m a n d L a rg e Firms, 1981, Bulletin 2140
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), p. 27. The bls study may not be
fully indicative of hmo penetration into employee health benefit plans.
An analysis by the General Accounting Office of hmo contracts with
employers of 25 workers or more found that the percentage of em
ployees enrolled in the hmos was considerably higher in small than in
large
firms.
See
Can
H ealth
M ain ten an ce
O rganizations
B e Successful?— A n A n alysis o f 14 F ederally Q u alified “hmos, ” hrd78-125 (U.S. General Accounting Office, June 30, 1978), pp. 48-49.
10The surveys are conducted annually in 70 areas, but questions re
lated to hmo participation were phased into the program over a
3-year period beginning in 1980. The surveys provide data on earn
ings in selected blue- and white-collar occupations common to a wide
variety of industries. Data are also obtained on weekly work sched
ules and employee benefits, separately for nonsupervisory office work
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ers and for production and related workers (nonoffice). While wage
data are collected annually, benefits are studied every 3 years.
"For data on each of the 51 areas, see tables B-14 and B-18 in
A rea W age Surveys: S elected M etropolitan Areas, 1980, Bulletin 300072 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982) and A rea W age Surveys: S elected
M etropolitan Areas, 1981, Bulletin 3010-72 (Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, 1983).
12This employment total excludes executive management, part-time,
temporary, seasonal, and operating personnel in constant travel status
(for example, airline pilots), who are outside the scope of the survey.
The 1981 survey collected data on employee work schedules and de
veloped information on the incidence and detailed characteristics of
11 private sector employee benefits paid for at least in part by the em
ployer: paid lunch and rest periods; holidays, vacations, and personal
and sick leave; accident and sickness, long-term disability, health, and
life insurance; and private retirement pension plans. Data were also
collected on the incidence of 17 other employee benefits, including
stock, savings and thrift, and profit sharing plans. Survey findings of
general interest are included in annual bls bulletins (see, for example,
E m ployee B enefits in M e d iu m a n d L arge Firms, 1981). More intensive
treatment of individual topics— such as the present analysis— appears
in M o n th ly L a b o r R eview articles. Tables in the bulletins show the
proportion of full-time workers participating in the individual benefit
plans studied or covered by specific types of plan provisions. Unlike
the simple counts of reported plans in this article, these proportions
in the bulletin tables are computed by applying appropriate sample
weights to the reports from the individual establishments in the sur
vey. For detailed information on the background and conduct of the
survey, see Robert Frumkin and William Wiatrowski, “Bureau of La
bor Statistics takes a new look at employee benefits,” M o n th ly L a b o r
Review , August 1982, pp. 41-45.
13A total of 365 hmo plans within individual establishments was in
cluded in the analysis.
14Plans restricted to dental benefits were excluded.
15The Act defines “basic health services” to include: (1) physicians’
services; (2) inpatient and outpatient hospital services; (3) emergency
health services; (4) short-term outpatient mental health services; (5)
medical treatment and referral services for the abuse of or addiction
to alcohol and drugs; (6) diagnostic laboratory and diagnostic and
therapeutic radiologic services; (7) home health services; and (8) pre
ventive health services (including immunizations, well-child care from
birth, periodic health evaluations for adults, voluntary family plan
ning services, infertility services, and children’s eye and ear examina
tions).
16As indicated in footnote 14, such dental-only plans are excluded.
17 Vision care benefits limited to children are excluded.
18E m ployee B enefits in M e d iu m a n d L arge Firms, 1981, p. 24.
14Where an hmo varied the copayment by type of outpatient
services, table 3 includes the charge for the most common service. If a
charge for emergency care was specified, it was tabulated.
33
Communications
W orklife estimates should be consistent
with known labor force participation
Table 1. Labor force participation rates, as published,
and as implied by the new worklife estimates, 1977
Women
Men
Age
Published
rates1
Implicit rates
Published
rates1
Implicit rates
Jo h n L . F i n c h
New worklife expectancy estimates were published by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics last year and were de
scribed at length by Shirley J. Smith in the March 1982
issue of the Monthly Labor R e v i e w These new figures
are different from those previously published for 1970
for two reasons: First, 1977 data were used. And sec
ond, a new methodology was adopted in which the
probability of entering or leaving the labor force at a
particular age was incorporated explicitly into the model.
The 1970 model, with respect to the worklife expec
tancy of an individual known to be in the labor force at
a given age, assumed that he or she would remain ac
tive until reaching the age of peak participation. As
Smith observes, this assumption resulted in a worklife
expectancy which was overstated for young persons.
The new methodology, which measures the extent of
movement into and out of the labor force, is conceptu
ally superior to the 1970 model for those individuals
whose labor force status is known in the reference year.
Under either model, the expectation of working life at
a given age is simply the total number of person-years
worked after that age, divided by the number of people
alive at that age. Thus, the new model should give the
same results for “all persons” — those in, and those not
in, the labor force— as did the 1970 model, if the same
data base is used in each. This is not the case.
Implicit in any worklife calculation is a labor force
participation rate for each age group. Table 1 compares
the participation rates implied by the Bureau’s new
worklife figures with the rates published by the Bureau
for 1977.2 (See appendix for methodology.) As indicat
ed, the Bureau’s implicit rates are too low for men (70
percent versus 75.1 percent) and slightly high for wom
en (44.3 percent versus 43.7 percent).
One result of this inconsistency is that, when the new
methodology is applied to 1970 data, different expecta-
John L. Finch is an economic consultant with the firm of Bassett,
Parks, Silberberg, and Finch in Seattle, Washington.
34
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16 and over ..
16-17.........
18-19.........
20-24 .........
25-34 .........
35-44 .........
45-54 .........
55-64 .........
65 and over
78.3
50.6
74.4
86.7
95.6
95.8
91.2
74.0
20.1
2 (75.1)
70.0
40.5
57.2
75.1
92.5
94.7
90.4
67.3
14.0
48.5
42.2
60.6
66.7
59.5
59.6
55.8
41.0
8.1
2 (43.7)
44.3
36.3
51.8
62.8
63.0
65.3
60.4
40.0
6.0
1These data are from Handbook o f Labor Statistics (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1980), ta
ble 2, pp. 8-9.
2 Rates in parentheses have been adjusted for static population.
tions are obtained for “all persons” than were obtained
with the old model.3 This is an incorrect result, for if
participation rates and mortality rates are the same in
both models, worklife expectancy should be the same
for “all persons.” Probabilities of leaving and entering
the labor force have no effect upon the total number of
years an average person will work.
For example, suppose two people, Brown and White,
are alive at age 97, and Brown works at ages 98 and 99,
whereas White is retired. The worklife expectancy for
“all persons” is 1 year. Now suppose as an alternative
that Brown works at age 98 and then retires, while
White reenters the labor market at age 99. The worklife
expectancy is still 1 year, because we are not here
attempting to distinguish between those, like Brown,
who are active in the base year and those, like White,
who are inactive.
A second result of this inconsistency is that incorrect
“transition probabilities” (probabilities of leaving and
entering the labor force) are obtained. As one would ex
pect, transition probabilities are not independent of la
bor force participation rates. To illustrate, suppose the
participation rate for a group is 80 percent in Year 1
and 90 percent in Year 2, and that 10 percent of those
alive in Year 1 die by Year 2. If 95 percent of the survi
vors who were active in Year 1 were still active in Year
2, then 70 percent of those survivors inactive in Year 1
must, by mathematical identity, have become active by
Year 2.
To accept the new BLS worklife projections, one must
accept the participation rates implicit in those projec-
tions. For example, one must be willing to concede that
men in their early 20’s, 87 percent of whom are current
ly in the labor force, are about to drop out in large
numbers, leaving a 75-percent participation rate4— an
unlikely occurrence indeed. (See table 1.) Therefore, one
must conclude that the transition probabilities and the
Bureau’s published labor force participation rates can
not both be correct. (See the appendix for a mathemati
cal proof of this assertion.)
Perhaps the survey from which the transition
probabilities were obtained captured the effects of some
transitory movement into and out of the labor force. If
so, this movement should not be extrapolated into the
future, because changes observed in a single sample can
not reliably be projected over people’s lifetimes, and be
cause no trend toward significantly lower male
participation has been observed between 1977 and the
present. Alternatively, it is possible that sampling error
by the survey was magnified by iterative computation of
the participation rates employed in the Bureau’s esti
mates. In any event, the transition probabilities should
be adjusted to make them consistent with known par
ticipation rates.
If the labor force participation rates and transition
probabilities used in the new model are made consistent
with published participation rates for 1977 (see appen
dix), significantly different worklife expectancies are
obtained. Table 2 presents a comparison between the
Bureau’s 1977 worklife figures and the revised figures
calculated by the author. (Results of the author’s calcu
lations for single years of age are available on request.)
The adjusted transition probabilities are used solely to
distinguish people who are currently in the labor force
from those who are not. These probabilities do not af
fect “all person” worklife expectancies, because there is
no justification for such an effect, unless observed tran
sition is seen as a predictor of future participation
Table 2. BLS worklife estimates compared with revised
figures based on published labor force rates, by sex and
labor force status, 1977
Table 3. Changes in men’s worklife expectancies by age
during 1970-77, as estimated by BLS and as revised
[in years]
16
20
30
40
50
60
70
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
1970
1977
Difference
1970
1977
Difference
41.4
39.4
31.2
23.2
14.8
7.4
5.4
38.5
36.8
29.2
20.3
11.7
4.3
.9
-2 .9
-2 .6
-2 .0
-2 .9
-3.1
-3.1
-4 .5
41.4
39.4
31.2
23.2
14.8
7.4
5.4
41.3
39.0
30.7
21.6
13.0
5.6
1.2
-0.1
-0 .4
-0 .5
-1 .6
1.8
-1 .8
4.2
which somehow invalidates currently observed partici
pation rates.
As previously indicated, worklife estimates consistent
with published participation rates are substantially
greater for men and slightly lower for young women
than those issued by the Bureau last year. Additionally,
Table 3, which presents the original estimates and the
revised figures for the 1970-77 trends in worklife expec
tancy for men, indicates that, while labor force partici
pation has indeed fallen for older men, the drop is less
than originally reported.
The increment-decrement model remains a useful tool
for distinguishing the work expectancies of persons now
in the labor force from those of persons who are not.
However, it adds no information to the conventional
model for predicting the worklife of “all persons.” In any
case, if the model is applied correctly, the estimates
should be consistent with known labor force participa
tion.
Methodological appendix. The labor force participation
rates for specific ages were obtained by solving the 10th
degree polynomial:
10
f(x ) = 2 a x j
i=0
where x is age and f i x ) is the fraction of those born
who are in the labor force at exact age x. The solution
for the 11 coefficients, a., is possible because
[in years]
Sex and
age
Men:
Age 16
Age 20
Age 30
Age 40
Age 50
Age 60
Age 70
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
All persons
In labor force
BLS
Revised
Difference
BLS
38.5
36.8
29.2
20.3
11.7
4.3
0.9
41.3
39.0
30.7
21.6
13.0
5.6
1.2
+2.8
+2.2
+ 1.5
+ 1.3
+ 1.3
+ 1.3
+0.3
39.6
37.3
29.3
20.4
12.2
5.2
2.6
Revised
42.2
39.4
30.7
21.7
13.4
6.6
2.5
/ v/(x)dx
Not in labor force
BLS
38.1
35.9
27.2
16.9
7.2
1.9
0.6
Revised
40.6
37.8
28.6
18.3
8.7
2.8
0.7
Revised figures
BLS estimates
Age
U
is k n o w n for th e eigh t age grou p s ( 1 6 -1 7 , 1 8 -1 9 , 2 0 -2 4 ,
2 5 -3 4 , 3 5 -4 4 , 4 5 -5 4 , 5 5 -6 4 , an d > 6 5 ) an d b ecau se it
w as a ssu m ed that / ( 9 9 ) = 0, th at th e BLS figure for
J i 75) is correct, an d th at th e BLS figure for
/
°° /(x)dx
75
Women:
Age 16
Age 20
Age 30
Age 40
Age 50
Age 60
Age 70
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
27.7
26.0
19.9
13.7
7.5
2.5
0.5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27.3
25.3
19.1
13.4
7.8
3.1
0.6
-0 .4
-0 .7
-0 .8
-0 .3
+0.3
+0.6
+0.1
28.8
26.7
20.9
14.9
9.2
4.4
2.4
28.2
25.9
20.1
14.6
9.6
5.3
2.3
27.4
25.2
18.2
11.4
4.9
1.2
0.2
26.7
24.4
17.6
11.5
5.5
1.6
0.3
is correct.
Given that
(1)
At+1 = (AA)At + (IA)It,
35
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Communications
where A t is the number of active persons at age t, I t is
the number of inactive persons, (AA) is the fraction of
active persons who remain active until the next age
(t+ 1), and (IA) is the fraction of inactives who become
active; and, given that all those alive, N f are either ac
tive or inactive:
(2)
N t = A, + It;
given that the participation rate, Wt, is the fraction of
those alive who are active:
(3)
and, given that the probability of remaining alive for
one year, Pt, is:
(4)
Pt =
Sh ir l e y
then it follows that:
(A A ) = P ,^ ± 1
- Q r - l )
(IA).
That is, if mortality and participation rates are known
(that is, P and W are given), then the transition proba
bilities, (AA) and (IA) cannot equal just any values
which happen to appear in a sample. If those values do
not lie along the line segment defined by equation 5,
then either they or the underlying mortality and partici
pation rates must be incorrect.
In fact, the transition probabilities used in the BLS es
timates for males lie mainly below this locus (like B):
A first attempt to adjust the BLS transition probabilities
minimally by moving to the locus perpendicularly (B to
D) led to some negative figures (C to E). Therefore, it
was decided to adjust all figures proportionately (B to
D' and C to E '):
□
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor force participation rates
are not the relevant factor
N
Nt
36
1Shirley J. Smith, “New worklife estimates reflect changing profile
of labor force,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , March 1982, pp. 15-20.
2H a n dbook o f L a b o r Statistics, Bulletin 2070 (Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics, 1980), pp. 8-9.
3See Smith, “New worklife estimates,” table 3, p. 17.
4 See Shirley J. Smith, N ew W orklife E stim ates, Bulletin 2157 (Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1982), table 4A, p. 10. An example of an
implicit participation rate for 20-year-old men would be
63,850/96,892 = 75.1 percent, well below the 86.7 percent actually
observed for such persons.
w = — ;
Nt
(5)
--------- F O O T N O T E S ----------
J.
Sm it h
The new BLS worklife estimates presented in my article
in the March 1982 issue of the Review are the result of
a computer simulation spelling out the lifetime implica
tions of age-specific mortality, labor force entry, and
exit rates which prevailed in this country during 1977.
They were derived using a new model, known as the in
crement-decrement working life table. This model was
tested against its predecessor, the conventional worklife
model, and judged superior because of its explicit allow
ance for movement into and out of the job market at
midlife. (The earlier technique had estimated worklife
expectancies and entry and exit rates from a cross-sec
tional profile of labor force activity rates. This entailed
assuming continuous labor force involvement from age
of first entry to age of final retirement.)
The preceding critique by John L. Finch maintains
that, because the labor force participation rates implicit
in the new 1977 working life tables do not match annu
al average rates for the year published elsewhere by BLS,
the worklife expectancies displayed in these tables are
wrong. To paraphrase his argument, the implicit rates
for men are too low and those for women are somewhat
high. As a result, “incorrect ‘transition probabilities’ . . .
are obtained.” He states that, through biased entry and
exit rates, errors are passed on to the worklife expectan
cy figures. According to Finch, the 1977 tables under
state the length of working life for men and overstate
that of younger women.
Finch makes a number of valid observations which,
on first reading, seem to substantiate his claim. He is
correct in noting that, if the participation rates and
Shirley J. Smith is a demographic statistician in the Division of Labor
Force Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
mortality rates were the same in the old and new mod
els, their population-based expectancies would also be
identical. In reality, when the two models are applied to
data for the same year they yield quite different esti
mates. Furthermore, he is correct in observing that the
two contain different schedules of implicit participation
rates. He may even be correct in asserting that the in
crement-decrement activity rates for men are somewhat
low, due to understatement of labor force retention.
However, I would take issue with Finch’s quick solu
tion, which implies knowledge of the precise magnitude
and character of this understatement. He maintains that
the link between annual average participation rates and
transition probabilities is tautological, such that the
“correct” probabilities would explain age-to-age differ
ences (as between cells a and b or b and c) in the activi
ty rates described in exhibit 1. Building on this
supposed relationship he forces BLS figures through an
additional iteration to bring them into line with the
cross-sectional profile of labor force activity for 1977.
This is accomplished by:
1. Reestimating the size of the model labor force at
each age (that is, multiplying the number of life ta
ble survivors to that age by the annual average par
ticipation rates published for that age group).1
2. Using conventional formulae to revise the personyears of activity estimates accordingly.
3. Recomputing worklife expectancies on the basis of
these values.
4. Determining discrepancies between the size of the la
bor force in his revised estimates and that embodied
in the 1977 increment-decrement tables from BLS.
(Differences are taken to indicate the magnitude of
misstatement in transition probabilities.)
5. Adjusting the probabilities of labor force entry and
exit accordingly, to take account of the apparent
“error.”
A closer look at this revision process shows that
Finch has actually reestimated worklife durations using
the conventional model. Steps 1 through 3 exactly repli
cate worklife derivation in that model. His “revised in
crement-decrement figures” no longer rest on observed
transition probabilities, but instead are drawn from
E xhibit 1. H ypothetical labor force activity rates under
lying the Finch and BLS w orklife tables
A ge
x -
1
X
X +
1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1977
an n u al
averages
(Finch)
1977
January
(B LS)
1978
January
(BLS)
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
cross-sectional activity rates.2 (The increment-decrement
technique actually derives participation levels from tran
sition probabilities, and not vice versa.)
Furthermore, steps 4 and 5 rework the model input
(observed rates of labor force entry and exit), then pres
ent the same data in an adjusted form as model output.
But because the figures have been significantly altered,
they are no longer really observed values. The observed
values are lost.
Such adjustments might be warranted in a stable
population, where age-specific activity rates never
changed— for example, if a = d = g ; b = e = h ; and c = f =
i in exhibit 1. But with rates changing over time, the ac
tivity level of persons aged x (cell h) is a function of the
same group’s activity level 1 year earlier (cell d), and
not that of persons aged x —1 at the same point in time
(cell g). The more rapidly activity rates change, the
more Finch’s cross-sectional approach introduces its
own bias.
To elaborate a little further, the real-world activity
rate of persons aged x is a function of three things: (1)
their present age (the “age effect”), (2) the current eco
nomic and social climate (the “period effect”), and (3)
the group’s unique work experience accumulated over
previous ages (the “cohort effect”). The last set of fac
tors is very important. The share of a birth cohort ac
tive at age x is the cumulative result of net labor force
entries and exits made by group members during each
previous year of life. To use an obvious example, the
share of all 38-year-old women active in 1978 was de
termined by labor force entry and exit rates of 37-yearolds in 1977, 27-year-olds in 1967, 17-year-olds in 1957,
and so on. It had nothing to do with entry and exit
rates of 16- to 36-year-old women in 1977.
The new working life table is an artificial construct
which attempts to eliminate cohort effects. It focuses
directly on age and period factors. Working with a hy
pothetical “stable population” (that is, one in which
age-specific rates never change), it spells out the lifetime
implications of labor force entry and exit rates observed
in the reference year— in this case, 1977.
If those rates have been constant over the lifetime of
a real cohort, model and observed labor force activity
rates will necessarily match. But this is never the case.
Any marked trend upward or downward in entry or
exit rates will cause real and model activity rates to di
verge. One would expect this result in a model based on
labor force mobility rates. For instance, in the case of
38-year-old women, the worklife model for 1977 implies
a higher activity rate than was observed in the real co
hort during that year. This is because the labor force
entry and retention rates of 1977, used to define the
model’s active population, were much higher than those
experienced by the real cohort between 1956 and 1976.
Because we wish to look at the implications of work
37
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Communications
patterns in 1977, it is to our advantage to weed out
those earlier cohort factors. The trends are less obvious
for men, but the same factors pertain.
There may be merit in Finch’s observation that the
activity rates of men in the 1977 tables are somewhat
low. However, the character of biases in the transition
matrix cannot be identified solely from a cross-sectional
profile of activity rates, nor can the biases be eliminated
by a simple prorating procedure. There are several key
problems yet to confront in the area of worklife, such
as how best to quantify person-years of work, and how
to move from a period to a longitudinal model. Finetuning the activity rates will not bring us any closer to
38
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
a solution of these problems. Nonetheless, we will cer
tainly give further thought to the question of implicit
participation rates as we continue to refine b l s worklife
estimates.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------' His activity rates are not actually the official BLS estimates. At
least some of the difference in estimates may be attributed to this fact.
For men 62 to 68, Finch’s values are as much as 10 to 15 percentage
points higher than BLS figures.
2For a discussion of the conventional model and the reasons it is
no longer used at BLS, see Shirley J. Smith, Tables o f W orking L ife:
The Increm en t-D ecrem ent M odel, Bulletin 2135 (Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics, 1982).
A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supple
ment, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be
considered for publication, communications should be factual and an
alytical, not polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed
to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212.
Research
Summaries
Compensation cost increases:
slowdown continues in 1982
W
il l ia m
R . B a il e y
Most Bureau of Labor Statistics measures of compensa
tion cost and its components showed markedly deceler
ating rates of increase in 1982, as the recession that
began in m id-1981 continued. The Employment Cost
Index ( e c i ) recorded a 1982 increase in employer costs
for compensation (wages, salaries, and employee benefits)
in private industry of 6.4 percent, down sharply from
9.8 percent in 1981. M ajor collective bargaining settle
ments in private industry provided the lowest average
wage adjustments ever recorded since the series began
in 1968.1 Gross average hourly earnings rose 5.0 per
cent, compared with 7.3 percent in 1981, and gross
weekly earnings rose 4.7 percent, following a 6.1-percent rise a year earlier. However, when adjusted for infla
tion, measures of real compensation and earnings
reversed declines that began in 1978, because price in
creases in 1982 slowed even more than wage increases.
(See table 1.)
The dampened 1982 increases in compensation costs
resulted from a combination of economic forces that are
difficult to isolate. These forces included the recession,
which had a pervasive impact throughout the labor
market, and conditions specific to certain industries,
such as competition from imports in auto manufactur
ing and increased competition in trucking resulting
from deregulation.
Pervasive dampening of increases
The ECI for 1982 provides data on compensation cost
trends by occupation, industry, and collective bargain
ing status. The following tabulation shows the percent
change in compensation costs in private industry for the
year ending in December of 1981 and 1982.
1981
1982
W hite-collar w o r k e r s ....................................
Blue-collar w o r k e r s .......................................
Service workers .............................................
10.1
9.6
9.3
6.5
6.1
8.4
M anufacturing in d u s tr y ..............................
N onm anufacturing in d u s t r y .....................
9.8
9.7
6.2
6.6
U n i o n ..................................................................
N o n u n i o n .........................................................
10.7
9.4
7.2
6.0
The declines in the rate of increase in private-sector
compensation costs were pervasive among all broad oc
cupational and industry groups, as well as among union
and nonunion groups.
Wage and salary trends. More detailed ECI series by oc
cupation and industry are limited to the wage and sala
ry components of compensation. These series provide
additional evidence of the widespread nature of the de
celeration in 1982 rates of increase. The data show, for
instance, that the deceleration was not limited to labor
force groups usually considered most sensitive to busi
ness cycle influences (for example, unskilled workers or
workers in durable goods manufacturing). Virtually all
other series showed slowdowns as well— notably
Table 1.
Changes in employee wages and compensation,
1976-82
[In percent]
Measure
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
Employment Cost Index:1
Compensation:2
Current dollars .............
Constant dollars ...........
Wages and salaries:
Current dollars .............
Constant dollars ...........
—
—
—
—
9.8
-2 .4
9.8
1.0
6.4
2.4
7.2
2.3
7.0
0.2
7.7
-1 .2
8.7
-4.1
9.0
-3.1
8.8
0.1
6.3
2.3
Gross Average Hourly Earnings:3
Current dollars ..................
Constant d o lla rs ...............
7.7
2.7
7.6
0.8
9.2
0.2
8.0
-4 .7
8.8
-3.4
7.3
-1.2
5.0
1.0
Gross Average Weekly Earnings:3
Current d o lla rs ..................
Constant d o lla rs ...............
6.8
1.9
7.6
0.7
8.9
-0.1
7.4
-5 .3
7.9
-4.1
6.1
-2.4
4.7
0.8
1Covers private industry workers, excluding farm and household.
2 In addition to wages and salaries, includes changes in the cost of employee benefits.
3Covers production and nonsupervisory workers in private nonfarm establishments.
William R. Bailey is an economist in Office of Wages and Industrial
Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N ote : Changes are for the 12-month period ending in December. Dashes indicate data
not available.
39
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Research Summaries
Table 2.
1981-82
Employment Cost Index for wages and salaries,
[In percent]
Series
1981
1982
Private industry workers1 .................................................
8.8
6.3
By occupational group:
White-collar workers ........................................................
Professional and technical w o rk e rs .............................
Managers and administrators ......................................
Salesworkers ..............................................................
Clerical workers............................................................
Blue-collar w o rke rs..........................................................
Craft and kindred workers ..........................................
Operatives, except transport........................................
Transport equipment operatives .................................
Nonfarm laborers..........................................................
Service workers ..............................................................
9.1
10.7
8.6
7.5
8.9
8.6
8.5
9.0
7.8
7.9
8.3
6.4
7.0
6.3
4.2
7.1
5.6
6.6
5.0
4.1
4.4
8.5
By Industry division:
Manufacturing...................................................................
Durables.......................................................................
Nondurables ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing............................................................
Construction ................................................................
Transportation and public utilities.................................
Wholesale and retail trade ..........................................
Wholesale tra d e .......................................................
Retail trade ..............................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te .............................
Services .......................................................................
8.7
9.2
7.7
9.0
8.8
8.4
7.6
7.8
7.5
9.9
10.6
5.6
5.6
5.8
6.5
5.2
7.2
4.8
6.2
4.1
6.5
8.0
By bargaining status:
U n io n ................................................................................
Manufacturing ..............................................................
Nonmanufacturing ........................................................
Nonunion .........................................................................
Manufacturing ..............................................................
Nonmanufacturing .......................................................
9.6
8.9
10.2
8.5
8.3
8.6
6.5
5.8
7.1
6.1
5.6
6.2
1 Excludes farm and household workers.
N ote :
Changes are for the 12-month period ending in December.
white-collar workers and nonmanufacturing industries.2
(See table 2.)
Among occupational categories, the 1982 slowdown
in wage increases was pronounced for transport equip
ment and other operatives and nonfarm laborers. Their
rates fell to 53-56 percent of their 1981 increase. These
were also the groups with the highest unemployment
rates among private industry workers. The wage slow
down for salesworkers, however, was equally severe—
the rate of increase was also about half as large as it
had been in 1981 (4.2 compared with 7.5 percent).
Salesworkers’ earnings are one of the most volatile ECI
series because they reflect fluctuations in commissions.
The slowdown in wage increases extended to all in
dustry divisions for which separate data are available.
The greatest slowdown was in the retail trade industry,
where the 12-month rate of change fell from 7.5 percent
in 1981 to 4.1 percent in 1982. Construction and dura
ble manufacturing also showed marked slowdowns.
A look at wage trends by bargaining status reveals
that both nonunion and union workers experienced a
slowing in the rate of wage increase in about the same
degrees. The 12-month rate for nonunion workers fell
from 8.5 percent in December 1981 to 6.1 percent in
December 1982 (about a 28-percent drop). The union
40
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
rate declined from 9.6 percent to 6.5 percent (a 32-percent drop). For both groups, the rates of increase re
corded by the ECI in 1982 were the lowest since these
data became available in 1976.
Negotiated wage changes. The 1982 deceleration in the
rate of wage increases in the union sector is also appar
ent in the BLS series on major collective bargaining set
tlements in private industry. Wage adjustments
negotiated in 1982 covered 3.3 million workers and
were the lowest since 1968, averaging 3.8 percent for
the first contract year and 3.6 percent over the life of
the contract. The adjustment rates for the recent 3-year
bargaining cycle are shown below:
1979 1980 1981 1982
Adjustment in first-year............ . 7.4
Adjustment over life-of-contract . 6.0
9.5
7.1
9.8
7.9
3.8
3.6
Rates of change were dampened by the fact that about
one-third of the workers in major 1982 bargaining situ
ations will receive no specified wage increases over the
life of their contracts. Even when increases were speci
fied in contracts, they were the lowest (averaging 5.7
percent) since 1973— a year of wage and price controls.3
Wage adjustments which actually became effective
under all major contracts (stemming from current set
tlements, cost-of-living adjustments, and deferred in
creases for prior-year contracts) were also dampened in
1982, as shown in the following tabulation of effective
wage adjustments:
1979 1980 1981 1982
Total adjustment........................
Adjustments resulting from—
Current settlement..............
Prior settlement ................
Cost-of-living adjustments .
9.1
9.9
9.5
6.8
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.6
3.5
2.8
2.5
3.8
3.2
1.7
3.6
1.4
The adjustments were held down by the low adjust
ments from current settlements and by reduced cost-ofliving adjustments resulting from the lower rate of
consumer price increases. Deferred adjustments in 1982
remained high, however, because they reflected specified
wage adjustments negotiated in prior years.
Constant-doilar trend
Although the rate of wage increases slowed substan
tially in 1982, the result, when adjusted for inflation,
was more favorable to workers than it had been in sev
eral years. Wages as measured by the ECI rose 6.3 per
cent, the lowest over-the-year increase since 1976, but
consumer prices rose even less, 3.9 percent. Therefore,
real wages recorded their first substantial over-the-year
increase since 1976— 2.3 percent. In the interim years,
real wages as measured by the ECI were stable or de
clined by as much as 4.1 percent (1979). (See table 1.)
Measures covering the gross average hourly earnings
and gross average weekly earnings of production and
nonsupervisory workers in the private nonfarm econo
my also showed improvement when adjusted for infla
tion. (See table l.)4 Because these measures do not
isolate employment shifts among occupations and in
dustries with different wage levels, they include the im
pact of the 1982 recession on the earnings of production
or nonsupervisory workers. A recession typically retards
the increase in average earnings because of employment
reductions in high-paying cyclically-sensitive industries
and the reduction of premium-paid hours. Weekly earn
ings are further reduced by shorter workweeks.
Reflecting these influences, real average hourly earn
ings declined through m id-1982, but finished the year
with a 1.0-percent gain for the 12 months ending in De
cember. For average weekly earnings, the recessionary
impact was slightly more pronounced because of the ad
ditional effects of a shortened workweek, which is an al
ternative to layoffs when demand is reduced. Real
average weekly earnings finished the year with an in
crease of 0.8 percent, a sharp contrast to the 2.4-percent
decline of 1981, and declines of 4.1 percent and 5.3 per
cent for 1980 and 1979.
□
' For a description of the Employment Cost Index and collective
bargaining data, see the explanatory notes for Wage and Compensa
tion Data in the Current Labor Statistics section of this Review.
2In this report, the indicator of the degree of slowdown in a rate of
increase is the ratio of the 1982 rate to the 1981 rate.
3For a complete review of bargaining in 1982, see Mary Anne An
drews and David Schlein, “Bargaining calendar will be heavy in
1982,” M o n th ly L a b o r Review , December 1981, pp. 21-31, and
George Ruben, “Collective bargaining in 1982: results dictated by
economy.” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , January 1983, pp. 29-37.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
“Unlike the ECI, the average hourly and average weekly earnings
series do not standardize the unit of labor services for which earnings
are measured. Earnings measures are influenced by shifts between
high- and low-paying jobs, changes in hours paid at premium rates,
and, for weekly earnings, changes in the length of the workweek.
Therefore, they reflect not only changes in rates of pay as such, but
also the employment effects of business cycle expansions and contrac
tions on the earnings of employed labor.
41
Research Notes
Benchmark unemployment
In Estimating Benchmark Unemployment fo r the 1980's,
John E. Connaughton and Roger A. Madsen (both of the
University of North Carolina-Charlotte) present a meth
od for determining the level of “benchmark unemploy
ment” — frictional and structural unemployment— in
the 1980’s.
The authors trace the evolution of the concept of
benchmark (that is, noncyclical) unemployment from
President Kennedy’s Council of Economic Advisors,
who proposed a 4-percent benchmark in 1961, through
the Nixon Administration advisors (5 percent), to the
Carter Administration advisors who, using novel
weighting procedures, suggested a 4.9-percent bench
mark. The authors cite other and usually higher bench
marks proposed, including those of the Reagan Admin
istration advisors.
Connaughton and Madsen point out that most
analysts agree that benchmark unemployment has risen
over time. These analysts attribute the rise to several
factors, but particularly emphasize the effect of the
change in the labor force because of increased propor
tions of women and teenage workers who have higher
unemployment rates than prime age men (25 to 54
years).
Connaughton and Madsen propose a model for deter
mining benchmark unemployment that includes the ra
tio of the demographic mix of workers, the ratio of
prices to unit labor costs, the noninstitutional popula
tion 16 years and over, annualized real Gross National
Product, lagged unemployment of the civilian labor
force, and a randomly distributed unexplained residual.
The authors also specify the following factors to esti
mate the demographic mix: average years of completed
schooling of females, the ratio of manufacturing em
ployment to total employment, the proportion of adult
females with spouse present, the noninstitutional civilian
labor force, and again, an unexplained residual. A ration
ale is provided for the selection of each factor of each
equation.
The authors estimate that benchmark unemployment
at the threshold of the 1980’s was 6.7 percent, a rise of
2.7 percentage points since the Kennedy advisors
suggested 4 percent in 1961. The authors caution that:
“The findings which suggest that the benchmark rate
“Research Notes” are brief reports on selected research published
elsewhere that is related to the work of the Bureau. They are prepared
by the author(s), the MLR staff, or others.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
has increased from 4.0 percent in 1961 to 6.7 percent in
1981 in no way imply that 6.7 percent is an acceptable
rate of unemployment. The 6.7 percent represents the
unemployment rate, or benchmark rate, below which
the economy can be expected to feel significant infla
tionary pressure caused by labor market tightness. To
reduce unemployment below 6.7 percent without infla
tionary pressure, micro rather than macro policies must
be followed to increase productivity and labor market
efficiency.”
This paper was presented at the 95th annual (winter
1982) meeting of the American Economic Association.
—Robert Fisher, M L R .
The R&D - productivity link
The well-documented slowdown in the growth of the
U.S. productivity over the last decade was accompanied
by dampened growth in company-financed research and
development. In R&D and Declining Productivity
Growth, F.M. Scherer, professor of economics at
Swarthmore College, examines the link between the two
factors.
Corporate research and development is a profit-seek
ing activity, but its returns are apparent only after a
considerable lag. Citing an earlier study, the author says
that David Ravenscraft and Scherer found that peak re
turns generally accrue 4 to 6 years after r &d spending
takes place. Effects of the lag may be seen in R&D activ
ity patterns over the last decade: during the early
1970’s, firms responded to depressed returns to R&D by
cutting back their R&D spending relative to sales, and
concentrating on relatively high-yield projects. When
healthy returns on this leaner portfolio of R&D projects
began to materialize during the second half of the de
cade, firms were encouraged to expand their R&D activi
ties, with the result that real growth in R&D spending
has been about 5.7 percent per year since 1979.
Assessing the importance of R&D in productivity
growth is difficult because the benefits of an innovation
tend to be greater for society as a whole than for the in
novating industry, the author observes. About threefourths of all company-financed industrial R&D is ori
ented toward the creation of products which are sold to
other industries, often at prices which have been driven
down by competition from other innovating firms. To
the extent that industries which purchase new products
share in the benefits of the selling industry’s R&D, the
true productivity contribution of innovators is under
stated.
Scherer has used a matrix structure to measure the
interindustry technology flows which arose from 1974
R&D expenditures. On the basis of these results, regres
sions were constructed to estimate the marginal produc
tivity of the economy’s R&D capital stock over the last
two decades. In almost all cases, the marginal produc
tivity of R&D for the society as a whole was found to
have been higher during 1973-78 than during the more
bullish 1964-69 period, in apparent contrast to the situ
ation for individual firms and industries. Scherer esti
mates that the previously noted contraction in
corporate R&D expenditures during the early to
mid-1970’s has cost the economy at least .20 to .28 per
centage point of the productivity growth that would
have resulted if spending had continued to increase at
rates posted during the 1960’s. And because of the
characteristic lag between R&D investments and returns,
the effects of the falloff in R&D activity are likely to be
felt for several years to come.
Scherer offers two scenarios which might account for
the stagnation of R&D growth during the last decade. In
the first, R&D spending is cut back because firms have
fewer innovation opportunities or because the markets
for their innovations are crowded with similar products.
In the second, the decline in R&D results from an in
creasing divergence between its private and social re
turns brought about by intensified research competition
or more rapid imitation of new products.
To date, there is some evidence to support each inter
pretation of the slowdown in R&D activity. But, says
Scherer, definitive conclusions about, and prescriptions
for, the problem will not be possible until U.S. statisti
cal series related to productivity and to technology
flows are considerably improved.
This paper was presented at the winter 1982 meetings
of the American Economic Association and is scheduled
to appear in the Proceedings of those meetings. —Mary
Military spending
K. Rieg, M L R .
—Anna H. Hill, M L R .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In Economic Consequences o f Military Spending, Faye
Duchin of the Institute of Economic Analysis, New
York University, examines the impact of military spend
ing on employment in the United States and on the
world economy if such spending is increased or de
creased.
Statistical data are presented which show the propor
tion of total employment generated by military spend
ing in 1968 (the peak year for military spending in
Vietnam) and in 1979, and the industry and occupation
al composition of employment created by military
spending in 1968 and 1977.
In analyzing the effect of military spending on the
world economy, the author presents several alternative
scenarios of hypothetical increases and decreases in mil
itary spending. The base scenario uses the recent trends
in military bbspending to project into the future. Sce
nario 1 reduces military spending in all regions below
that of the base in each year from 1981 to 2000, result
ing, nonetheless, in real increases in military expendi
tures over the 20-year period. In this scenario, a portion
of the “savings” (from the reduced military spending) is
transferred from rich developed regions to the poorest,
least-developed regions in the form of economic aid. In
scenario 2, the real military expenditures are continually
reduced and the entire “savings” are transferred to the
poorest regions.
Personal consumption to the year 2000 for each sce
nario is projected for the world, the developed
countries, and the four poorest regions (“arid” Africa,
“low-income” Asia, “resource-poor” Latin America,
and “tropical” Africa) which, according to the scenar
ios, would receive the additional aid.
This paper was presented at the 95th annual (winter
1982) meeting of the American Economic Association.
[]]
43
M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
This list of selected collective bargaining agreements expiring in July is based on contracts on file in
the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering 1,000
workers or more.
Employer and location
Number of
workers
Labor organization1
Industry
M in in g ...........................................
Oil, Chemical and Atomic W orkers
. .
2,300
Transportation equipment . . . .
Federal Labor Union ..............................
3,000
C o n stru ctio n ................................
C o n stru ctio n ................................
Carpenters ................................................
Bricklayers ................................................
7,000
3,500
1,700
Bowaters Southern Paper Corp. (Calhoun, T e n n . ) ...........................................
P a p e r ..............................................
1,100
Briggs and Stratton Corp. (Milwaukee, Wis.) ...................................................
Brooklyn Union Gas Co. (New Y o r k ) .................................................................
Machinery ...................................
U tiliti e s ........................................
Paperworkers; Electrical Workers
(iBEw)
Allied Industrial W o r k e r s .....................
Transport W o rk e rs ...................................
7,900
2,350
California Metal Trades Association (C a lifo rn ia)..............................................
C arborundum Co., 7 Divisions (Niagara Falls, N .Y .) ......................................
Crucible, Inc. (New York and Pennsylvania) ...................................................
C o n stru ctio n ................................
Stone, clay, and glass products
Primary metals ...........................
B oilerm akers..............................................
Oil, Chemical and Atomic W orkers . .
Steelworkers ..............................................
1,200
1,950
4,900
Dresser Industries, Inc., Harbison-W alker Refractories (Interstate)
Stone, clay, and glass products
Steelworkers ..............................................
1,400
E. J. Brach and Sons, Inc. (Chicago, 111.)...........................................................
Food products
Teamsters (Ind.)
......................................
3,200
Firestone Tire and R ubber Co., Firestone Steel Products Co. Division
(W yandotte, Mich.)
Floor Covering Association of Southern California and 3 others (California)
FM C Corp., N orthern Ordnance Division (Fridley, M in n .)...........................
Fred Meyer, Inc. (O re g o n )......................................................................................
Transportation equipment . . . .
A uto W o r k e r s ...........................................
1,050
C o n stru ctio n ................................
Fabricated metal products . . .
Retail trade ................................
Painters ......................................................
A uto W o rk e rs ...........................................
Food and Commercial W o r k e r s ...........
1,850
2,300
1,800
General Refractories Co. (I n te r s ta te )...................................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products
Steelworkers ..............................................
1,100
Industry Food Agreement (Arizona)2 ...................................................................
Retail trade
................................
Food and Commercial W o r k e r s ...........
4,400
Kaiser Steel Corp., Steel M anufacturing Division (Fontana, Calif.) ...........
Kelsey-Hayes Co., Heintz Division (Pennsylvania)...........................................
Kimberly-Clark Corp. (Memphis, T e n n . ) ...........................................................
Kroger Co. (Indiana) ..............................................................................................
Primary metals ...........................
Fabricated metal products . . .
P a p e r ..............................................
Retail trade ................................
Steelworkers ..............................................
A uto W o r k e r s ...........................................
Paperworkers ...........................................
Food and Commercial W o r k e r s ...........
5,550
1,000
1,100
2,000
M cGraw-Edison Co., Power Systems Division (Canonsburg, Pa.) .............
M irro Aluminum Co. (M anitowoc and Two Rivers, Wis.) ...........................
M ontgomery W ard and Co., Inc. (Baltimore, M d.) ........................................
Electrical p ro d u c ts ......................
Fabricated metal products . . .
Retail trade ................................
Steelworkers ..............................................
Steelworkers ..............................................
Teamsters (Ind.) ......................................
1,450
1,750
1,550
National Tea Co., Standard Grocery Division (Illinois and In d ia n a )...........
Retail trade
Food and Commercial W o r k e r s ...........
1,100
Pipeline C ontractors Association of California and Associated General
C ontractors of California (California)
C o n stru ctio n ................................
Plumbers
1,500
Restaurant Association State of W ashington, Inc., and Independents
(Washington)
Restaurants
Hotel Employees and R estaurant Em
ployees
1,550
Sand and Gravel Producers (Louisiana)2 ...........................................................
Teamsters (Ind.)
......................................
1,000
Sealed Power Corp. (Muskegon, M ic h .) ................................................... '. . . .
Southern California Association of Cabinet M anufacturers (California) . . .
Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals, except fuels
Machinery ...................................
F u r n itu r e ......................................
Auto W o rk e rs ...........................................
Carpenters ................................................
1,050
1,350
Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp., Los Angeles Division (C alifo rn ia)................
Transportation equipment . . . .
M arine and Shipbuilding Workers
. . .
4,000
Weyerhaeuser Co. (Plymouth, N.C.) ...................................................................
W hite Pine Copper Co. (White Pine, M ic h .) ......................................................
Winery Employers Association (California) ......................................................
P a p e r ..............................................
M in in g ...........................................
Food products ...........................
Paperworkers; Operating Engineers . . .
Steelworkers ..............................................
Distillery W o r k e r s ...................................
1,600
1,050
2,000
American Metal Climax, Inc., Climax Molybdenum Co. Division (Climax,
Colo.)
A. O. Smith Corp. (Milwaukee, Wis.) .................................................................
Associated General Contractors of America, Inc.:
M assachusetts Chapter and 3 others ..............................................................
M assachusetts Chapter and 7 others ..............................................................
...........
'A ffiliated with A F L -C IO except where noted as independent (Ind.).
Digitized for44
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
...........................
................................
................................
...................................................
in d u s try area (group of companies signing same contract).
Developments in
Industrial Relations
Pattern contract in copper mining and processing
An expected pattern setter for the 1983 round of
bargaining in the copper mining and processing indus
try was established when a coalition of 13 unions set
tled with Kennecott Corp. for 4,000 employees in Utah,
Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Maryland. The
new contract freezes wages and benefits for its 3-year
term, except for possible quarterly pay adjustments re
sulting from the cost-of-living clause, which was contin
ued. There will be some reductions in benefits for
workers hired after the July 1 effective date of the ac
cord. The reduction will not apply to any of the compa
ny’s 4,000 laid-off employees who are rehired.
Kennecott, which operated at a loss in 1982, had
initially pressed the Steelworkers and the other unions
for wage-and-benefit concessions similar to those the
Steelworkers had accepted in negotiations with major
steel producers. (See Monthly Labor Review, May 1983,
pp. 47-48.)
A spokesman for the union coalition called the settle
ment “a major victory in holding the line . . . [and]
protecting jobs and benefits.”
The coalition was continuing to bargain with ASARCO,
Phelps-Dodge Corp., Inspiration Consolidated Copper
Co., and other companies, where current contracts also
expire at the end of June. Currently, about 24,000 mem
bers of the union are employed in the industry, com
pared with 45,000 when the downturn began in 1981.
Concessions smaller at Allegheny Ludlum
Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp., which had withdrawn
from the Coordinating Committee Steel Companies (an
association of major steel companies) and the Steel
workers union negotiated a contract that provided for a
smaller wage concession than the Coordinating Com
mittee’s agreement. The pay cut at Allegheny Ludlum
was 50 cents an hour, which will be restored in incre
ments of 18 cents an hour in April 1984, 14 cents in
April 1985, and 18 cents in April 1986. (See Monthly
Labor Review, May 1983, pp. 47-48, for terms of the
“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.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
February settlement for the seven Coordinating Com
mittee Steel Companies, which included a $1.25 an hour
temporary pay cut.)
The Allegheny Ludlum accord also differed from the
Coordinating Committee’s settlement by instituting a
company payment of 25 cents an hour into individual
retirement accounts, rather than increasing company fi
nancing of supplemental unemployment benefits.
A company officiai admitted that the agreement
“isn’t as competitive as we’d like it to be.” The union
said that it was able to negotiate a smaller wage cut
with Allegheny Ludlum because the company earned a
profit in 1982, while other companies had losses.
Allegheny Ludlum has not announced why it quit the
Coordinating Committee, but union sources say the
company believed that certain bargaining goals of the
committee favored the larger companies. The Allegheny
Ludlum contract covers 5,400 workers at operations in
Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Connecticut. It expires
October 1, 1986, 2 months after the Coordinating Com
mittee’s agreements.
Volkswagen, Champion accords with UAW
More than 8,000 members of the Auto Workers
union were covered by 3-year agreements with Volks
wagen of America and Champion Spark Plug Co. that
did not provide for specified wage increases except for a
3-percent third year increase at Champion. Both compa
nies revised their automatic cost-of-living pay adjust
ment clauses. At Volkswagen, the adjustments will be
made annually during the first 2 years, reverting to
quarterly adjustments in December 1985. At Champi
on, quarterly adjustments will continue but each of the
first 10 possible adjustments will be reduced by 1 cent
an hour.
The Volkswagen contract, which covered 5,500 em
ployees (including 2,400 on layoff) at New Stanton, Pa.,
and South Charleston, W. Va., also increased company
financing of supplemental unemployment benefits, and
improved worker job security, health, and safety provi
sions.
At Champion, benefit improvements included an ad
ditional annual paid holiday and a longer paid shut
down during the Christmas-New Year’s Day period— 6
days in 1983, 7 in 1984, and 8 in 1985.
45
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Developments in Industrial Relations
The Champion settlement ended a 6-week strike and
covered operations in Toledo and Cambridge, Ohio;
Burlington, Iowa; Detroit, Mich.; and Windsor, Ontar
io, Canada.
Communication accord aids displaced workers
The Communications Workers of America ( c w a ) and
other unions’ effort to win increased job security in cur
rent negotiation with American Telephone & Telegraph
Co.’s Bell System was bolstered by c w a ’ s agreement
with General Telephone Co. of California that con
tained two forms of aid. One provides that workers
with 20 years of service who are displaced because of
technological change are entitled to immediate pensions
calculated at unreduced rates. In addition, these work
ers will receive $200 to $400 a month, varying by
length of service, for up to 4 years, and will be entitled
to $3,000 to be used to maintain insurance coverage for
up to 4 years, finance training in another field, or cover
moving expenses.
The second aid plan is available to all employees with
at least 1 year of service who decline a company request
to relocate to another job more than 50 miles away.
These workers will receive up to 36 weeks of pay, com
puted at 1 week for each of the first 10 years of service,
plus 2 weeks for each additional year. In addition, Gen
eral Telephone will pay half their insurance for the first
6 months after leaving the company, plus up to $2,500
of their retraining courses.
Other changes for the 21,000 employees included im
provement in pensions and a boost to $500,000 in life
time major medical, from $100,000. Wages also were
increased: for workers at the top of their progression
schedule, the increase was 7 percent effective March 4,
2.25 percent in October 1983, and 4 percent in March
and October 1985. The contract expires in March 1986.
Company reorganizes, nullifies contract
The 6,200 members of the United Food and Com
mercial Workers union employed by Wilson Foods
Corp. faced an uncertain future when the meatpacking
company filed for reorganization under Federal bank
ruptcy laws and cut pay by 40 to 50 percent. Kenneth
J. Griggy, chairman and chief executive officer of the
company, claimed that the filing nullified the current la
bor contract. He said the company was not going out
of business, but union leaders must understand that
“we simply cannot continue under the existing competi
tive disadvantage.” According to Griggy, Wilson’s la
bor costs of about $17 an hour were 80 percent higher
than some of its competitors, apparently referring to
Iowa Beef Processors and other firms that have entered
the industry in recent years and introduced new pro
cessing and distribution systems that undercut the costs
46
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of Wilson and other “old line” meatpackers.
Prior to the bankruptcy filing and compensation cut,
the company had discussed wage concessions with the
union that would have been at least partly offset by
adoption of profit sharing and a lump-sum payment to
workers in exchange for termination of the “burden
some” agreement provisions. According to Wilson,
these proposals were not acceptable to the union.
There was no immediate comment from the United
Food and Commercial Workers on Wilson’s contract
nullification move. The current agreement between Wil
son and the union was negotiated in late 1981 and had
been scheduled to expire in August 1985. It is similar to
contracts the union negotiated with other meatpackers, providing for no specified wage increases, sus
pension of the automatic cost-of-living pay adjustment
formula until the last day of the contract, and cuts in
pay rates for new employees.
Truckers scheduled pay increase diverted
In the trucking industry, a scheduled 33-cent-an-hour
cost-of-living pay adjustment for members of the Team
sters union was diverted to help bolster health and wel
fare plans. Such a diversion was permitted under the
February 1982 accord between Trucking Management,
Inc., the industry’s main bargaining arm, and the union.
At the time that accord was negotiated, the parties di
verted 25 cents of a 72-cent adjustment scheduled for
April 1982.
Early in 1983, the industry had sought to eliminate
the April 1983 adjustment, and to reopen the entire
contract for bargaining, contending that it needed labor
cost relief because of reduced operations and earnings.
The proposal was rejected by the union. (See Monthly
Labor Review, April 1983, p. 42.)
Elsewhere, 3,800 members of the Machinists union
covered by the Western States Truck Maintenance
Agreement had their 33-cent scheduled cost-of-living
adjustment diverted to help maintain health and welfare
and pension benefits.
Similarly, about three-fourths of the 7,500 local cart
age drivers represented by the independent Chicago
Truck Drivers Union had their scheduled 33-cent ad
justment diverted to help maintain multiemployer
health and welfare plans. The other drivers, who are
covered by separate plans maintained by individual em
ployers, had 13 cents of their scheduled 33-cent adjust
ment diverted.
Williams convicted, resigns as Teamsters head
Roy L. Williams, president of the Teamsters union
since 1981, resigned in mid-April. The action came after
a Federal district judge said the union leader could re
main free pending his appeal of a bribery-conspiracy
conviction only if he gave up the post. (See Monthly La-
bor Review, March 1983, p. 45.) Earlier, Williams had
been sentenced to a 55-year term because Federal crimi
nal rules require a maximum sentence before prison au
thorities can determine if a convict is physically able to
stand imprisonment. Williams, age 68, suffers from em
physema. Final sentencing is scheduled in June.
Jackie Presser, age 56, a vice president of the union,
was selected to complete Williams’ 5-year term of office,
which runs to June 1986. The decision by the Team
sters’ executive board was unanimous. Presser was head
of the Ohio Conference of Teamsters, as well as several
other units of the union in the State.
Public contract bans layoffs, contracting out
Employees of Milwaukee County, Wis., negotiated a
contract that bans layoffs during the first year and the
use of outside contractors during both years. In ex
change, they agreed to a single general wage increase of
3 percent, effective in the second year. The 6,500 work
ers, who are represented by the State, County and Mu
nicipal Employees, will be eligible for step or merit pay
increases in both years.
The accord was negotiated by the Personnel Commit
tee of the County Board. County Executive O’Donnell,
criticized the accord, saying the ban on layoffs severely
restricted his ability to counter possible budget deficits.
However, he did not veto the settlement, apparently be
cause he did not have the backing needed to push an al
ternative through the board.
Sugar and pineapple accords
In Hawaii, 13,000 members of the International
Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union were cov
ered by settlements with sugar and pineapple growers.
The 2-year agreement for the 7,500 sugar workers did
not provide for an immediate wage increase, but they
will receive a 30-cent-an-hour increase in February
1984. Other provisions included elimination of the Pres
idents Day paid holiday and a $300 increase (to $900)
in maximum annual dental benefits.
The 21-month pineapple accord also did not call for
an immediate wage increase, but the workers will re
ceive increases ranging from 15.5 to 23 cents in Febru
ary and July of 1984. The medical plan was improved
and the minimum monthly pension rate was increased
to $8.50 (formerly $7.50) for each year of service to 35
years, plus $4.25 (formerly $3.75) for each additional
year.
new workers. Joseph Crump, secretary-treasurer of a
United Food and Commercial Workers local union, said
the contract was accepted by the employees not because
Meijer was in financial difficulty but “with the idea that
it would help the company expand.’’ The revisions re
quire new employees to pay a small portion of the cost
of their insurance benefits and reduces their pay for
Sunday work to time and one-half. Current employees
will continue to receive double time pay for Sunday
work and insurance benefits fully financed by Meijer.
Social security system changes
Years of controversy over the financial condition of
the social security system were eased when President
Ronald Reagan signed into law a plan designed to as
sure the solvency of the system for the next 75 years.
The amendments to the 48-year-old system were devel
oped by a bipartisan National Commission on Social
Security. Among other things, the new law:
• Defers the scheduled July 1983 cost-of-living adjust
ments in benefits to January 1984 and provides that
all future annual adjustments also will be in January.
• Modifies the cost-of-living adjustments for 1985
through 1988 in cases where trust funds are less than
15 percent of the amount that will be needed for the
year. If this occurs, the adjustment will equal the rise
in the Consumer Price Index or the increase in aver
age wages, whichever is less.
• Gradually increases the normal retirement age to 67
by the year 2027.
• Increases employer and employee payroll taxes from
6.7 percent of wages to 7 percent in 1984, 7.15 per
cent in 1988, and 7.51 percent in 1989.
• Increases the tax for self-employed persons by 33 per
cent to equal the combined amount paid by
employers and employees. This increase will be offset
by a special income tax credit.
• Brings those who start work for the Federal Govern
ment after January 1, 1984, under the system.
• Brings employees of private, nonprofit organizations
under the system on January 1, 1984.
• Prohibits State and local governments from with
drawing from the system.
• Further reduces benefits for workers who retire early.
• For retired persons with adjusted gross income of
$25,000, imposes income taxes on either one-half of
the social security benefits received or one-half of the
income over $25,000, whichever is less. The base in
come is $32,000 for married couples.
Workers retain current pay to help company
Harsher penalties for union officers banned
More than 14,500 employees of Meijer Inc. super
markets throughout Michigan were covered by a con
tract that retained wage and benefit levels for current
employees, but made some concessionary changes for
Employers cannot arbitrarily discipline union officials
more severely than other workers for participating in
unauthorized work stoppages. In a unanimous decision,
the Supreme Court ruled that employers can impose
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
47
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Developments in Industrial Relations
harsher penalties on union officers in such cases only if
the labor contract specifically holds them responsible
for stopping unauthorized strikes.
The case arose in 1977 when members of Local 563
of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
refused to cross a picket line set up by members of an
Operating Engineers local at the construction site of
Metropolitan Edison Co.’s nuclear power plant near
Harrisburg, Pa. After the picketing was ended and
work resumed, Metropolitan Edison imposed 25-day
suspensions on David Lang and Gene Light, the local’s
president and vice president, and 5 to 10 days suspen
sions on about 130 other members of the local.
The company contended that the additional penalty
for Lang and Light was warranted because they had a
special duty to obey and help enforce the no-strike pro
vision in the collective bargaining agreement, even
though the agreement did not list the specific obliga
tions of union officers. The company also cited earlier
arbitration decisions on the issue.
The union then filed a complaint with the National
Labor Relations Board, which held that the more severe
penalty for Lang and Light violated provisions of the
National Labor Relations Act assuring employees the
right to hold union office. The board also said that even
if a waiver of union officers’ rights is included in a labor
contract, the waiver must be reflected in “clear and un
mistakable language.” The board’s position was af
firmed by a court of appeals, leading to the company’s
appeal to the Supreme Court.
In the opinion, written by Justice Lewis Powell, the
Supreme Court said: “If, as the company urges, an em
ployer could define unilaterally the actions that a union
official is required to take, it would give the employer
considerable leverage over the manner in which the offi
cial performs his union duties. Failure to comply with
the employer’s directions would place the official’s job
in jeopardy. But compliance might cause him to take
actions that would diminish the respect and authority
necessary to perform his job as a union official. This is
the dilemma Congress sought to avoid. We believe the
Board’s decision furthers these policies and upholds its
determination.”
48
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The company’s contention that a higher duty was re
quired of the two officers because of the earlier arbitra
tion decisions also was rejected. The court explained
that the previous arbitration decisions did not apply be
cause they had been issued during labor agreements
which specifically stated that such decisions would be
binding only “for the term of this agreement.”
Public workers not protected by ‘free speech’
Public employees who complain about their supervi
sors or working conditions are not protected by consti
tutional guarantees of free speech and can be fired,
according to the Supreme Court. The case originated in
1980, when Sheila Myers, an assistant district attorney
in New Orleans, circulated a questionnaire among fel
low employees seeking information on office morale, the
competence of supervisors, pressure on employees to
participate in political campaigns, and the need for a
grievance committee. When she was fired for this activi
ty, she began legal action. A U.S. district court ruled
that Myers’ constitutional rights had been violated and
ordered her reinstated with back pay and $1,500 in
damages. The decision was affirmed on appeal, leading
to the appeal to the Supreme Court.
Writing for the five member majority, Justice Byron
R. White said that “While . . . public officials should be
receptive to constructive criticism offered by their em
ployees, the First Amendment does not require a public
office to be run as a round table for employee com
plaints over internal office affairs.” Continuing, he said
that when a public employee speaks not on matters of
public concern, but only on “matters of personal inter
est, absent the most unusual circumstances, a Federal
court is not the appropriate forum in which to review
the wisdom of a personnel decision taken by a public
agency.. . .”
In a dissenting opinion, Justice William J. Brennan,
joined by the other three justices, said that the majority
decision would deter public employees from making
critical statements about the operation of their agencies
for fear of reprisal, depriving the public of information
needed to evaluate the performance of elected officials. □
Book Reviews
Incentives to change
Full Employment and Public Policy: The United States
and Sweden. By Helen Ginsburg. Lexington, Mass.,
D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington Books, 1983. 235
pp. $24.95.
In this highly useful book, Professor Helen Ginsburg,
of Brooklyn College of the City University of New
York, compares in rich detail the Swedish and Ameri
can approaches to employment policy. The first half of
the book is devoted to an analysis of the sources, di
mensions, and results of unemployment in the United
States, tracing the origins of the Humphrey-Hawkins
“full employment” legislation of 1978, while the second
half describes and evaluates the vast array of measures
adopted in Sweden to preserve full employment there.
Although Professor Ginsburg’s discussion of the Ameri
can economy is valuable, as a summary of the relatively
feeble steps taken to ameliorate high levels of unem
ployment and as a basis for intercountry comparisons,
by far the most intriguing chapters deal with the Swed
ish experience. These represent the most extensive and
most current examination of Sweden’s unique economic
policy now available in the United States.
The contrast between the Swedish and American
approaches is sharp. While levels of national unemploy
ment in excess of 9 and 10 percent are tolerated in the
United States, with added millions outside the labor
force despite a willingness to work or employed at jobs
that pay them only a substandard income, Swedish poli
cymakers, whether from government, labor, or business,
become deeply concerned when unemployment rises
above 2 percent. The ironies are manifold: while Ameri
cans generally pay rhetorical homage to the “work eth
ic,” our society gives relatively higher priority to socialwelfare programs and transfer payments than to the
systematic assurance of employment. Sweden, on the
other hand, has the image of a “welfare-oriented” soci
ety, but regularly emphasizes, and underwrites, the pro
vision of jobs and decries any proposed substitution of
“welfare” for “work.” Ginsburg notes that production
and investment in Sweden remain predominantly in pri
vate hands, also noting the irony that government own
ership of industry increased under the supposedly more
conservative “centrist” regime of 1976-82, after decades
of Social Democratic rule.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Full-employment policy in Sweden is a legacy of the
Keynesian-oriented Social Democratic party, but the
short-lived opposition regime of 1976-82 continued to
enforce it. Several macroeconomic and microeconomic
tools used in its implementation reflect a genuine na
tional consensus in support of the full-employment prin
ciple, according to Ginsburg. These tools include: a Na
tional Labor Market Board, with representation from
business, labor, and,government, which also supervises
24 County Labor Market Boards and the employment
service; Investment-Reserve Funds, under which compa
nies can set aside up to half of pretax profits
with substantial tax advantages, for tax-free use in ap
proved projects during recessions; accelerated public
works; stockpiling and inplant training subsidies, for
use during slack periods; job placement, information,
and training services, with mandatory listing of job
openings with the employment service; regional devel
opment or relocation grants, largely to offset higher un
employment in the northern regions; and specialized
skills training and general or remedial education
designed to meet the needs of women, youth, the handi
capped, immigrant workers, and others with unique
problems in the labor market.
When unemployment rises, “relief” indeed is provid
ed, but primarily in the form of direct job creation, at
prevailing wages and benefits and without a means test.
Sweden uses public-service employment as an antire
cession tool to a far greater extent than does the United
States, with an increasing emphasis on social service,
public health, and children’s programs in addition to
the traditional construction, forestry, and conservation
projects. Where plant closings and major layoffs are
contemplated, firms are required to give advance warn
ings, notify the local Labor Market Board and the em
ployment service, and negotiate with unions before
personnel cuts are implemented.
Like most other countries, Sweden experiences rising
and troublesome youth unemployment, although it re
mains quite low in contrast with the astronomically
high rates in the United States. Similar problems have
arisen in recent years in relation to increasing immigra
tion and a rising proportion of immigrant workers in
the labor force. In the past, Sweden has had a racially
and culturally homogeneous population, and perhaps,
as Ginsburg observes, the ultimate test of Sweden’s
49
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Book Reviews
commitment to full employment will lie in its handling
of the immigration issue. So far, the commitment has
been extended to those of immigrant background, as
well as to women and others who are newly entering
the work force.
As Ginsburg concedes, it is uncertain how much of
the Swedish system could be successfully implemented
in the United States. Unlike American workers, Swedish
workers, white- and blue-collar alike, overwhelmingly
are unionized, and there is no evidence that the equally
organized employers are intent upon “breaking” unions.
Furthermore, there is far greater social consciousness
and class unity in Sweden, where, Ginsburg notes,
higher-paid workers may accept relatively lower wage
increases in order that the lesser-paid can advance more
rapidly, surely a rare occurrence in the United States.
Nevertheless, while few would argue that all Swedish
policies are readily transferable, it is clear that a great
many valuable lessons can be learned from the Swedish
experience.
Ginsburg’s book should be read by every policymak
er dealing with the persistent problem of unemploy
ment. It demonstrates tellingly that full employment,
without inflation, can be achieved and maintained in a
capitalistic economy, provided that there is a genuine
social and political commitment to this goal.
— Pa u l Bullock
R esearch E conom ist
Institute of Industrial R elations
U niversity of California
L os A ngeles
Union activity in the U.S.S.R.
Soviet Trade Unions: Their Development in the 1970’s.
By Blair A. Ruble. New York, Cambridge Univer
sity Press, 1981. 144 pp., bibliography. $29.50.
W hat do Soviet trade unions do? That’s the question
that most Americans think of when the subject is men
tioned. What should they do? That’s the question that
has dominated Soviet thinking.
This monograph is based on the author’s doctoral
dissertation at the University of Toronto and includes
material previously published. Specialists in the Soviet
Union will find the volume most useful, and those rea
sonably informed about labor relations will not find the
material difficult. A 13-page bibliography (with citations
in Russian and English) can be consulted for further in
formation. Blair Ruble begins by reporting briefly on
the early development of unions under Lenin. As is well
known, the 1921 Communist Party Congress, after con
siderable debate, assigned the unions a dual function—
50
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
to protect workers but only within the broader goals of
the party. Under Stalin, protection of workers was
abandoned and unions turned to promoting productivi
ty. Thus, Ruble arrives at his starting point— the resur
rection of Soviet unions under Nikita Khrushchev’s
leadership, beginning in 1957.
Ruble cites and summarizes many studies and much
information on trade union activity. Almost all readers
will conclude that the Khrushchev initiative has had
some success. Union leaders now play a role in the for
mation of national labor policy. On the factory level,
the “carrot” has emerged as a substitute for the “stick.”
Pay policies tend to favor the lower-income worker, and
Ruble tells us that wage inequality has diminished. Per
haps nothing summarizes the change in the domestic
situation more dramatically than this comment: “Four
decades ago, a truant would have been sent to jail or to
a forced labor colony. Today he can hardly even be
fired, a turnabout resulting from an increasing aware
ness of the social causes of labor discipline violations.”
But all is not sweetness and light. Trade union offi
cials are not elected directly, nor controlled entirely, by
the membership. The party ultimately controls. The re
moval of the labor federation’s president in 1975 result
ed in the appointment of a person who had no trade
union experience— about 18 months later! In 1979, the
required written notice for legally vacating a job was
changed from 2 weeks to 1 month. The trade union
newspaper is filled with accounts of managerial failure
to live up to collective agreements and the law; less fre
quent are accounts of the removal of managers for these
violations. Individual workers and unions attempted to
improve safety conditions during the 1970’s, but were
not overwhelmingly successful. Ruble’s chapter on lim
ited worker participation in management suggests that
even this may be declining. And the assignment of indi
viduals to psychiatric hospitals and then to “corrective
labor facilities” for protesting poor working conditions
will hardly encourage the average Soviet worker to par
ticipate in his trade union or factory committees.
Ruble’s conclusion is balanced: Unions “have neither
entirely succeeded nor entirely failed in meeting their
dual function.” Thus, he sees the unions as encouraging
productivity and defending workers against the manag
ers. W hat will the future bring? Ruble’s book was com
pleted long before Leonid Brezhnev’s death and is
vague about future patterns. But Yuri Andropov’s re
cent speech in a Moscow factory suggests that unions
may be sorely tested in the next decade. The new leader
called upon workers to “increase the efficiency of pro
duction.” He also called for increased discipline. The
campaign to increase discipline has already begun, with
the media criticizing “absenteeism, loafing, and late ar
rivals at work” ( The New York Times, Feb. 1, 1983,
and World Press Review, March 1983).
Readers will find this volume an excellent summary
of the 1970 decade. But the newly launched unions will
surely change in the next decade. Perhaps Ruble is al
ready planning a sequel and will tell us what happened
during the 1980’s.
— Jo s e p h K r is l o v
Professor of E conom ics
U niversity of K entucky
Publications received
Agriculture and natural resources
Clarke, Sada L., “The 1983 O utlook for A griculture,” Eco
nom ic Review, Federal R eserve Bank of R ichm ond, January-F ebruary 1983, pp. 7 -1 1 .
D uncan, M arvin and M ark D rabenstott, “The O utlook for
Agriculture: Is R ecovery on the W ay?” Econom ic Review,
Federal R eserve Bank of K ansas City, D ecem ber 1982,
pp. 16-27.
Economic growth and development
M alenbaum , W ilfred, “M odern E conom ic G row th in India
and China: The C om parison R evisited, 19 5 0 -1 9 8 0 ,” Eco
nom ic D evelopm ent a n d C u ltu ral Change, O ctober 1982,
pp. 4 5 -8 4 .
O shim a, Harry J., “ Reinterpreting Japan’s P ostw ar G row th ,”
E conom ic D evelopm ent a n d C u ltu ral Change, O ctober
1982, pp. 1-43.
Education
K erckhoff, A lan C., R ichard T. C am pbell, Jerry M . T rott,
“D im en sion s o f E ducational and O ccupational A ttain
m ent in G reat Britain,” A m erican Sociological Review,
June 1982, pp. 347-64.
M olnar, A ndrew R. and Patricia W. Babb, “The Electronic
A g e C hallenges E ducation,” Appalachia, N ovem b er-D ecem ber 1982, pp. 1-7.
Industrial relations
Bellace, Janice R. and H ow ard F. G ospel, “D isclosure of In
form ation to Trade U nions: A C om parative Perspective,”
In tern ation al L abou r Review, January-February 1983, pp.
57 -7 4 .
Brown, Frederick, “ Lim iting Y our R isks in the N ew R ussian
R o u lette— D ischarging E m ployees,” E m ployee R elations
L a w Journal, W inter 1982-83, pp. 3 8 0 -406.
Buffenstein, D aryl R ., “The Proposed Im m igration Reform
and C ontrol A ct of 1982: A N ew Epoch in Im m igration
Law and a N ew H eadache for E m ployers,” E m ployee R e
lations L a w Journal, W inter 1982—83, pp. 4 5 0 -6 2 .
Enderwick, Peter and Peter J. Buckley, “Strike A ctivity and
Foreign Ownership: A n A nalysis of British M anufactur
ing, 1 9 7 1 -1 9 7 3 ,” B ritish Journal o f In du strial Relations,
N ovem ber 1982, pp. 308 -2 1 .
F laherty, Sean, “C ontract Status and the E conom ic D eterm i
nants of Strike A ctiv ity ,” In du strial Relations, W inter
1982, pp. 2 0 -3 3 .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Ford, Ford Barney, “Im proving M ine Safety and H ealth,”
L a b o r L a w Journal, M arch 1983, pp. 131-37.
G ellens, K athryn A ., “ R esolving Industrial Safety D isputes:
T o Arbitrate or N o t to A rbitrate,” L abor L a w Journal,
M arch 1983, pp. 149-59.
Inagam i, Takeshi, L abo r-M a n a g em en t Com m unication a t the
W orkshop Level. T okyo, The Japan Institute of Labour,
1983, 36 pp. (Japanese Industrial R elations Series, 11.)
Jauvtis, R obert L., “The R ights of N onsm okers in the
W orkplace: R ecent D evelop m en ts,” L a b o r L a w Journal,
M arch 1983, pp. 144-48.
“Judicial D ecision s in the Field of Labour L aw ,” International
L abou r Review, January-February 1982, pp. 37 -5 6 .
Karim, A hm ad and R ichard Pegnetter, “M ediator Strategies
and Qualities and M ediation Effectiveness,” In du strial
Relations, W inter 1982, pp. 105-14.
K aufm an, Bruce E., “Interindustry Trends in Strike A ctivity,”
In du strial Relations, W inter 1982, pp. 4 5 -5 7 .
M cLennan, Barbara N ., “Product Liability in the W orkplace:
Product Liability Legislation and W orker C om pensation
L aw s,” L abor L a w Journal, M arch 1983, pp. 160-71.
Parker, H ow ard J. and H arold L. G ilm ore, “The Unfair La
bor Practice Caseload: A n A nalysis o f Selected R em e
dies,” L abor L a w Journal, M arch 1982, pp. 172-79.
P oole, M ichael and others, “M anagerial A ttitu d es and
Behavior in Industrial R elations: E vidence from a N a
tional Survey,” British Journal o f In du strial Relations,
N ovem ber 1982, pp. 2 8 5 -307.
Seeber, R onald L. and W illiam N . C ooke, “T he D ecline in
U n ion Success in N L R B Representation E lections,” In
du stria l Relations, W inter 1982, pp. 34-44.
Sim on, W illiam A ., Jr., “V oluntary Affirmative A ction After
Weber," L abor L a w Journal, M arch 1983, pp. 138-43.
U .S. D epartm ent of Labor, L abo r-M a n a g em en t Cooperation:
R ecen t Efforts a n d R esu lts— R eadings fro m the M on th ly
L a b o r Review. W ashington, U .S. D epartm ent of Labor,
L abor-M anagem ent Services A dm inistration and Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1982, 135 pp. (L M S A Publication 6;
BLS Bulletin 2153.) Stock N o . 029-001-02744-3. $6, Su
perintendent of D ocum ents, W ashington 20402.
U .S. W om en’s Bureau, A W orking W o m a n s G uide to H er Job
Rights. Prepared by R uth R obinson and Jane W alstedt.
W ashington, U .S. D epartm ent of Labor, W om en’s Bu
reau, 1983, 54 pp. (Leaflet 55.)
W illiam s, K evin and D avid Lewis, “ L egislating for Job Secu
rity: The British Experience of R einstatem ent and
R eengagem ent,” E m ployee R elations L a w Journal, W inter
1982-83, pp. 4 8 2 -5 0 4 .
Zieger, R obert H ., “Industrial R elations and Labor H istory in
the E ighties,” In du strial Relations, W inter 1982, pp. 5 8 70.
International economics
C anzoneri, M atthew B., “Exchange Intervention Policy in a
M ultiple C ountry W orld,” Journal o f Intern ation al E co
nomics, N ovem ber 1982, pp. 2 6 7 -8 9 .
“C hina’s Place in W orld Trade,” The O E C D Observer, Janu
ary 1983, pp. 10-11.
de M iram on, Jacques, “Countertrade: A M odernized Barter
51
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Book Renews
System ,” The O E C D Observer, January 1983, pp. 12-15.
Frenkel, Jacob A . and Joshua A izenm an, “A sp ects of the O p
timal M anagem ent of E xchange R ates,” Journ al o f In ter
national Economics, N ovem ber 1982, pp. 231 -5 6 .
M organ, Theodore and A lbert D avis, “The C oncom itants of
Exchange R ate D epreciation: Less D evelop ed Countries,
19 7 1 -1 9 7 3 ,” Econom ic D evelopm ent a n d C u ltu ral Change,
O ctober 1982, pp. 101-29.
Sm ith, A lasdair, “Som e Sim ple R esults on the G ains from
Trade, from G row th, and from Public P roduction,” Jour
n al o f Intern ation al Economics, N ovem ber 1982, pp. 215—
30.
Bad A pples in the M anagerial Barrel,” M an agem en t R e
view, February 1983, pp. 8-13.
Tregoe, Benjamin B., “Productivity in America: W here It
W ent and H ow to G et It Back,” M anagem ent Review,
February 1983, beginning on p. 23.
W illiam s, Frederick, E xecutive Com m unication Power: Basic
Skills' fo r M an agem en t Success. E nglew ood Cliffs, N .J.,
Prentice-H all, Inc., 1983, 170 pp. $12.95, cloth; $6.95,
paper.
M onetary and fiscal policy
W ells, Louis T ., Jr., T hird W orld M ultinationals: The R ise o f
Foreign In vestm en t fro m D eveloping Countries. Cam
bridge, M ass., The M IT Press, 1983, 206 pp., bibliogra
phy. $25.
Broaddus, A lfred and T im othy C ook, “The R elationship Be
tween the D iscou n t R ate and the Federal Funds Rate
U nder the Federal R eserve’s P ost-O ctober 6, 1979 Oper
ating Procedure,” Econom ic Review, Federal Reserve
Bank of R ichm ond, January-February 1983, pp. 12-15.
Labor and economic history
Feldstein, M artin, “The Fiscal Framework of M onetary P oli
c y ,” Econom ic Inquiry, January 1983, pp. 11-23.
Johansen, Bruce and R oberto M aestas, E l Pueblo: The
Gallegos F am ily's A m erican Journey, 1503-1980. N ew
Y ork, M on th ly R eview Press, 1983, 205 pp. $20, cloth;
$11.80, paper.
H ahn, Frank, M oney a n d Inflation. Cambridge, M ass., The
M IT Press, 1983, 116 pp., bibliography. $12.50.
Schneer, Jonathan, Ben Tillett: P ortrait o f a L abou r Leader.
U rbana, U niversity of Illinois Press, 1982, 241 pp., bibli
ography. $23.95.
Labor force
Borjas, G eorge J., “T he Substitutability of Black, H ispanic,
and W hite L abor,” Econom ic Inquiry, January 1983, pp.
9 3 -1 0 6 .
Prices and living conditions
H irsch, A lbert A ., “A Stage-of-Processing Price Sector for the
B E A Quarterly Econom etric M od el” (Sum mary of B E A
W orking Paper), Survey o f C urrent Business, D ecem ber
1982, p. 10.
N ob le, N ich olas R. and T. W indsor Fields, “Testing the R a
tionality of Inflation E xpectations D erived from Survey
D ata: A Structure-Based A p proach,” Southern Econom ic
Journal, O ctober 1982, pp. 361-73.
E llw ood , D avid T. and D avid A . W ise, Youth E m ploym en t in
the Seventies: The Changing Circum stances o f Young
A dults. Cam bridge, M ass., N ational Bureau of E conom ic
R esearch, Inc., 1983, 70 pp. (N B E R W orking Paper Se
ries, 1055.) $1.50.
U .S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Changing the H om eownership
C om ponent o f the Consum er Price In dex to R e n ta l E quiva
lence. W ashington, 1983, 7 pp. (BLS N ew s R elease, Janu
ary 1983.)
G reat Britain, D epartm ent of Em ploym ent, “Effects of R ising
U nem ploym ent on School Leavers,” by Pauline Jones,
E m ploym en t Gazette, January 1983, pp. 13-16.
---------- Questions a n d Answers on H om eownership Costs.
W ashington, 1983, 2 pp. (BLS N ew s R elease, January
1983. )
Lynch, Lisa M . and R ay R ichardson, “U nem ploym ent of
Y ou n g W orkers in B ritain,” British Journ al o f In du strial
R elations, N ovem ber 1982, pp. 362 -7 2 .
Productivity and technological change
N ew Zealand, D epartm ent o f Labor, “ R ecent D evelopm ents
A ffecting W om en’s E m ploym ent,” L abou r a n d E m ploy
m en t Gazette, D ecem ber 1982, pp. 2 -4 .
-----------“The Labour M arket Situation,” L abou r a n d E m ploy
m en t G azette, D ecem ber 1982, pp. 9 -1 2 .
U .S. Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Q uestions a n d Answers on the
U nem ploym ent R a te a n d the R esiden t A rm e d Forces.
W ashington, 1983, 2 pp. (BLS N ew s R elease, January
1983.)
Y em in, Edward, ed., W orkforce R edu ction s in Undertakings.
G eneva, International Labor O rganization, 1982, 214 pp.
A vailable from the W ashington Branch of ILO.
Management and organization theory
A m aya, Tadashi, H u m an Resource D evelopm ent in Industry.
T ok yo, The Japan Institute of Labor, 1983, 34 pp.
Bittel, Lester R. and Jackson E. R am sey, “M isfit Supervisors:
52
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cuneo, Philippe and Jacques M airesse, P roductivity a n d R & D
a t the Firm L evel in French M anufacturing. Cambridge,
M ass., N ational Bureau of E conom ic R esearch, Inc.,
1983, 26 pp. (N B E R W orking Paper Series, 1068.) $1.50.
U .S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, The Im p a ct o f Technology on
L a b o r in Five Industries: Printing a n d Publishing, W ater
Transportation, Copper Ore M ining, F abricated S tru ctu ral
M etal, In tercity Trucking. W ashington, 1982, 59 pp. (Bul
letin 2137.) $5, Superintendent of D ocum ents, W ashing
ton 20402.
Wages and compensation
B loom , D avid E. and M ichael P. M artin, “Fringe Benefits a la
C arte,” A m erican Demographics, February 1983, begin
ning on p. 22.
Schaafsma, Joseph and W illiam D . W alsh, “Em ploym ent and
Labour Supply Effects of the M inim um Wage: Som e
P ooled Time-Series E stim ates from Canadian Provincial
D a ta ,” Canadian Journal o f Economics, February 1983,
pp. 86 -9 7 .
Current
Labor Statistics
Notes on Current Labor Statistics
.......................................
Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series
Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes
Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes .
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
55
Employment status of the noninstitutional population, selected
years, 1950-82 ............................................
55
Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces
in the United
States, bysex,seasonally adjusted .56
Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, race,
and Hispanic
origin, seasonallyadjusted
57
Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted ..........................................................................................................
58
Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted .....................................................................................................
59
Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................................
60
Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted ........................................................................
60
Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted ..................................................................................................................
60
.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Employment by industry, selected years, 1950-82 ..............................................................................................................
Employment by State ..................................................................................................................................................................
Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ...........................................
Hours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1950-82 ..................................................................................
Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ........................................
Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................
Hourly Earnings Index, by industry division .......................................................................................................................
Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................
Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased ........................................................................................
Unemployment insurance data. Definitions
18.
61
62
62
63
64
65
66
66
67
67
..............
Unemployment insurance and employment service operations
Price data. Definitions and notes
................................................................ .....................................................................
Consumer Price Index, 1967-82 ..........................
Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected items ...........................................................
Consumer Price Index, cross-classification of region and population size class ..............................................................
Consumer Price Index, selected areas .............................
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing .............
Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings
Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product
Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries .....................................................................................
69
70
70
76
Productivity data. Definitions and notes ............................................. .........................................
83
83
84
84
85
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years,1950-82 ......................
Annual changes inproductivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1972-82 ...............................................
Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted ......................
Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, andprices . .
Wage and compensation data. Definitions and notes .....................................................................
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Employment Cost Index, total compensation, by occupation and industry g r o u p ........................................................
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry grou p ...........................................................
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area s i z e .................................
Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1978 to d a t e .............................................
Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1978 to d a te ................
Work stoppage data. Definition .......................................
37.
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
82
86
87
88
89
90
90
91
91
53
NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS
T his section of the R eview presents the principal statistical se
ries collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A brief introduction to each group of tables provides defi
nitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually
found in footnotes.
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.
R eaders w ho need additional inform ation are invited to
consult the BLS regional offices listed on the inside front cov
er of this issue o f the Review. Som e general notes applicable to
several series are given below .
Adjustments for price changes. Some data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing
current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate
component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given
a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of
150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is
$2 ($3/150 X 100 = $2). The resulting values are described as
“real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars.
Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect of such factors as climatic conditions, industry
production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying
periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short
term movements of the statistical series. Tables containing these data
are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated
on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are com
p u te d each y e ar, rev isio n s m a y affect s ea so n ally a d ju s te d d a ta for sev
eral preceding years.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 3-8 were revised in
the February 1983 issue of the R eview , to reflect experience through
1982.
Beginning in January 1980, the BLS introduced two major modifi
cations in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data.
First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new procedure
called X -ll/A R IM A , which was developed at Statistics Canada as an
extension of the standard X -ll method. A detailed description of the
procedure appears in The X - l l A R IM A S easonal A d ju stm e n t M e th o d
by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 12-564E, Feb
ruary 1980). The second change is that seasonal factors are now being
calculated for use during the first 6 months of the year, rather than for
the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year for the July-December period. Revisions of historical data continue to be made only
at the end of each calendar year.
Annual revision of the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in
tables 11, 13, and 15 were made in August 1981 using the X -ll
ARIM A seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for
productivity data in tables 29 and 30 are usually introduced
in the September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent
changes from month to month and from quarter to quarter are
Availability of information. Data that supplement the tables in this
section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety of
sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information
published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published
according to the schedule given below. More information from house
hold and establishment surveys is provided in E m p lo ym en t a n d E arn
ings, a monthly publication of the Bureau. Comparable household in
formation is published in a two-volume data book-L a b o r Force
S tatistics D erived From the C u rren t Population Survey, Bulletin 2096.
Comparable establishment information appears in two data booksE m p lo y m e n t a n d Earnings, U nited States, and E m p lo y m e n t a n d E arn
ings, S ta tes a n d Areas, and their annual supplements. More detailed
information on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining ap
pears in the monthly periodical, C urrent W age D evelopm ents. More
detailed price information is published each month in the periodicals,
the C P I D e ta iled R e p o rt and P rodu cer Prices a n d P rice Indexes.
Symbols
p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series,
preliminary figures are issued based on representative
but incomplete returns.
r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability
of later data but may also reflect other adjustments,
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified.
Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series
Series
Employment situation ..............................
Producer Price Index................................
Consumer Price Index..............................
Real earnings..........................................
Productivity and costs:
Nonfinancial corporations ....................
Nonfarm business and manufacturing . . .
Major collective bargaining settlements . . .
Employment Cost Index ..........................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
54
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Release
date
Period
covered
Release
date
Period
covered
Release
date
June 3
June 10
June 22
June 22
May
May
May
May
July 8
July 15
July 22
July 22
June
June
June
June
Period
covered
MLR table
number
August 5
August 12
August 23
August 23
July
July
July
July
1-11
23-27
19-22
12-16
August 26
2nd quarter
August 4
2nd quarter
July 29
July 28
32-34
EM PLOYM ENT DATA FRO M TH E H O U SEH O LD SURVEY
employed as a percent of the civilian labor force.
The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians
plus members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
Persons not in the labor force are those not classified as employed or
unemployed; this group includes persons retired, those engaged in
their own housework, those not working while attending school, those
unable to work because of long-term illness, those discouraged from
seeking work because of personal or job market factors, and those
who are voluntarily idle. The noninstitutional population comprises all
persons 16 years of age and older who are not inmates of penal or
mental institutions, sanitariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or
needy, and members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United
States. The labor force participation rate is the proportion of the
noninstitutional population that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is total employment (including the
resident Armed Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional
population.
E m p l o y m e n t d a t a in this section are obtained from the
Current P opulation Survey, a program of personal interviews
conducted m onthly by the Bureau of the C ensus for the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. T he sam ple con sists of about 60,000
h ou seholds selected to represent the U .S. population 16 years
of age and older. H ouseholds are interview ed on a rotating
basis, so that three-fourths of the sam ple is the sam e for any 2
consecutive m onths.
Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any
time during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or
who worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated
enterprise and (2) those who were temporarily absent from their
regular jobs because of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar
reasons. Members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States
are also included in the employed total. A person working at more
than one job is counted only in the job at which he or she worked the
greatest number of hours.
Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a decennial census,
adjustments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to
correct for estimating errors during the preceding years. These
adjustments affect the comparability of historical data presented in
table 1. A description of these adjustments and their effect on the
various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m p lo ym en t
Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey
week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and
had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did
not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new
jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed.
The overall unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as
a percent of the labor force, including the resident Armed Forces. The
unemployment rate for all civilian workers represents the number un
1.
a n d Earnings.
Data in tables 2-8 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1982.
Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-82
[Numbers in thousands]
Labor force
Unemployed
Employed
Year
Noninsti
tutional
population
Number
Percent of
population
Civilian
Total
Percent of
population
Resident
Armed
Forces
Total
Agriculture
Nonagricultural
industies
Number
Percent of
labor
force
Not in
labor force
1950 ..........
1955 ..........
1960 ..........
106,164
111,747
119,106
63,377
67,087
71,489
59.7
60.0
60.0
60,087
64,234
67,639
56.6
57.5
56.8
1,169
2,064
1,861
58,918
62,170
65,778
7,160
6,450
5,458
51,758
55,722
60,318
3,288
2,852
3,852
5.2
4.3
5.4
42,787
44,660
47,617
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
128,459
130,180
132,092
134,281
136,573
76,401
77,892
79,565
80,990
82,972
59.5
59.8
60.2
60.3
60.8
73,034
75,017
76,590
78,173
80,140
56.9
57.6
58.0
58.2
58.7
1,946
2,122
2,218
2,253
2,238
71,088
72,895
74,372
75,920
77,902
4,361
3,979
3,844
3,817
3,606
66,726
68,915
70,527
72,103
74,296
3,366
2,875
2,975
2,817
2,832
4.4
3.7
3.7
3.5
3.4
52,058
52,288
52,527
53,291
53,602
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
139,203
142,189
145,939
148,870
151,841
84,889
86,355
88,847
91,203
93,670
61.0
60.7
60.9
61.3
61.7
80,796
81,340
83,966
86,838
88,515
58.0
57.2
57.5
58.3
58.3
2,118
1,973
1,813
1,774
1,721
78,678
79,367
82,153
85,064
86,794
3,463
3,394
3,484
3,470
3,515
75,215
75,972
78,669
81,594
83,279
4,093
5,016
4,882
4,365
5,156
4.8
5.8
5.5
4.8
5.5
54,315
55,834
57,091
57,667
58,171
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
154,831
157,818
160,689
163,541
166,460
95,453
97,826
100,665
103,882
106,559
61.6
62.0
62.6
63.5
64.0
87,524
90,420
93,673
97,679
100,421
56.5
57.3
58.3
59.7
60.3
1,678
1,668
1,656
1,631
1,597
85,846
88,752
92,017
96,048
98,824
3,408
3,331
3,283
3,387
3,347
82,438
85,421
88,734
92,661
95,477
7,929
7,406
6,991
6,202
6,137
8.3
7.6
6.9
6.0
5.8
59,377
59,991
60,025
59,659
59,900
1980 ..........
1981 ..........
1982 ..........
169,349
171,775
173,939
108,544
110,315
111,872
64.1
64.2
64.3
100,907
102,042
101,194
59.6
59.4
58.2
1,604
1,645
1,668
99,303
100,397
99,526
3,364
3,368
3,401
95,938
97,030
96,125
7,637
8,273
10,678
7.0
7.5
9.5
60,806
61,460
62,067
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
55
M ONTHLY
2.
LABOR
R E V IE W
June 1983 •
C u r r e n t L a b o r S ta tis tic s : H o u s e h o ld D a ta
Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Annual average
1982
1983
Employment status and sex
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
171,775
110,315
64.2
102,042
59.4
1,645
100,397
3,368
97,030
8,273
7.5
61,460
173,939
111,872
64.3
101,194
58.2
1,668
99,526
3,401
96,125
10,678
9.5
62,067
173,512
111,408
64.2
101,152
58.3
1,668
99,484
3,356
96,128
10,256
9.2
62,104
173,691
112,043
64.5
101,659
58.5
1,665
99,994
3,446
96,548
10,384
9.3
61,648
173,854
111,811
64.3
101,345
58.3
1,664
99,681
3,371
96,310
10,466
9.4
62,043
174,038
112,090
64.4
101,262
58.2
1,674
99,588
3,445
96,143
10,828
9.7
61,948
174,200
112,303
64.5
101,372
58.2
1,689
99,683
3,429
96,254
10,931
9.7
61,897
174,360
112,528
64.5
101,213
58.0
1,670
99,543
3,363
96,180
11,315
10.1
61,832
174,549
112,420
64.4
100,844
57.8
1,668
99,176
3,413
95,763
11,576
10.3
62,129
174,718
112,702
64.5
100,796
57.7
1,660
99,136
3,466
95,670
11,906
10.6
62,016
174,864
112,794
64.5
100,758
57.6
1,665
99,093
3,411
95,682
12,036
10.7
62,070
175,021
112,215
64.1
100,770
57.6
1,667
99,103
3,412
95,691
11,446
10.2
62,806
175,169
112,217
64.1
100,727
57.5
1,664
99,063
3,393
95,670
11,490
10.2
62,952
175,320
112,148
64.0
100,767
57.5
1,664
99,103
3,375
95,729
11,381
10.1
63,172
175,465
112,457
64.1
101,129
57.6
1,671
99,458
3,371
96,088
11,328
10.1
63,008
82,023
63,486
77.4
58,909
71.8
1,512
57,397
4,577
7.2
83,052
63,979
77.0
57,800
69.6
1,527
56,271
6,179
9.7
82,844
63,829
77.0
57,973
70.0
1,529
56,444
5,856
9.2
82,929
64,172
77.4
58,251
70.2
1,527
56,724
5,921
9.2
83,006
63,851
76.9
57,775
69.6
1,526
56,249
6,076
9.5
83,097
63,898
76.9
57,664
69.4
1,537
56,127
6,234
9.8
83,173
64,055
77.0
57,710
69.4
1,551
56,159
6,345
9.9
83,231
64,301
77.3
57,598
69.2
1,526
56,072
6,703
10.4
83,323
64,300
77.2
57,456
69.0
1,524
55,932
6,844
10.6
83,402
64,414
77.2
57,408
68.8
1,516
55,892
7,006
10.9
83,581
64,384
77.0
57,338
68.6
1,529
55,809
7,046
10.9
83,652
63,916
76.4
57,283
68.5
1,531
55,752
6,633
10.4
83,720
63,996
76.4
57,234
68.4
1,528
55,706
6,762
10.6
83,789
63,957
76.3
57,300
68.4
1,528
55,772
6,657
10.4
83,856
64,207
76.6
57,476
68.5
1,530
55,946
6,731
10.5
89,751
46,829
52.2
43,133
48.1
133
43,000
3,696
7.9
90,887
47,894
52.7
43,395
47.7
139
43,256
4,499
9.4
90,668
47,579
52.5
43,179
47.6
139
43,040
4,400
9.2
90,762
47,871
52.7
43,408
47.8
138
43,270
4,463
9.3
90,848
47,960
52.8
43,570
48.0
138
43,432
4,390
9.2
90,941
48,192
53.0
43,598
47.9
137
43,461
4,594
9.5
91,027
48,248
53.0
43,662
48.0
138
43,524
4,586
9.5
91,129
48,227
52.9
43,615
47.9
144
43,471
4,612
9.6
91,226
48,120
52.7
43,388
47.6
144
43,244
4,732
9.8
91,316
48,288
52.9
43,388
47.5
144
43,244
4,900
10.1
91,283
48,410
53.0
43,420
47.6
136
43,284
4,990
10.3
91,369
48,299
52.9
43,486
47.6
136
43,350
4,813
10.0
91,449
48,220
52.7
43,493
47.6
136
43,357
4,727
9.8
91,532
48,191
52.6
43,467
47.5
136
43,331
4,724
9.8
91,609
48,251
52.7
43,653
47.7
141
43,512
4,597
9.5
Total
Noninstitutional population12 ......................
Labor force2 ..........................................
Participation rate3 ......................
Total employed2 ................................
Employment-population ratio4 . . . .
Resident Armed Forces1 ................
Civilian employed............................
Agriculture..................................
Nonagricultural industries ............
Unemployed ......................................
Unemployment rate5 ..................
Not in labor force....................................
Men, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population12 ......................
Labor force2 ..........................................
Participation rate3 ......................
Total employed2 ................................
Employment-population ratio4 . . . .
Resident Armed Forces1 ................
Civilian employed............................
Unemployed ......................................
Unemployment rate5 ..................
Women, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population12 ......................
Labor force2 ......................................
Participation rate3 ......................
Total employed2 ................................
Employment-population ratio4 ___
Resident Armed Forces1 ................
Civilian employed............................
Unemployed ......................................
Unemployment rate5 ..................
1The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation.
2 Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
3 Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
56
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces).
3.
Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Annual average
1983
1982
Employment status
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
170,130
108,670
63.9
100,397
59.0
3,368
97,030
8,273
7.6
61,460
172,271
110,204
64.0
99,526
57.8
3,401
96,125
10,678
9.7
62,067
171,844
109,740
63.9
99,484
57.9
3,356
96,128
10,256
9.3
62,104
172,026
110,378
64.2
99,994
58.1
3,446
96,548
10,384
9.4
61,648
172,190
110,147
64.0
99,681
57.9
3,371
96,310
10,466
9.5
62,043
172,364
110,416
64.1
99,588
57.8
3,445
96,143
10,828
9.8
61,948
172,511
110,614
64.1
99,683
57.8
3,429
96,254
10,931
9.9
61,897
172,690
110,858
64.2
99,543
57.6
3,363
96,180
11,315
10.2
61,832
172,881
110,752
64.1
99,176
57.4
3,413
95,763
11,576
10.5
62,129
173,058
111,042
64.2
99,136
57.3
3,466
95,670
11,906
10.7
62,016
173,199
111,129
64.2
99,093
57.2
3,411
95,682
12,036
10.8
62,070
173,354
110,548
63.8
99,103
57.2
3,412
95,691
11,446
10.4
62,806
173,505
110,553
63.7
99,063
57.1
3,393
95,670
11,490
10.4
62,952
173,656
110,484
63.6
99,103
57.1
3,375
95,729
11,381
10.3
63,172
173,794
110,786
63.7
99,458
57.2
3,371
96,088
11,328
10.2
63,008
72,419
57,197
79.0
53,582
74.0
2,384
51,199
3,615
6.3
73,644
57,980
78.7
52,891
71.8
2,422
50,469
5,089
8.8
73,392
57,794
78.7
53,024
72.2
2,417
50,607
4,770
8.3
73,499
58,008
78.9
53,190
72.4
2,446
50,744
4,818
8.3
73,585
57,959
78.8
52,943
71.9
2,424
50,519
5,016
8.7
73,685
58,055
78.8
52,905
71.8
2,462
50,443
5,150
8.9
73,774
58,064
78.7
52,832
71.6
2,433
50,399
5,232
9.0
73,867
58,354
79.0
52,776
71.4
2,436
50,340
5,578
9.6
73,984
58,363
78.9
52,649
71.2
2,444
50,205
5,714
9.8
74,094
58,454
78.9
52,589
71.0
2,434
50,155
5,865
10.0
74,236
58,443
78.7
52,534
70.8
2,389
50,145
5,909
10.1
74,339
58,048
78.1
52,452
70.6
2,426
50,025
5,597
9.6
74,434
58,177
78.2
52,428
70.4
2,374
50,054
5,749
9.9
74,528
58,170
78.1
52,589
70.6
2,420
50,169
5,581
9.6
74,611
58,454
78.3
52,752
70.7
2,404
50,348
5,702
9.8
81,497
42,485
52.1
39,590
48.6
604
38,986
2,895
6.8
82,864
43,699
52.7
40,086
48.4
601
39,485
3,613
8.3
82,591
43,355
52.5
39,827
48.2
600
39,227
3,528
8.1
82,707
43,632
52.8
40,064
48.4
614
39,450
3,568
8.2
82,811
43,819
52.9
40,254
48.6
586
39,668
3,565
8.1
82,926
43,983
53.0
40,311
48.6
598
39,713
3,672
8.3
83,035
44,039
53.0
40,368
48.6
590
39,778
3,671
8.3
83,152
43,996
52.9
40,286
48.4
588
39,698
3,710
8.4
83,271
43,936
52.8
40,112
48.2
578
39,534
3,824
8.7
83,385
44,112
52.9
40,123
48.1
590
39,533
3,989
9.0
83,383
44,286
53.1
40,215
48.2
628
39,587
4,071
9.2
83,490
44,201
52.9
40,238
48.2
625
39,613
3,963
9.0
83,593
44,216
52.9
40,291
48.2
657
39,634
3,925
8.9
83,699
44,166
52.8
40,277
48.1
647
39,630
3,889
8.8
83,794
44,238
52.8
40,509
48.3
622
39,886
3,729
8.4
16,214
8,988
55.4
7,225
44.6
380
6,845
1,763
19.6
15,763
8,526
54.1
6,549
41.5
378
6,171
1,977
23.2
15,861
8,591
54.2
6,633
41.8
339
6,294
1,958
22.8
15,820
8,738
55.2
6,740
42.6
386
6,354
1,998
22.9
15,794
8,369
53.0
6,484
41.1
361
6,123
1,885
22.5
15,753
8,378
53.2
6,372
40.4
385
5,987
2,006
23.9
15,702
8,511
54.2
6,483
41.3
406
6,077
2,028
23.8
15,671
8,508
54.3
6,481
41.4
339
6,142
2,027
23.8
15,625
8,453
54.1
6,415
41.1
391
6,024
2,038
24.1
15,579
8,476
54.4
6,424
41.2
442
5,982
2,052
24.2
15,580
8,400
53.9
6,344
40.7
394
5,950
2,056
24.5
15,525
8,299
53.5
6,413
41.3
361
6,052
1,886
22.7
15,478
8,160
52.7
6,345
41.0
362
5,983
1,815
22.2
15,429
8,148
52.8
6,237
40.4
308
5,929
1,911
23.5
15,389
8,094
52.6
6,197
40.3
344
5,853
1,897
23.4
147,908
95,052
64.3
88,709
60.0
6,343
6.7
149,441
96,143
64.3
87,903
58.8
8,241
8.6
149,249
95,941
64.3
88,011
59.0
7,930
8.3
149,250
96,405
64.6
88,350
59.2
8,055
8.4
149,429
96,165
64.4
88,089
59.0
8,076
8.4
149,569
96,385
64.4
88,021
58.8
8,364
8.7
149,536
96,375
64.4
87,979
58.8
8,396
8.7
149,652
96,640
64.6
87,872
58.7
8,768
9.1
149,838
96,453
64.4
87,477
58.4
8,976
9.3
149,887
96,719
64.5
87,435
58.3
9,284
9.6
150,056
96,864
64.6
87,443
58.3
9,421
9.7
150,129
96,176
64.1
87,466
58.3
8,711
9.1
150,187
95,987
63.9
87,194
58.1
8,793
9.2
150,382
95,996
63.8
87,324
58.1
8,672
9.0
150,518
96,287
64.0
87,709
58.3
8,577
8.9
18,219
11,086
60.8
9,355
51.3
1,731
15.6
18,584
11,331
61.0
9,189
49.4
2,142
18.9
18,511
11,201
60.5
9,135
49.3
2,066
18.4
18,542
11,318
61.0
9,209
49.7
2,109
18.6
18,570
11,267
60.7
9,171
49.4
2,096
18.6
18,600
11,341
61.0
9,211
49.5
2,130
18.8
18,626
11,400
61.2
9,220
49.5
2,180
19.1
18,659
11,443
61.3
9,172
49.2
2,271
19.8
18,692
11,398
61.0
9,102
48.7
2,296
20.1
18,723
11,475
61.3
9,159
48.9
2,316
202
18,740
11,522
61.5
9,127
48.7
2,395
20.8
18,768
11,542
61.5
9,142
48.7
2,400
20.8
18,796
11,548
61.4
9,276
49.4
2,271
19.7
18,823
11,554
61.4
9,253
49.2
2,302
19.9
18,851
11,631
61.7
9,207
48.8
2,423
20.8
9,310
5,972
64.1
5,348
57.4
624
10.4
9,400
5,983
63.6
5,158
54.9
825
13.8
9,235
5,966
64.6
5,211
56.4
755
12.7
9,297
6,004
64.6
5,182
55.7
822
13.7
9,428
5,965
63.3
5,155
54.7
810
13.6
9,521
5,972
62.7
5,136
53.9
836
14.0
9,689
6,045
62.4
5,162
53.3
883
14.6
9,464
5,961
63.0
5,097
53.9
864
14.5
9,474
5,973
63.0
5,075
53.6
898
15.0
9,355
5,923
63.3
5,012
53.6
911
15.4
9,301
5,898
63.4
4,998
53.7
900
15.3
9,328
5,981
64.1
5,053
54.2
929
15.5
9,368
5,992
64.0
5,042
53.8
950
15.8
9,551
6,074
63.6
5,088
53.3
986
16.2
9,665
6,206
64.2
5,304
54.9
902
14.5
TOTAL
Civilian nonlnstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor fo rce ......................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Agriculture..........................................
Nonagrlcultural Industries ....................
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Not in labor force........................................
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian nonlnstitutional population1 ..................
Civilian labor force ....................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Agriculture..........................................
Nonagrlcultural industries ....................
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Women, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor force ....................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Agriculture..........................................
Nonagrlcultural industries ....................
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian nonlnstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor fo rce ......................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Agriculture..........................................
Nonagrlcultural industries ....................
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
White
Civilian noninstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor force ....................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Black
Civilian noninstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor force ....................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
Hispanic origin
Civilian nonlnstitutional population' ..................
Civilian labor fo rce ......................................
Participation rate ............................
Employed ..............................................
Employment-population ratio2 ..........
Unemployed ..........................................
Unemployment rate ........................
' The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian nonlnstitutional population.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N ote : Detail for the above race and Hlspanic-orlgin groups will not sum to totals because data for the
“ other races” groups are not presented and Híspanles are included in both the white and black population
groups.
57
M ONTHLY
4.
LABOR
R E V IE W
J u n e 1 9 8 3 • C u r r e n t L a b o r S ta tis tic s : H o u s e h o ld D a ta
Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted
[ Numbers in thousands]
Annual average
1983
1982
Selected categories
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
99,526
56,271
43,256
38,074
24,053
5,099
99,484
56,444
43,040
38,212
23,891
5,093
99,994
56,724
43,270
38,274
24,112
4,991
99,681
56,249
43,432
38,254
24,331
5,120
99,588
56,127
43,461
38,177
24,173
5,200
99,683
56,159
43,524
38,121
24,235
5,208
99,543
56,073
43,471
37,998
24,159
5,118
99,176
55,932
43,244
37,852
24,081
5,107
99,136
55,892
43,244
37,641
23,985
5,025
99,093
55,809
43,284
37,507
24,155
4,985
99,103
55,752
43,350
37,450
24,205
5,038
99,063
55,706
43,357
37,428
24,070
5,050
99,103
55,772
43,331
37,452
24,171
5,097
99,458
55,946
43,512
37,523
24,371
4,944
1,464
1,638
266
1,505
1,636
261
1,442
1,656
266
1,530
1,679
251
1,457
1,661
254
1,523
1,655
254
1,548
1,620
255
1,537
1,569
254
1,576
1,621
229
1,584
1,628
241
1,547
1,627
224
1,637
1,587
231
1,624
1,541
223
1,515
1,585
260
1,560
1,607
208
89,543
15,689
73,853
1,208
72,645
7,097
390
88,462
15,516
72,945
1,207
71,738
7,262
401
88,454
15,464
72,990
1,196
71,794
7,246
410
88,872
15,454
73,418
1,204
72,214
7,262
392
88,548
15,614
72,934
1,205
71,729
7,301
398
88,491
15,471
73,020
1,200
71,820
7,286
393
88,576
15,562
73,014
1,227
71,787
7,338
408
88,562
15,681
72,881
1,220
71,661
7,422
378
88,064
15,436
72,628
1,216
71,412
7,332
403
87,936
15,514
72,422
1,221
71,201
7,349
382
87,976
15,477
72,499
1,163
71,336
7,335
383
87,813
15,386
72,427
1,162
71,265
7,465
380
87,794
15,501
72,293
1,232
71,061
7,385
353
87,912
15,452
72,459
1,235
71,225
7,453
342
88,187
15,518
72,668
1,205
71,463
7,528
353
91,377
74,339
4,499
1,738
2,761
12,539
90,552
72,245
5,852
2,169
3,683
12,455
90,755
72,562
5,750
2,197
3,553
12,443
91,082
72,869
5,731
2,195
3,536
12,482
90,917
72,545
5,561
2,126
3,435
12,811
90,414
72,288
5,577
2,047
3,530
12,549
90,486
72,045
5,820
2,100
3,720
12,621
90,884
71,723
6,495
2,519
3,976
12,666
90,232
71,394
6,903
2,381
4,022
12,435
90,238
71,442
6,411
2,228
4,183
12,385
90,219
71,499
6,425
2,153
4,272
12,295
90,903
71,786
6,845
2,200
4,645
12,271
90,207
71,564
6,481
2,097
4,384
12,162
90,271
71,878
6,202
1,927
4,275
12,191
92,267
73,594
6,082
1,871
4,211
12,592
1981
1982
100,397
57,397
43,000
38,882
23,915
4,998
CHARACTERISTIC
Civilian employed, 16 years and over....................
Men ............................................................
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 ..................................
Nonagrlcultural industries:
Wage and salary workers..............................
Government ..........................................
Private Industries....................................
Private households ..........................
Other..............................................
Self-employed workers..................................
Unpaid family workers ..................................
PERSONS AT WORK1
Nonagricultural Industries ....................................
Full-time schedules ......................................
Part time for economic reasons......................
Usually work full time..............................
Usually work part tim e............................
Part time for noneconomic reasons................
’ Excludes persons “ with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation,
illness, or industrial disputes.
58
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5.
Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted
[Unemployment rates]
Annual average
Selected categories
1982
1983
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
Total, all civilian workers......................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ..........................
Men, 20 years and over................................
Women, 20 years and over ..........................
7.6
19.6
6.3
6.8
9.7
23.2
8.8
8.3
9.3
22.8
8.3
8.1
9.4
22.9
8.3
8.2
9.5
22.5
8.7
8.1
9.8
23.9
8.9
8.3
9.9
23.8
9.0
8.3
10.2
23.8
9.6
8.4
10.4
24.1
9.8
8.7
10.7
24.2
10.0
9.0
10.8
24.5
10.1
9.2
10.4
22.7
9.6
9.0
10.4
22.2
9.9
8.9
10.3
23.5
9.6
8.8
10.2
23.4
9.8
8.4
White, to ta l..................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................
Men, 16 to 19 years........................
Women, 16 to 19 years ..................
Men, 20 years and over ........................
Women, 20 years and o v e r....................
6.7
17.3
17.9
16.6
5.6
5.9
8.6
20.4
21.7
19.0
7.8
7.3
8.3
20.4
21.9
18.8
7.3
7.1
8.4
19.9
20.9
18.7
7.5
7.2
8.4
19.7
21.2
18.0
7.7
7.1
8.7
20.9
22.5
19.1
7.9
7.3
8.7
20.8
22.5
18.9
8.0
7.2
9.1
20.7
22.2
19.1
8.6
7.5
9.3
21.5
23.0
19.9
8.8
7.6
9.6
21.2
22.6
19.8
9.1
8.0
9.7
21.6
22.8
20.4
9.2
8.1
9.1
20.0
21.2
18.7
8.4
7.8
9.2
19.7
21.1
18.2
8.7
7.7
9.0
21.4
22.9
19.7
8.5
7.4
8.9
20.4
21.7
19.0
8.6
7.2
Black, total ..................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................
Men, 16 to 19 years........................
Women, 16 to 19 years ..................
Men, 20 years and over ........................
Women, 20 years and o v e r....................
15.6
41.4
40.7
42.2
13.5
13.4
18.9
48.0
48.9
47.1
17.8
15.4
18.4
48.0
48.4
47.7
17.0
15.4
18.6
49.4
49.7
49.1
17.1
15.3
18.6
51.2
55.7
46.0
17.3
15.1
18.8
49.3
48.9
49.7
17.4
15.5
19.1
51.2
50.5
52.1
17.6
15.4
19.8
48.6
51.0
45.9
19.2
15.7
20.1
47.7
49.2
45.9
19.6
16.2
20.2
49.8
53.0
46.2
19.2
16.5
20.8
49.5
52.5
46.2
20.5
16.5
20.8
45.7
45.9
45.5
19.7
18.2
19.7
45.4
45.3
45.4
18.7
17.0
19.9
43.5
44.5
42.3
18.8
17.7
20.8
49.0
48.0
50.0
20.3
17.0
Hispanic origin, total ....................................
10.4
13.8
12.7
13.7
13.6
14.0
14.6
14.5
15.0
15.4
15.3
15.5
15.8
16.2
14.5
Married men, spouse present........................
Married women, spouse present....................
Women who maintain families........................
4.3
6.0
10.4
6.5
7.4
11.7
6.0
7.6
11.5
6.1
7.3
11.9
6.4
7.1
12.1
6.6
7.4
12.0
6.8
7.3
11.7
7.2
7.6
12.4
7.5
7.9
11.3
7.6
8.2
12.5
7.8
8.2
13.2
7.1
7.8
13.2
7.2
7.6
13.0
7.1
7.5
13.5
7.1
7.3
13.2
Full-time workers..........................................
Part-time workers ........................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and over....................
Labor force time lost1 ..................................
7.3
9.4
2.1
8.5
9.6
10.5
3.2
11.0
9.1
10.8
2.8
10.4
9.2
10.5
3.0
10.7
9.4
10.0
3.2
10.4
9.6
11.2
3.2
10.7
9.7
10.4
3.3
10.9
10.2
10.6
3.5
11.7
10.5
10.3
3.8
12.0
10.6
11.3
4.1
12.4
10.8
11.1
4.3
12.7
10.3
10.6
4.2
11.7
10.4
10.1
4.2
12.0
10.3
10.5
4.2
11.8
10.2
10.6
3.9
11.4
7.7
6.0
15.6
8.3
8.2
8.4
5.2
8.1
5.9
4.7
12.1
10.1
13.4
20.0
12.3
13.3
10.8
6.8
10.0
6.9
4.9
14.7
9.8
10.6
19.3
11.3
11.9
10.6
6.7
9.9
7.0
5.2
14.6
9.8
12.1
18.9
11.5
12.2
10.4
6.4
10.2
6.8
4.9
18.1
10.0
14.0
19.5
12.2
13.1
11.1
6.8
9.7
6.9
4.7
15.0
10.2
15.8
20.3
12.1
12.8
11.0
6.6
10.3
7.0
4.7
14.1
10.2
16.0
20.4
12.4
13.3
11.0
7.1
10.0
7.0
4.7
14.2
11.0
18.5
22.3
14.1
16.0
11.2
7.9
10.4
7.1
4.9
13.3
11.0
17.9
22.3
14.1
16.0
11.2
7.9
10.4
7.1
4.9
13.3
11.4
18.1
21.8
14.8
17.0
11.4
8.3
10.6
7.7
5.1
15.6
11.6
18.1
22.0
14.8
17.1
11.4
8.0
11.0
7.9
5.1
16.5
10.8
17.1
20.0
13.0
14.7
10.5
7.8
10.8
7.6
5.7
16.0
10.8
18.4
19.7
13.3
14.7
11.4
8.0
10.9
7.3
6.0
16.4
10.8
18.6
20.3
12.8
14.1
11.1
7.8
11.2
7.2
5.9
16.3
10.5
20.3
20.3
12.4
13.5
10.8
7.7
10.4
7.3
6.1
17.2
CHARACTERISTIC
INDUSTRY
Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ..
Mining ........................................................
Construction ................................................
Manufacturing..............................................
Durable goods ......................................
Nondurable goods..................................
Transportation and public utilities ..................
Wholesale and retail trad e............................
Finance and service industries ......................
Government workers ..........................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers ..................
' Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a
percent of potentially available labor force hours.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
59
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
7.
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Reason for unemployment
1983
1982
Annual average
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
4,267
1,430
2,837
923
2,102
981
6,268
2,127
4,141
840
2,384
1,185
5,889
1,967
3,922
901
2,342
1,096
5,938
1,956
3,982
864
2,393
1,159
6,181
2,097
4,084
826
2,378
1,091
6,323
2,126
4,197
819
2,478
1,230
6,446
2,218
4,228
814
2,440
1,304
6,979
2,625
4,354
786
2,437
1,303
7,325
2,519
4,806
803
2,322
1,296
7,369
2,531
4,838
794
2,546
1,244
7,295
2,468
4,827
826
2,629
1,288
6,704
2,131
4,573
839
2,623
1,174
6,809
2,024
4,784
848
2,491
1,161
6,823
1,945
4,878
901
2,426
1,155
6,750
1,948
4,803
815
2,488
1,245
100.0
51.6
17.3
34.3
11.2
25.4
11.9
100.0
58.7
19.9
38.8
7.9
22.3
11.1
100.0
57.6
19.2
38.3
8.8
22.9
10.7
100.0
57.3
18.9
38.5
8.3
23.1
11.2
100.0
59.0
20.0
39.0
7.9
22.7
10.4
100.0
58.3
19.6
38.7
7.5
22.8
11.3
100.0
58.6
20.2
38.4
7.4
22.2
11.9
100.0
60.7
22.8
37.8
6.8
21.2
11.3
100.0
62.4
21.4
40.9
6.8
19.8
11.0
100.0
61.6
21.2
40.5
6.6
21.3
10.4
100.0
60.6
20.5
40.1
6.9
21.8
10.7
100.0
59.1
18.8
40.3
7.4
23.1
10.4
100.0
60.2
17.9
42.3
7.5
22.0
10.3
100.0
60.4
17.2
43.1
8.0
21.5
10.2
100.0
59.7
17.2
42.5
7.2
22.0
11.0
3.9
.8
1.9
.9
5.7
.8
2.2
1.1
5.4
.8
2.1
1.0
5.4
.8
2.2
1.1
5.6
.7
2.2
1.0
5.7
.7
2.2
1.1
5.8
.7
2.2
1.2
6.3
.7
2.2
1.2
6.6
.7
2.1
1.2
6.6
.7
2.3
1.1
6.6
.7
2.4
1.2
6.1
.8
2.4
1.1
6.2
.8
2.3
1.1
6.2
.8
2.2
1.0
6.1
.7
2.2
1.1
NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED
Job losers ..........................................................
On layoff ....................................................
Other job losers..........................................
Job leavers ........................................................
Reentrants..........................................................
New entrants ......................................................
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
Total unemployed................................................
Job losers ..........................................................
On layoff ....................................................
Other job losers..........................................
Job leavers ........................................................
Reentrants..........................................................
New entrants ......................................................
PERCENT OF
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
Job losers ..........................................................
Job leavers ........................................................
Reentrants..........................................................
New entrants ......................................................
8.
Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Weeks of unemployment
Less than 5 weeks ..............................................
5 to 14 weeks ....................................................
15 weeks and o ver..............................................
15 to 26 weeks............................................
27 weeks and over......................................
Mean duration, in weeks ......................................
Median duration, In weeks....................................
60
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1983
1982
Annual average
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
3,449
2,539
2,285
1,122
1,162
13.7
6.9
3,883
3,311
3,485
1,708
1,776
15.6
8.7
3,930
3,255
3,080
1,582
1,498
14.3
8.3
3,871
3,281
3,267
1,633
1,634
14.9
8.6
3,605
3,398
3,517
1,683
1,834
16.3
9.8
3,959
3,249
3,569
1,780
1,789
15.6
8.3
3,933
3,346
3,637
1,808
1,829
16.1
8.3
4,004
3,549
3,856
1,830
2,026
16.6
9.4
3,930
3,511
4,167
1,951
2,216
17.1
9.6
3,963
3,549
4,524
2,191
2,333
17.3
10.0
4,019
3,460
4,732
2,125
2,607
18.0
10.1
3,536
3,328
4,634
1,928
2,706
19.4
11.5
3,731
3,106
4,618
1,928
2,689
19.0
9.6
3,440
3,140
4,615
1,875
2,740
19.1
10.3
3,547
3,154
4,356
1,662
2,694
19.0
11.3
EM PLOYM ENT, HOU RS, AND EARNINGS DATA FRO M ESTABLISHM ENT SURVEYS
E m p l o y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a t a in this section are
com piled from payroll records reported m onthly on a volun
tary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperat
ing State agencies by 177,000 establishm ents representing all
industries except agriculture. In m ost industries, the sam pling
probabilities are based on the size of the establishm ent; m ost
large establishm ents are therefore in the sam ple. (A n estab
lishm ent is n ot necessarily a firm; it m ay be a branch plant,
for exam ple, or w arehouse.) Self-em ployed persons and others
n ot on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the
survey because they are excluded from establishm ent records.
T his largely accounts for the difference in em ploym ent figures
betw een the household and establishm ent surveys.
Definitions
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holi
day and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the
12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 per
cent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establish
ment which reports them.
Production workers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker
supervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with
production operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 in
clude production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction
workers in construction; and nonsupervisory workers in transporta
tion and public utilities; in wholesale and retail trade; in finance, in
surance, and real estate; and in services industries. These groups
account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private
nonagricultural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers
receive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime
or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special
payments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of
changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived
from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical
Workers (CPI-W). The Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from av
erage hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two types
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments:
fluctuations in overtime premiums in manufacturing (the only sector
for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes and
seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and lowwage industries.
Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or
nonsupervisory workers for which pay was received and are different
from standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the por
tion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular
hours and for which overtime premiums were paid.
The Diffusion Index, introduced in table 17 of the May issue, repre
sents the percent of 186 nonagricultural industries in which employ
ment was rising over the indicated period. One-half of the industries
with unchanged employment are counted as rising. In line with Bu
reau practice, data for the 3-, 6-, and 9-month spans are seasonally
adjusted, while that for the 12-month span is unadjusted. The diffu
sion index is useful for measuring the dispersion of economic gains or
losses and is also an economic indicator.
Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are
periodically adjusted to comprehensive counts of employment (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the re
lease of May 1982 data, published in the July 1982 issue of the Review.
Consequently, data published in the R eview prior to that issue are not
necessarily comparable to current data. Earlier comparable unadjusted
and seasonally adjusted data are published in a Supplement to E m
p lo y m e n t a n d E arnings (unadjusted data from April 1977 through Feb
ruary 1982 and seasonally adjusted data from January 1974 through
February 1982) and in E m p lo ym en t a n d Earnings, U n ited States, 1 9 0 9 78, BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household
and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur
veys,” M o n th ly L a b o r Review , December 1969, pp. 9-20. See also B L S
H a n dbook o f M eth ods f o r Surveys a n d Studies, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1976).
61
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
9.
Employment by industry, selected years, 1950-82
[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
Service-producing
Goods-producing
Total
Year
Private
sector
Total
Mining
Construe- Manufacturing
tion
Transportation
and
public
utilities
Total
Wholesale and retail trade
Total
Wholesale
trade
Retail
trade
Finance,
insurance,
Services
and real
estate
Government
Total
Federal
State
and
local
1950 . .
1955 . .
I960' .
1964 . .
1965 . .
45,197
50,641
54,189
58,283
60,765
39,170
43,727
45,836
48,686
50,689
18,506
20,513
20,434
21,005
21,926
901
792
712
634
632
2,364
2,839
2,926
3,097
3,232
15,241
16,882
16,796
17,274
18,062
26,691
30,128
33,755
37,278
38,839
4,034
4,141
4,004
3,951
4,036
9,386
10,535
11,391
12,160
12,716
2,635
2,926
3,143
3,337
3,466
6,751
7,610
8,248
8,823
9,250
1,888
2,298
2,629
2,911
2,977
5,357
6,240
7,378
8,660
9,036
6,026
6,914
8,353
9,596
10,074
1,928
2,187
2,270
2,348
2,378
4,098
4,727
6,083
7,248
7,696
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
.
.
..
.
.
63,901
65,803
67,897
70,384
70,880
53,116
54,413
56,058
58,189
58,325
23,158
23,308
23,737
24,361
23,578
627
613
606
619
623
3,317
3,248
3,350
3,575
3,588
19,214
19,447
19,781
20,167
19,367
40,743
42,495
44,160
46,023
47,302
4,158
4,268
4,318
4,442
4,515
13,245
13,606
14,099
14,705
15,040
3,597
3,689
3,779
3,907
3,993
9,648
9,917
10,320
10,798
11,047
3,058
3,185
3,337
3,512
3,645
9,498
10,045
10,567
11,169
11,548
10,784
11,391
11,839
12,195
12,554
2,564
2,719
2,737
2,758
2,731
8,220
8,672
9,102
9,437
9,823
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
.
.
.
.
.
71,214
73,675
76,790
78,265
76,945
58,331
60,341
63,058
64,095
62,259
22,935
23,668
24,893
24,794
22,600
609
628
642
697
752
3,704
3,889
4,097
4,020
3,525
18,623
19,151
20,154
20,077
18,323
48,278
50,007
51,897
53,471
54,345
4,476
4,541
4,656
4,725
4,542
15,352
15,949
16,607
16,987
17,060
4,001
4,113
4,277
4,433
4,415
11,351
11,836
12,329
12,554
12,645
3,772
3,908
4,046
4,148
4,165
11,797
12,276
12,857
13,441
13,892
12,881
13,334
13,732
14,170
14,686
2,696
2,684
2,663
2,724
2,748
10,185
10,649
11,068
11,446
11,937
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
.
.
.
.
.
79,382
82,471
86,697
89,823
90,406
64,511
67,344
71,026
73,876
74,166
23,352
24,346
25,585
26,461
25,658
779
813
851
958
1,027
3,576
3,851
4,229
4,463
4,346
18,997
19,682
20,505
21,040
20,285
56,030
58,125
61,113
63,363
64,748
4,582
4,713
4,923
5,136
5,146
17,755
18,516
19,542
20,192
20,310
4,546
4,708
4,969
5,204
5,275
13,209
13,808
14,573
14,989
15,035
4,271
4,467
4,724
4,975
5,160
14,551
15,303
16,252
17,112
17,890
14,871
15,127
15,672
15,947
16,241
2,733
2,727
2,753
2,773
2,866
12,138
12,399
12,919
13,147
13,375
1981 .
1982 .
91,105
89,630
75,081
73,842
25,481
23,882
1,132
1,121
4,176
3,913
20,173
18,848
65,625
65,748
5,157
5,058
20,551
20,551
5,359
5,294
15,192
15,258
5,301
5,350
18,592
19,001
16,024
15,788
2,772
2,739
13,253
13,050
'Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.
10.
E m p lo y m e n t b y S ta te
[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
State
March 1982
February 1983
March 1983»
State
March 1982
February 1983
March 1983 ”
Alabama................................................
Alaska ..................................................
Arizona..................................................
Arkansas ................................................
California................................................
1,314.5
183.7
1,038.8
718.8
9,867.2
1,302.3
194.7
1,038.0
712.8
9,688.9
1,304.3
198.6
1,042.6
727.0
9,738.5
Montana..................................................
Nebraska ................................................
Nevada ....................................................
New Hampshire ......................................
New Jersey ............................................
266.0
603.3
404.0
387.0
3,037.2
265.3
579.0
399.7
382.4
3,014.1
267.1
583.6
403.0
385.3
3,032.6
Colorado................................................
Connecticut............................................
Delaware ..............................................
District of Columbia ................................
1,313.2
1,417.2
256.3
593.7
3,8164
1,302.4
1,402.8
251.9
590.4
3,837.5
1,309.7
1,407.7
254.7
591.5
3,846.1
New Mexico ............................................
New Y o rk................................................
North Carolina..........................................
North Dakota ..........................................
470.9
7,197.7
2,344.3
244.8
4,129.1
470.3
7,100.4
2,310.0
246.7
4,015.0
472.3
7,132.6
2,318.7
248.6
4,034.9
Georgia..................................................
Hawaii....................................................
Idaho ....................................................
Illinois ....................................................
Indiana ..................................................
2,184.4
403.7
307.7
4,605.1
2,019.4
2,198.2
399.1
306.7
4,441.4
1,944.2
2,209.2
400.1
308.2
4,463.9
1,952.9
Oklahoma................................................
Oregon ....................................................
Pennsylvania............................................
Rhode Island............................................
South Carolina ........................................
1,241.0
956.3
4,579.3
386.8
1,168.3
1,187.5
933.5
4,362.9
383.9
1,147.7
1,195.2
939.6
4,398.9
385.5
1,154.8
Iow a......................................................
Kansas ..................................................
Kentucky................................................
Louisiana................................................
Maine ....................................................
1,029.7
932.5
1,154.6
1,628.8
398.7
1,001.9
890.8
1,140.8
1,588.6
396.9
1,005.5
897.6
1,152.5
1,588.6
396.8
South Dakota ..........................................
Tennessee ..............................................
Texas ......................................................
Utah........................................................
Vermont..................................................
226.5
1,697.8
6,332.4
557.6
201.3
223.4
1,640.2
6,161.1
552.5
201.0
224.1
1,649.2
6,163.1
555.2
202.8
Maryland................................................
Massachusetts........................................
Michigan ................................................
Minnesota..............................................
Mississippi..............................................
Missouri ................................................
1,656.1
2,616.3
3,204.5
1,698.6
797.8
1,909.5
1,623.2
2,567.9
3,119.7
1,651.9
779.9
1,869.9
1,640.7
2,587.2
3,129.4
1,658.3
782.7
1,884.4
Virginia....................................................
Washington..............................................
West Virginia............................................
Wisconsin................................................
Wyoming ................................................
2,115.1
1,567.8
611.9
1,857.0
213.2
2,101.3
1,548.9
581.1
1,802.5
205.2
2,114.4
1,558.3
581.7
1,806.2
204.1
Virgin Islands............................................
37.5
35.9
36.0
p= preliminary.
62
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11.
Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted
[Nonagricultural payroll data, In thousands]
Annual average
1983
1982
Industry division and group
1981
1982
Apr.
TOTAL ..........................................................
91,105
89,630
90,083
90,166
89,839
89,535
89,313
89,264
PRIVATE SECTOR ..............................
75,081
73,842
74,231
74,313
74,007
73,900
73,640
73,504
25,481
23,882
24,289
24,255
23,994
23,840
23,657
23,530
1,132
1,121
1,182
1,152
1,124
1,100
1,086
1,075
GOODS-PRODUCING
Mining ................................................................
May
June
Juiy
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.p
88,877
88,750
88,565
88,920
88,759
88,955
89,213
73,118
72,996
72,810
73,182
73,003
73,225
73,492
23,239
23,081
22,986
23,162
23,018
23,050
23,183
1,058
1,046
1,037
1,027
1,005
997
990
Oct.
Apr.p
Construction ......................................................
4,176
3,913
3,938
3,988
3,940
3,927
3,899
3,883
3,856
3,854
3,818
3,927
3,787
3,777
3,808
Manufacturing ....................................................
Production workers..................................
20,173
14,021
18,848
12,782
19,169
13,042
19,115
13,008
18,930
12,852
18,813
12,760
18,672
12,647
18,572
12,566
18,325
12,335
18,181
12,203
18,131
12,172
18,208
12,246
18,226
12,267
18,276
12,323
18,385
12,432
Durable goods ................................................
Production workers..................................
12,117
8,301
11,112
7,364
11,375
7,576
11,332
7,553
11,203
7,443
11,133
7,388
10,993
7,272
10,900
7,191
10,666
6,979
10,550
6,874
10,519
6,853
10,576
6,913
10,607
6,939
10,640
6,981
10,729
7,061
Lumber and wood products ............................
Furniture and fixtures......................................
Stone, clay, and glass products ......................
Primary metal Industries..................................
Fabricated metal products ..............................
668.7
467.3
638.2
1,121.1
1,592.4
613.9
441.7
577.2
918.5
1,442.6
615
443
584
976
1,481
617
443
586
945
1,472
615
442
580
926
1,452
614
439
579
906
1,446
614
443
574
889
1,427
616
439
571
865
1,414
614
434
565
831
1,381
616
435
556
813
1,365
621
436
552
803
1,358
633
436
554
815
1,368
640
433
554
810
1,371
649
440
556
820
1,371
666
449
564
827
1,379
Machinery, except electrical............................
Electric and electronic equipment....................
Transportation equipment................................
Instruments and related products ....................
Miscellaneous manufacturing ..........................
2,507.0
2,092.2
1,892.6
726.8
410.7
2,288.7
2,011.2
1,726.0
705.2
387.3
2,389
2,034
1,748
713
392
2,377
2,034
1,755
713
390
2,322
2,026
1,745
708
387
2,274
2,018
1,759
708
390
2,230
2,011
1,719
702
384
2,208
1,995
1,709
701
382
2,142
1,969
1,658
694
378
2,108
1,963
1,631
689
374
2,086
1,946
1,662
682
373
2,067
1,964
1,679
684
376
2,060
1,972
1,711
681
375
2,062
1,982
1,702
679
379
2,066
1,999
1,717
679
383
Nondurable goods ..........................................
Production workers..................................
8,056
5,721
7,736
5,418
7,794
5,466
7,783
5,455
7,727
5,409
7,680
5,372
7,679
5,375
7,672
5,375
7,659
5,356
7,631
5,329
7,612
5,319
7,632
5,333
7,619
5,328
7,636
. 5,342
7,656
5,371
Food and kindred products..............................
Tobacco manufactures ..................................
Textile mill products........................................
Apparel and other textile products ..................
Paper and allied products ..............................
1,674.3
69.8
822.5
1,244.0
687.8
1,644.0
65.6
748.9
1,158.3
659.5
1,643
67
773
1,165
664
1,652
67
759
1,165
661
1,637
67
741
1,161
658
1,643
65
741
1,126
657
1,628
65
737
1,145
653
1,629
63
735
1,143
657
1,644
63
735
1,141
650
1,644
61
726
1,134
652
1,636
66
725
1,131
650
1,637
67
723
1,145
650
1,627
65
723
1,143
649
1,629
65
727
1,139
650
1,630
64
733
1,137
649
Printing and publishing....................................
Chemicals and allied products ........................
Petroleum and coal products ..........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products . . .
Leather and leather products..........................
1,265.8
1,107.3
215.6
736.1
233.0
1,270.7
1,074.0
206.8
697.8
210.1
1,274
1,082
206
706
214
1,274
1,079
207
708
211
1,269
1,073
205
704
212
1,267
1,068
205
700
208
1,269
1,070
205
699
208
1,269
1,066
209
694
207
1,268
1,061
208
684
205
1,266
1,059
206
678
205
1,265
1,054
206
678
201
1,270
1,052
207
680
201
1,268
1,052
206
685
201
1,273
1,050
206
695
202
1,277
1,053
207
705
201
SERVICE-PRODUCING
65,625
65,748
65,794
65,911
65,845
65,695
65,656
65,734
65,638
65,669
65,579
65,758
65,741
65,905
66,030
Transportation and public utilities ......................
5,157
5,058
5,094
5,101
5,078
5,044
5,025
5,031
5,007
4,992
4,983
4,949
4,938
4,934
4,955
Wholesale and retail trade..................................
20,551
20,551
20,584
20,652
20,595
20,615
20,550
20,492
20,441
20,425
20,316
20,487
20,448
20,521
20,512
Wholesale trade..................................................
5,359
5,294
5,323
5,331
5,307
5,299
5,278
5,272
5,254
5,228
5,205
5,197
5,192
5,199
5,204
Retail trade ........................................................
15,192
15,258
15,261
15,321
15,288
15,316
15,272
15,220
15,187
15,197
15,111
15,290
15,256
15,322
15,308
Finance, insurance, and real e state....................
5,301
5,350
5,335
5,342
5,352
5,359
5,360
5,367
5,357
5,363
5,377
5,384
5,396
5,406
5,424
Services..............................................................
18,592
19.001
18,929
18,963
18,988
19,042
19,048
19,084
19,074
19,135
19,148
19,200
19,203
19,314
19,418
Government........................................................
Federal..........................................................
State and local ..............................................
16,024
2,772
13,253
15,788
2,739
13,050
15,852
2,730
13,122
15,853
2,728
13,125
15,832
2,739
13,093
15,635
2,737
12,898
15,673
2,740
12,933
15,760
2,731
13,029
15,759
2,740
13,019
15,754
2,745
13,009
15,755
2,761
12,994
15,738
2,749
12,989
15,756
2,751
13,005
15,730
2,748
12,982
15,721
2,746
12,975
p=preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
12.
Hours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1950-82
[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls]
Year
Average
weekly
earnings
Average
weekly
hours
Average
hourly
earnings
Average
weekly
earnings
Private sector
Average
weekly
hours
Average
hourly
earnings
Average
weekly
earnings
Average
weekly
hours
Average
hourly
earnings
Average
weekly
earnings
Average
hourly
earnings
Manufacturing
Construction
Mining
Average
weekly
hours
1950 ..................
1955 ..................
I960' ................
1964 ..................
1965 ..................
$53.13
67.72
80.67
91.33
95.45
39.8
39.6
38.6
38.7
38.8
$1.335
1.71
2.09
2.36
2.46
$67.16
89.54
105.04
117.74
123.52
37.9
40.7
40.4
41.9
42.3
$1.772
2.20
2.60
2.81
2.92
$69.68
90.90
112.67
132.06
138.38
37.4
37.1
36.7
37.2
37.4
$1.863
2.45
3.07
3.55
3.70
$58.32
75.30
89.72
102.97
107.53
40.5
40.7
39.7
40.7
41.2
$1.440
1.85
2.26
2.53
2.61
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
98.82
101.84
107.73
114.61
119.83
38.6
38.0
37.8
37.7
37.1
2.56
2.68
2.85
3.04
3.23
130.24
135.89
142.71
154.80
164.40
42.7
42.6
42.6
43.0
42.7
3.05
3.19
3.35
3.60
3.85
146.26
154.95
164.49
181.54
195.45
37.6
37.7
37.3
37.9
37.3
3.89
4.11
4.41
4.79
5.24
112.19
114.49
122.51
129.51
133.33
41.4
40.6
40.7
40.6
39.8
2.71
2.82
3.01
3.19
3.35
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
127.31
136.90
145.39
154.76
163.53
36.9
37.0
36.9
36.5
36.1
3.45
3.70
3.94
4.24
4.53
172.14
189.14
201.40
219.14
249.31
42.4
42.6
42.4
41.9
41.9
4.06
4.44
4.75
5.23
5.95
211.67
221.19
235.89
249.25
266.08
37.2
36.5
36.8
36.6
36.4
5.69
6.06
6.41
6.81
7.31
142.44
154.71
166.46
176.80
190.79
39.9
40.5
40.7
40.0
39.5
3.57
3.82
4.09
4.42
4.83
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
175.45
189.00
203.70
219.91
235.10
36.1
36.0
35.8
35.7
35.3
4.86
5.25
5.69
6.16
6.66
273.90
301.20
332.88
365.07
397.06
42.4
43.4
43.4
43.0
43.3
6.46
6.94
7.67
8.49
9.17
283.73
295.65
318.69
342.99
367.78
36.8
36.5
36.8
37.0
37.0
7.71
8.10
8.66
9.27
9.94
209.32
228.90
249.27
269.34
288.62
40.1
40.3
40.4
40.2
39.7
5.22
5.68
6.17
6.70
7.27
1981 ..................
1982 ..................
255.20
266.92
35.2
34.8
7.25
7.67
439.19
460.93
43.7
42.6
10.05
10.82
398.52
425.41
36.9
36.8
10.80
11.56
318.00
330.65
39.8
38.9
7.99
8.50
Transportation and public
utilities
1950
1955 . . .
I9601 ..............
1964 ..................
1965 ..................
Finance, Insurance, and
real estate
Wholesale and retail trade
$118.78
125.14
41.1
41.3
$2.89
3.03
$44.55
55.16
66.01
74.66
76.91
Services
40.5
39.4
38.6
37.9
37.7
$1.100
1.40
1.71
1.97
2.04
$50.52
63.92
75.14
85.79
88.91
37.7
37.6
37.2
37.3
37.2
$1.340
1.70
2.02
2.30
2.39
$70.03
73.60
36.1
35.9
$1.94
2.05
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
128.13
130.82
138.85
147.74
155.93
41.2
40.5
40.6
40.7
40.5
3.11
3.23
3.42
3.63
3.85
79.39
82.35
87.00
91.39
96.02
37.1
36.6
36.1
35.7
35.3
2.14
2.25
2.41
2.56
2.72
92.13
95.72
101.75
108.70
112.67
37.3
37.1
37.0
37.1
36.7
2.47
2.58
2.75
2.93
3.07
77.04
80.38
83.97
90.57
96.66
35.5
35.1
34.7
34.7
34.4
2.17
2.29
2.42
2.61
2.81
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
168.82
187.86
203.31
217.48
233.44
40.1
40.4
40.5
40.2
39.7
4.21
4.65
5.02
5.41
5.88
101.09
106.45
111.76
119.02
126.45
35.1
34.9
34.6
34.2
33.9
2.88
3.05
3.23
3.48
3.73
117.85
122.98
129.20
137.61
148.19
36.6
36.6
36.6
36.5
36.5
3.22
3.36
3.53
3.77
4.06
103.06
110.85
117.29
126.00
134.67
33.9
33.9
33.8
33.6
33.5
3.04
3.27
3.47
3.75
4.02
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
256.71
278.90
302.80
325.58
351.25
39.8
39.9
40.0
39.9
39.6
6.45
6.99
7.57
8.16
8.87
133.79
142.52
153.64
164.96
176.46
33.7
33.3
32.9
32.6
32.2
3.97
4.28
4.67
5.06
5.48
155.43
165.26
178.00
190.77
209.60
36.4
36.4
36.4
36.2
36.2
4.27
4.54
4.89
5.27
5.79
143.52
153.45
163.67
175.27
190.71
33.3
33.0
32.8
32.7
32.6
4.31
4.65
4.99
5.36
5.85
1981 ..................
1982 ..................
382.18
402.09
39.4
39.0
9.70
10.31
190.95
198.42
32.2
31.9
5.93
6.22
229.05
245.44
36.3
36.2
6.31
6.78
208.97
225.27
32.6
32.6
6.41
6.91
1Data Include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959,
64
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
13.
Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted
[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1983
1982
Annual average
Industry division and group
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.”
Apr.p
PRIVATE SECTOR ......................................
35.2
34.8
34.9
35.0
34.9
34.9
34.8
34.8
34.7
34.7
34.8
35.1
34.5
34.8
35.0
MANUFACTURING ............................................
Overtime hours......................................
39.8
2.8
38.9
2.3
39.0
2.4
39.1
2.3
39.2
2.4
39.2
2.4
39.0
2.4
38.8
2.3
38.8
2.3
38.9
2.3
38.9
2.3
39.8
2.3
39.1
2.3
39.6
2.5
40.1
3.0
Durable goods................................................
Overtime hours......................................
40.2
2.8
39.3
2.2
39.5
2.2
39.6
2.2
39.7
2.3
39.7
2.2
39.4
2.2
38.9
2.1
39.0
2.0
39.2
2.1
39.2
2.1
40.2
2.1
39.5
2.2
40.0
2.4
40.6
2.9
Lumber and wood products ..........................
Furniture and fixtures....................................
Stone, clay, and glass products......................
Primary metal industries................................
Fabricated metal products ............................
38.7
38.4
40.6
40.5
40.3
38.0
37.3
40.1
38.6
39.2
37.6
37.4
40.0
38.5
39.4
38.5
37.5
40.2
38.5
39.5
38.7
37.8
40.4
38.9
39.4
38.6
37.6
40.6
38.9
39.5
38.2
37.9
40.3
38.8
39.2
38.5
37.4
40.2
37.8
38.8
38.0
37.5
40.2
38.0
38.9
38.5
37.6
40.2
38.2
39.0
38.5
37.7
40.0
38.9
39.1
40.8
38.8
41.6
38.9
39.8
39.4
37.7
40.3
38.9
39.5
39.6
38.3
40.7
39.4
39.9
40.0
39.4
41.0
39.8
40.7
Machinery, except electrical ..........................
Electric and electronic equipment ..................
Transportation equipment..............................
Instruments and related products ..................
Miscellaneous manufacturing ........................
40.9
39.9
40.9
40.4
38.8
39.6
39.3
40.5
39.8
38.5
40.1
39.3
41.1
39.9
38.5
39.8
39.4
41.1
40.2
38.7
39.6
39.5
41.6
40.2
38.6
39.8
39.8
41.0
40.1
38.7
39.5
39.3
40.5
40.1
38.6
39.0
38.8
39.8
39.8
38.3
39.2
39.0
40.1
39.4
38.6
39.2
39.2
40.8
39.2
38.6
39.3
39.3
39.9
39.6
38.4
39.7
39.9
41.7
40.6
39.4
39.4
39.3
41.0
39.6
37.9
39.8
39.8
41.9
40.1
38.8
40.3
40.2
42.5
40.4
39.3
Nondurable goods ........................................
Overtime hours......................................
39.1
2.8
38.4
2.5
38.4
2.6
38.5
2.5
38.6
2.5
38.6
2.6
38.5
2.6
38.6
2.6
38.5
2.6
38.5
2.5
38.5
2.5
39.3
2.5
38.5
2.5
38.9
2.8
39.4
3.0
Food and kindred products............................
Textile mill products......................................
Apparel and other textile products..................
Paper and allied products..............................
39.7
39.6
35.7
42.5
39.5
37.5
34.7
41.8
39.4
37.7
34.7
42.1
39.4
37.9
34.8
41.8
39.5
37.8
35.1
42.0
39.5
37.7
35.2
41.9
39.1
38.2
35.0
41.7
39.4
38.1
35.2
41.5
39.7
38.2
35.0
41.7
39.4
38.6
35.1
41.6
39.2
38.4
35.0
41.6
39.4
40.3
36.9
41.7
39.1
38.9
35.0
41.3
39.2
39.6
35.4
42.0
39.4
40.5
35.9
42.4
Printing and publishing ..................................
Chemicals and allied products........................
Petroleum and coal products ........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ..
Leather and leather products ........................
37.3
41.6
43.2
40.3
36.8
37.0
40.9
43.9
39.6
35.6
37.1
40.7
44.0
39.8
35.6
36.8
41.0
44.1
39.9
35.6
37.1
41.0
44.1
40.1
35.7
37.0
40.9
43.3
40.2
36.1
36.8
40.9
43.9
39.7
36.0
37.0
41.2
44.0
39.6
35.7
36.9
40.8
43.3
39.0
35.2
37.1
40.6
43.9
39.3
35.9
37.1
40.9
44.4
39.6
35.8
37.6
41.1
44.6
40.2
36.7
37.1
41.0
44.6
39.8
34.9
37.4
41.2
45.0
40.5
35.9
37.7
41.3
44.2
41.3
37.0
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE
32.2
31.9
31.8
32.0
31.9
31.9
31.9
32.1
31.9
31.8
32.1
32.0
31.3
32.0
31.9
WHOLESALE TRADE..........................................
38.6
38.4
38.3
38.5
38.6
38.5
38.5
38.4
38.3
38.4
38.4
38.7
38.2
38.5
38.5
RETAIL TRADE..................................................
30.1
29.9
29.8
30.0
29.8
29.9
29.9
30.1
29.9
29.8
30.2
30.0
29.2
30.0
29.9
SERVICES..........................................................
32.6
32.6
32.7
32.7
32.7
32.6
32.6
32.8
32.6
32.6
32.7
32.8
32.5
32.7
32.7
p= prelim inary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
65
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
14.
Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group
[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
Annual average
1982
1983
Industry division and group
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar."
Apr.P
PRIVATE SECTOR ......................................
Seasonally adjusted ..............................
$7.25
( ')
$7.67
(’ )
$7.58
7.59
$7.63
7.65
$7.64
7.67
$7.67
7.71
$7.70
7.74
$7.76
7.72
$7.79
7.77
$7.81
7.79
$7.82
7.82
$7.90
7.87
$7.92
7.90
$7.90
7.89
$7.93
7.94
MINING..............................................................
10.05
10.82
10.65
10.66
10.82
10.91
10.93
11.04
11.02
11.06
11.08
11.27
11.30
11.20
11.20
CONSTRUCTION................................................
10.80
11.56
11.32
11.46
11.41
11.53
11.60
11.68
11.82
11.66
11.90
11.89
11.95
11.88
11.91
MANUFACTURING ............................................
7.99
8.50
8.42
8.45
8.50
8.55
8.51
8.59
8.56
8.61
8.69
8.71
8.75
8.75
8.78
Durable goods............................................
Lumber and wood products ....................
Furniture and fixtures..............................
Stone, clay, and glass products ..............
Primary metal industries..........................
Fabricated metal products ......................
8.53
7.00
5.91
8.27
10.81
8.20
9.05
7.50
6.32
8.87
11.33
8.78
8.94
7.24
6.21
8.72
11.24
8.69
9.01
7.41
6.23
8.80
11.23
8.79
9.06
7.59
6.30
8.86
11.31
8.83
9.11
7.64
6.34
8.93
11.37
8.85
9.09
7.61
6.39
8.93
11.49
8.85
9.16
7.70
6.41
9.03
11.54
8.90
9.13
7.61
6.41
9.04
11.42
8.85
9.17
7.63
6.44
9.04
11.49
8.90
9.23
7.59
6.47
9.08
11.49
8.97
9.26
7.72
6.50
9.12
11.57
8.98
9.31
7.76
6.51
9.11
11.54
9.05
9.30
7.72
6.51
9.15
11.28
9.05
9.31
7.79
6.53
9.18
11.36
9.08
Machinery, except electrical....................
Electric and electronic equipment............
Transportation equipment........................
Instruments and related products ............
Miscellaneous manufacturing ..................
8.81
7.62
10.39
7.43
5.96
9.28
8.17
11.12
8.26
6.42
9.24
8.03
10.89
8.07
6.35
9.26
8.05
11.08
8.16
6.38
9.27
8.09
11.21
8.23
6.41
9.30
8.18
11.25
8.31
6.40
9.33
8.24
11.18
8.40
6.39
9.40
8.31
11.24
8.44
6.49
9.34
8.34
11.30
8.48
6.50
9.36
8.38
11.35
8.57
6.56
9.41
8.45
11.44
8.66
6.66
9.38
8.48
11.41
8.75
6.71
9.42
8.51
11.49
8.78
6.73
9.44
8.54
11.49
8.79
6.74
9.44
8.52
11.54
8.77
6.72
Nondurable goods......................................
Food and kindred products......................
Tobacco manufactures............................
Textile mill products................................
Apparel and other textile products ..........
Paper and allied products........................
7.18
7.43
8.88
5.52
4.96
8.60
7.73
7.89
9.78
5.83
5.18
9.32
7.65
7.90
10.05
5.79
5.18
9.11
7.66
7.92
9.93
5.79
5.16
9.14
7.70
7.90
10.35
5.79
5.18
9.28
7.77
7.88
10.42
5.81
5.17
9.41
7.74
7.85
9.53
5.82
5.18
9.45
7.84
7.91
9.57
5.86
5.20
9.63
7.81
7.88
9.50
5.87
5.19
9.54
7.88
8.00
10.16
5.92
5.22
9.60
7.96
8.06
9.63
6.03
5.26
9.66
7.98
8.08
9.87
6.08
5.31
9.66
8.00
8.10
9.97
6.10
5.32
9.66
8.01
8.14
10.33
6.11
5.31
9.68
8.05
8.19
10.47
6.13
5.33
9.70
8.18
9.12
11.38
7.16
4.99
8.73
9.98
12.46
7.63
5.33
8.59
9.81
12.50
7.52
5.32
8.61
9.83
12.52
7.56
5.32
8.66
9.95
12.53
7.64
5.36
8.74
10.02
12.42
7.65
5.30
8.79
10.03
12.42
7.64
5.33
8.90
10.20
12.62
7.76
5.41
8.87
10.24
12.57
7.72
5.39
8.91
10.28
12.69
7.79
5.41
8.99
10.34
12.72
7.89
5.44
8.96
10.35
13.17
7.89
5.51
8.98
10.43
13.26
7.89
5.51
9.02
10.41
13.35
7.91
5.53
9.04
10.47
13.47
7.93
5.52
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES .
9.70
10.31
10.14
10.17
10.20
10.29
10.43
10.46
10.48
10.59
10.62
10.69
10.71
10.68
10.71
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ....................
5.93
6.22
6.18
6.20
6.20
6.21
6.22
6.26
6.30
6.32
6.29
6.44
6.47
6.42
6.44
WHOLESALE TRADE..........................................
7.57
8.06
7.97
8.03
8.01
8.07
8.11
8.14
8.17
8.18
8.24
8.34
8.32
8.29
8.33
Printing and publishing............................
Chemicals and allied products ................
Petroleum and coal products ..................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products ..................
RETAIL TRADE..................................................
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE
SERVICES..........................................................
.
5.25
5.49
5.44
5.47
5.47
5.48
5.48
5.52
5.54
5.58
5.56
5.67
5.71
5.68
5.69
6.31
6.78
6.64
6.77
6.71
6.78
6.87
6.90
6.97
7.01
7.01
7.23
7.25
7.25
7.29
6.41
6.91
6.81
6.85
6.84
6.87
6.90
6.99
7.05
7.08
7.12
7.19
7.19
7.18
7.19
1Not available.
15.
p=preliminary.
Hourly Earnings Index, for production workers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry
[1977=100]
Not seasonally adjusted
Industry
PRIVATE SECTOR (in current dollars)
Mining..................................................
Construction ........................................
Manufacturing ......................................
Transportation and public utilities............
Wholesale and retail trade ....................
Finance, insurance, and real estate . . . .
Services ..............................................
PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant dollars)
Apr.
1982
Feb.
1983
Mar.
1983 p
Apr.
1983P
Percent
change
from:
Apr. 1982
to
Apr. 1983
Apr.
1982
Dec.
1982
Jan.
1983
Feb.
1983
Mar.
1983 p
Apr.
1983P
Percent
change
from:
Mar. 1983
to
Apr. 1983
146.5
153.8
153.5
154.0
5.2
146.3
152.1
152.8
153.4
153.4
153.9
0.3
156.5
137.4
150.9
146.4
144.3
145.4
145.6
165.4
144.1
157.4
156.1
150.2
158.1
153.4
164.0
143.6
157.0
155.5
150.1
157.9
153.2
164.6
144.4
157.2
155.7
150.9
158.7
153.7
5.2
5.2
4.2
6.3
4.5
9.2
5.6
( ')
138.7
150.8
146.9
143.7
144.9
145.1
( 1)
143.8
155.6
153.4
148.6
153.7
152.4
( 1)
143.8
156.6
155.1
148.9
156.9
152.2
( 1)
145.5
157.4
155.7
149.3
156.3
152.2
( 1)
144.9
157.1
156.5
149.4
157.4
152.4
( ')
145.9
157.2
156.2
150.2
158.2
153.2
( ')
.7
.1
-.2
.5
.5
.5
93.7
95.5
95.1
(2)
(2)
93.7
94.3
94.8
95.3
95.0
(2)
<2)
'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.
Digitized for66
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Seasonally adjusted
2 Not available,
p = preliminary,
16.
Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group
[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
Annual average
1982
1983
Industry division and group
1981
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.p
Apr.p
PRIVATE SECTOR
Current dollars..........................................
Seasonally adjusted................................
Constant (1977) dollars..............................
$255.20
(’ )
170.13
$266.92
n
167.87
$262.27
264.89
167.80
$265.52
267.75
168.16
$267.40
267.68
167.33
$269.98
269.08
167.90
$271.04
269.35
168.24
$270.05
268.66
167.42
$270.31
269.62
167.06
$271.01
270.31
167.81
$274.48
272.14
170.59
$273.34
276.24
169.88
$270.86
272.55
168.24
$274.13
274.57
169.85
$275.96
277.90
( 1)
MINING ........................................................
439.19
460.93
454.76
454.12
463.10
463.68
463.43
462.58
461.74
460.10
467.58
478.98
466.69
461.44
$460.32
CONSTRUCTION ..........................................
398.52
425.41
415.44
429.75
427.88
438.14
436.16
430.99
438.52
420.93
437.92
437.55
423.03
432.43
437.10
MANUFACTURING
Current dollars..........................................
Constant (1977) dollars..............................
318.00
212.00
330.65
207.96
325.85
208.48
329.55
208.71
334.05
209.04
332.60
206.84
331.89
206.40
334.15
207.16
333.84
206.33
338.37
209.52
344.99
214.41
341.43
212.20
340.38
211.42
346.50
214.68
348.57
( ')
Durable goods..............................................
Lumber and wood products........................
Furniture and fixtures ................................
Stone, clay, and glass products..................
Primary metal industries ............................
Fabricated metal products..........................
342.91
270.90
226.94
335.76
437.81
330.46
355.67
285.00
235.74
355.69
437.34
344.18
350.45
270.05
230.39
347.93
434.99
338.91
355.90
285.29
231.76
355.52
430.11
346.33
360.59
297.53
238.77
361.49
439.96
349.67
357.11
294.90
233.31
362.56
437.75
344.27
356.33
295.27
243.46
362.56
440.07
346.04
357.24
298.76
241.66
365.72
438.52
346.21
357.90
292.22
244.22
367.02
431.68
346.04
363.13
293.76
245.36
367.02
440.07
350.66
370.12
295.25
250.39
366.83
450.41
359.70
367.62
302.62
243.75
367.54
451.23
354.71
366.81
301.86
243.47
358.93
451.21
354.76
372.93
304.94
251.29
370.58
446.69
362.00
$375.19
309.26
254.67
375.46
454.40
365.92
Machinery except electrical........................
Electric and electronic equipment................
Transportation equipment ..........................
Instruments and related products................
Miscellaneous manufacturing......................
360.33
304.04
424.95
300.17
231.25
367.49
321.08
450.36
328.75
247.17
367.75
313.17
441.05
318.77
242.57
367.62
315.56
455.39
327.22
245.63
367.09
319.56
466.34
330.85
247.43
363.63
319.84
456.75
328.25
244.48
364.80
322.18
447.20
335.16
246.65
367.54
322.43
443.98
335.91
250.51
365.19
326.09
457.65
334.96
253.50
370.66
331.85
467.62
341.09
256.50
380.16
339.69
474.76
349.86
259.74
371.45
336.66
468.95
351.75
259.68
371.15
334.44
469.94
348.57
253.72
377.60
340.75
481.43
354.24
262.19
377.60
339.95
483.53
350.80
262.08
Nondurable goods........................................
Food and kindred products ........................
Tobacco manufactures ..............................
Textile mill products ..................................
Apparel and other textile products..............
Paper and allied products ..........................
280.74
294.97
344.54
218.59
177.07
365.50
296.83
311.66
369.68
218.63
179.75
389.58
291.47
306.52
367.83
215.39
178.19
380.80
294.14
312.05
369.40
219.44
180.08
379.31
297.99
312.05
397.44
220.60
183.89
389.76
299.15
312.05
383.46
216.13
183.02
391.46
299.54
310.86
363.09
222.91
183.37
393.12
304.19
315.61
379.93
223.85
182.52
401.57
302.25
312.84
370.50
227.17
183.21
397.82
306.53
317.60
386.08
231.47
184.79
402.24
311.24
319.98
364.98
236.38
186.20
410.55
308.03
315.12
360.26
236.51
187.44
402.82
305.60
312.66
339.98
236.07
184.60
397.03
311.59
315.83
377.05
242.57
188.51
405.59
313.95
317.77
398.91
245.20
189.22
408.37
Printing and publishing................................
Chemicals and allied products....................
Petroleum and coal products......................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products....................................
Leather and leather products......................
305.11
379.39
491.62
323.01
408.18
546.99
316.11
399.27
550.00
315.99
401.06
549.63
319.55
406.96
553.83
322.51
407.81
546.48
326.11
408.22
546.48
331.08
420.24
572.95
328.19
417.79
555.59
332.34
421.48
564.71
340.72
428.08
563.50
332.42
423.32
572.90
330.46
426.59
574.16
337.35
428.89
584.73
338.10
432.41
595.37
288.55
183.63
302.15
189.75
297.04
187.26
300.13
191.52
306.36
196.71
302.94
191.33
303.31
192.95
307.30
192.06
303.40
190.27
308.48
194.76
317.97
196.38
316.39
197.26
313.23
191.20
321.15
197.42
325.13
202.03
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES .
382.18
402.09
393.43
394.60
399.84
403.37
409.90
405.85
406.62
413.01
415.24
409.43
411.26
411.18
413.41
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ..................
190.95
198.42
195.91
197.78
199.02
202.45
202.77
200.95
200.97
200.34
203.80
202.22
199.92
203.51
204.79
WHOLESALE TRADE ......................................
292.20
309.50
304.45
308.35
309.19
312.31
313.05
312.58
314.55
314.93
318.89
320.26
315.33
318.34
319.87
RETAIL TRADE................................................
158.03
164.15
161.02
163.01
164.65
168.24
168.24
166.70
165.09
165.73
170.14
166.13
163.88
168.13
168.99
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE . .
229.05
245.44
240.37
245.75
242.23
245.44
249.38
249.09
252.31
253.76
254.46
263.90
261.73
261.00
262.44
SERVICES........................................................
208.97
225.27
221.33
222.63
224.35
227.40
227.70
228.57
229.13
230.10
232.82
234.39
232.96
234.07
233.68
1 Not available.
17.
p = preliminary.
Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased
[In percent]
Time
span
Year
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Over
1-month
span
1981 . . . .
1982 . . . .
1983 . . . .
56.7
32.5
54.8
48.7
42.5
39.2
51.1
35.8
p60.5
68.3
40.9
p72.6
65.3
51.1
54.0
32.0
59.9
43.5
50.3
37.6
50.3
43.0
34.7
26.1
28.2
34.9
31.2
39.0
Over
3-month
span
1981 . . . .
1982 . . . .
1983 . . . .
53.5
28.0
41.1
52.2
31.2
p 51.3
60.2
33.6
»64.2
70.2
37.1
70.4
35.8
65.9
35.8
59.4
27.7
57.0
31.7
40.1
27.7
30.6
28.0
26.3
23.9
23.4
38.2
Over
6-month
span
1981 . . . .
1982 . . . .
1983 . . . .
64.8
21.8
p49.7
65.9
27.4
67.2
27.4
67.7
29.8
67.2
28.8
67.5
30.1
51.3
24.2
39.0
21.0
33.9
24.7
30.1
28.2
27.7
28.0
24.2
»33.3
Over
12-month
span
1981 . . . .
1982 . . . .
1983 . . . .
73.9
23.1
71.0
23.1
70.4
21.2
62.1
18.8
50.0
18.0
43.3
21.0
35.2
24.7
33.6
21.8
31.5
p25.0
27.2
p34.9
27.7
25.8
p = preliminary
N ote :
Figures are the percent of industries with employment rising. Half of the unchanged
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
components are counted as rising.) Data are centered within the spans. See the “ Definitions” in this
section.
67
U NEM PLOY M ENT INSURANCE DATA
ployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about 10
percent of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet
earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. Ini
tial claims are notices filed by persons in unemployment insurance
programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiv
ing compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a
full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The
rate of insured unemployment expresses the number of insured unem
ployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a
12-month period.
N a t i o n a l u n e m p l o y m e n t in s u r a n c e d a t a are com piled
m onthly by the E m ploym ent and Training A dm inistration of
the U .S. D epartm ent of Labor from m on th ly reports of unem
ploym ent insurance activity prepared by State agencies. R ail
road unem ploym ent insurance data are prepared by the U .S.
R ailroad R etirem ent Board.
Definitions
An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the be
ginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no ap
plication is required for subsequent periods in the same year. Num
ber of payments are payments made in 14-day registration periods.
The average amount of benefit payment is an average for all com
pensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or set
tlement of underpayments. However, total benefits paid have been
adjusted.
Data for all programs represent an unduplicated count of insured
unemployment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation
for Ex-Servicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal
Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act.
Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs
for civilian employees, insured workers must report the completion of
at least 1 week of unemployment before they are defined as unem-
18.
Unemployment insurance and employment service operations
[All items except average benefits amounts are in thousands]
1982
Item
All programs:
Insured unemployment........................
State unemployment insurance program:'
Initial claims2 ......................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume) ..............................
Rate of insured unemployment ............
Weeks of unemployment compensated .
Average weekly benefit amount
for total unemployment....................
Total benefits paid ..............................
State unemployment insurance program:1
(Seasonally adjusted data)
Initial claims2 ......................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume) ..............................
Rate of insured unemployment ............
Unemployment compensation for exservicemen:3
Initial claims ' ......................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume) ..............................
Weeks of unemployment compensated .
Total benefits paid ..............................
Mar.
Apr.
May
July
June
Sept.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.e
4,892
4,760
4,388
4,327
4,495
4,398
4,283
4,391
4,635
5,074
5,459
5,436
5,134
2,418
2,347
1,989
2,399
2,655
2,358
2,342
2,443
2,661
3,080
3,143
2,065
2,075
4,282
4.9
18,144
4,067
4.6
16,158
3,729
4.3
13,679
3,707
4.3
14,648
3,912
4.6
14,655
3,831
4.4
15,015
3,712
4.2
14,547
3,828
4.4
13,786
4,156
4.7
15,170
4,581
5.2
17,873
4,923
5.6
r 18,232
4,759
5.5
16,888
4,401
5.0
19,121
$117.10
$117.61
$118.08
$2,072,642 $1,849,881 $1,573,444
$118.64
$117.28
$118.97
$1,692,150 $1,679,378 $1,746,195
r $124.34
$124.44
$120.78
$122.81
$123.43
$123.42
$125.89
$1,710,573 $1,647,343 $1,820,019 $2,135,302 r $2,196,641 $2,044,646 $2,321,281
2,521
2,442
2,379
2,528
2,317
2,814
2,902
2,688
2,680
2,586
2,187
r 2,138
2,148
3,777
4.3
3,939
4.5
3,925
4.5
3,995
4.6
3,959
4.5
4,137
4.7
4,446
5.1
4,680
5.3
4,618
5.3
4,355
5.0
3,980
4.6
3,979
4.6
3,884
4.5
10
9
8
10
10
11
11
10
17
24
21
16
18
11
48
$5,141
10
37
$4,013
9
31
$3,395
8
29
$3,314
7
25
$2,821
7
24
$2,793
8
25
$2,900
9
28
$3,366
14
33
$4,006
26
90
$11,191
37
r 132
r $16,541
37
138
$17,372
34
149
$18,779
Unemployment compensation for
Federal civilian employees:4
Initial claims........................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume) ..............................
Weeks of unemployment compensated .
Total benefits paid ..............................
13
13
11
14
13
12
13
16
14
15
16
10
11
38
172
$19,677
33
146
$16,806
29
120
$13,526
28
123
$13,922
29
120
$13,445
27
118
$13,140
26
111
$12,303
28
110
$12,144
31
126
$14,023
33
146
$16,114
35
r 142
'$16,090
33
131
$15,103
31
146
$16,824
Railroad unemployment insurance:
Applications........................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume) ..............................
Number of payments ..........................
Average amount of benefit payment . . .
Total benefits paid ..............................
9
5
5
36
68
68
14
20
17
17
20
7
7,628
65
154
$215.71
$33,853
57
130
$209.48
$26,262
44
95
$200.75
$19,110
44
93
$199.15
$18,574
55
100
$202.54
$17,998
55
100
$202.54
$17,998
61
137
$216.14
$31,123
82
159
$212.35
$31,638
81
162
$216.55
$35,061
83
172
$217.00
$39,500
102
219
$220.32
$44,514
72
158
$214.54
$33,100
65,000
169,000
$213.44
$36,243
Employment service:5
New applications and renewals............
Nonfarm placements ..........................
7,439
1,232
10,965
1,902
11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican
sugarcane workers.
2 Excludes transition claims under State programs.
3 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs.
4 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs.
68
1983
Aug.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14,320
2,804
4,527
642
5Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1-September 30). Data computed quarterly,
N0TE: Data for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands included. Dashes indicate data not available.
p= preliminary.
r= revised.
7,229
1,034
PRICE DATA
d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
from retail and primary markets in the U nited States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100,
P r ic e
unless otherw ise noted).
Definitions
The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure of the
average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and ser
vices. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics began publishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. It in
troduced a CPI for All Urban Consumers, covering 80 percent of the
total noninstitutional population, and revised the CPI for Urban
Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covering about half the new in
dex population. The All Urban Consumers index covers in addition to
wage earners and clerical workers, professional, managerial, and tech
nical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed,
retirees, and others not in the labor force.
The CPI is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs,
transportation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and
services that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quali
ty of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revi
sions so that only price changes will be measured. Data are collected
from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000 tenants in 85
urban areas across the country. All taxes directly associated with the
purchase and use of items are included in the index. Because the
CPI’s are based on the expenditures of two population groups in 1972—
73, they may not accurately reflect the experience of individual
families and single persons with different buying habits.
Though the CPI is often called the “Cost-of-Living Index,” it meas
ures only price change, which is just one of several important factors
affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the
level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in
prices for each area since the base period.
Producer Price Indexes measure average changes in prices received
in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodities
in all stages of processing. The sample used for calculating these in
dexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations
per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all com
modities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing,
mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe
includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial
transactions in primary markets in the United States.
Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or
by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products
by degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or
semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure
organizes products by similarity of end-use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price In
dexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the Unit
ed States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data
are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire.
Most prices are obtained directly from producing companies on a vol
untary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the
Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month.
In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the vari
ous commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights
representing their importance in the total net selling value of all com
modities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain in
dexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, dura
bility of product groupings, and a number of special composite
groupings.
Price indexes for the output of selected SIC industries measure av
erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries,
as defined in the S ta n d a rd In d u stria l Classification M a n u a l 1972
(Washington, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1972). These
indexes are derived from several price series, combined to match the
economic activity of the specified industry and weighted by the value
of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive in
dustrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Notes on the data
Regional CPI’s cross classified by population size were introduced
in the May 1978 R eview . These indexes enable users in local areas for
which an index is not published to get a better approximation of the
CPI for their area by using the appropriate population size class mea
sure for their region. The cross-classified indexes are published bi
monthly. (See table 20.)
For details concerning the 1978 revision of the CPI, see The
C onsum er Price In dex: C oncepts a n d C on ten t O ver the Years, Report
517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978).
As of January 1976, the Producer Price Index incorporated a re
vised weighting structure reflecting 1972 values of shipments.
Additional data and analyses of price changes are provided in the
C P I D eta iled R e port and P rodu cer Prices a n d Price Indexes, both
monthly publications of the Bureau.
For a discussion of the general method of computing producer, and
industry price indexes, see B L S H an d b o o k o f M ethods, Bulletin 2134-1
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 7. For consumer prices,
see B L S H an d b o o k o f M e th o d s f o r S u rveys a n d S tu dies (1976), chapter
13. See also John F. Early, “Improving the measurement of producer
price change,” M o n th ly L a b o r Review, April 1978. For industry prices,
see also Bennett R. Moss, “Industry and Sector Price Indexes,”
M o n th ly L a b o r Review, August 1965.
Beginning with the January 1983 data, tables 19 through 21 introduce a new treatment of homeownership costs into the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) will not be af
fected by this change until 1985. For an explanation of the change, see “Changing the treatment of shelter costs for homeowners in the CPI”
by Robert Gillingham and Walter Lane in the June 1982 issue of the M o n th ly L a b o r R eview and “Labor Month in the Review” in the
March 1983 issue. Additional information appears in the C P I D e ta iled R eport, January 1983.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
69
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
19.
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-82
[1967 = 100]
Food and
beverages
All items
Year
Index
Percent
change
Index
Percent
change
Apparel and
upkeep
Housing
Index
Percent
change
Index
Transportation
Percent
change
Index
Percent
change
Medical care
Index
Other goods
and services
Entertainment
Percent
change
Index
Percent
change
Index
Percent
change
1967
1968
1969
1970
..................
..................
..................
..................
100.0
104.2
109.8
116.3
4.2
5.4
5.9
100.0
103.6
108.8
114.7
3.6
5.0
5.4
100.0
104.0
110.4
118.2
4.0
6.2
7.1
100.0
105.4
111.5
116.1
5.4
5.8
4.1
100.0
103.2
107.2
112.7
3.2
3.9
5.1
100.0
106.1
113.4
120.6
6.1
6.9
6.3
100.0
105.7
111.0
116.7
5.7
5.0
5.1
100.0
105.2
110.4
116.8
5.2
4.9
5.8
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
121.3
125.3
133.1
147.7
161.2
4.3
3.3
6.2
11.0
9.1
118.3
123.2
139.5
158.7
172.1
3.1
4.1
13.2
13.8
8.4
123.4
128.1
133.7
148.8
164.5
4.4
3.8
4.4
11.3
10.6
119.8
122.3
126.8
136.2
142.3
3.2
2.1
3.7
7.4
4.5
118.6
119.9
123.8
137.7
150.6
5.2
1.1
3.3
11.2
9.4
128.4
132.5
137.7
150.5
168.6
6.5
3.2
3.9
9.3
12.0
122.9
126.5
130.0
139.8
152.2
5.3
2.9
2.8
7.5
8.9
122.4
127.5
132.5
142.0
153.9
4.8
4.2
3.9
7.2
8.4
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
170.5
181.5
195.3
217.7
247.0
5.8
6.5
7.6
11.5
13.5
177.4
188.0
206.2
228.7
248.7
3.1
6.0
9.7
10.9
8.7
174.6
186.5
202.6
227.5
263.2
6.1
6.8
8.6
12.3
15.7
147.6
154.2
159.5
166.4
177.4
3.7
4.5
3.4
4.3
6.6
165.5
177.2
185.8
212.8
250.5
9.9
7.1
4.9
14.5
17.7
184.7
202.4
219.4
240.1
267.2
9.5
9.6
8.4
9.4
11.3
159.8
167.7
176.2
187.6
203.7
5.0
4.9
5.1
6.5
8.5
162.7
172.2
183.2
196.3
213.6
5.7
5.8
6.4
7.2
8.8
1981 ..................
1982 ..................
272.3
288.6
10.2
6.0
267.8
278.5
7.7
4.0
293.2
314.7
11.4
7.3
186.6
190.9
5.2
2.3
281.3
293.1
12.3
4.2
295.1
326.9
10.4
10.8
219.0
232.4
7.5
6.1
233.3
257.0
9.2
10.2
20. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers and revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers,
U.S. city average— general summary and groups, subgroups, and selected items
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
1983
1982
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
All items......................................................................................
283.1
294.1
293.6
Food and beverages ....................................................................
Housing........................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep......................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................
Medical care ................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services..............................................................
275.6
306.7
191.1
285.1
318.8
232.8
252.2
279.6
320.7
195.5
295.5
338.7
240.3
271.2
279.1
319.0
195.4
295.8
342.2
239.9
273.8
Commodities................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ....................................
Nondurables less food and beverages..................................
Durables ............................................................................
258.8
247.1
263.4
233.5
267.5
257.6
271.0
246.0
267.8
258.2
271.4
246.6
Services ......................................................................................
Rent, residential..................................................................
Household services less rent of shelter (12/82= 100) ..........
Transportation services........................................................
Medical care services..........................................................
Other services....................................................................
325.5
219.6
340.3
228.9
338.6
230.2
288.8
345.1
254.0
300.5
366.9
268.4
299.9
371.0
269.2
281.7
294.0
293.6
Dec.
1982
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct
292.4
293.1
293.2
293.4
282.5
279.1
316.3
193.6
294.8
344.3
240.1
276.6
280.7
317.9
191.0
293.0
347.8
241.5
279.9
281.6
318.5
192.0
289.9
351.3
243.1
281.6
283.2
318.6
194.5
287.4
352.3
244.6
281.9
275.9
306.2
190.5
286.6
317.4
229.5
249.3
267.7
258.0
270.0
247.3
267.2
256.5
267.4
247.3
266.7
255.2
265.2
247.1
266.7
254.3
263.4
247.4
335.6
230.8
100.0
299.4
373.4
270.0
337.9
232.2
100.9
300.1
377.4
271.5
338.9
339.4
101.0
299.9
381.5
272.6
101.6
299.8
382.2
272.9
292.6
100.2
254.4
262.4
303.1
275.2
100.7
331.4
265.7
271.2
414.5
414.9
283.8
281.1
237.1
331.8
292.6
100.2
253.2
260.5
299.9
274.6
101.0
332.2
266.6
272.0
406.7
401.6
284.7
282.0
237.9
332.9
292.4
100.3
252.4
258.9
296.5
274.4
101.3
332.7
268.4
272.6
399.9
388.3
285.6
282.6
239.1
333.1
$0,341
$0,341
$0,341
1983
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
293.6
293.2
292.0
292.1
292.3
293.0
279.9
321.2
194.6
297.0
336.5
236.5
267.8
279.4
319.6
194.4
297.3
339.8
236.1
270.9
279.6
316.8
192.8
296.3
341.8
236.5
274.0
281.1
317.0
190.0
294.3
345.3
237.7
277.8
282.1
317.6
191.0
291.1
348.9
239.5
279.6
283.5
319.2
194.0
288.6
350.0
240.8
280.0
259.1
247.5
265.3
232.4
267.9
258.3
272.9
245.4
268.2
258.9
273.3
246.2
268.2
258.8
271.9
247.0
268.0
257.8
269.3
247.3
267.8
257.1
266.9
247.8
268.4
257.4
265.0
249.7
325.8
219.1
341.2
228.4
339.3
229.7
336.2
230.2
336.9
231.7
337.8
232.5
338.5
233.1
287.9
343.0
252.4
298.4
363.9
266.1
297.5
367.7
266.8
296.7
370.1
267.5
297.1
374.0
269.1
296.9
378.2
270.2
296.7
379.0
270.6
281.3
293.9
293.5
292.1
291.9
291.9
292.4
245.6
260.2
297.8
271.6
256.1
267.5
306.9
277.4
256.7
267.9
307.5
277.4
256.6
266.6
306.5
276.8
255.7
264.2
304.4
276.2
255.0
262.2
301.1
275.6
255.4
260.6
297.4
275.3
321.6
262.7
273.3
407.9
425.0
272.3
268.3
224.5
321.8
336.3
265.5
273.2
426.0
432.3
282.8
280.4
235.4
335.2
334.0
264.4
273.2
423.7
431.8
282.5
280.2
236.2
333.7
330.4
264.0
271.2
420.8
425.6
282.2
279.0
236.8
330.1
330.7
265.0
272.5
415.1
415.2
282.2
279.3
237.1
330.5
331.2
266.0
273.5
406.9
401.9
283.0
280.2
c 237.9
331.4
332.0
267.6
274.0
399.8
388.7
284.4
281.6
240.0
331.9
$0,354
$0,341
$0,341
$0,342
$0,342
$0,342
$0,341
Special indexes:
All items less food ........................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/82= 100) ............................
Commodities less food..................................................................
Nondurables less food ..................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel................................................
Nondurables ................................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (12/82= 100) ....................................
Services less medical ca re ............................................................
Domestically produced farm foods ................................................
Selected beef cuts........................................................................
Energy1 ......................................................................................
Energy commodities' ................................................................
All items less energy ....................................................................
All items less food and energy ............................................
Commodities less food and energy....................................
Services less energy........................................................
245.2
258.4
296.6
270.7
255.4
265.7
305.5
276.5
256.0
266.1
306.2
276.4
321.1
263.8
272.0
406.1
424.5
273.6
269.8
225.3
321.5
335.1
266.6
272.0
425.0
431.9
284.0
281.5
236.0
334.4
332.9
265.3
271.9
422.6
431.6
283.6
281.2
236.6
333.1
292.1
100.0
255.8
264.7
305.2
275.8
100.0
329.3
264.8
270.0
419.9
425.4
282.5
279.9
237.1
329.6
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 = $1 ....................
$0,353
$0,340
$0,341
$0,342
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
70
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
20.
Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
All Urban Consumers
General summary
1983
1982
1983
1982
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
FOOD AND BEVERAGES ......................................................................
275.6
279.6
279.1
279.1
280.7
281.6
283.2
275.9
279.9
279.4
279.6
281.1
282.1
283.5
Food ....................................................................................................
283.0
287.0
286.4
286.5
288.1
289.0
290.5
283.1
287.2
286.6
286.7
288.4
289.3
290.7
Food at home ........................................................................................
Cereals and bakery products............................................................
Cereals and cereal products (12/77 - 100)................................
Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 100)......................
Cereal (12/77 = 100) ........................................................
Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 - 100) ............................
Bakery products (12/77 - 100) ................................................
White bread........................................................................
Other breads (12/77 = 100) ..............................................
Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 - 100)....................
Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 - 100) ..........................
Cookies (12/77 = 100) ......................................................
Crackers, bread, and cracker products (12/77 = 100)..........
Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts (12/77 = 100) . . . .
Frozen and refrigerated bakery products
and fresh pies, tarts, and turnovers (12/77 = 100) ............
277.1
281.3
153.9
139.2
165.2
151.2
147.1
242.3
145.1
148.4
148.0
149.4
135.3
146.3
279.4
285.0
154.0
139.9
167.5
147.6
149.7
246.7
146.5
151.0
150.1
152.2
141.9
148.7
278.3
285.5
153.2
139.2
167.2
146.1
150.3
246.8
147.3
150.9
J50.5
153.6
143.3
149.6
277.8
286.3
153.4
139.5
168.0
145.3
150.9
248.1
147.6
151.6
151.5
153.7
144.1
150.4
279.3
287.8
154.0
140.3
168.1
146.5
151.7
248.9
147.7
152.6
153.1
153.6
144.9
152.3
280.3
288.7
154.0
139.8
169.2
145.3
152.4
249.8
148.7
153.1
154.0
153.7
146.5
154.2
281.9
289.8
155.0
139.4
171.3
146.0
152.8
252.0
149.0
152.0
153.8
155.1
146.0
154.2
276.2
280.0
154.8
139.6
167.2
152.4
146.0
238.3
147.0
144.6
146.4
150.2
136.5
148.7
278.5
283.7
154.9
140.3
169.7
148.7
148.6
242.6
148.4
147.1
148.5
153.2
143.3
151.4
277.4
284.1
154.1
139.5
169.4
147.3
149.1
242.6
149.4
146.9
148.8
154.5
144.6
152.3
277.1
284.9
154.2
139.8
170.1
146.5
149.6
243.9
149.6
147.6
149.7
154.6
145.5
152.9
278.6
286.4
154.8
140.6
170.3
147.6
150.5
244.6
149.7
148.6
151.3
154.6
146.4
154.9
279.7
287.4
154.7
140.1
171.4
146.3
151.2
245.7
150.6
149.1
152.2
154.6
147.9
156.8
281.2
288.5
155.8
139.9
173.5
147.0
151.6
247.8
151.1
148.0
152.1
156.0
147.3
156.9
153.5
154.4
155.8
155.2
156.8
155.7
156.2
146.8
147.6
148.6
148.4
149.8
149.0
149.4
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs............................................................
Meats, poultry, and fis h ..............................................................
Meats ................................................................................
Beef and v eal..................................................................
Ground beef other than canned ....................................
Chuck roast ................................................................
Round roast ................................................................
Round steak ................................................................
Sirloin steak ................................................................
Other beef and veal (12/77 - 100) ..............................
Pork................................................................................
Bacon ..........................................................................
Chops..........................................................................
Ham other than canned (12/77 = 100)..........................
Sausage ......................................................................
Canned ham ................................................................
Other pork (12/77 = 100)............................................
Other meats....................................................................
Frankfurters ................................................................
Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 - 100) ..............
Other lunchmeats (12/77 - 100)..................................
Lamb and organ meats (12/77 - 100)..........................
Poultry ..............................................................................
Fresh whole chicken ....................................................
Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 - 100) ..............
Other poultry (12/77 = 100) ........................................
Fish and seafood ................................................................
Canned fish and seafood (12/77 = 100)........................
Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 100)..........
E g g s........................................................................................
256.9
262.1
261.2
271.7
265.8
284.3
243.0
258.8
260.6
161.5
239.5
249.6
216.3
109.2
305.8
247.6
132.6
262.4
260.5
149.2
133.7
141.0
194.7
195.1
127.5
123.9
376.3
141.0
144.7
195.2
265.1
272.4
274.9
272.2
262.4
281.9
237.9
253.4
266.3
164.9
277.9
312.4
252.3
126.5
342.1
267.2
151.3
272.2
274.8
158.5
140.1
137.0
195.4
192.6
126.8
128.5
367.1
138.6
140.5
175.8
263.6
270.8
273.6
272.0
263.0
281.7
241.4
257.1
259.8
164.1
274.2
298.7
249.0
127.3
337.7
270.5
149.6
271.6
274.4
156.6
141.3
135.4
192.0
189.3
125.3
125.4
366.6
139.0
140.0
175.0
261.6
268.8
271.1
270.2
261.7
281.0
243.0
253.5
253.0
162.8
270.1
290.8
242.4
129.6
332.0
272.4
145.6
269.7
268.9
155.3
141.8
134.3
190.4
185.4
124.8
126.0
369.6
138.9
141.9
172.5
263.0
270.3
272.2
271.3
262.7
281.7
243.3
255.1
253.1
163.7
272.0
290.8
245.6
129.2
333.6
275.2
147.9
269.3
269.7
154.0
139.9
137.4
191.3
186.8
125.0
126.3
376.7
140.2
145.4
172.9
264.0
271.7
273.2
272.2
261.8
286.9
242.6
259.8
260.3
163.5
273.6
294.5
252.1
125.0
333.9
276.2
150.4
269.2
269.4
154.5
139.7
137.2
194.0
190.6
126.2
127.7
379.2
139.1
147.6
169.3
264.2
271.4
272.8
272.8
263.6
284.8
239.9
257.9
262.8
164.4
271.1
288.7
246.4
125.6
336.9
277.3
148.1
269.7
270.8
155.2
139.0
138.2
193.7
190.7
126.6
126.6
380.1
138.3
148.6
175.0
256.4
261.5
260.6
272.3
266.9
293.1
245.9
256.4
262.2
159.8
238.9
253.3
214.7
106.5
306.6
251.2
131.7
261.7
260.0
149.4
131.7
144.2
192.8
192.8
125.9
123.3
375.5
140.5
144.6
196.3
265.0
272.1
274.6
272.7
263.7
290.4
240.5
251.0
268.0
163.4
277.0
317.7
250.0
123.4
343.2
271.4
150.5
272.2
274.0
158.5
137.9
140.6
193.2
190.3
124.9
128.0
366.0
138.1
140.2
176.7
263.5
270.6
273.2
272.5
264.2
290.3
244.3
255.1
260.6
162.4
273.4
304.0
247.0
124.2
338.5
275.0
148.6
271.5
273.8
156.4
139.1
138.5
190.0
187.4
123.5
124.6
365.3
138.4
139.6
176.2
261.5
268.6
270.8
270.6
262.7
289.6
246.4
251.3
252.7
161.2
269.5
296.1
240.8
126.4
332.5
276.9
144.9
269.8
268.4
155.1
139.8
137.5
188.4
183.5
123.1
125.3
368.2
138.2
141.5
173.3
262.8
270.0
271.8
271.8
263.7
290.4
246.6
253.0
254.5
162.1
271.4
295.5
243.9
126.0
335.0
279.7
147.1
268.7
268.5
153.9
137.7
140.3
189.4
185.0
123.5
125.7
375.1
139.5
145.0
173.7
263.9
271.4
272.9
272.9
263.0
295.9
245.3
258.0
261.7
162.1
272.9
299.5
250.3
121.7
334.8
280.6
149.5
269.0
268.6
154.5
137.8
140.1
191.9
188.4
124.6
127.1
377.5
138.5
147.1
170.0
264.0
271.1
272.4
273.5
264.7
293.0
242.8
257.1
264.5
163.0
270.4
293.1
244.7
122.4
337.0
282.2
147.3
269.3
270.1
155.1
137.0
140.9
191.6
188.4
125.1
125.6
378.9
137.8
148.3
175.8
Dairy products ..........................................................................
Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) ..................................
Fresh whole milk..............................................................
Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) ......................
Processed dairy products (12/77 = 100)..............................
Butter..............................................................................
Cheese (12/77 = 100)....................................................
Ice cream and related products (12/77 - 100)..................
Other dairy products (12/77 - 100) ................................
246.5
135.3
221.7
135.1
144.9
250.1
143.3
149.5
139.5
247.1
135.0
220.8
135.3
146.2
252.6
144.7
150.4
141.0
247.4
135.1
220.9
135.4
146.6
252.5
144.5
152.4
140.9
247.8
135.5
221.9
135.2
146.6
252.1
144.6
151.8
141.7
249.5
136.7
223.7
136.9
147.1
253.4
145.2
152.5
141.6
249.7
136.7
223.4
137.3
147.4
253.6
145.5
153.1
141.6
249.6
136.8
223.4
137.7
147.2
253.5
145.5
150.7
143.9
245.9
134.8
220.8
134.6
145.3
252.7
143.6
148.9
140.3
246.4
134.5
220.0
134.7
146.5
255.1
145.0
149.6
141.7
246.7
134.6
220.1
134.9
146.9
255.1
144.8
151.5
141.5
247.1
135.0
221.1
134.7
146.9
254.5
144.9
150.8
142.4
248.9
136.2
222.9
136.3
147.4
255.9
145.5
151.6
142.3
249.1
136.2
222.6
136.8
147.7
256.2
145.8
152.2
142.3
248.9
136.3
222.6
137.1
147.4
256.1
145.8
149.8
144.6
Fruits and vegetables ................................................................
Fresh fruits and vegetables..................................................
Fresh fruits......................................................................
Apples ........................................................................
Bananas ......................................................................
Oranges......................................................................
Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 100) ..................................
Fresh vegetables ............................................................
Potatoes......................................................................
Lettuce........................................................................
Tomatoes ....................................................................
Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 100) ..........................
293.1
302.1
297.8
288.7
263.0
316.3
157.2
306.1
301.0
270.9
258.1
185.0
280.7
277.4
317.1
250.7
227.8
520.8
148.0
240.2
243.8
259.2
210.5
131.5
276.1
268.3
288.9
239.4
243.7
399.6
143.3
249.1
240.8
259.2
242.9
137.6
277.6
272.3
273.9
243.7
242.6
313.0
144.8
270.8
241.3
334.6
272.8
142.2
276.2
269.2
268.3
244.2
241.3
292.2
143.1
270.0
236.2
301.3
236.8
156.0
278.1
272.0
270.5
244.0
254.0
286.3
145.1
273.4
240.6
249.0
265.0
165.6
286.9
288.6
282.8
249.3
257.1
299.1
154.4
294.0
241.1
247.9
352.2
175.8
289.1
296.1
287.3
288.5
261.1
285.9
151.8
304.2
294.8
271.3
261.8
184.0
275.0
268.4
300.4
251.9
226.7
465.7
142.4
239.7
240.5
260.9
213.7
131.0
271.3
261.0
275.4
239.9
241.9
360.4
137.5
248.1
235.9
259.8
246.6
137.1
273.6
266.6
262.5
243.7
242.0
283.0
138.7
270.4
237.5
336.0
278.4
141.5
272.6
264.3
258.9
244.8
239.9
267.5
138.0
269.2
231.5
303.4
241.5
155.3
274.5
267.1
261.0
243.9
250.9
263.1
139.8
272.7
236.5
250.0
269.0
165.2
282.9
283.0
272.5
249.6
254.6
272.7
149.0
292.5
236.1
246.6
358.1
174.9
Processed fruits and vegetables ..........................................
Processed fruits (12/77 - 100)........................................
Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 100) ....................
Fruit juices other than frozen (12/77 - 100)..................
Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 100)..........................
Processed vegetables (12/77 - 100) ..............................
Frozen vegetables (12/77 - 100) ................................
285.8
149.0
149.2
152.4
145.3
138.2
142.0
286.8
149.2
144.8
152.5
149.2
139.1
147.7
287.3
149.7
145.6
153.4
149.1
139.0
149.0
286.0
149.5
143.6
154.0
149.6
138.0
147.5
286.6
150.1
144.7
154.1
150.4
137.9
149.7
287.4
150.8
144.6
155.3
151.0
138.1
151.2
287.6
151.3
145.0
156.6
151.0
137.7
149.7
283.7
148.6
148.2
151.4
145.9
137.2
143.4
284.6
148.8
144.0
151.4
149.8
137.9
148.8
285.1
149.4
144.7
152.6
149.7
137.8
150.4
283.8
149.2
142.6
153.1
150.2
136.8
148.9
284.3
149.8
143.8
153.1
151.1
136.7
151.2
285.1
150.5
143.7
154.4
151.7
136.9
152.7
285.3
151.0
144.1
155.6
151.5
136.6
151.3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
71
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
20.
Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary
1982
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
1983
1982
1983
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Fruits and vegetables— Continued
Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77=100) . . . .
Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77=100)..............
Other foods at hom e........................................................................
Sugar and sweets......................................................................
Candy and chewing gum (12/77=100) ................................
Sugar and artificial sweeteners (12/77-100)........................
Other sweets (12/77=100) ................................................
Fats and oils (12/77=100) ........................................................
Margarine ..........................................................................
Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (12/77-100) ............
Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12/77-100) ................
Nonalcoholic beverages ............................................................
Cola drinks, excluding diet c o la ............................................
Carbonated drinks, including diet cola (12/77=100)..............
Roasted coffee ..................................................................
Freeze dried and instant coffee............................................
Other noncarbonated drinks (12/77=100)............................
Other prepared foods ................................................................
Canned and packaged soup (12/77=100)............................
Frozen prepared foods (12/77=100)....................................
Snacks (12/77=100)..........................................................
Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish (12/77=100)..............
Other condiments (12/77=100) ..........................................
Miscellaneous prepared foods (12/77=100) ........................
Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12/77=100) . . .
141.2
134.8
331.7
365.5
150.3
161.0
147.4
259.6
256.7
156.1
129.5
424.8
306.6
143.4
366.6
343.6
138.9
266.5
135.6
147.0
153.4
153.2
148.2
147.7
143.2
140.8
133.9
334.8
370.6
149.4
167.3
151.0
258.4
258.4
151.2
129.7
427.5
308.9
146.2
362.0
343.6
139.1
270.5
136.8
148.5
153.3
156.5
152.1
151.4
145.8
140.8
133.0
334.3
370.3
149.6
165.2
152.5
258.6
257.5
152.0
129.8
426.2
308.8
144.8
360.0
344.2
138.8
270.2
136.6
149.7
153.1
157.1
151.7
150.2
145.0
140.3
132.0
333.7
369.2
149.5
164.3
151.7
258.6
256.5
151.7
130.3
424.3
307.2
142.4
361.4
346.1
139.0
270.7
136.9
149.0
152.7
157.4
152.6
151.0
146.1
139.5
131.0
337.1
371.5
149.8
167.0
152.0
259.3
259.4
151.6
130.2
431.1
312.9
145.2
365.0
348.2
141.0
272.6
138.1
150.6
154.0
159.5
153.8
151.1
146.1
138.5
131.1
338.2
370.7
149.6
165.9
152.3
258.0
255.9
151.8
129.8
432.2
312.5
147.4
365.9
349.3
140.6
275.1
139.0
152.0
157.6
161.1
154.9
151.5
146.4
138.9
131.1
339.1
372.8
150.3
166.9
153.4
258.4
255.8
151.4
130.4
432.7
314.1
146.7
363.2
349.2
141.1
276.0
140.0
153.1
157.9
161.6
154.9
151.7
146.8
138.8
133.3
332.6
365.4
150.1
162.4
145.5
259.7
256.1
154.4
130.0
426.6
303.8
141.4
362.2
343.4
139.1
268.1
137.8
146.5
155.4
152.2
149.9
147.9
144.5
138.4
132.4
335.7
370.6
149.3
168.8
148.9
258.4
257.8
149.5
130.2
429.2
306.2
144.0
357.2
343.2
139.3
272.2
138.7
147.9
155.4
155.6
153.9
151.6
147.2
138.4
131.6
335.1
370.1
149.5
166.6
150.2
258.5
256.8
150.3
130.3
427.9
306.2
142.4
354.8
343.7
139.1
271.9
138.5
149.2
155.2
156.2
153.4
150.3
146.4
137.8
130.5
334.6
369.1
149.6
165.6
149.4
258.7
255.4
150.2
130.8
426.1
304.8
140.2
356.2
345.6
139.2
272.4
138.9
148.5
154.8
156.4
154.4
151.2
147.3
137.0
129.6
337.9
371.4
149.8
168.5
149.8
259.3
258.5
150.0
130.7
432.8
310.3
142.8
359.9
347.8
141.3
274.2
140.1
150.0
156.0
158.5
155.6
151.4
147.3
136.2
129.8
339.1
370.6
149.6
167.1
150.2
258.1
255.3
150.1
130.3
433.9
310.0
144.9
360.5
349.0
140.8
276.8
141.1
151.3
159.6
160.1
156.8
151.7
147.7
136.4
129.7
339.9
372.5
150.3
168.3
151.0
258.4
254.5
149.7
131.0
434.5
311.5
144.5
357.9
348.8
141.3
277.5
141.9
152.2
160.1
160.4
156.7
151.9
148.0
Food away from home............................................................................
Lunch (12/77=100) ........................................................................
Dinner (12/77=100) ........................................................................
Other meals and snacks (12/77=100)..............................................
302.4
147.0
145.7
147.9
310.7
151.2
149.5
152.1
311.4
151.6
149.7
152.7
312.6
152.2
150.4
153.0
314.5
153.1
151.3
154.0
315.2
153.3
151.7
154.5
316.5
153.7
152.0
156.0
305.4
148.6
147.3
148.7
313.8
152.8
151.2
152.7
314.6
153.2
151.4
153.3
315.8
153.8
152.1
153.7
317.7
154.8
153.0
154.6
318.4
155.0
153.4
155.1
319.7
155.3
153.7
156.5
Alcoholic beverages ............................................................................
206.6
210.6
210.9
210.9
211.6
213.3
215.1
208.8
212.8
213.0
213.0
213.7
215.6
217.3
Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77=100)..............................................
Beer and a le ....................................................................................
Whiskey..........................................................................................
Wine................................................................................................
Other alcoholic beverages (12/77-100)............................................
Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77=100)..................................
134.0
209.2
147.0
235.3
118.1
138.2
136.2
212.7
150.0
236.4
120.3
142.7
136.2
212.5
150.7
235.9
120.4
143.6
136.1
212.6
150.2
235.6
120.2
144.2
136.5
213.3
150.5
235.6
120.6
144.8
137.7
217.4
150.9
234.7
120.7
145.4
139.1
219.8
151.3
239.1
121.5
145.7
135.4
208.3
147.8
243.3
118.0
139.7
137.6
211.8
150.7
244.8
120.3
144.0
137.5
211.7
151.2
243.7
120.4
144.8
137.4
211.7
150.7
243.3
120.1
145.3
137.8
212.5
151.2
243.0
120.6
146.0
139.2
216.4
151.6
241.8
120.5
146.6
140.6
218.6
151.9
246.8
121.2
146.9
321.2
319.6
316.0
317.0
317.6
319.2
345.2
343.0
338.0
337.9
338.8
341.1
FOOD AND BEVERAGES-Continued
Food
Continued
Food at home — Continued
HOUSING..............................................................................................
306.7
320.7
319.0
316.3
317.9
318.5
318.6
306.2
Shelter (CPI-U)......................................................................................
327.6
342.8
340.7
335.9
338.3
339.2
339.3
328.5
Renters' costs........................................................................................
Rent, residential ..............................................................................
Other renters' costs..........................................................................
219.6
320.1
228.9
341.6
230.2
337.8
Owners’ equivalent re n t....................................................................
Household insurance........................................................................
Maintenance and repairs ........................................................................
Maintenance and repair services........................................................
Maintenance and repair commodities ................................................
327.2
357.8
255.0
339.4
374.1
257.3
339.0
373.4
257.8
100.0
230.8
333.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
337.8
371.4
258.5
100.8
232.2
339.2
100.7
100.7
100.9
342.9
380.6
259.4
101.2
233.1
340.8
100.9
100.9
100.9
339.4
373.6
259.3
101.4
233.6
340.6
1009
100.8
101.5
339.9
376.7
257.7
Shelter (CPI-W) ....................................................................................
219.1
318.9
323.7
358.6
248.6
Rent, residential......................................................................................
228.4
229.7
230.3
231.7
232.5
233.1
Other renters' costs................................................................................
Lodging while out of town..................................................................
Tenants'insurance (12/77-100) ......................................................
339.5
355.6
148.3
335.6
349.3
149.1
330.7
341.4
149.3
337.3
350.8
151.5
339.0
353.6
151.5
339.0
353.1
152.6
Homeownership......................................................................................
Home purchase................................................................................
Financing, taxes, and insurance ........................................................
Property insurance ....................................................................
Property taxes ..........................................................................
Contracted mortgage interest costs ............................................
Mortgage interest rates........................................................
Maintenance and repairs ..................................................................
Maintenance and repair services ................................................
Maintenance and repair commodities ..........................................
Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and
equipment (12/77-100) ..................................................
Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77=100)..............
Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling
supplies (12/77-100)......................................................
Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (12/77-100) ............
387.1
289.7
524.3
408.5
226.4
678.8
232.4
335.4
374.9
251.2
383.7
290.4
514.6
409.7
227.5
663.4
226.6
334.9
374.0
251.6
376.8
290.9
495.7
412.1
228.8
633.5
215.9
333.7
371.7
252.3
375.9
291.9
490.2
414.5
230.6
624.0
212.0
337.8
377.3
253.6
376.9
293.7
491.3
417.9
231.4
625.1
211.1
336.2
374.5
254.5
379.9
298.9
491.8
419.2
231.7
625.7
207.5
337.5
376.6
254.2
145.7
120.4
145.9
120.8
146.5
121.3
148.2
120.5
148.0
122.2
146.0
124.1
134.6
141.8
135.3
141.6
136.2
141.2
137.3
141.3
136.6
142.2
137.5
142.4
72
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
339.4
374.1
257.3
339.0
373.4
257.8
337.8
371.4
258.5
342.9
380.6
259.4
339.4
373.6
259.3
20.
Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average
[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
All Urban Consumers
General summary
Fuel and other utilities ..........................................................................
1983
1982
1983
1982
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
339.3
363.4
362.2
364.1
365.4
364.6
363.8
340.2
364.7
363.6
365.5
366.8
365.9
365.2
461.2
656.0
671.3
188.1
413.8
319.4
557.6
459.5
627.3
637.9
187.0
417.5
320.7
565.9
430.5
664.0
692.3
168.0
375.9
313.3
458.6
464.5
677.2
699.1
183.7
413.4
327.0
542.0
461.9
691.3
712.8
189.0
407.6
318.4
543.1
464.0
688.5
708.7
190.4
410.6
319.6
549.6
463.5
671.1
689.3
188.4
413.5
319.2
559.1
461.5
654.0
669.7
187.1
414.5
320.1
560.1
459.7
625.3
636.4
185.9
418.0
321.2
568.3
429.9
666.7
694.4
169.5
374.8
312.3
456.6
464.0
679.7
c 701.2
184.8
412.4
326.3
538.8
461.7
693.7
714.7
190.3
406.9
317.3
541.6
463.9
690.8
710.6
191.6
410.0
318.7
547.6
463.3
673.4
691.2
189.5
412.8
318.3
556.9
Other utilities and public services..............................................................
Telephone services ..........................................................................
Local charges (12/77 - 100) ....................................................
Interstate toll calls (12/77 - 100) ..............................................
Intrastate toll calls (12/77 - 100) ..............................................
Water and sewerage maintenance ....................................................
195.0
158.5
125.6
117.7
109.0
316.9
204.5
166.2
135.2
119.7
110.4
334.1
205.1
166.6
135.4
119.7
111.1
335.1
206.6
168.2
137.8
119.7
111.5
335.8
210.1
171.4
140.6
121.0
114.0
341.6
210.9
171.7
139.9
121.8
115.9
343.9
211.4
172.1
140.3
121.8
116.3
345.6
195.4
158.6
125.7
117.8
108.7
319.7
205.3
166.6
135.7
120.2
110.1
337.1
205.9
167.0
135.9
120.2
110.9
338.2
207.3
168.6
138.1
120.2
111.3
338.9
210.9
171.7
140.8
121.5
113.9
344.8
211.6
172.1
140.2
122.2
115.8
347.2
212.2
172.5
140.6
122.2
116.2
349.0
Household furnishings and operations..................................................
231.6
235.4
235.1
235.7
235.8
236.7
237.6
228.0
232.3
231.8
232.3
232.6
233.4
234.6
195.3
222.0
132.7
144.4
215.4
147.4
118.2
122.2
140.4
151.5
107.2
102.6
112.4
186.1
193.3
141.0
123.2
194.9
221.9
131.5
145.6
213.9
146.1
117.3
121.6
139.4
151.9
107.0
102.3
112.2
187.6
193.2
141.5
124.7
195.9
228.2
139.0
145.7
213.8
146.6
116.5
121.0
139.8
151.5
107.1
101.9
112.8
186.3
192.2
141.8
123.6
197.1
230.3
136.7
150.9
215.8
148.9
118.3
122.0
139.7
151.9
106.9
101.2
113.1
187.7
193.3
142.5
124.6
190.4
219.9
135.6
138.7
208.2
137.2
118.2
121.8
135.8
149.7
108.2
103.5
113.2
180.4
189.3
133.5
120.0
193.9
226.4
137.6
145.3
212.3
143.5
119.6
122.9
136.0
151.9
107.6
102.1
113.3
185.9
196.9
140.4
121.7
193.0
225.8
135.0
147.5
210.3
142.1
117.0
122.5
135.3
151.5
107.3
101.7
113.1
185.6
198.4
140.3
120.7
193.2
224.9
134.0
147.6
211.6
143.4
118.8
122.5
135.6
151.4
106.3
101.4
111.4
186.7
199.1
141.4
121.5
193.0
224.5
132.6
148.6
210.4
142.6
117.9
122.0
134.6
151.8
106.1
101.1
111.3
187.9
199.2
142.1
122.8
193.8
232.2
140.7
149.5
210.2
142.7
117.1
121.5
135.1
151.3
106.1
100.5
111.8
186.7
198.1
142.3
121.5
195.3
234.8
137.9
156.2
213.2
146.0
118.9
122.6
136.0
151.7
105.9
99.9
111.9
188.0
198.9
142.9
122.7
121.5
123.7
122.3
124.2
119.3
121.4
119.2
120.1
121.9
120.2
122.4
125.1
140.2
125.2
140.7
120.7
135.3
122.0
137.6
122.4
137.1
123.0
137.1
123.8
137.0
122.9
137.9
122.9
138.6
Fuels......................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ............................................................
Fuel o i l......................................................................................
Other fuels (6/78 - 100) ..........................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ................................................................
Electricity ..................................................................................
Utility (piped) gas........................................................................
HOUSING
Fuel and other utilities
Housefurnishings ....................................................................................
Textile housefurnishings ....................................................................
Household linens (12/77 - 100) ................................................
Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) .
Furniture and bedding..............................................................................
Bedroom furniture (12/77 - 100)................................................
Sofas (12/77 - 100)..................................................................
Living room chairs and tables (12/77 - 100) ..............................
Other furniture (12/77 - 100) ....................................................
Appliances including TV and sound equipment ....................................
Television and sound equipment (12/77 - 100) ..........................
Television............................................................................
Sound equipment (12/77 - 100)..........................................
Household appliances ................................................................
Refrigerators and home freezers ..........................................
Laundry equipment (12/77 - 100)........................................
Other household appliances (12/77 - 100) ..........................
Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing
machines (12/77 - 100) ..............................................
Office machines, small electric appliances,
and air conditioners (12/77 - 100)................................
Other household equipment (12/77 - 100)........................................
Floor and window coverings, infants’, laundry,
cleaning, and outdoor equipment (12/77 - 100) ......................
Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 - 100)............................
Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric
kitchenware (12/77 - 100) ....................................................
Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 = 100) .
192.7
217.7
134.7
136.7
212.1
140.8
118,0
121.6
140.5
150.1
109.1
104.7
114.0
180.3
183.7
133.3
122.2
195.9
223.2
136.4
142.0
215.8
146.7
119.4
122.6
140.6
152.0
108.5
103.5
114.1
185.4
191.1
140.0
123.5
195.1
222.6
133.8
144.0
214.1
146.2
116.4
122.1
140.1
151.7
108.1
102.9
113.9
185.2
192.7
140.0
122.7
121.9
122.9
120.7
122.5
137.3
124.0
139.6
124.7
139.1
125.1
139.2
125.8
139.1
140.9
129.0
143.4
131.3
142.6
131.3
142.7
131.0
141.2
130.8
143.3
132.4
143.0
133.9
133.3
125.4
136.0
126.4
134.5
126.8
134.3
126.6
133.2
126.1
134.9
127.3
135.0
129.2
143.1
132.1
145.1
134.8
144.6
134.2
145.1
134.1
145.9
134.1
145.7
135.4
146.4
135.5
139.0
137.3
141.3
140.1
141.0
139.5
141.2
139.2
141.9
139.3
141.8
140.6
142.6
140.9
Housekeeping supplies ............................................................................
Soaps and detergents ......................................................................
Other laundry and cleaning products (12/77 - 100) ..........................
Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins (12/77 = 100) ..
Stationery, stationery supplies, and gift wrap (12/77 - 100)................
Miscellaneous household products (12/77 - 100) ..............................
Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 - 100)..........................................
284.2
279.5
142.1
145.7
130.7
147.5
144.7
290.1
283.5
146.8
148.9
137.6
150.9
142.3
290.3
283.5
147.3
148.2
138.3
151.6
141.9
292.3
285.3
148.0
148.6
137.9
152.3
145.7
294.0
288.9
149.0
150.2
138.1
153.5
144.3
294.8
290.1
149.1
150.4
138.6
154.3
144.4
295.4
292.3
149.5
149.3
139.3
154.4
145.0
280.4
275.7
140.9
145.4
133.8
142.4
136.7
286.7
279.7
145.7
148.9
140.7
145.6
135.1
287.1
279.9
146.2
148.1
141.4
146.2
134.9
288.8
281.5
146.9
148.5
141.0
146.9
138.5
290.7
285.0
147.7
150.3
141.1
148.3
137.0
291.6
286.1
147.9
150.5
141.7
149.1
137.4
292.2
288.1
148.3
149.1
142.3
149.2
138.5
Housekeeping services............................................................................
Postage............................................................................................
Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and
drycleaning services (12/77 - 100)................................................
Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 - 100)......................................
309.9
337.5
313.8
337.5
314.3
337.5
315.0
337.5
315.4
337.5
315.9
337.5
316.4
337.5
308.2
337.5
313.2
337.5
313.7
337.5
314.5
337.5
315.0
337.5
315.6
337.5
316.1
337.5
150.8
135.0
157.0
139.0
157.7
139.5
158.6
140.2
159.3
140.4
159.8
141.2
160.6
141.5
150.6
133.5
157.2
137.4
157.8
137.9
158.7
138.5
159.5
138.7
160.0
139.5
160.7
139.8
APPAREL AND UPKEEP
191.1
195.5
195.4
193.6
191.0
192.0
194.5
190.5
194.6
194.4
192.8
190.0
191.0
194.0
182.9
178.9
187.0
117.6
102.1
102.2
137.6
124.4
117.4
121.4
116.4
129.6
122.3
162.8
108.4
178.4
144.4
Apparel commodities ............................................................................
180.8
184.6
184.3
182.3
179.2
180.2
182.8
180.8
184.1
183.8
181.9
178.7
179.7
Apparel commodities less footwear....................................................
Men’s and boys’ ..............................................................................
Men’s (12/77 - 100) ................................................................
Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 - 100) ......................
Coats and jackets (12/77 - 100) ........................................
Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 - 100) ....................
Shirts (12/77 - 100) ..........................................................
Dungarees, jeans, and trousers (12/77 - 100)......................
Boys’ (12/77 - 100)..................................................................
Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 - 100) ..............
Furnishings (12/77 - 100) ..................................................
Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 - 100)..........
Women's and girls’ ............................................................................
Women’s (12/77 - 100)............................................................
Coats and jackets................................................................
Dresses ..............................................................................
176.8
181.7
114.5
107.2
98.1
136.8
119.9
108.6
117.8
109,4
128.7
120.1
160.3
106.8
162.0
163.1
180.9
188.6
119.0
111.6
103.7
141.0
125.2
112.4
121.7
114.5
133.6
122.7
163.0
108.1
170.5
162.6
180.6
189.0
119.3
111.5
103.4
142.4
125.8
112.6
121.6
113.7
132.6
123.4
162.2
107.3
169.5
161.4
178.4
187.4
118.3
108.7
103.2
141.5
126.5
111.9
120.7
112.2
132.4
122.8
159.6
105.5
166.3
159.0
175.0
184.9
116.8
106.5
98.8
142.2
124.5
111.0
118.9
108.9
132.0
121.5
153.9
101.8
158.1
152.9
176.0
184.4
116.2
106.7
98.1
142.6
122.0
110.5
119.3
108.1
132.5
122.9
155.7
103.2
160.9
154.9
178.9
186.7
117.1
109.1
100.0
141.4
121.7
111.5
123.2
115.5
134.0
124.9
160.0
106.2
170.1
158.5
176.6
181.6
114.7
100.4
99.7
133.1
122.3
144.2
116.1
109.7
124.7
117.8
163.0
109.0
173.1
148.1
180.2
188.6
119.4
104.3
106.4
137.7
128.1
118.0
119.8
115.3
129.5
119.7
164.7
109.8
176.8
149.2
179.8
188.9
119.7
104.2
105.4
139.1
128.7
118.1
119.7
114.6
128.5
120.5
163.8
108.8
173.2
147.7
177.8
187.6
118.8
101.7
105.5
137.9
129.2
117.5
119.0
113.3
128.3
120.0
161.3
106.8
171.0
144.9
174.3
185.2
117.4
99.9
100.5
138.7
127.5
116.5
117.2
110.4
128.0
118.6
155.4
102.9
161.4
139.8
175.3
184.8
116.9
100.2
99.9
139.1
125.0
116.1
117.7
109.3
128.4
120.2
157.2
104.4
165.5
140.6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
73
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
20.
Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average
[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
Ail Urban Consumers
General summary
1982
1982
1983
1983
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
100.3
127.1
92.7
105.6
98.2
104.6
102.0
129.9
88.6
109.9
104.5
106.0
100.1
130.6
87.4
110.4
103.9
106.0
97.1
130.8
82.8
109.5
103.7
104.1
93.7
128.8
76.9
105.1
95.8
102.1
94.6
130.0
79.7
105.1
96.5
101.5
98.5
131.0
83.7
107.6
98.4
105.6
101.2
126.9
114.1
106.0
97.2
106.9
102.9
129.6
106.7
108.7
102.3
105.2
100.9
130.2
105.8
109.6
102.2
105.1
97.8
103.5
99.7
109.2
102.0
105.1
94.4
128.4
91.8
105.0
95.2
102.9
95.3
129.7
95.6
104.9
95.8
102.0
99.2
130.7
104.7
108.0
97.6
107.5
119.6
264.7
212.7
118.1
145.7
126.0
275.8
213.1
119.3
145.6
129.3
274.2
212.7
120.0
144.9
129.1
273.1
210.1
120.8
142.2
125.7
277.1
211.5
120.4
143.7
125.8
278.8
213.4
120.5
145.4
126.4
280.1
213.4
120.4
145.4
118.7
275.4
201.6
116.5
136.7
125.1
286.8
201.7
117.7
136.2
128.1
285.5
201.4
118.2
135.7
128.0
284.2
199.2
118.5
133.5
124.9
287.5
200.1
118.5
134.4
124.9
289.5
201.7
118.5
135.9
125.6
291.1
201.9
118.4
136.1
Footwear................................................................................................
Men’s (12/77 = 100) ......................................................................
Boys' and girls’ (12/77 - 100) ........................................................
Women’s (12/77 = 100)..................................................................
204.9
132.5
129.2
124.7
206.8
133.2
129.5
126.9
206.9
132.5
129.3
127.6
205.9
132.0
129.0
126.8
204.8
131.4
130.4
124.5
205.6
132.2
131.2
124.6
206.6
133.2
131.1
125.5
205.2
134.5
132.1
120.8
206.7
135.0
132.1
122.8
206.7
134.2
131.8
123.6
205.8
133.7
131.5
122.9
204.6
133.0
132.9
120.4
205.2
133.9
133.4
120.4
206.1
134.8
133.2
121.1
Apparel services ..................................................................................
271.3
281.3
282.0
282.8
283.9
285.4
286.7
269.0
279.7
280.3
281.1
282.2
283.6
284.9
Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 = 100)..............
Other apparel services (12/77 = 100) ....................................................
162.4
141.1
167.2
148.2
167.9
148.1
168.9
147.7
169.6
148.3
170.3
149.1
170.8
150.4
160.9
141.5
165.8
149.3
166.4
149.2
167.5
148.8
168.1
149.4
168.8
150.3
169.3
151.4
TRANSPORTATION ..............................................................................
285.1
295.5
295.8
294.8
293.0
289.9
287.4
286.6
297.0
297.3
296.3
294.3
291.1
288.6
Private..................................................................................................
281.3
291.1
291.4
290.4
288.4
285.2
282.7
283.7
293.8
294.1
293.1
290.9
287.6
285.0
194.4
280.9
383.9
310.2
154.5
197.7
306.7
390.6
321.9
160.4
199.0
310.5
388.1
322.3
161.0
200.1
312.6
381.3
323.1
161.4
201.0
311.0
371.9
324.4
162.2
201.3
309.1
359.4
325.9
162.7
201.2
309.3
348.6
326.6
163.6
194.2
280.9
385.4
311.1
152.7
197.4
306.7
391.9
322.6
159.4
198.7
310.5
389.5
323.1
159.8
199.9
312.6
383.0
323.8
160.2
200.8
311.1
373.6
325.2
161.1
201.0
309.1
361.2
326.6
"161.5
200.9
309.3
350.3
327.4
162.5
148.7
143.9
148.0
254.5
215.6
150.2
137.9
191.7
135.7
267.2
269.8
188.9
129.7
168.5
122.9
129.3
145.3
153.2
149.3
154.3
261.4
214.4
151.9
136.7
189.6
135.4
276.4
283.9
185.2
138.8
183.7
132.8
128.5
154.2
153.7
149.3
154.4
260.7
215.1
153.3
137.0
190.4
135.1
275.3
286.9
178.9
139.2
183.8
132.8
128.5
155.0
154.3
149.9
154.2
259.6
214.3
153.3
136.5
190.0
133.8
274.2
288.8
173.8
139.3
183.8
132.8
128.5
155.2
155.4
150.5
154.4
259.9
215.6
153.9
137.3
191.3
134.3
274.2
292.0
169.6
139.8
184.6
132.8
128.6
155.8
156.1
151.1
155.4
259.7
215.0
154.8
136.7
190.6
133.7
274.1
295.6
165.0
140.1
184.9
133.5
128.6
156.2
156.3
150.9
156.2
259.2
213.3
154.8
135.5
188.1
133.9
273.9
297.0
161.9
141.1
186.6
133.9
129.2
157.0
152.8
143.4
147.5
257.8
218.2
148.7
139.9
195.5
135.9
270.8
269.6
188.2
130.1
167.8
123.0
130.6
152.5
157.2
148.6
153.8
264.1
216.9
151.0
138.6
193.2
135.4
279.1
283.2
184.6
139.8
183.2
133.1
129.9
162.7
157.8
148.6
153.9
262.9
217.7
152.3
139.0
194.0
135.4
277.5
286.1
178.1
140.0
183.4
133.1
129.8
162.9
158.3
149.2
153.7
261.6
216.9
152.3
138.4
193.7
133.9
276.0
288.2
173.0
140.1
183.4
133.1
129.8
163.2
159.4
149.9
153.9
261.5
218.0
153.0
139.1
194.9
134.3
275.6
291.3
168.7
140.5
184.0
133.1
129.9
163.9
160.1
150.5
154.8
261.1
217.4
153.8
138.5
194.1
133.6
275.2
294.9
164.0
140.8
184.3
133.7
129.9
164.1
160.3
150.3
155.6
260.5
215.8
153.8
137.4
191.7
133.8
274.8
296.3
161.0
141.9
186.3
134.1
130.5
165.1
Public....................................................................................................
336.7
356.3
356.0
355.6
357.7
355.2
354.5
331.0
348.2
348.2
348.0
349.8
347.7
347.3
Airline fare..............................................................................................
Intercity bus fare ....................................................................................
Intracity mass transit ..............................................................................
Taxi fare ................................................................................................
Intercity train fare....................................................................................
379.0
365.6
306.6
297.2
314.1
413.7
370.6
315.2
300.2
338.4
411.6
373.8
316.1
300.5
348.3
408.8
377.7
317.7
300.8
351.3
412.3
381.8
318.5
300.9
351.8
405.5
383.8
319.4
301.2
351.8
402.9
389.4
320.1
300.8
351.9
376.3
367.0
305.7
306.6
314.5
411.1
372.5
314.7
309.9
338.4
408.8
375.7
315.7
310.1
349.3
405.9
379.3
316.7
310.5
351.9
409.8
383.3
317.4
310.5
352.3
401.5
385.4
318.3
310.8
352.2
398.9
392.0
319.0
310.4
352.3
MEDICAL CARE ....................................................................................
318.8
338.7
342.2
344.3
347.8
351.3
352.3
317.4
336.5
339.8
341.8
345.3
348.9
350.0
Medical care commodities....................................................................
200.0
211.6
212.9
213.7
215.3
216.7
218.6
200.6
212.1
213.4
214.0
215.9
217.2
219.0
Prescription drugs ..................................................................................
Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 100)....................................................
Tranquilizers and sedatives (12/77 = 100)........................................
Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 = 100)..........................................
Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and
prescription medical supplies (12/77 - 100) ..................................
Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77 = 100) ................................
Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and
respiratory agents (12/77 = 100)..................................................
186.1
139.3
148.6
135.7
199.4
149.1
161.5
143.0
201.0
150.1
163.5
144.0
202.8
150.9
165.8
144.9
204.1
151.4
166.6
145.9
205.9
153.3
168.2
147.2
208.7
153.8
171.4
151.2
187.0
141.1
148.3
135.6
200.5
151.2
161.1
142.8
202.1
152.3
163.2
143.9
203.9
153.1
165.5
144.8
205.3
153.5
166.4
145.8
207.1
155.5
167.9
147.2
209.9
155.8
171.2
151.0
170.8
150.8
183.5
161.7
183.9
164.0
185.5
166.2
186.5
167.7
189.0
168.6
192.4
170.0
172.0
152.0
185.1
163.6
185.2
166.0
187.0
168.0
188.0
169.5
190.8
170.3
194.2
171.7
142.7
152.3
153.4
154.2
155.8
156.4
157.8
142.7
152.4
153.6
154.5
156.2
156.7
158.1
142.5
129.5
228.1
138.1
149.2
132.6
240.7
144.1
149.9
132.9
241.9
145.2
149.7
133.0
241.3
145.2
151.0
133.9
244.3
145.3
151.6
134.6
245.1
146.1
152.3
134.9
245.5
148.0
143.2
128.1
229.6
138.8
149.8
131.4
241.9
145.1
150.5
131.6
243.0
146.2
150.3
131.8
242.2
146.3
151.8
132.6
245.7
146.3
152.4
133.4
246.4
147.4
153.1
133.7
246.8
149.4
APPAREL AND UPKEEP-Continued
Apparel commodities—Continued
Apparel commodities less footwear—Continued
Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100)............................
Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100)................
Suits (12/77 = 100)............................................................
Girls’ (12/77 = 100)..................................................................
Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 100)..................
Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100)............................
Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and
accessories (12/77 = 100)..............................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ ........................................................................
Other apparel commodities ..............................................................
Sewing materials and notions (12/77 = 100) ..............................
Jewelry and luggage (12/77 = 100) ..........................................
Used c a rs ..............................................................................................
Gasoline ................................................................................................
Automobile maintenance and repair..........................................................
Body work (12/77 = 100)................................................................
Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous
mechanical repair (12/77 = 100) ..................................................
Maintenance and servicing (12/77 - 100) ........................................
Power plant repair (12/77 = 100) ....................................................
Other private transportation ....................................................................
Other private transportation commodities ..........................................
Motor oil, coolant, and other products (12/77 = 100) ..................
Automobile parts and equipment (12/77 = 100)..........................
Tires ..................................................................................
Other parts and equipment (12/77 = 100) ..........................
Other private transportation services..................................................
Automobile insurance ................................................................
Automobile finance charges (12/77 - 100) ................................
Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) . . . .
State registration ................................................................
Drivers’ licenses (12/77 = 100) ..........................................
Vehicle inspection (12/77 = 100) ........................................
Other vehicle-related fees (12/77 = 100) ............................
Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 = 100) ......................
Eyeglasses (12/77 = 100) ..............................................................
Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs ..................................
Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 - 100)..........
Medical care services ..........................................................................
345.1
366.9
371.0
373.4
377.4
381.5
382.2
343.0
363.9
367.7
370.1
374.0
378.2
379.0
Professional services ..............................................................................
Physicians’ services..........................................................................
295.8
320.3
306.6
334.2
308.3
335.3
309.4
336.6
312.5
341.3
315.4
344.8
316.7
346.4
295.9
323.2
306.9
337.4
308.4
338.6
309.5
339.9
312.7
344.6
315.7
348.2
316.9
349.8
Digitized for 74
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
20.
Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
Ail Urban Consumers
1983
1982
1983
1982
General summary
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Professional services—Continued
Dental services................................................................................
Other professional services (12/77 - 100)........................................
278.6
142.4
287.0
146.1
289.2
147.2
290.1
147.6
291.6
149.1
294.0
150.5
294.6
151.6
276.6
139.4
285.0
143.0
287.0
143.9
288.0
144.4
289.3
145.7
291.8
147.2
292.3
148.3
Other medical care services....................................................................
Hospital and other medical services (12/77 - 100) ..............................
Hospital room ..................................................................................
Other hospital and medical care services (12/77 - 100)....................
404.7
168.5
538.5
165.2
439.8
180.0
576.8
176.0
446.8
182.6
586.6
176.0
450.8
183.2
588.5
178.7
455.9
185.1
594.6
180.6
461.3
188.6
604.1
184.5
461.4
189.5
606.2
185.6
401.6
166.9
531.0
164.2
435.6
178.3
569.1
174.7
442.3
180.7
578.7
176.7
446.3
181.5
581.5
177.5
451.3
183.4
587.1
179.4
457.0
187.0
596.7
183.3
457.1
187.8
598.8
184.3
ENTERTAINMENT..................................................................................
232.8
240.3
239.9
240.1
241.5
243.1
244.6
229.5
236.5
236.1
236.5
237.7
239.5
240.8
Entertainment commodities..................................................................
236.6
242.9
241.4
241.8
242.6
244.5
246.8
230.8
236.6
235.4
236.0
236.7
238.8
240.8
155.5
295.6
162.6
155.5
296.4
162.1
158.7
299.8
167.3
MEDICAL CARE - Continued
Medical care service — Continued
Reading materials (12/77 - 100)............................................................
Newspapers ....................................................................................
Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 - 100)..............................
146.1
276.4
152.4
153.1
290.4
159.2
153.4
290.9
159.6
154.3
294.7
159.3
156.1
295.7
162.6
156.1
296.5
162.2
159.3
299.6
167.1
145.3
276.0
152.2
152.4
290.1
159.2
152.7
290.5
159.6
153.8
294.8
159.2
Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 - 100)..........................................
Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) ..........................................................
Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 - 100)..................
Bicycles ..........................................................................................
Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 - 100 )..........................
132.3
135.4
119.9
197.6
125.6
134.3
137.1
120.6
198.7
131.9
132.1
133.8
119.9
198.3
131.5
131.6
133.3
120.0
197.1
130.6
131.5
132.9
120.3
197.3
131.4
133.4
136.1
120.5
196.7
132.1
134.2
137.3
120.8
197.8
131.6
124.3
122.5
118.1
198.9
126.0
125.8
123.6
118.3
199.9
132.1
124.7
122.2
117.6
199.5
131.3
124.3
122.0
117.7
198.5
130.0
124.4
122.0
117.0
198.4
130.9
127.0
126.0
117.9
197.7
131.9
127.2
126.4
118.4
198.0
131.5
Toys, hobbles, and other entertainment (12/77 - 100)..............................
Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 - 100) ..........................
Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 - 100)..........................
Pet supplies and expenses (12/77 - 100) ........................................
134.5
133.4
128.3
140.8
137.1
136.4
129.6
143.9
136.4
135.5
129.0
143.4
136.8
135.5
129.7
144.2
136.8
135.5
129.9
144.2
138.0
136.9
131.2
144.9
138.6
137.6
131.6
145.6
133.5
130.2
129.5
141.7
136.1
133.0
130.6
145.0
135.2
131.8
130.1
144.5
135.6
132.0
130.8
145.1
135.6
131.9
131.0
145.1
136.7
133.0
132.3
145.9
137.3
133.7
132.8
146.5
Entertainment services ........................................................................
227.8
237.2
238.2
238.2
240.5
241.6
241.9
228.4
237.6
238.4
238.5
240.8
241.8
242.1
Fees for participant sports (12/77 - 100)................................................
Admissions (12/77 = 100)......................................................................
Other entertainment services (12/77 - 100)............................................
141.9
131.2
125.1
148.0
136.6
129.6
149.0
136.9
129.8
148.9
137.3
129.6
150.0
139.9
129.8
150.6
140.9
130.3
150.9
140.1
131.0
143.5
130.3
125.9
149.4
135.6
130.5
150.1
135.9
130.7
150.0
136.4
130.6
151.2
138.8
130.6
151.7
139.8
131.2
152.2
139.1
131.8
OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES............................................................
252.2
271.2
273.8
276.6
279.9
281.6
281.9
249.3
267.8
270.9
274.0
277.8
279.6
280.0
Tobacco products ................................................................................
234.1
257.3
264.0
272.3
280.3
282.8
283.3
233.2
256.6
263.4
271.9
279.9
282.2
282.7
287.6
145.8
290.0
147.8
290.4
148.6
236.3
138.2
261.4
143.1
268.8
143.0
278.0
143.9
286.5
145.8
288.8
147.7
289.3
148.5
Cigarettes..............................................................................................
Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 - 100)..............
237.3
138.1
262.3
142.9
269.8
142.8
279.0
143.8
Personal care ......................................................................................
243.7
252.9
254.2
254.8
256.1
257.8
257.8
241.8
250.9
252.1
252.5
253.9
255.5
255.8
Toilet goods and personal care appliances................................................
Products for the hair, hairpieces, and wigs (12/77 - 100) ..................
Dental and shaving products (12/77 - 100) ......................................
Cosmetics, bath and nail preparations, manicure
and eye makeup implements (12/77 - 100) ..................................
Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100)
240.6
140.8
148.0
251.5
147.8
155.2
253.5
148.3
157.2
252.2
146.8
156.2
253.9
147.1
157.6
256.0
148.1
159.3
257.1
148.5
160.4
241.5
140.0
146.6
252.1
146.9
153.5
254.1
147.3
155.4
253.1
146.2
154.6
254.8
146.5
155.9
256.8
147.4
157.8
257.8
147.8
158.9
135.1
137.4
141.4
142.2
141.7
144.7
142.2
143.2
144.0
143.6
145.6
144.1
146.0
144.9
136.1
140.7
142.1
145.8
142.3
148.4
143.0
147.0
144.8
147.3
146.4
147.7
146.7
148.5
Personal care services............................................................................
Beauty parlor services for women......................................................
Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 - 100) ........
247.3
248.9
138.4
255.1
258.3
141.0
255.8
258.9
141.4
258.0
262.1
141.6
259.0
263.3
142.0
260.4
264.4
143.1
259.5
262.4
143.7
242.6
242.5
137.2
250.0
251.6
139.8
250.6
252.1
140.3
252.4
254.7
140.4
253.4
255.8
140.8
254.7
256.8
141.9
254.3
255.5
142.6
Personal and educational expenses ....................................................
290.4
319.3
320.0
320.5
322.1
323.3
323.9
291.7
320.4
321.3
321.7
323.6
325.0
325.7
286.8
328.7
167.7
166.9
169.6
171.7
286.8
329.8
167.7
166.9
169.7
174.0
287.0
330.3
167.7
166.9
169.7
175.2
292.4
331.5
167.7
167.0
169.7
177.9
296.0
332.5
167.9
167.1
169.8
179.5
296.3
333.2
167.9
167.1
169.8
181.1
386.9
433.9
325.4
355.7
384.8
427.2
323.2
355.4
378.5
414.7
325.1
354.4
369.4
411.1
328.1
357.9
357.3
411.6
328.5
356.5
346.7
411.8
330.4
357.9
Schoolbooks and supplies ......................................................................
Personal and educational services............................................................
Tuition and other school fees ............................................................
College tuition (12/77 - 100) ....................................................
Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 - 100) ......................
Personal expenses (12/77 - 100)....................................................
263.3
297.1
151.1
150.7
152.2
157.4
283.0
327.7
167.2
166.8
168.6
171.9
283.1
328.6
167.2
166.8
168.7
174.1
283.3
329.1
167.2
166.8
168.7
175.4
288.4
330.2
167.3
166.9
168.7
178.8
292.0
331.0
167.4
167.0
168.8
179.6
292.3
331.5
167.4
167.0
168.8
181.2
267.5
298.0
151.7
150.9
152.9
156.7
379.3
420.9
302.7
344.0
385.7
432.9
326.5
355.0
383.5
426.2
324.1
354.8
377.0
413.4
326.0
354.0
367.9
355.8
345.2
329.1
355.3
329.4
355.1
331.1
356.0
380.6
419.9
301.5
344.0
Special indexes:
Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products........................................
Insurance and finance ............................................................................
Utilities and public transportation..............................................................
Housekeeping and home maintenance services ........................................
1Excludes motor oil, coolant, and other products as of January 1983.
2 See box with "Price Data.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
c = corrected.
75
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
21. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Cross classification of region and population size class by expenditure
category and commodity and service group
[December 1977 = 100]
Size class A
(1.25 million or more)
Size class B
(385,000-1.250 million)
Size class C
(75,000-385,000)
Size class D
(75,000 or less)
Category and group
1982
Oct
Dec.
1982
Feb.
Oct.
Dec.
1982
Feb.
Oct
1982
Dec.
Feb.
Oct
Dec.
Feb.
Northeast
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY
All items ......................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ........................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................
151.8
145.1
157.7
122.2
160.7
151.4
140.6
150.0
151.0
144.4
155.9
119.8
161.0
153.6
140.2
152.8
151.8
146.0
156.7
120.3
159.1
158.1
141.6
154.4
156.6
142.4
164.9
127.0
166.6
158.1
139.9
151.4
157.1
142.1
166.5
124.9
166.7
160.6
135.9
153.9
158.2
144.2
168.8
121.9
164.8
161.6
139.1
157.3
160.7
147.0
172.9
128.5
165.2
161.5
138.1
154.3
162.3
147.4
175.2
129.1
166.2
163.6
139.2
157.8
162.9
149.8
176.2
126.6
164.2
165.5
140.0
160.4
155.8
141.9
163.0
131.4
164.6
157.0
144.8
153.4
156.3
142.0
163.2
131.1
164.5
159.8
145.0
158.7
156.1
144.0
163.1
124.3
162.5
164.1
147.2
159.4
COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP
Commodities ......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................
147.7
149.3
157.1
147.5
149.4
155.6
147.6
148.4
157.1
152.4
157.2
163.3
153.5
159.0
162.9
153.1
157.1
166.1
152.0
154.3
175.0
153.7
156.6
176.4
153.3
154.5
178.3
150.9
155.2
163.5
151.7
156.3
163.4
150.2
152.7
165.1
North Central Region
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY
All items ............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................
163.1
143.5
181.2
118.8
164.5
157.9
140.7
150.5
162.0
143.3
179.1
116.4
163.8
160.3
140.2
152.8
162.4
144.7
180.2
115.4
160.7
164.2
141.3
155.4
158.9
142.6
168.5
128.7
164.1
162.7
133.5
161.4
159.3
141.9
169.1
129.4
164.5
164.0
134.1
163.8
159.6
143.4
170.2
124.4
162.1
167.7
135.9
167.5
155.9
143.8
162.6
127.8
165.0
160.9
142.5
148.1
156.2
143.4
162.8
126.1
165.2
162.9
143.7
150.6
155.8
143.8
163.2
124.1
162.0
164.7
144.3
152.9
159.0
149.2
167.8
121.9
163.1
163.7
133.3
157.3
156.8
149.1
161.9
121.4
163.8
166.5
134.5
160.3
156.6
149.1
162.2
122.0
160.6
171.0
135.2
163.3
COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP
Commodities...................................................................................................... •.
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................
151.9
155.8
179.7
151.7
155.7
177.3
151.2
153.9
178.8
149.7
152.6
173.7
150.8
154.5
173.1
149.7
152.0
175.3
148.2
150.1
168.6
148.7
150.9
168.4
147.2
148.4
169.6
147.6
147.0
177.0
148.4
148.1
170.1
147.2
146.2
171.5
South
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY
All items ............................................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................
158.1
146.8
166.1
127.5
164.7
160.9
135.5
152.9
157.5
147.0
164.3
128.0
164.6
164.0
135.0
155.0
158.0
148.7
164.9
127.6
162.1
167.1
137.5
157.5
159.6
146.4
167.5
125.3
167.7
161.3
147.3
152.5
159.3
146.4
166.0
124.7
168.0
163.5
148.5
158.1
159.5
147.3
166.1
124.0
165.0
167.2
151.0
163.2
159.1
145.6
167.3
123.7
166.0
169.4
144.5
153.3
158.8
145.4
166.0
122.6
166.8
173.5
144.4
154.9
159.0
146.1
167.3
120.1
163.8
176.8
145.9
157.8
159.8
147.5
169.7
112.4
164.5
173.9
149.7
153.2
159.1
147.3
168.2
111.1
163.5
179.4
143.8
155.8
159.5
147.7
169.9
108.3
161.3
182.5
145.4
160.3
COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP
Commodities......................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................
150.1
151.6
169.2
150.9
152.6
166.9
150.9
151.5
167.9
151.7
154.0
171.5
152.3
154.8
169.9
151.7
153.2
171.1
149.9
151.8
173.2
150.2
152.3
172.1
149.2
150.2
173.9
150.6
152.0
173.6
150.6
151.9
172.1
149.2
149.6
174.9
West
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY
All items ............................................................................................
Food and beverages ....................................................................................
Housing ......................................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ....................................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................................
Medical care................................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................................
Other goods and services ............................................................................
160.3
148.3
166.9
120.7
169.4
168.9
136.6
155.4
156.9
147.8
160.7
119.9
166.3
171.1
137.8
159.3
157.8
149.3
163.2
120.1
162.8
174.4
139.2
162.9
160.1
148.6
166.0
126.5
169.8
165.1
142.4
155.0
157.9
149.2
161.2
125.8
168.1
168.4
142.5
158.9
158.3
150.6
162.2
125.1
165.3
170.5
144.7
161.7
152.6
145.7
153.4
123.8
166.0
168.8
136.2
148.0
150.1
144.8
148.3
123.4
165.1
170.7
137.2
153.0
151.0
146.0
150.1
122.4
161.0
174.2
143.3
155.9
158.1
150.8
158.7
138.6
165.7
169.6
154.9
164.2
157.8
150.7
158.3
136.9
165.2
171.5
154.3
165.2
157.9
150.6
159.3
139.7
162.0
173.3
155.2
168.8
COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP
Commodities................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..........................................................
Services ............................................................................................................
149.4
149.9
174.8
148.1
148.3
168.5
148.0
147.0
170.7
151.6
152.9
171.8
150.7
151.3
167.9
150.5
150.1
169.0
150.6
152.6
155.4
149.0
150.7
151.7
148.5
148.6
154.0
147.7
146.4
173.4
148.9
148.1
171.0
148.0
146.8
172.5
76
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
22.
Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average, and selected areas
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)
All Urban Consumers
Area'
Mar.
Oct.
Nov.
U.S. city average2 ..............................................................
283.1
294.1
293.6
Anchorage, Alaska (10/67-100) ........................................
Atlanta, Ga...........................................................................
Baltimore, Md.......................................................................
Boston, Mass........................................................................
Buffalo, N.Y..........................................................................
260.0
Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind................................................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind.........................................................
Cleveland, O hio..................................................................
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex............................................................
Denver-Boulder, Colo............................................................
294.4
294.3
304.2
Detroit, Mich.........................................................................
Honolulu, Hawaii ................................................................
Houston, Tex........................................................................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas ....................................................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif................................
278.2
Miami, Fla. (11/77-100) ....................................................
Milwaukee, Wis.....................................................................
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis..............................................
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J...........................................
Northeast, Pa. (Scranton)....................................................
155.1
289.3
286.4
267.4
267.2
295.2
275.2
317.6
289.3
289.5
286.7
280.7
319.0
San Francisco-Oakland, Calif........................ ........................
Seattle-Everett, Wash...........................................................
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.......................................................
293.4
289.0
296.0
288.5
292.6
269.9
318.1
290.6
285.3
156.8
303.1
307.7
284.5
283.6
279.4
282.9
306.1
281.8
281.6
302.1
Nov.
293.2
293.4
282.5
293.6
293.2
261.0
254.5
293.7
292.6
285.6
282.6
278.9
282.1
305.8
283.2
282.0
304.8
332.5
292.4
275.1
287.1
290.2
159.0
305.0
156.4
292.5
283.5
278.9
265.9
268.4
291.2
274.7
314.9
287.3
292.8
284.7
293.2
327.5
283.8
279.3
313.9
297.8
289.0
289.6
283.8
281.9
280.6
282.0
291.8
292.8
305.2
291.4
288.0
326.8
288.0
287.1
274.8
317.4
289.0
290.1
281.0
301.7
280.8
282.6
282.5
289.8
289.6
159.7
311.0
159.2
303.5
306.1
280.3
291.4
307.6
313.7
298.1
309.0
279.6
283.3
296.6
280.3
280.6
285.5
283.0
293.2
315.4
281.7
285.3
313.6
293.9
293.6
294.1
291.6
295.0
284.3
276.5
323.9
288.7
271.0
316.1
288.6
288.0
283.5
288.9
318.2
301.3
253.9
289.7
283.9
158.6
306.9
307.6
282.7
281.2
300.3
283.0
291.6
Mar.
293.0
297.0
315.0
299.4
292.1
297.3
297.5
289.0
293.1
307.1
315.0
329.6
292.3
270.4
317.3
292.3
286.8
293.2
314.1
302.5
319.9
304.5
293.9
297.5
286.3
276.5
287.2
Feb.
292.3
250.6
275.0
274.3
293.7
307.6
Jan.
297.8
289.7
284.4
282.2
269.8
280.3
294.0
306.0
Dec.
254.4
298.7
292.4
285.9
286.6
291.1
324.9
’ The areas listed include not only the central city but the entire portion of the Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Oct
157.9
305.0
285.6
290.0
321.7
302.4
Mar.
327.5
326.2
281.8
300.7
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J..............................................................
Pittsburgh, Pa.......................................................................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash............................................................
St. Louis, Mo.-lll....................................................................
San Diego, Calif....................................................................
293.1
317.6
303.3
316.6
306.7
309.2
Mar.
291.4
286.2
277.8
277.1
Feb.
295.1
296.1
290.1
285.0
281.9
269.8
Jan.
257.6
257.2
297.8
276.4
284.9
Dec.
1983
1982
1983
1982
291.4
292.9
290.8
294.3
Area is used for New York and Chicago.
2Average of 85 cities.
77
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
23.
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
[1967 = 100]
Annual
average
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Finished goods ................................................................
'280.7
277.3
277.8
279.9
281.7
282.3
281.2
Finished consumer g o o d s..........................................
Finished consumer fo o d s ........................................
C ru d e ...................................................................
Processed ............................................................
Nondurable goods less fo o d s.................................
Durable goods .......................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy
Capital equipment .....................................................
'281.0
259.3
'252.7
257.7
'333.6
226.7
'223.8
'279.4
277.3
260.0
266.6
257.3
325.7
224.1
222.3
277.2
277.7
262.3
259.9
260.3
324.3
225.0
223.1
278.1
280.1
263.4
254.7
262.0
328.7
225.9
223.5
279.2
282.1
260.6
241.0
260.2
335.3
226.7
223.7
280.2
282.8
259.7
239.2
259.4
337.2
227.5
224.3
280.7
281.9
259.9
228.2
260.6
338.3
223.0
225.5
278.7
Intermediate materials, supplies, and components...........
310.4
309.9
309.8
309.9
311.1
310.8
310.5
309.9
309.9
'310.1
309.9
Materials and components for manufacturing...........
Materials for food manufacturing ...........................
Materials for nondurable manufacturing ...............
Materials for durable manufacturing ......................
Components for manufacturing .............................
'289.8
'255.1
'284.4
310.1
'273.9
290.6
254.4
287.6
311.0
272.6
291.4
260.0
287.6
311.0
273.6
289.8
260.7
285.4
307.5
273.6
289.2
259.7
283.1
308.0
273.9
288.7
258.0
282.6
306.5
274.3
289.9
257.3
281.7
310.5
275.8
289.4
254.2
280.4
309.8
276.7
288.7
251.0
279.2
309.3
276.9
'288.3
'249.8
'278.0
'309.4
'277.3
289.0
250.9
277.4
312.1
277.4
Materials and components for construction
Commodity grouping
1982
1983
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.1
Jan.
Feb.
284.1
284.9
284.3
257.7
232.4
257.9
340.0
231.0
227.8
283.2
285.3
257.4
236.1
257.2
342.5
231.2
228.4
283.8
'285.5
283.6
'285.6
'258.3
'247.6
257.1
'342.2
'232.0
'229.2
'284.9
283.0
258.3
232.6
258.4
335.2
231.9
227.4
285.7
Mar.
Apr.
283.7
283.4
283.0
283.0
259.9
240.4
259.5
332.5
233.5
227.7
286.2
282.5
260.8
247.5
259.9
330.6
233.1
228.1
286.5
282.0
262.9
265.4
260.5
328.0
232.2
229.8
286.5
310.5
309.2
309.1
291.3
253.0
277.4
319.1
278.1
290.3
252.5
277.0
315.0
279.0
291.1
254.8
277.5
316.4
279.0
FINISHED GOODS
INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS
.............
'293.7
294.0
293.7
294.5
294.3
293.5
294.2
293.7
293.6
'294.7
296.2
298.6
299.4
300.1
Processed fuels and lubricants .................................
Manufacturing industries ........................................
Nonmanufacturing industries .................................
'591.7
'497.8
'674.3
579.9
487.5
661.1
570.9
481.4
649.5
581.1
491.7
659.5
600.7
506.9
683.0
603.8
510.7
685.5
592.3
496.4
676.9
590.0
496.6
672.1
593.0
500.4
674.2
'595.0
'502.2
'676.4
583.5
493.2
662.7
571.1
483.5
647.8
557.9
471.8
633.4
549.0
468.4
619.2
Containers...................................................................
'285.6
287.0
287.0
286.5
286.3
285.4
285.3
285.1
284.9
'285.0
284.9
285.1
285.3
285.0
Supplies .....................................................................
Manufacturing industries ........................................
Nonmanufacturing industries .................................
Feeds ..................................................................
Other supplies.....................................................
'272.1
'265.8
275.7
'207.0
'289.8
272.1
265.3
276.0
213.1
288.9
273.4
266.7
277.2
214.2
290.1
273.4
266.7
277.1
213.1
290.4
273.1
266.8
276.7
210.3
290.5
272.6
266.5
276.0
203.1
291.1
272.2
266.7
275.3
198.1
291.3
272.0
266.9
274.9
192.9
291.9
272.8
266.9
276.1
199.8
291.9
'273.0
'267.2
'276.3
'204.7
'291.1
273.6
268.0
276.8
206.9
291.3
274.2
268.7
277.3
207.6
291.8
274.5
268.9
277.6
207.8
292.1
275.6
268.8
279.4
219.1
292.1
Crude materials for further processing.............................
319.5
322.6
328.3
325.6
323.4
319.8
316.1
312.0
313.2
'312.7
313.7
321.0
322.1
325.7
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs..........................................
247.8
254.4
262.6
259.9
255.5
249.6
242.9
236.3
236.3
'237.1
239.6
249.3
249.1
256.8
Nonfood materials .....................................................
'473.9
469.9
470.2
467.7
469.8
471.0
473.7
474.8
478.6
'475.3
473.0
475.5
479.4
474.4
Nonfood materials except fuel ...............................
Manufacturing industries......................................
Construction .......................................................
'376.8
387.2
'270.3
378.8
389.0
273.3
376.6
386.3
274.5
370.0
378.9
274.2
369.2
378.4
271.4
369.5
378.9
270.3
369.5
379.1
268.8
371.9
382.2
266.3
369.2
379.2
265.6
'365.8
375.0
'268.1
368.1
377.5
268.9
366.6
375.5
270.8
367.1
376.2
270.2
366.5
376.0
267.2
Crude fuel ..............................................................
Manufacturing industries......................................
Nonmanufacturing industries...............................
'886.1
1,034.8
'782.2
851.2
989.1
755.8
864.8
1006.7
766.4
883.9
901.3
1,032.0 1,053.9
780.5
794.5
906.9
1,061.1
798.9
923.5
1,083.6
810.7
'952.2
926.3
'1,121.4 1,088.2
'832.2
812.0
949.1
1,118.7
828.8
970.0
1,144.8
845.7
943.2
1,109.4
825.5
Finished goods excluding fo o d s........................................
Finished consumer goods excluding fo o d s ................
Finished consumer goods less e n e rg y......................
'285.8
287.8
'244.1
281.1
282.3
243.0
281.0
281.8
244.3
283.4
284.8
245.1
286.7
288.8
244.5
287.9
290.2
244.7
286.3
288.9
243.9
290.8
293.3
246.5
292.0
294.8
246.7
'292.5
'295.0
'247.6
289.9
291.1
246.9
289.6
290.3
248.0
288.8
289.1
248.4
287.5
287.2
249.5
Intermediate materials less foods and fe e d s....................
Intermediate materials less energy ...........................
315.7
'290.4
315.1
291.0
314.6
291.6
314.7
290.8
316.1
290.4
316.0
289.7
315.9
290.5
315.5
290.1
315.5
289.8
315.7
'290.0
315.3
290.7
315.9
292.6
314.5
292.3
314.0
293.1
Intermediate foods and feeds ..........................................
'239.4
240.9
245.0
245.1
243.6
240.2
238.1
234.4
234.4
'235.1
236.5
238.2
237.9
243.2
Crude materials less agricultural products ......................
Crude materials less e ne rgy......................................
'536.3
240.4
531.6
247.3
531.5
252.8
529.1
248.7
531.5
245.1
532.0
240.7
535.5
235.6
537.2
230.0
541.9
229.2
'537.4
229.9
534.8
232.6
537.5
241.6
541.7
242.8
535.9
248.4
CRUDE MATERIALS
917.2
954.7
1,075.3 1,124.5
805.9
834.2
SPECIAL GROUPINGS
1 Data for December 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and
corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
78
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
r=revised,
24.
Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Annual
average
1982
Apr.
May
All commodities ........................................................................
All commodities (1957-59 - 100)..............................................
299.3
317.6
298.0
316.2
298.6
316.8
Farm products and processed foods and feeds........................
Industrial commodities..............................................................
248.9
312.3
251.6
309.9
Live poultry..............................................................................
Plant and animal fibers..............................................................
Fluid milk ................................................................................
Eggs........................................................................................
Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ....................................................
Other farm products ................................................................
r 242.4
r 253.7
210.9
257.8
191.9
202.9
282.5
178.7
212.8
274.5
Processed foods and feeds..........................................................
Cereal and bakery products......................................................
Meats, poultry, and fish ............................................................
Dairy products..........................................................................
Processed fruits and vegetables................................................
Sugar and confectionery ..........................................................
Beverages and beverage materials............................................
Fats and o ils ............................................................................
Miscellaneous processed foods ................................................
Prepared animal feeds..............................................................
Commodity group and subgroup
Code
01
01-1
01-2
01-3
01-4
01-5
01-6
01-7
01-8
01-9
02
02-1
02-2
02-3
02-4
02-5
02-6
02-7
02-8
02-9
FARM PRODUCTS AND PROCESSED FOODS
AND FEEDS
Farm products ............................................................................
Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables ........................................
Grains......................................................................................
1983
1982
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
'300.7
'319.0
300.0
318.3
301.2
319.6
300.5
318.8
300.8
319.1
243.9
315.0
244.8
'315.2
245.9
314.0
249.9
314.4
250.4
313.4
254.7
312.6
299.2
223.0
183.2
248.5
177.1
198.1
285.0
177.9
194.3
274.0
230.7
233.4
198.6
239.1
181.6
195.3
285.9
172.5
204.8
276.3
' 232.6
'248.8
262.3
237.2
177.8
200.6
285.5
170.0
209.0
280.1
233.1
227.0
206.3
242.3
177.1
201.7
284.5
170.0
212.4
279.9
240.8
227.2
222.4
251.1
200.1
206.4
284.5
170.0
217.9
282.0
241.4
234.3
227.4
251.4
177.8
217.0
282.9
170.0
217.8
280.3
250.5
266.0
243.8
260.6
170.8
213.6
280.8
170.0
226.3
279.2
253.5
254.0
265.7
249.1
272.8
278.5
257.1
211.4
247.0
204.3
250.8
253.0
256.9
249.8
273.4
276.3
257.9
213.8
247.9
199.8
250.2
254.2
251.6
250.2
272.8
280.4
258.4
207.2
247.8
206.0
'250.5
'256.2
249.9
250.8
'275.7
'280.1
'258.8
'203.0
248.6
'210.1
251.8
256.9
252.2
250.7
274.6
281.8
260.9
203.6
248.9
212.1
253.9
257.3
257.7
251.0
273.9
286.4
261.6
205.6
248.9
212.4
254.3
257.4
260.1
250.7
272.9
283.7
261.8
205.0
248.5
212.5
256.0
259.1
259.3
251.0
273.8
286.7
263.0
213.4
249.9
222.3
Oct.
Nov.
299.3
317.6
299.8
318.1
300.3
318.6
249.6
313.2
247.4
312.7
243.8
314.3
246.6
239.1
212.8
270.3
212.5
220.8
279.0
171.7
220.0
265.5
240.8
238.6
197.2
268.4
189.3
207.5
278.8
171.7
204.5
274.4
234.5
221.0
187.3
259.0
196.5
196.8
281.9
173.3
201.8
276.8
255.8
252.7
271 i
248.7
275.8
269.1
256.7
221.8
248.6
216.4
254.6
253.0
266.0
248.6
274.4
275.7
256.9
221.3
248.1
213.9
253.5
252.7
262.2
248.8
274.1
285.5
258.0
215.6
245.9
207.5
July
Aug.
299.3
317.6
300.4
318.7
300.2
318.5
255.8
309.6
255.3
310.6
252.4
312.8
250.6
267.6
226.0
267.6
186.2
207.4
280.3
192.1
222.8
274.2
256.5
271.5
228.2
282.9
192.7
214.1
278.8
164.3
227.3
273.9
252.7
264.5
225.7
277.5
207.2
203.1
278.9
159.3
219.3
271.8
'251.5
'253.8
257.6
248.9
'274.5
'269.7
256.9
'215.1
248.6
211.3
251.1
253.5
258.2
248.4
275.2
256.0
256.6
218.1
249.6
216.3
254.4
252.8
267.6
248.5
273.8
265.3
256.5
222.3
248.0
217.4
June
Sept
Dec.1
INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES
03
03-1
03-2
03-3
03-4
03-81
03-82
Textile products and apparel ........................................................
Synthetic fibers (12/75 - 100)..................................................
Processed yams and threads (12/75 - 100) ............................
Gray fabrics (12/75 - 100)......................................................
Finished fabrics (12/75 - 100) ................................................
Appare.....................................................................................
Textile housefumishings............................................................
'204.6
'162.1
'138.3
145.3
124.6
'194.4
'238.5
205.4
163.0
140.4
146.3
125.4
194.1
241.8
205.4
163.4
141.0
145.9
125.2
194.5
239.5
205.0
162.8
139.4
146.0
124.0
195.0
239.7
204.1
161.5
135.9
144.9
123.8
194.8
238.2
204.2
162.2
135.9
144.6
124.3
195.1
236.4
204.3
162.5
136.6
143.6
123.7
195.4
238.2
204.1
161.1
136.5
143.7
123.2
195.7
236.2
203.9
161.2
136.7
143.1
123.0
195.4
236.2
'202.6
'159.7
136.7
143.3
'122.8
'193.0
'236.2
202.6
158.4
135.1
144.8
122.3
192.9
240.8
202.4
155.4
135.4
144.4
122.4
193.3
238.7
203.2
156.3
135.9
145.0
122.5
194.6
238.5
203.3
155.4
136.0
146.2
122.8
194.7
238.5
04
04-2
04-3
04-4
Hides, skins, leather, and related products ....................................
Leather....................................................................................
Footwear ................................................................................
Other leather and related products............................................
'262.6
'311.4
245.0
'247.4
263.4
310.6
244.8
248.1
263.2
309.8
244.5
248.1
261.8
307.7
244.2
245.6
263.1
307.4
247.3
246.9
262.0
304.9
247.7
244.9
263.5
309.2
248.3
247.7
263.2
309.5
248.0
247.2
263.2
312.8
249.1
247.1
'264.1
'314.4
'247.7
'249.1
265.6
314.9
247.5
254.6
265.0
312.7
246.9
255.0
265.9
316.0
248.0
254.5
267.1
317.9
248.4
254.4
05
05-1
05-2
05-3
05-4
05-61
05-7
Fuels and related products and power ..........................................
C oal........................................................................................
Coke ......................................................................................
Gas fuels2 ..............................................................................
Electric power..........................................................................
Crude petroleum3 ....................................................................
Petroleum products, refined4 ....................................................
'693.2
'534.7
'461.7
'1060.8
'406.5
'733.4
'761.2
670.6
532.6
467.5
992.7
406.3
717.9
733.5
'703.4
700.4
698.8 706.1
705.6
662.2
677.3
701.1
'538.7
538.5
538.1 539.6
538.0
539.0
534.0
533.6
452.3
460.0
452.3 452.3
462.0
460.3
459.1
467.5
1,001.2 1,027.5 1,054.3 1,074.6 1,112.2 1,130.1 1,190.0 '1,181.2
'409.9
408.7 404.9
415.0
416.0
414.9
407.1
405.7
'720.0
735.3 733.6
718.4
718.4
718.3
717.8
718.2
'754.2
781.7
761.6
754.6 758.0
739.4
776.5
713.2
686.3
532.3
450.9
1,143.5
411.2
720.1
727.1
06
06-1
06-21
06-22
06-3
06-4
06-5
06-6
06-7
Chemicals and allied products......................................................
Industrial chemicals5 ................................................................
Prepared paint..........................................................................
Paint materials ........................................................................
Drugs and pharmaceuticals ......................................................
Fats and oils, inedible ..............................................................
Agricultural chemicals and chemical products ............................
Plastic resins and materials ......................................................
Other chemicals and allied products..........................................
'292.3
'352.6
'262.8
304.6
210.1
267.1
'292.4
'283.4
'270.1
294.3
357.8
258.9
306.7
208.9
282.6
295.8
286.0
270.0
295.0
357.1
264.7
306.9
209.9
288.4
294.8
283.2
272.7
293.3
351.2
264.7
304.9
209.7
287.5
294.1
282.1
273.8
291.6
349.1
264.7
304.5
210.0
278.2
291.5
280.9
271.1
291.6
349.1
264.7
302.5
211.2
254.2
290.8
282.2
272.3
290.7
346.5
264.7
303.0
212.4
254.1
289.9
281.6
271.2
289.9
345.8
264.7
303.0
214.9
242.3
288.8
281.3
268.6
290.5
345.2
264.7
302.4
215.5
239.6
286.5
282.2
272.3
'289.6
'342.4
'264.7
'301.7
216.0
240.8
'285.2
'282.5
'272.0
289.2
339.9
265.1
301.3
218.3
241.9
282.8
282.8
272.6
290.6
341.0
265.1
299.3
221.3
253.4
282.5
282.3
274.8
290.1
339.4
265.1
298.1
222.7
262.0
284.0
282.8
272.2
291.3
339.7
265.1
299.5
225.1
278.8
283.7
284.7
273.4
07
07-1
07-11
07-12
07-13
07-2
Rubber and plastic products ........................................................
Rubber and rubber products......................................................
Crude rubber ..........................................................................
Tires and tubes........................................................................
Miscellaneous rubber products..................................................
Plastic products (6/78 - 100) ..................................................
'241.4
'267.8
278.9
255.2
'276.9
'132.3
241.1
266.6
283.3
253.4
274.7
132.6
242.1
269.0
283.7
254.9
278.8
132.5
242.5
269.3
282.5
255.3
279.5
132.8
242.0
268.8
280.3
255.0
279.4
132.5
242.6
270.1
278.7
257.8
279.7
132.5
242.5
269.5
276.6
255.6
281.6
132.7
242.2
268.9
272.5
255.7
281.4
132.7
241.7
267.9
270.9
254.5
280.7
132.7
'242.2
'268.2
'271.1
'256.0
'279.7
'133.0
244.5
273.9
271.0
259.1
290.7
132.6
242.8
270.0
274.2
250.4
290.8
132.8
243.1
271.1
281.1
250.1
291.9
132.6
242.2
269.2
280.6
246.6
291.6
132.5
08
08-1
08-2
08-3
08-4
Lumber and wood products..........................................................
Lumber....................................................................................
Millwork ..................................................................................
Plywood ..................................................................................
Other wood products................................................................
284.7
310.8
279.4
232.1
236.2
286.5
312.4
276.6
234.0
237.7
284.6
310.5
276.3
230.5
237.4
289.0
315.8
280.5
239.2
236.0
288.6
319.2
282.3
232.4
236.0
284.2
311.6
280.2
229.0
235.8
283.0
310.3
279.5
228.5
235.6
279.4
305.6
278.6
224.0
235.8
279.9
305.1
280.3
227.8
233.0
'285.6
'312.6
'286.5
231.2
'231.2
292.1
324.2
293.7
234.4
232.0
302.7
343.6
300.5
239.3
233.2
305.0
348.2
304.0
238.8
231.6
305.4
352.8
302.7
239.3
230.8
662.3 648.1
673.5
540.0 539.3
534.6
447.3 447.3
450.9
1,169.2 1,190.5 1,158.4
411.7 409.5
411.2
678.5 678.4
693.3
672.7 651.8
699.2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
79
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
24.
Continued — Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Code
Commodity group and subgroup
INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES
Annual
average
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct
Nov.
Dec.1
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
1982
1983
Continued
09
09-1
09-11
09-12
09-13
09-14
09-15
09-2
Pulp, paper, and allied products....................................................
Pulp, paper, and products, excluding building paper and board . . .
Woodpulp................................................................................
Wastepaper ............................................................................
Paper ......................................................................................
Paperboard ..............................................................................
Converted paper and paperboard products................................
Building paper and board..........................................................
r 288.7
r 273.2
'379.0
121.1
'286.3
254.9
264.4
' 239.5
288.5
275.3
389.9
128.1
289.4
261.2
264.3
236.3
289.6
274.8
393.3
121.5
288.2
258.8
264.3
240.2
289.5
274.1
388.0
115.2
287.8
255.9
264.5
240.0
289.1
272.6
368.3
115.6
286.3
255.0
264.4
239.8
289.3
272.2
367.0
116.0
285.3
255.4
264.3
244.4
289.4
271.5
365.0
116.0
285.3
250.7
264.2
243.4
289.8
270.3
350.4
116.0
285.4
248.0
264.0
242.1
289.8
269.4
347.3
116.0
280.6
247.6
264.7
241.0
'290.5
'268.8
'347.2
116.0
'279.2
'244.1
'264.8
'242.0
291.1
269.1
350.5
116.0
279.8
243.6
265.0
240.5
293.3
269.0
349.5
116.0
279.1
244.0
265.1
240.8
293.8
269.1
346.7
116.0
278.6
246.6
265.2
243.3
295.1
268.8
344.5
116.0
278.7
248.4
264.5
246.1
10
10-1
10-17
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-5
10-6
10-7
10-8
Metals and metal products ..........................................................
Iron and steel ..........................................................................
Steel mill products....................................................................
Nonferrous metals....................................................................
Metal containers ......................................................................
Hardware ................................................................................
Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings............................................
Heating equipment....................................................................
Fabricated structural metal products..........................................
Miscellaneous metal products....................................................
'301.6
'339.0
'349.5
263.6
'328.5
'280.3
278.7
'237.2
'304.8
'282.3
303.1
342.8
352.2
266.1
330.0
278.5
280.3
236.0
305.2
279.7
302.8
341.3
352.1
263.6
330.2
278.9
281.0
237.2
304.9
284.5
299.3
338.3
349.9
253.4
329.9
280.3
282.6
238.5
305.3
283.9
299.5
337.5
349.0
256.4
330.0
281.2
283.3
238.9
303.9
283.2
299.2
337.1
348.6
255.7
328.8
282.6
274.6
238.4
304.3
283.3
301.8
336.5
348.2
265.1
328.8
282.7
277.1
239.1
306.4
283.8
301.6
337.6
349.8
262.9
329.7
283.0
277.8
238.4
305.9
284.1
300.5
335.9
348.6
261.7
329.0
283.1
278.3
238.8
305.3
283.4
'299.9
'332.8
'344.7
'263.2
'328.3
'285.8
'279.2
239.3
'304.7
'283.2
301.7
333.2
343.7
267.6
327.0
284.9
280.6
240.1
303.3
288.6
306.1
340.3
351.8
275.5
330.3
285.6
283.4
240.8
302.5
288.6
305.4
341.8
350.1
268.8
331.6
285.9
285.5
241.1
303.7
289.8
305.3
341.7
350.1
271.7
332.0
286.3
287.5
242.3
302.6
285.3
11
11-1
11-2
11-3
11-4
11-6
11-7
11-9
Machinery and equipment ............................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment........................................
Construction machinery and equipment......................................
Metalworking machinery and equipment ....................................
General purpose machinery and equipment................................
Special industry machinery and equipment ................................
Electrical machinery and equipment ..........................................
Miscellaneous machinery..........................................................
'278.8
'311.1
'343.9
'320.9
'304.0
'325.1
'231.6
'268.4
277.6
306.8
341.5
319.6
303.4
322.9
231.7
266.1
278.2
308.2
343.5
320.7
303.8
323.9
231.3
267.9
278.6
309.7
343.9
321.2
303.5
325.0
231.5
268.5
279.6
311.0
346.1
322.5
304.8
327.1
231.6
269.5
279.9
312.2
346.5
322.8
304.9
326.7
231.8
270.9
280.2
314.1
347.5
323.1
305.0
326.8
231.7
271.5
281.1
317.5
347.6
323.1
305.9
327.8
232.6
271.6
281.8
318.7
347.9
323.5
306.4
329.1
233.7
272.0
'282.4
'320.7
'348.1
'323.6
'307.0
'329.9
'234.2
'272.3
282.7
321.4
348.6
323.7
306.9
331.7
234.3
272.5
283.6
322.5
348.1
324.5
307.5
332.9
235.8
272.5
284.0
322.8
349.6
324.8
307.3
333.7
236.1
273.5
284.9
324.8
350.8
325.6
307.9
334.4
237.3
274.0
12
12-1
12-2
12-3
12-4
12-5
12-6
Furniture and household durables ................................................
Household furniture..................................................................
Commercial furniture................................................................
Floor coverings ........................................................................
Household appliances ..............................................................
Home electronic equipment ......................................................
Other household durable goods ................................................
'206.9
'229.8
'275.5
'181.2
'199.1
88.1
'289.3
206.0
229.7
274.2
181.1
197.8
87.9
285.9
206.5
230.0
275.2
181.3
198.9
88.0
285.4
207.0
230.2
276.0
181.9
199.6
88.4
286.1
206.8
230.0
277.4
181.2
200.2
87.2
285.1
208.1
230.4
278.1
181.0
201.0
88.0
291.8
208.3
230.7
278.2
181.5
201.2
87.4
293.4
208.9
231.2
278.3
181.6
201.3
87.8
296.5
208.9
231.4
278.6
181.3
201.2
87.0
297.2
'209.2
'232.0
'278.5
'181.5
'201.8
'87.1
'298.1
210.1
231.5
281.6
181.0
202.1
87.6
302.0
211.7
231.6
282.6
181.2
203.2
87.2
313.9
212.1
232.9
285.4
181.0
203.4
87.2
311.7
213.1
233.7
286.7
181.4
205.2
86.9
313.3
13
13-11
13-2
13-3
13-4
13-5
13-6
13-7
13-8
13-9
Nonmetallic mineral products........................................................
Flat glass ................................................................................
Concrete ingredients ................................................................
Concrete products....................................................................
Structural clay products, excluding refractories ..........................
Refractories ............................................................................
Asphalt roofing ........................................................................
Gypsum products ....................................................................
Glass containers ......................................................................
Other nonmetallic minerals........................................................
320.2
221.5
'310.0
297.8
'260.8
'337.1
'398.4
'256.1
'355.5
'471.8
320.2
216.2
309.5
297.7
258.1
338.7
386.7
263.2
358.1
479.1
321.2
226.4
312.5
298.2
258.6
339.5
385.5
259.4
358.1
471.3
320.9
226.4
312.7
298.5
258.9
340.4
396.4
256.4
358.1
465.2
321.1
226.1
311.8
298.8
259.3
340.4
399.8
255.8
358.1
466.6
320.5
221.1
311.2
299.0
263.9
340.7
400.1
253.9
358.0
466.0
321.2
221.1
310.8
298.7
264.0
340.8
413.4
253.9
358.6
467.7
321.1
221.1
309.9
298.6
264.0
340.8
406.7
255.1
358.5
470.4
321.2
225.3
310.0
298.2
264.8
337.2
399.0
255.0
357.8
471.3
'320.5
225.3
'306.7
298.5
'264.8
'337.2
'397.0
253.9
'357.6
'471.0
321.5
229.7
308.1
298.6
264.4
338.2
392.2
259.7
358.2
471.8
321.9
229.7
309.6
299.5
264.4
338.2
378.9
263.4
355.8
476.1
321.9
229.7
309.0
300.1
270.9
338.2
373.2
263.4
354.1
476.3
323.7
229.7
310.6
300.3
275.3
338.7
389.0
271.4
353.8
478.6
14
14-1
14-4
Transportation equipment (12/68 = 100)......................................
Motor vehicles and equipment ..................................................
Railroad equipment ..................................................................
249.7
251.3
'346.5
245.8
247.2
343.5
247.5
249.2
342.8
249.1
251.1
342.8
249.8
252.0
342.6
250.6
252.8
347.7
244.5
244.6
348.0
256.0
257.8
350.8
256.3
257.8
350.8
257.5
'258.1
'350.8
257.1
257.8
357.6
257.3
258.1
357.3
257.1
257.7
357.4
255.6
255.9
357.2
15
15-1
15-2
15-3
15-4
15-5
15-9
Miscellaneous products................................................................
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition............................
Tobacco products ....................................................................
Notions....................................................................................
Photographic equipment and supplies ........................................
Mobile homes (12/74 = 100)....................................................
Other miscellaneous products ..................................................
'276.4
'221.5
'323.1
'277.0
'210.4
'161.9
'338.3
273.2
221.0
306.7
271.5
214.2
162.2
334.1
272.2
221.8
307.0
280.1
210.6
162.5
331.3
271.5
221.9
307.0
280.1
210.4
162.4
328.6
273.4
222.0
311.5
280.1
208.9
162.6
333.7
272.0
223.5
311.5
280.1
208.9
162.8
327.0
279.5
221.8
329.1
280.1
209.9
162.9
345.2
285.4
221.2
365.4
280.1
209.7
162.6
345.2
285.2
221.3
364.5
279.8
209.7
161.6
345.1
'290.4
'223.7
'382.9
'279.8
'210.0
'161.7
'351.6
284.7
223.7
350.9
280.5
210.3
161.3
350.3
285.7
225.6
338.1
280.6
212.1
161.3
359.2
284.4
226.2
335.1
280.6
216.9
163.3
349.9
287.6
226.8
354.7
280.3
216.9
162.5
349.8
1Data for December 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
2 Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month.
3 Includes only domestic production.
80
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4 Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month,
5 Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month.
r= revised.
25.
Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Annual
1983
1982
Commodity grouping
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct
Nov.
Dec.1
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
All commodities — less farm products..............................
All foods............................................................................
Processed foods ..............................................................
Industrial commodities less fuels ..........................................
Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 100) ..................
Hosiery ..............................................................................
Underwear and nightwear....................................................
Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber
and fibers and yarns ........................................................
303.0
r 254.4
'256.0
272.8
138.2
138.3
'217.6
300.9
254.7
255.1
272.3
139.0
138.0
215.9
301.2
257.9
259.0
272.8
138.7
138.5
215.9
302.2
259.0
260.8
272.4
138.2
138.5
217.4
303.9
256.6
259.5
272.5
137.6
138.5
218.6
304.1
255.8
258.7
272.6
137.8
138.5
218.6
303.7
255.3
259.2
272.5
137.8
138.7
219.6
304.7
252.8
256.2
274.4
137.4
138.7
220.1
305.1
251.9
254.7
274.4
137.1
139.7
219.7
'305.4
252.7
'254.7
'274.9
'136.8
139.7
'219.7
304.6
252.4
255.8
275.4
136.6
141.7
223.1
305.2
254.7
258.2
277.0
136.7
144.5
222.3
304.4
255.5
258.6
277.0
137.1
144.5
223.8
304.0
258.1
259.5
277.5
137.2
144.5
223.8
'283.8
285.6
286.1
284.5
282.9
283.3
282.5
281.8
282.3
'281.4
280.8
281.6
281.1
281.9
Pharmaceutical preparations ................................................
Lumber and wood products, excluding millwork......................
Steel mill products, including fabricated wire products............
Finished steel mill products, excluding fabricated wire
products..........................................................................
Finished steel mill products, Including fabricated wire
products..........................................................................
206.0
288.8
349.4
204.5
290.5
352.2
205.8
288.1
352.1
205.4
294.5
349.9
205.9
294.6
348.4
207.4
288.3
348.1
209.0
287.2
347.8
211.7
282.5
349.1
212.3
283.4
348.5
'212.8
'289.6
344.8
215.5
298.7
343.1
218.4
313.5
350.5
220.0
316.4
348.8
222.9
319.8
348.7
348.4
351.0
350.9
348.6
347.7
347.3
346.9
348.6
348.0
344.0
342.1
350.5
348.7
348.8
'348.0
351.0
350.9
348.6
347.0
346.7
346.3
347.8
347.2
343.3
341.5
349.1
347.4
347.3
Special metals and metal products ......................................
Fabricated metal products....................................................
Copper and copper products................................................
Machinery and motive products............................................
Machinery and equipment, except electrical ..........................
'286.6
'291.6
'185.5
272.1
'306.4
285.6
290.8
191.6
269.6
304.6
286.3
292.6
193.0
270.7
305.7
285.2
292.8
179.7
271.7
306.2
285.7
292.0
179.2
272.8
307.6
285.8
291.9
179.8
273.3
308.1
284.0
292.9
181.0
270.7
308.6
289.5
293.0
178.8
276.4
309.4
288.9
292.5
181.2
277.0
310.0
'288.7
'292.5
'181.8
'277.9
'310.6
289.7
293.9
190.5
277.9
311.1
292.3
294.2
201.6
278.5
311.6
291.8
295.3
199.0
278.6
312.1
291.0
293.4
201.0
278.5
312.8
Agricultural machinery, including tractors ..............................
Metalworking machinery ......................................................
Numerically controlled machine tools (Dec. 1971 = 100) . . . .
Total tractors ......................................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment less parts....................
'323.1
350.4
'239.6
'355.0
'313.8
319.0
348.8
239.9
352.4
310.3
319.9
349.3
239.9
353.6
311.0
321.3
350.1
240.0
354.1
312.2
321.8
352.6
239.2
354.8
312.8
322.8
353.1
239.2
355.5
313.6
325.5
353.5
239.4
359.6
315.8
330.6
354.1
239.4
361.4
320.1
332.2
354.2
239.4
361.4
321.5
'335.1
'354.1
'239.4
'364.2
'324.3
336.0
354.8
238.0
365.3
325.1
337.1
355.9
238.7
365.6
326.1
337.4
355.7
236.8
365.7
326.4
340.1
356.3
235.0
370.4
328.7
Farm and garden tractors less parts ....................................
Agricultural machinery, excluding tractors less parts ..............
Construction materials..........................................................
'327.8
'319.6
'288.0
323.5
315.6
288.2
325.0
316.1
288.2
325.8
317.9
289.5
325.4
319.1
289.2
326.0
320.4
288.3
333.0
319.6
288.4
336.1
326.4
288.0
336.1
329.3
287.8
'340.3
'331.1
'287.9
342.2
331.2
290.0
342.2
333.3
294.4
342.2
333.7
294.9
348.7
333.4
295.5
Oct
Nov.
Dec.1
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
1Data for December 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
26.
r=revised,
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product
[1967 = 100]
Commodity grouping
Annual
average
1982
1983
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Total durable goods ..........................................................
Total nondurable goods......................................................
279.0
315.3
278.1
313.6
278.5
314.5
278.3
316.0
278.9
317.6
278.8
317.1
278.6
315.7
281.2
314.3
281.2
315.3
282.0
'315.3
282.8
313.4
285.2
313.5
285.1
312.4
285.1
312.8
Total manufactures ............................................................
Durable ......................................................................
Nondurable ................................................................
292.7
'279.8
306.4
291.1
278.7
304.1
291.3
279.2
304.0
292.4
279.3
306.3
293.7
279.9
308.5
293.8
279.8
308.6
292.9
279.6
307.1
293.8
282.3
306.0
293.9
282.4
306.1
'294.3
283.2
'305.9
293.7
283.9
303.9
294.1
286.1
302.3
293.0
285.8
300.5
292.9
285.8
300.2
Total raw or slightly processed goods..................................
Durable ......................................................................
Nondurable ................................................................
'331.2
'233.8
'337.3
331.9
245.3
337.2
335.1
239.7
341.1
333.4
225.4
340.3
333.2
225.3
340.1
331.1
225.0
337.9
329.9
226.2
336.5
327.9
224.2
334.5
330.9
219.2
338.1
'331.6
'217.4
'339.0
330.3
225.2
337.0
336.2
236.3
342.5
338.1
244.3
343.9
340.7
244.9
346.7
1Data for December 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
r=revised,
81
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
27.
Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries
[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972
SIC
code
Industry description
Annual
average
1982
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.1
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
175.2
312.2
r 925.8
151.2
171.3
327.0
893.3
151.7
177.1
308.3
901.2
151.7
177.1
307.5
914.3
151.7
177.1
306.2
924.3
151.7
177.1
287.5
926.7
151.7
177.1
289.5
937.6
151.7
177.1
312.5
945.9
151.7
177.1
308.3
969.0
151.7
177.1
312.5
'958.4
151.7
177.1
306.2
942.8
153.6
177.1
289.5
938.4
156.3
177.1
285.4
939.5
158.4
177.1
272.9
922.9
164.3
1982
1983
MINING
1011
1092
1311
1455
Iron ores (12/75 = 100) ..............................................
Mercury ores (12/75 = 100)........................................
Crude petroleum and natural g a s..................................
Kaolin and ball clay (6/76 = 100) ..........................
2021
2024
2041
2044
2067
Creamery butter......................................................
Ice cream and frozen desserts (12/72 = 100) ..............
Flour mills (12/71 =100) ............................................
Rice milling..........................................................
Chewing g u m ........................................................
276.0
214.4
186.2
185.1
304.1
275.3
214.2
192.5
177.9
303.4
274.9
214.2
188.4
183.0
303.4
274.9
214.2
189.1
180.3
303.4
275.0
213.6
185.5
177.6
303.3
276.3
213.6
180.2
183.0
304.7
276.8
216.5
182.2
183.0
304.7
276.8
216.5
179.6
183.0
304.8
276.5
216.5
184.8
175.2
306.0
277.8
216.5
185.5
196.1
306.1
275.5
216.5
182.6
191.3
326.0
275.6
217.7
181.7
183.0
326.0
275.6
217.7
183.8
183.0
326.1
275.6
218.6
191.9
188.9
326.1
2074
2083
2085
2091
2098
Cottonseed oil mills......................................................
M alt............................................................................
Distilled liquor, except brandy (12/75 = 100)................
Canned and cured seafoods (12/73 = 100)..................
Macaroni and spaghetti................................................
168.3
256.9
140.1
187.0
258.5
164.7
259.1
140.2
188.2
259.5
167.9
259.8
139.8
188.0
259.5
170.2
259.8
139.8
188.4
259.5
174.6
259.8
139.8
187.8
259.5
173.1
259.8
140.4
184.3
259.5
164.4
251.2
140.4
186.2
259.5
157.6
251.2
140.4
186.3
255.5
164.1
240.6
141.3
186.4
255.5
'169.1
240.6
141.3
186.6
255.5
157.5
232.6
141.3
182.8
255.5
160.4
232.6
141.3
179.2
255.5
153.8
232.6
141.3
177.9
255.5
172.0
232.6
141.3
177.8
255.5
2251
2261
2262
2284
2298
Women's hosiery, except socks (12/75 = 100) ............
Finishing plants, cotton (6/76 = 100)............................
Finishing plants, synthetics, silk (6/76 = 100)................
Thread mills (6/76 = 100) ..........................................
Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100)................................
116.8
139.5
128.2
157.2
141.5
116.2
141.6
128.5
156.7
141.0
116.9
141.5
128.4
156.6
141.0
116.9
141.4
127.6
156.6
141.0
116.8
140.3
126.8
156.5
141.0
116.9
139.8
129.0
158.0
141.0
116.9
138.5
128.2
158.0
142.6
116.9
136.8
127.5
157.9
142.6
118.5
136.2
127.8
157.9
142.6
'118.3
136.1
'127.3
157.8
142.6
118.6
135.3
125.6
157.9
142.6
122.7
136.0
125.5
161.9
142.7
122.8
136.1
125.0
165.6
142.8
122.8
135.6
125.6
165.7
137.6
2321
2323
2331
2361
2381
Men’s and boys’ shirts and nightwear............................
Men’s and boys’ neckwear (12/75 = 100)....................
Women’s and misses’ blouses and waists (6/78 = 100) .
Children’s dresses and blouses (12/77 = 100)..............
Fabric dress and work gloves ......................................
r 215.1
119.5
'126.8
120.6
292.1
217.3
117.3
126.5
122.2
295.5
217.5
117.3
126.5
122.2
295.5
217.8
121.3
126.6
122.2
294.5
218.1
121.3
126.4
119.4
294.5
218.2
121.3
126.7
120.3
288.2
221.5
121.3
126.6
118.6
288.2
221.6
121.3
126.7
118.6
287.4
221.6
121.3
128.5
117.0
287.4
'221.0
121.3
'127.6
117.0
287.4
223.4
121.3
124.8
117.0
288.8
223.5
121.3
124.7
117.0
288.8
222.5
121.3
125.3
115.5
288.8
222.8
121.3
125.3
115.5
291.0
2394
2396
2448
2515
2521
Canvas and related products (12/77 = 100) ................
Automotive and apparel trimmings (12/77 = 100)..........
Wood pallets and skids (12/75 = 100) ........................
Mattresses and bedsprings ..........................................
Wood office furniture....................................................
r 145.4
131.0
r 145.6
'205.7
'270.3
145.7
131.0
145.9
205.7
270.8
145.9
131.0
144.7
205.9
270.8
143.1
131.0
144.2
205.9
270.8
143.1
131.0
144.1
205.7
270.9
143.1
131.0
143.9
205.9
271.3
144.8
131.0
143.8
206.0
271.3
147.3
131.0
144.3
206.0
271.4
147.3
131.0
144.2
206.0
271.4
'147.3
131.0
'144.6
'206.0
'271.4
149.4
131.0
144.5
208.7
272.5
149.4
131.0
145.1
208.7
272.5
146.8
131.0
145.6
208.7
278.7
146.8
131.0
146.8
208.8
281.5
2647
2654
2655
2911
2952
Sanitary paper products ..............................................
Sanitary food containers ..............................................
Fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) ..
Petroleum refining (6/76 = 100) ..................................
Asphalt felts and coating (12/75 = 100) ......................
'348.7
'259.7
177.8
'278.3
'173.5
344.5
259.9
176.5
267.4
168.1
343.6
259.9
176.7
259.2
168.4
346.2
259.9
176.7
267.9
173.1
346.9
259.9
176.7
281.5
174.7
351.5
259.9
177.5
283.7
174.4
352.3
260.8
177.5
279.6
180.4
351.8
261.7
177.9
278.3
177.2
357.8
261.7
180.7
280.1
173.7
'355.9
'261.7
183.8
'278.3
’ 172.9
356.9
263.2
183.8
268.3
170.8
359.6
263.1
183.8
258.5
165.1
359.6
266.7
183.8
249.7
162.6
357.2
266.6
185.5
241.4
169.1
3031
3251
3253
3255
3259
Reclaimed rubber(12/73 = 100 )..................................
Brick and structural clay tile ..........................................
Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) ....................
Clay refractories..........................................................
Structural clay products, n.e.c.........................................
'207.9
'307.4
'140.6
'352.8
'219.7
209.2
303.4
140.6
355.2
215.9
209.5
304.5
140.6
355.5
215.8
210.7
305.0
140.6
356.2
215.9
209.9
305.9
140.6
356.3
215.9
209.7
313.8
140.7
356.8
219.0
209.8
314.0
140.7
356.9
219.0
209.8
314.0
140.7
357.0
219.0
209.3
315.5
140.7
350.3
218.9
'208.8
'315.5
'140.7
’ 350.3
'219.0
207.1
317.1
138.0
352.0
219.5
207.4
317.1
138.0
352.0
219.5
207.0
329.8
138.1
352.1
219.4
206.7
333.7
138.1
353.1 .
232.8
3261
3262
3263
3269
3274
Vitreous plumbing fixtures ............................................
Vitreous china food utensils..........................................
Fine earthenware food utensils......................................
Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100)..........................
Lime (12/75 = 100)....................................................
265.0
'357.8
'318.2
'167.3
'186.3
261.8
346.5
314.9
164.0
186.3
265.4
355.5
316.2
166.3
188.0
265.5
360.2
316.9
167.4
188.3
264.2
360.2
316.9
167.4
188.0
263.9
360.2
316.9
167.4
188.0
267.2
360.2
316.9
167.4
187.8
269.1
360.8
323.5
169.6
187.7
270.3
370.2
324.8
171.9
187.5
269.7
'377.7
'326.0
'173.7
'185.7
272.1
369.2
363.5
183.8
187.5
273.3
369.2
363.5
183.8
185.8
275.1
369.2
363.5
183.8
185.4
275.3
369.2
363.5
183.8
188.1
3297
3313
3425
3482
3623
Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 100)..............................
Electrometallurgical products (12/75 = 100) ................
Hand saws and saw blades (12/72 = 100) ..................
Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100) ........................
Welding apparatus, electric (12/72 = 100)....................
201.8
121.4
'219.1
'164.2
'239.6
202.3
120.3
215.3
166.3
237.6
203.2
120.3
221.3
166.3
237.6
203.8
120.4
221.4
170.3
237.8
203.8
120.4
221.5
170.3
241.6
203.8
121.4
221.6
170.3
242.4
203.8
121.4
221.6
149.0
242.8
203.8
121.3
221.6
150.1
243.0
203.7
121.3
221.8
150.6
243.3
203.6
121.2
'221.6
'174.1
'243.3
203.7
121.1
221.4
180.9
238.5
203.6
121.2
226.0
180.9
238.9
203.6
121.1
225.9
187.7
238.3
203.8
119.0
225.9
187.6
238.1
3636
3641
3648
3671
3942
Sewing machines (12/75 = 100)..................................
Electric lamps..............................................................
Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ......................
Electron tubes, receiving type ......................................
Dolls (12/75 = 100)....................................................
'154.6
294.0
170.0
'382.1
'136.7
154.3
296.6
170.9
374.5
136.8
154.3
294.5
171.2
374.4
136.8
154.3
293.9
171.1
374.5
136.8
154.3
291.8
171.1
375.4
136.8
153.6
293.7
171.2
375.4
136.8
153.6
296.3
171.2
380.2
136.8
154.2
302.9
171.3
380.3
136.8
154.2
303.0
171.3
414.0
136.8
'154.2
'303.8
'171.4
'414.1
'136.8
153.6
305.6
171.5
431.6
136.8
153.8
311.1
171.7
432.0
136.5
154.4
311.4
171.7
431.9
136.5
156.1
316.3
172.6
431.9
137.4
3944
3955
3995
3996
Games, toys, and children’s vehicles ............................
Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 = 100)............
Burial caskets (6/76 = 100) ........................................
Hard surface floor coverings (12/75 = 100)..................
'234.0
140.0
148.4
155.9
234.1
140.3
145.3
156.1
234.3
140.5
149.3
156.3
234.3
140.6
149.3
154.3
234.4
140.4
150.8
155.0
234.4
140.5
150.8
155.7
234.8
139.3
150.8
156.9
235.3
139.3
150.8
156.9
235.3
139.2
150.8
156.9
'235.5
139.4
150.8
156.8
232.7
139.2
147.0
159.2
238.6
139.2
152.1
159.2
237.4
139.2
152.1
159.2
237.9
139.2
152.1
159.4
MANUFACTURING
..
1Data for December 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by
respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Indexes which were deleted in the March issue may now be found in Table 4 of the BLS
monthly report, Producer Prices and Price indexes.
r=revised.
N ote :
PRODUCTIVITY DATA
d a t a are com piled by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics from establishm ent data and from estim ates of com
pensation and output supplied by the U .S. D epartm ent of
C om m erce and the Federal R eserve Board.
P r o d u c t iv it y
Definitions
Output is the constant dollar gross domestic product produced in a
given period. Indexes of output per hour of labor input, or labor pro
ductivity, measure the value of goods and services produced per hour
of labor. Compensation per hour includes wages and salaries of em
ployees plus employers’ contributions for social insurance and private
benefit plans. The data also include an estimate of wages, salaries, and
supplementary payments for the self-employed, except for nonfinancial corporations, in which there are no self-employed. Real com
pensation per hour is compensation per hour adjusted by the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor cost measures the labor compensation cost required to
produce one unit of output and is derived by dividing compensation
by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, in
terest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by
subtracting compensation of all persons from the current dollar gross
domestic product and dividing by output. In these tables, unit
nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments
except unit profits. Unit profits include corporate profits and invento
ry valuation adjustments per unit of output.
The implicit price deflator is derived by dividing the current dollar
estimate of gross product by the constant dollar estimate, making the
deflator, in effect, a price index for gross product of the sector reported.
28.
The use of the term “man hours” to identify the labor component
of productivity and costs, in tables 27 through 30, has been discontin
ued. Hours of all persons is now used to describe the labor input of
payroll workers, self-employed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Output per all-employee hour is now used to describe labor productiv
ity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed.
Notes on the data
In the business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the basis
for the output measure employed in the computation of output per
hour is Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National Product.
Computation of hours includes estimates of nonfarm and farm propri
etor hours.
Output data are supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly
manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to annual estimates of output (gross product originating)
from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Compensation and hours data
are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Beginning with the September 1982 issue of the Review , all of the
productivity and cost measures contained in these tables are based on
revised output and compensation measures released by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis in July as part of the regular revision cycle of the
National Income and Product Accounts. Measures of labor input
have been revised to reflect results of the 1980 census, and seasonal
factors have been recomputed for use in the preparation of quarterly
measures. The word “private” is no longer being used as part of the
series title of one of the two business sector measures prepared by
BLS; no change has been made in the definition or content of the
measures as a result of this change.
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1950-82
[1977=100]
Item
Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ........................
Compensation per hour ..................................
Real compensation per hour............................
Unit labor costs ..............................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ........................
Compensation per hour ..................................
Real compensation per hour............................
Unit labor costs ..............................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees ....................
Compensation per hour ..................................
Real compensation per hour............................
Unit labor costs ..............................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons ........................
Compensation per hour ..................................
Real compensation per hour............................
Unit labor costs ..............................................
Unit nonlabor payments ..................................
Implicit price deflator ......................................
1Not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1981
1982
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
50.4
20.0
50.5
39.7
43.4
41.0
58.3
26.4
59.6
45.2
47.6
46.0
65.2
33.9
69.5
52.0
50.6
51.6
78.3
41.7
80.1
53.3
57.6
54.7
86.2
58.2
90.8
67.5
63.2
66.0
94.5
85.5
96.3
90.5
90.4
90.5
97.6
92.9
98.9
95.1
94.0
94.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.6
108.6
100.9
108.0
106.7
107.5
99.6
119.1
99.4
119.5
112.8
117.2
98.9
131.4
96.7
132.9
119.3
128.3
100.7
144.1
96.0
143.1
135.2
140.4
101.0
154.5
97.0
'153.1
'138.5
148.1
56.3
21.8
55.0
38.8
42.7
40.1
62.8
28.3
64.0
45.0
47.8
46.0
68.3
35.7
73.0
52.2
50.4
51.6
80.5
42.8
82.2
53.2
58.0
54.8
86.8
58.7
91.5
67.6
63.7
66.3
94.7
86.0
96.8
90.8
88.5
90.0
97.8
93.0
99.0
95.1
93.5
94.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.6
108.6
100.9
108.0
105.3
107.1
99.3
118.8
99.2
119.6
110.3
116.5
98.5
130.9
96.3
133.0
119.1
128.3
99.9
143.6
95.7
143.8
134.8
140.8
100.0
154.0
96.7
' 154.1
'138.8
149.0
(’ )
(’ )
( ')
(’ )
( 1)
(’ )
(’ )
( 1)
( 1)
(’ )
( 1)
( ')
68.0
37.0
75.8
54.4
54.6
54.5
81.9
43.9
84.3
53.5
60.8
56.1
87.4
59.4
92.7
68.0
63.1
66.3
95.5
86.1
96.9
90.2
90.8
90.4
98.2
92.9
98.9
94.6
95.0
94.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.9
108.5
'100.7
107.5
104.2
106.4
100.7
118.7
99.1
117.8
106.9
114.1
100.3
130.9
'96.3
130.5
117.7
126.1
'102.1
'143.6
'95.7
140.6
134.8
138.6
'102.9
'154.2
96.8
'149.9
'140.0
146.5
49.4
21.5
54.0
43.4
54.3
46.6
56.4
28.8
65.1
51.0
58.5
53.2
60.0
36.7
75.1
61.1
61.1
61.1
74.5
42.8
82.3
57.5
69.3
61.0
79.1
57.6
89.8
72.7
65.0
70.5
93.4
85.4
96.2
91.5
87.3
90.3
97.5
92.3
98.3
94.6
93.7
94.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
'100.8
108.3
100.6
107.4
102.5
106.0
101.5
118.9
99.2
'117.0
99.9
112.0
101.7
132.8
97.7
130.6
97.1
120.8
104.5
'146.5
'97.6
140.0
108.8
130.8
'103.6
'158.9
'99.8
153.4
(’ )
(’ )
r=revised.
83
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Productivity
29.
Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1972-82
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1950-82
1972-82
3.5
6.5
3.1
2.9
4.5
3.4
2.6
8.0
1.6
5.3
5.9
5.5
-2.4
9.4
-1.4
12.1
4.4
9.5
2.2
9.6
0.5
7.3
15.1
9.8
3.3
8.6
2.6
5.1
4.0
4.7
2.4
7.7
1.2
5.1
6.4
5.6
0.6
8.6
0.9
8.0
6.7
7.5
-0.9
9.7
-1.4
10.7
5.7
9.0
-0.7
10.4
-2.8
11.2
5.8
9.4
1.8
9.6
-0.7
7.7
13.3
9.5
r0.3
'7.2
'1.0
'7.0
'2.4
5.5
2.2
6.6
2.1
4.3
3.7
4.1
0.9
8.9
0.1
7.9
6.9
7.6
3.7
6.7
3.3
2.9
3.2
3.0
2.4
7.6
1.3
5.0
1.3
3.8
-2.5
9.4
-1.4
12.2
5.9
10.2
2.0
9.6
0.4
7.5
16.7
10.3
3.2
8.1
2.2
4.7
5.7
5.0
2.2
7.5
1.0
5.2
6.9
5.7
0.6
8.6
0.9
8.0
5.3
7.1
-1.3
9.3
-1.7
10.7
4.7
8.8
-0.9
10.2
-2.9
11.2
8.0
10.2
1.4
9.7
'- 0 .6
8.1
13.1
9.7
0.1
7.2
1.0
7.1
3.2
5.8
1.8
6.3
1.8
4.4
3.7
4.2
0.7
8.7
0.0
'8.0
7.0
7.6
2.9
5.7
2.4
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.4
7.5
1.2
4.9
1.5
3.8
-3.7
9.4
-1.5
13.6
7.1
11.4
2.9
9.6
0.4
6.5
20.1
10.9
2.9
7.9
2.0
4.9
4.6
4.8
1.8
7.6
1.1
5.7
5.3
5.6
0.9
8.5
r0.7
7.5
4.2
6.4
-0.2
9.4
-1.7
9.6
2.6
7.2
-0.4
10.3
' -2.8
10.7
10.1
10.5
'1.8
r9.7
'- 0 .6
7.8
14.6
10.0
'0.8
7.4
1.2
'6.6
'3.8
5.7
( ')
(’ )
( 1)
( ')
( ')
(’ )
0.9
8.7
5.0
5.4
2.0
0.3
0.8
0.5
5.4
7.2
0.9
1.7
-3.3
0.3
-2.4
10.6
-0.3
13.3
-1.8
9.0
2.9
11.9
2.5
8.8
25.9
13.1
4.4
8.0
2.1
3.4
7.4
4.6
2.5
8.3
1.8
5.7
6.7
6.0
r0.8
8.3
0.6
7.4
2.5
6.0
0.7
9.7
-1.4
9.0
-2.6
5.7
0.2
11.8
' —1.5
11.6
-2.7
7.8
r2.9
r 10.3
r -0.1
7.2
12.0
8.4
-1.0
8.5
2.2
9.6
( 1)
2.3
6.5
1.9
'3.9
( 1)
1972
Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per hou r......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per hour ......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees........................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
1Not available.
r= revised.
30.
Annual rate
of change
Year
Item
n
n
0.0
'7.8
'7.2
7.6
1.6
9.5
0.7
7.7
f1)
( ')
p= preliminary.
Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted
[1977=100]
Item
Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per hou r......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per hour ......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator ..........................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees........................
Compensation per hour ......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Total unit costs ..................................................
Unit labor costs ..........................................
Unit nonlabor costs......................................
Unit profits ........................................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per ho u r......................................
Real compensation per hour................................
Unit labor costs..................................................
’ Not available.
r= revised.
84
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Quarterly Indexes
Annual
average
1980
1981
1983
1982
1981
1982
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
100.7
144.1
96.0
143.1
135.2
140.4
101.0
'154.5
97.0
'153.1
'138.5
148.1
98.9
133.1
96.9
134.7
120.6
129.9
'99.4
'136.2
'96.3
137.0
124.6
132.8
100.7
140.0
'96.5
139.0
'131.7
136.5
100.7
142.5
'96.3
141.5
133.4
138.8
101.0
'145.7
95.7
144.2
137.4
141.9
'100.3
'148.3
'95.7
147.9
'138.4
144.6
'100.1
'151.1
'96.8
150.9
'136.3
'145.9
'100.4
'153.5
97.1
152.9
137.0
147.5
'101.3
'155.9
'96.7
153.8
'139.9
149.1
'102.0
'158.0
'97.6
'154.9
'140.7
150.1
»102.6
»159.8
»98.8
»155.8
»145.4
»152.3
99.9
143.6
95.7
143.8
134.8
140.8
'99.9
154.0
96.7
'154.1
'138.8
149.0
98.4
132.6
96.5
134.7
120.3
129.9
99.2
135.7
'95.9
136.8
124.4
132.7
100.4
'139.6
'96.2
'139.1
131.5
136.5
'100.1
142.0
96.0
141.9
'132.9
138.9
100.0
145.1
'95.3
145.1
136.7
142.3
99.1
147.7
95.3
149.0
'138.3
145.5
'99.3
'150.6
'96.5
151.6
136.7
146.6
'99.5
'152.8
96.6
153.5
137.2
148.1
'100.4
'155.3
96.4
154.7
140.1
149.8
'100.4
'157.4
'97.2
'156.7
'141.2
'151.5
»101.6
»159.7
»98.8
»157.2
»146.0
»153.4
'102.1
'143.6
'95.7
143.4
140.6
151.4
101.6
138.6
'102.9
'154.2
96.8
'154.4
'149.9
'167.2
'85.3
146.5
100.6
132.6
96.6
132.9
131.9
135.7
87.8
127.7
101.1
135.6
95.8
135.8
134.1
140.7
90.5
130.6
102.3
139.6
'96.3
138.3
136.5
143.4
104.7
134.5
102.2
'142.0
'95.9
141.7
138.9
149.6
98.8
136.8
'102.3
'144.9
95.2
144.7
141.7
153.7
105.2
140.2
101.7
'147.8
'95.4
149.1
145.4
159.6
97.6
143.2
'101.8
'150.9
'96.7
151.8
148.3
161.8
86.1
144.3
'102.4
'153.2
'96.9
153.8
149.5
166.0
82.3
145.6
'103.6
'155.4
96.4
154.8
150.0
168.3
89.6
147.3
» 103.7
» 157.4
p97.2
»157.3
»151.8
»172.9
»83.1
»148.8
'104.6
'146.5
'97.6
140.0
'103.6
'158.9
'99.8
153.4
100.3
'135.3
98.5
134.9
'103.7
'138.5
'97.9
133.6
105.2
142.6
'98.4
135.5
'105.1
'145.0
'98.0
138.0
'105.1
'147.4
96.8
140.3
'103.0
'151.0
'97.4
146.6
'102.4
'155.1
'99.4
151.5
'102.6
'158.1
'100.0
154.0
'104.4
'160.5
'99.6
153.6
'104.7
'162.2
'100.2
'155.0
p= preliminary.
I
II
III
IV
I
( 1)
<’ )
C )
( ')
(’ )
( 1)
n
( 1)
»106.5
»164.7
»101.9
»154.7
31.
Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,
seasonally adjusted at annual rate
[1977 = 100]
Percent change from same quarter a year ago.
Quarterly percent change at annual rate
Item
Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour ..............................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour ..............................
Unit labor costs..................................................
Unit nonlabor payments......................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees........................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour ..............................
Total unit costs ..................................................
Unit labor costs..............................................
Unit nonlabor costs ........................................
Unit profits ........................................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons ............................
Compensation per h o u r......................................
Real compensation per hour ..............................
Unit labor costs..................................................
1Not available.
r= revised.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
III 1982
to
IV 1982
IV 1980
to
I 1981
IV 1980
to
IV 1981
1 1981
to
I 1982
II 1981
to
II 1982
III 1981
to
III 1982
IV 1981
to
IV 1982
11982
to
I 1983
'3.7
'6.3
-1.4
2.4
8.9
4.4
'2.6
'5.5
'3.5
'2.9
'2.3
2.7
2.2
'4.7
'5.1
'2.4
'13.8
'5.9
'1.0
8.9
-0.6
7.9
11.0
8.9
' -0.6
'7.9
'0.2
8.6
3.5
6.9
' -0.3
'7.7
0.8
'8.0
2.7
6.3
'0.3
'7.0
1.1
6.7
'1.8
5.1
'1.7
6.5
1.9
'4.7
'1.7
3.8
»2.5
»5.8
»2.1
»3.3
»6.7
»4.3
'0.9
'6.0
'0.7
'5.1
'1.6
4.0
'3.4
6.6
' —1.1
3.1
'8.8
4.9
'0.4
'5.5
'3.5
'5.1
'3.0
'4.5
4.8
'6.1
'- 6 .5
'1.3
'14.3
'5.2
'- 0 .0
'8.9
-0.6
8.9
11.2
9.6
-1.1
'7.9
'0.2
9.0
4.0
7.4
-0.6
'7.6
'0.7
8.2
3.3
6.6
'0.4
'7.0
1.1
6.6
'2.5
5.3
'1.3
6.5
1.9
'5.1
'2.0
4.1
»2.3
»6.1
»2.4
»3.6
»6.8
»4.6
'0.4
'8.6
'5.4
7.4
8.1
5.7
-39.4
3.0
2.7
6.2
'0.9
5.4
3.4
10.7
-16.7
3.8
4.6
5.9
' —1.8
2.5
1.2
5.9
40.8
4.7
»0.4
»5.4
»3.3
»6.8
»5.0
»11.4
» -25.9
»4.2
<1)
( 1)
(’ )
n
( 1)
(’ )
( 1)
(’ )
0.5
'9.0
-0.5
9.8
8.4
13.4
7.9
9.6
' -0.5
'8.1
'0.4
9.7
8.6
12.8
-17.8
7.3
0.2
'7.9
'1.0
8.5
7.6
10.9
-16.7
6.4
1.3
7.2
'1.4
7.0
5.8
9.9
-14.8
5.1
»2.0
»6.5
»1.9
»5.5
»4.4
»8.4
»-14.8
»3.9
' —2.1
'11.5
'8.3
13.9
'0.9
7.8
'2.4
6.9
7.3
6.2
' —1.5
-1.0
'1.0
4.5
'2.4
'3.5
'7.1
'6.3
'- 6 .7
' -0.8
' —0.7
'9.0
'- 0 .5
9.8
'- 2 .7
'8.7
1.0
'11.8
'- 2 .4
'9.0
'2.1
11.6
' -0.6
'8.9
'2.9
9.5
'1.7
'7.5
'2.9
'5.7
III 1981
to
IV 1981
IV 1981
to
I 1982
11982
to
II 1982
' -2.8
r7.5
' -0.2
10.6
2.9
8.0
' -0.8
r7.6
r4.5
'8.5
'- 5 .9
'3.7
'1.3
'6.7
'1.3
'5.3
'2.1
4.3
-3.4
7.4
-0.2
11.2
r5.0
9.2
'0.7
'7.9
'4.8
'7.2
'- 4 .8
3.3
' -2.3
r8.3
'1.0
12.8
10.9
17.8
-25.9
8.9
' -7.9
r9.9
r2.5
19.4
I11982
to
III 1982
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
( 1)
(’ )
(’ )
»4.0
»6.2
»2.5
»2.1
p= preliminary.
85
WAGE AND COM PENSA TION DATA
FOR t h e e m p l o y m e n t c o s t i n d e x are reported to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics by a sam ple of 2,OCX) private n on
farm establishm ents and 750 State and local governm ent units
selected to represent total em ploym ent in those sectors. On
average, each reporting unit provides wage and com pensation
inform ation on five w ell-specified occupations.
data
Data on negotiated wage and benefit changes are obtained
from contracts on file at the Bureau, direct contact w ith the
parties, and secondary sources.
Definitions
The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is a quarterly measure of the
average change in the cost of employing labor. The rate of total com
pensation, which comprises wages, salaries, and employer costs for
employee benefits, is collected for workers performing specified tasks.
Employment in each occupation is held constant over time for all se
ries produced in the ECI, except those by region, bargaining status,
and area. As a consequence, only changes in compensation are meas
ured. Industry and occupational employment data from the 1970 Cen
sus of Population are used in deriving constant weights for the ECI.
While holding total industry and occupational employment fixed, in
the estimation of indexes by region, bargaining status, and area, the
employment in those measures is allowed to vary over time in accord
with changes in the sample. The rate of change (in percent) is avail
able for wages and salaries, as well as for total compensation. Data
are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey
months of March, June, September, and December. The statistics are
neither annualized nor adjusted for seasonal influence.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions,
excluding premium pay for overtime, work on weekends and holidays,
and shift differentials. Production bonuses, incentive earnings, com
missions, and cost-of-living adjustments are included; nonproduction
bonuses are included with other supplemental pay items in the bene
fits category; and payments-in-kind, free room and board, and tips are
excluded. B enefits include supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and
savings plans, and hours-related and legally required benefits.
Data on negotiated wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry
collective bargaining agreements covering 1,000 workers or more.
Data on compensation changes apply only to those agreements cover
ing 5,000 workers or more. F irst-year wage or compensation changes
refer to average negotiated changes for workers covered by settle
ments reached in the period and implemented within the first 12
months after the effective date of the agreement. Changes o ver the life
86
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
o f the agreem en t refer to all adjustments specified in the contract,
expressed as an average annual rate. These measures exclude wage
changes that may occur under cost-of-living adjustment clauses, that
are triggered by movements in the Consumer Price Index. W age-rate
changes are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earnings;
com pensation changes are expressed as a percent of total wages and
benefits.
Effective wage adjustments reflect all negotiated changes imple
mented in the reference period, regardless of the settlement date. They
include changes from settlements reached during the period, changes
deferred from contracts negotiated in an earlier period, and cost-ofliving adjustments. The data also reflect contracts providing for no
wage adjustment in the period. Effective adjustments and each of
their components are prorated over all workers in bargaining units
with at least 1,000 workers.
Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quar
ter of 1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in
the private nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee bene
fits were included in 1980, to produce a measure of the percent
change in employers’ cost for employees’ total compensation. State
and local government units were added to the ECI coverage in 1981,
providing a measure of total compensation change in the civilian non
farm economy.
Data for the broad white-collar, blue-collar, and service worker
groups, and the manufacturing, nonmanufacturing, and service indus
try groups are presented in the ECI. Additional occupation and in
dustry detail are provided for the wages and salaries component of
total compensation in the private nonfarm sector. For State and local
government units, additional industry detail is shown for both total
compensation and its wages and salaries component.
Historical indexes (June 1981 = 100) of the quarterly rates of chang
es presented in the ECI are also available.
For a more detailed discussion of the ECI, see chapter 11, “The
Employment Cost Index,” of the BLS H an d b o o k o f M e th o d s (Bulletin
2134-1), and the M o n th ly L a b o r R eview articles: “Employment Cost
Index: a measure of change in the ‘price of labor,’” July 1975; “How
benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost Index,” Janu
ary 1978; and “The Employment Cost Index: recent trends and ex
pansion,” May 1982.
Additional data for the ECI and other measures of wage and com
pensation changes appear in C u rren t W age D evelopm ents, a monthly
publication of the Bureau.
32.
Employment Cost Index, total compensation, by occupation and industry group
[June 1981=100]
Percent change
1981
1983
1982
Series
March
Sept.
Dec.
March
June
Sept.
Dec.
March
100.0
102.6
104.5
106.3
107.5
110.1
111.4
113.2
1.6
6.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.7
102.3
102.8
104.9
104.1
104.2
106.5
105.7
107.2
107.7
107.1
108.3
110.7
109.2
110.8
111.9
110.5
112.4
113.7
112.3
114.3
1.6
1.6
1.7
6.8
6.2
6.6
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.1
102.8
104.4
104.3
104.0
104.8
107.1
106.0
106.0
106.4
108.2
108.1
107.2
107.7
109.2
109.1
109.3
110.5
113.5
112.8
110.4
111.8
115.0
113.6
112.5
113.5
116.6
116.2
1.9
1.5
1.4
2.3
6.1
6.7
7.8
7.5
98.1
100.0
102.0
104.0
105.8
107.2
109.3
110.7
112.6
1.7
6.4
98.3
97.8
99.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.8
102.2
101.9
104.0
104.0
103.1
105.8
105.6
106.7
107.2
107.0
107.9
109.5
109.0
109.6
110.8
110.3
111.8
112.8
112.1
113.8
1.8
1.6
1.8
6.6
6.2
6.7
98.0
98.2
100.0
100.0
102.1
102.0
104.0
103.9
106.0
105.7
107.2
107.1
109.3
109.3
110.4
110.8
112.5
112.6
1.9
1.6
6.1
6.5
—
—
—
—
—
State and local government workers................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ..................................................
Blue-collar workers ....................................................
Workers, by Industry division
Services ....................................................................
Schools..................................................................
Elementary and secondary..................................
Hospitals and other services3 ..................................
Public administration2 ..................................................
'Excludes household and Federal workers.
Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12 months
ended
June
Civilian nonfarm workers' ....................................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ......................................................
Blue-collar workers ........................................................
Service workers..............................................................
Workers, by Industry division
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
Services ....................................................................
Public administration2 ..................................................
Private nonfarm workers..................................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ..................................................
Blue-collar workers ....................................................
Service workers..........................................................
Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing ............................................................
Nonmanufacturing ......................................................
3 months
ended
March 1983
_
100.0
105.3
107.4
108.8
109.3
114.3
115.1
116.5
1.2
7.1
—
—
100.0
100.0
105.7
104.2
107.8
105.9
109.1
108.2
109.5
108.9
114.9
112.7
115.8
113.0
117.0
114.9
1.0
1.7
7.2
6.2
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
105.8
106.0
106.3
105.0
104.3
107.9
107.9
108.3
107.8
106.0
109.0
108.9
109.3
109.5
108.1
109.4
109.1
109.5
110.3
109.1
114.9
114.8
115.6
115.3
112.8
115.9
115.8
116.6
116.0
113.6
116.8
116.6
117.2
117.5
116.2
.8
.7
.5
1.3
2.3
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.5
—
—
—
3 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
N ote : Dashes indicate data not available.
87
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data
33.
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
[June 1981 = 100]
Percent change
1983
1982
1981
Series
3 months
ended
12 months
ended
March 1983
June
Sept.
Dec.
March
June
Sept.
Dec.
March
100.0
102.5
104.4
106.3
107.3
109.7
110.9
112.2
1.2
5.6
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.6
102.4
102.5
104.7
104.0
103.6
106.7
105.5
106.8
107.6
106.7
107.9
110.4
108.6
110.1
111.4
109.8
111.8
113.0
110.8
113.2
1.4
.9
1.3
5.9
5.0
6.0
—
—
—
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.1
102.7
104.4
103.8
104.0
104.5
106.6
105.5
105.9
106.5
108.6
107.5
107.0
107.5
109.5
108.4
108.8
110.1
113.2
111.9
109.8
111.3
114.4
112.6
111.0
112.7
115.8
114.6
1.1
1.3
1.2
1.8
4.8
5.8
6.6
6.6
Private nonfarm workers......................................................
Workers by occupational group
White-collar workers ......................................................
Professional and technical workers ..............................
Managers and administrators ......................................
Salesworkers..............................................................
Clerical workers..........................................................
Blue-collar workers ........................................................
Craft and kindred workers ..........................................
Operatives, except transport........................................
Transport equipment operatives ..................................
Nonfarm laborers........................................................
Service workers..............................................................
Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing ................................................................
Durables....................................................................
Nondurables ..............................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
Construction ..................................................................
Transportation and public utilities......................................
Wholesale and retail trade ..............................................
Wholesale trade..........................................................
Retail trad e................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................
Services ........................................................................
98.0
100.0
102.0
103.8
105.9
107.1
109.0
110.3
111.6
1.2
5.4
98.1
98.2
98.6
96.2
98.6
97.7
97.8
97.8
96.8
97.5
99.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.8
103.3
101.6
98.0
102.7
102.3
102.9
102.1
101.0
101.5
101.8
103.9
105.5
102.8
101.9
104.2
103.9
104.3
104.1
102.7
103.3
102.7
106.2
108.0
105.8
102.2
107.0
105.4
106.2
105.4
103.2
104.1
106.7
107.3
109.4
107.2
101.8
108.3
106.6
107.6
106.6
104.1
105.1
107.9
109.4
111.8
108.5
104.5
110.3
108.5
109.6
108.3
106.0
106.5
109.3
110.6
112.9
109.3
106.2
111.6
109.7
111.2
109.3
106.9
107.8
111.4
112.2
114.8
112.0
105.7
113.4
110.7
112.2
110.0
108.0
109.0
112.9
1.4
1.7
2.5
-.5
1.6
.9
.9
.6
1.0
1.1
1.3
5.6
6.3
5.9
3.4
6.0
5.0
5.6
4.4
4.7
4.7
5.8
97.9
97.9
97.8
98.1
97.6
97.7
98.2
98.5
98.1
95.7
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.1
102.1
102.0
102.0
103.0
102.0
101.3
102.0
101.0
98.3
103.6
104.0
104.5
103.1
103.8
104.3
103.6
102.3
103.4
101.9
102.3
105.8
105.9
106.3
105.3
105.9
105.9
105.7
103.9
106.3
103.0
103.7
108.8
107.0
107.4
106.3
107.1
107.3
106.9
105.8
108.9
104.5
102.4
110.0
108.8
109.0
108.5
109.1
109.1
109.5
106.5
109.0
105.5
106.1
112.5
109.8
110.3
109.1
110.5
109.7
111.1
107.2
109.8
106.1
109.0
114.3
111.0
111.1
110.9
112.0
110.4
112.9
108.5
111.8
107.2
110.6
116.0
1.1
.7
1.6
1.4
.6
1.6
1.2
1.8
1.0
1.5
1.5
4.8
4.5
5.3
5.8
4.2
6.8
4.4
5.2
4.1
6.7
6.6
State and local government workers....................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ......................................................
Blue-collar workers ........................................................
Workers, by industry division
Services ........................................................................
Schools......................................................................
Elementary and secondary......................................
Hospitals and other services3 ..........................................
Public administration2 ....................................................
—
100.0
105.0
107.0
108.2
108.7
113.5
114.0
115.1
1.0
6.4
—
—
100.0
100.0
105.4
103.9
107.5
105.5
108.5
107.5
108.9
107.9
114.2
111.5
114.6
112.0
115.6
113.3
.9
1.2
6.5
5.4
—
—
—
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
105.5
105.7
106.0
104.6
103.8
107.6
107.7
107.9
107.3
105.5
108.4
108.3
108.7
108.8
107.5
108.8
108.5
108.8
109.5
108.4
114.2
114.2
114.9
114.3
111.9
114.6
114.5
115.1
114.9
112.6
115.5
115.2
115.6
116.5
114.6
.8
.6
.4
1.4
1.8
6.5
6.4
6.3
7.1
6.6
March
Civilian nonfarm workers1 ....................................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ......................................................
Blue-collar workers ........................................................
Service workers..............................................................
Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
Services ....................................................................
Public administration2 ..................................................
1Excludes household and Federal workers.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
88
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—
—
—
3 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
Note: Dashes indicate data not available.
34.
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size
[June 1981=100]
Percent change
1983
1982
1981
Seríes
3 months
ended
12 months
ended
March 1983
March
June
Sept.
Dec.
March
June
Sept
Dec.
March
Workers, by bargaining status1
Union .................................................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
97.6
—
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.5
102.3
102.7
104.8
104.6
105.0
106.5
106.3
106.8
108.4
108.0
108.7
110.6
110.3
111.0
112.3
111.8
112.8
114.5
114.0
114.9
2.0
2.0
1.9
7.5
7.2
7.6
Nonunion.............................................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
98.4
—
—
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.7
101.8
101.7
103.5
103.5
103.5
105.3
105.7
105.2
106.5
106.6
106.4
108.5
108.4
108.6
109.7
109.2
109.9
111.5
111.2
111.6
1.6
1.8
1.5
5.9
5.2
6.1
Workers, by area size '
Metropolitan areas..............................................................
Other areas........................................................................
98.1
98.1
100.0
100.0
102.1
101.8
104.1
103.2
105.7
106.2
107.2
107.0
109.4
108.6
110.9
109.1
112.9
110.8
1.8
1.6
6.8
4.3
Workers, by bargaining status1
Union .................................................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
97.4
97.7
97.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
102.7
102.6
102.8
105.0
104.7
105.2
106.5
105.9
107.0
108.1
107.3
108.8
110.3
109.5
111.1
111.8
110.8
112.7
112.9
111.4
114.3
1.0
.5
1.4
6.0
5.2
6.8
Nonunion............................................................................
Manufacturing ................................................................
Nonmanufacturing ..........................................................
98.2
97.9
98.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.6
101.7
101.6
103.2
103.3
103.2
105.6
105.9
105.5
106.5
106.7
106.4
108.3
108.2
108.3
109.5
109.1
109.6
110.9
110.7
111.0
1.3
1.5
1.3
5.0
4.5
5.2
Workers, by region1
Northeast ..........................................................................
South ................................................................................
North Central......................................................................
West..................................................................................
98.3
98.0
98.1
97.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.7
101.9
101.6
103.2
104.4
102.8
103.3
105.1
106.1
105.7
104.7
107.9
106.7
107.4
106.1
108.6
109.7
108.8
107.6
110.7
111.5
109.8
108.6
112.0
112.0
111.4
110.1
114.1
.4
1.5
1.4
1.9
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.7
Workers, by area size1
Metropolitan areas..............................................................
Other areas........................................................................
97.9
98.3
100.0
100.0
102.1
101.8
104.0
103.1
105.9
106.0
107.1
106.8
109.1
108.3
110.5
108.8
111.9
110.1
1.3
1.2
5.7
3.9
COMPENSATION
WAGES AND SAURIES
'The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For a
detailed description of the index calculation, see BLS Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 1910.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
89
M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1983 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data
35.
Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1978 to date
[In percent]
Quarterly average
Annual average
Measure
1983p
1982
1981
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
II
III
IV
1
II
8.3
6.3
9.0
6.6
10.4
7.1
10.2
8.3
3.2
r2.8
11.6
10.8
10.5
8.1
11.0
5.8
1.9
1.2
First year of contract..................
Annual rate over life of contract ..
7.6
6.4
7.4
6.0
9.5
7.1
9.8
7.9
3.8
3.6
11.8
9.7
10.8
8.7
9.0
5.7
Manufacturing:
First year of contract..................
Annual rate over life of contract ..
8.3
6.6
6.9
5.4
7.4
5.4
7.2
6.1
2.8
2.6
8.2
6.7
9.0
7.5
Nonmanufacturing (excluding
construction):
First year of contract..................
Annual rate over life of contract ..
8.0
6.5
7.6
6.2
9.5
6.6
9.8
7.3
4.3
4.1
11.8
9.1
Construction:
First year of contract..................
Annual rate over life of contract ..
6.5
6.2
8.8
8.3
13.6
11.5
13.5
11.3
6.5
6.3
12.9
11.1
I
III
IV
2.6
'2.1
6.2
4.7
r 3.3
r 4.8
-1.8
1.4
3.0
2.8
3.4
3.2
5.4
4.5
3.8
4.8
-1.4
2.2
6.6
5.4
2.5
2.7
1.8
1.7
5.1
3.9
4.1
4.5
-3.5
.8
8.6
7.2
9.6
5.6
2.7
2.1
6.6
6.1
5.5
4.8
3.6
5.2
3.8
5.9
16.4
12.4
11.4
11.7
8.6
8.2
6.2
6.3
6.3
5.9
3.4
2.9
-.2
2.6
Total compensation changes covering
5,000 workers or more, all
industries:
First year of contract..................
Annual rate over life of contract ..
Wage rate changes covering at least
1,000 workers, all industries:
p= preliminary.
36.
r= revised.
Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1978 to date
Year and quarter
Year
Measure
1978
Average percent adjustment (including no change):
All industries....................................................
Manufacturing..............................................
Nonmanufacturing........................................
From settlements reached in period ..................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period
From cost-of-living clauses................................
Total number of workers receiving wage change (in
thousands)1 ....................................................
From settlements reached
in period......................................................
Deferred from settlements
reached in earlier period ..............................
From cost-of-living clauses................................
Number of workers receiving no adjustments (in
thousands) ......................................................
1979
1980
1981
1982
90
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
8.2
8.6
7.9
9.1
9.6
8.8
9.9
10.2
9.7
9.5
9.4
9.5
6.8
5.2
7.9
3.2
2.4
3.8
3.3
3.1
3.4
1.5
1.9
1.1
1.0
.9
1.1
2.0
1.0
2.7
2.4
1.7
2.9
1.3
1.5
1.2
0.3
-.4
.8
2.0
3.7
2.4
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.6
3.5
2.8
2.5
3.8
3.2
1.7
3.6
1.4
1.1
1.4
.7
.5
1.5
1.2
.4
.4
.6
.2
.6
.3
.4
1.4
.2
.5
1.3
.6
.6
.4
.3
-.2
.4
.1
7,852
4,701
4,364
3,225
2,878
3,423
3,760
3,441
2,927
—
—
—
8,648
-
-
-
2,270
1,907
909
540
604
204
511
620
825
412
—
_
—
—
6,267
4,593
4,846
3,830
2,055
2,669
3,023
2,934
882
2,179
1,001
1,920
1,594
1,568
2,400
2,251
860
1,970
819
2,005
145
483
4,092
4,428
5,568
5,457
4,912
4,575
4,895
5,364
1The total number of workers who received adjustments does not equal the sum of workers that received
each type of adjustment, because some workers received more than one type of adjustment during the period.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1983p
1982
1981
p= preliminary,
WORK STOPPAGE DATA
Estim ates of days idle as a percent of estim ated working
tim e measures only the im pact of larger strikes (1,000 workers
or more). Form erly, these estim ates m easured the im pact of
strikes involving 6 workers or more; that is, the im pact of vir
tually a ll strikes. D u e to budget stringencies, collection of
data on strikes involving 6 workers or m ore was discontinued
with the D ecem ber 1981 data.
W o r k s t o p p a g e s include all know n strikes or lock ou ts involv
ing 1,000 workers or m ore and lasting a full shift or longer.
D ata are based largely on new spaper accounts and cover all
workers idle one shift or m ore in establishm ents directly in
volved in a stoppage. T hey do not measure the indirect or sec
ondary effect on other establishm ents w hose em ployees are idle
ow in g to material or service shortages.
37.
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date
Number of stoppages
Month and year
Beginning in
month or year
In effect
during month
Workers involved
Beginning in
month or year
(in thousands)
Days idle
In effect
during month
(in thousands)
Number
(in thousands)
Percent of
estimated
working time
1947
1948
1949
1950
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
270
245
262
424
1,629
1,435
2,537
1,698
25 720
26127
43,420
30 390
22
38
.26
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
415
470
437
265
363
1 462
2 746
1 623
1,075
2,055
15 070
48 820
18 130
16 630
21 180
12
38
14
13
16
1956
1957
1950
1959
1960
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
287
279
332
245
222
1,370
887
1,587
1,381
896
26 840
10,340
17 900
60 850
13,260
20
07
13
43
09
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
195
211
181
246
268
1,031
793
512
1 183
999
10140
11,760
10 020
16220
15 140
07
08
07
11
10
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
321
381
392
412
381
1,300
2,192
1,855
1 576
2 468
16000
31 320
35 567
29 397
52 761
10
18
20
16
29
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
298
250
317
424
235
2,516
975
1,400
1,796
965
35 538
16 764
16 260
31 809
17 563
19
09
08
16
09
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
231
298
219
235
187
1,519
1,212
1 006
1,021
795
23 962
21 258
23 774
20 409
20 844
12
10
11
09
09
1981 ........................................................................................
1982 ........................................................................................
145
96
729
656
16 908
9 061
07
04
1982
January..................................................................
February ................................................................
March....................................................................
April ......................................................................
2
3
4
14
4
7
9
21
6.1
3.9
13.3
59.5
11.4
15.3
26.1
79.1
202.8
241.1
357.0
533.1
.01
.01
.02
.03
1983°
January..................................................................
February ................................................................
March ....................................................................
April ......................................................................
1
5
r4
2
3
7
r9
9
1.6
14.0
r9.0
2.8
38.0
50.4
r 53.4
52.4
794.8
844.4
r 1,127.0
789.5
.04
.05
.05
.04
p=preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
r=revised.
Published by BLS in April
SALES PUBLICATIONS
BLS Bulletins
Children o f Working Mothers. Bulletin 2158, 13 pp. $3 (GPO
Stock No. 029-001-02751-6). Part o f the Special Labor Force
Report series, this bulletin discusses the increase in the number
o f children with working mothers and the two major reasons for
this growth. It consists o f an article first published in the
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1982, additional tables pro
viding more detailed data, and explanatory notes.
Women at Work: A Chartbook. Bulletin 2168, 29 pp. $4 (GPO
Stock No. 029-001-02750-8). Focuses on women’s economic ac
tivity—labor force trends, occupational and industrial employ
ment patterns, unemployment, and market work o f women in a
family context.
Mailgram Service
Consumer price index data summary by mailgram within 24 hours
o f the CPI release. Provides unadjusted and seasonally adjusted
U.S. City Average data for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) and
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W).
(NTISUB/158). $125 in contiguous United States.
Telephone Summary
A recorded summary o f principal CPI, PPI, and Employment
Situation numbers is available 24 hours a day on (202) 523-9658.
FREE PUBLICATIONS
Area Wage Survey Summaries
Area Wage Survey Bulletins
These bulletins cover office, professional, technical, maintenance,
custodial, and material movement occupations in major
metropolitan areas. The annual series o f 70 is available by
subscription for $115 per year. Individual area bulletins are also
available separately. The following were published in April:
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Metropolitan Area, January 1983.
B ulletin 3020-3, 42 p p ., $ 4.50 (G PO Stock N o .
029-001-90194-1).
Portland, Maine, Metropolitan Area, December 1982. Bulletin
3015-70, 28 pp., $3.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90191-7).
Sacramento, California, Metropolitan Area, December 1982.
B ulletin 3015-71, 26 p p ., $3.50 (G PO Stock N o.
029-001-90195-0).
Seattle-Everett, Washington, Metropolitan Area, December 1982.
B u lletin 3 0 1 5 -7 2 , 41 p p .,$ 4 .5 0 (G PO S to ck N o .
029-001-90196-8).
York, Pennsylvania, Metropolitan Area, February 1983. Bulletin
3020-4, 28 pp., $3.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90197-6).
Periodicals
CPI Detailed Report. February issue provides a comprehensive
report on price movements for the month, a description o f the
change in the CPI homeownership component to rental
equivalence, statistical tables, charts, and technical notes. 149
pp., $5 ($28 per year).
Current Wage Developments. March issue includes Employment
Cost Index, December 1982; State and local government collec
tive bargaining settlements, 1982; selected employee wage and
benefit changes; major collective bargaining agreements expir
ing in April; and statistics on work stoppages and compensation
changes. 49 pp., $4.50 ($23 per year).
Employment and Earnings. April issue covers employment and
unemployment developments in March, historical quarterly data
for new series including the resident Armed Forces, by sex,
1950-82, plus regular statistical tables on national, State, and
area employment, unemployment, hours, and earnings. 184 pp.,
$6 ($39 per year).
Producer Prices and Price Indexes. February issue includes a com
prehensive report on price movements for the month, plus
regular tables and technical notes. 134 pp. $5 ($34 per year).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Alexandria-Leesville, La., February 1983. 6 pp.
Birmingham, Ala., March 1983. 3 pp.
Clarksville-Hopkinsville, Tenn.-Ky., March 1983. 3 pp.
El Paso-Alamogordo-Las Cruces, Tex.-N. Mex., March 1983.
3 pp.
New Bern-Jacksonville, N .C ., March 1983. 2 pp.
New Hampshire, November 1982. 7 pp.
Pine Bluff, Ark., January 1983. 6 pp.
Tocoma, Wash., January 1983. 6 pp.
Virgin Islands o f the U .S., December 1982. 6 pp.
Western and Northern Massachusetts, January 1983. 3 pp.
BLS Reports
Evaluating Your Firm’s Injury and Illness Record, 1981: Con
struction Industries, Report 679, 9 pp.; Manufacturing In
dustries, Report 680, 29 pp.; Transportation and Public Utilities
Industries, Report 682, 11 pp. These reports provide a means o f
comparing a firm’s safety record with the record o f other firms
o f similar size and with the industry as a whole. They present
tabulations o f occupational injury and illness incidence rates for
the subject industry by employment size and quartile distribu
tion.
Employment in Perspective: Working Women, First Quarter
1983., Report 683., 3 pp. Presents highlights o f current data on
women in the labor force.
To order:
S a les p u b lic a tio n s — Order from BLS regional offices (see inside
front cover), or the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20212. Order by title and
GPO stock number. Subscriptions available o n ly from the
Superintendent o f Documents. Orders can be charged to a deposit
account number or checks can be made payable to the Superintend
ent o f Documents. Visa and MasterCard are also accepted. Include
card number and expiration date.
M a ilg ra m se rv ic e —Available from the National Technical Infor
mation Service, U.S. Department o f Commerce, 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
F ree p u b lic a tio n s —Available from the Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
U.S. Department o f Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212 or from any
BLS regional office. Request regional office publications from the
issuing office. Free publications are available while supplies last.
Microfiche*
Subscription
Service
Now Available
for
>•• :.••••
'>■'•■.1
-: v . - . v :\ - v
;• '< 'Vu ?>■■>■.' .>■ ”■- • « V - r i r-VV'"';’»’' •W*-»'CV;V
Employment and
Unemployment
in States and
Local Areas
llpl
.''ü'V'1"***
Provides monthly, provisional estimates of the
labor force, employment, and unemployment,
for States, metropolitan areas, counties, and
cities of 50,000 or more. These estimates are
used by industry marketing departments, by
labor organizations, and by administrators of
various Federal economic assistance programs.
The subscription service also includes annual
revisions of the monthly data and supplemental
material issued on an irregular basis. One year
subscription: $50.00.
Bureau of Labor Statistics
U.S. Department of Labor
*48X
O rd er form
Send order form and check or money order to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Washington, D.C. 20402
□ Please enter a 1-vear subscription to E m p loym ent and U n em plo ym en t in States and Local Areas
issued monthly at $50.00 domestic, $62.50 foreign.
□ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents fo r _____________________
□ Please charge to my GPO Account No.____________________ ____________ ________
□ Please charge to my Master Card Account No_____________________ Expiration date________________
I I Please charge to my Visa Account No________ ____________________ Expiration date_______________
Name
Organization
(if applicable)
Street Address
City, State, Zip,
Country
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington D.C. 20212
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
Lab-441
Official Business
SECOND CLASS MAIL
P e n a lty fo r p riv a te u se , $ 3 0 0
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
Ml H
LÌBKAAHLL I S SÜUfcOiUK
w L I BRAK t
f PfcÜ RfcStKVt BANK OF S T L O U I S
! PO BOA * * 2
<ù
*
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
¿>AìhÌ
LOUIS
HU
òBlOfc
@FedFRASER