The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR William E. Brock, Secretary Regional Commissioners for Bureau of Labor Statistics Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner Region I— Boston: Anthony J. Ferrara 1603 John F. Kennedy Federal Building, Government Center, Boston, Mass. 02203 Phone: (617) 223-6761 Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont The Monthly Labor Review is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Communications on editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C. 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327. Region II— New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt 1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036 Phone: (212) 944-3121 New Jersey New York Puerto Rico Virgin Islands BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Subscription price per year— $24 domestic; $30 foreign. Single copy $4, domestic; $5 foreign. Subscription prices and distribution policies for the Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-1818) and other Government publications are set by the Government Printing Office, an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence on circulation and subscription matters (including address changes) to: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents. The Secretary of Labor has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of this Department. Use of funds for printing this periodical has been approved by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget through April 30, 1987. Second-class postage paid at Washington, D.C. and at additional mailing addresses. ml/1 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW o Region III— Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis 3535 Market Street P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 Phone: (215) 596-1154 Delaware District of Columbia Maryland Pennsylvania Virginia West Virginia Region IV—Atlanta: Donald M. Cruse 1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 3C367 Phone: (404) 881-4418 Alabama Florida Georgia Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Region V— Chicago: William 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 Federal Building, Room 221 525 Griffin Street, Dallas, Texas 75202 Phone: (214) 767-6971 Arkansas Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Regions VII and VIII— Kansas City: Elliott A. Browar 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 June cover: “ He Drove His Cohorts,” a 1907 drawing by John Sloan (1871-1951), photograph courtesy National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Cover design by Richard L. Mathews https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Regions IX and X— San Francisco: Sam M. Hirabayashi 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017, San Francisco, Calif. 94102 Phone: (415) 556-4678 IX American Somoa Arizona California Guam Hawaii Nevada Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands X Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW JUNE 1985 VOLUME 108, NUMBER 6 Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor Paul 0. Flaim, Ellen Sehgal 3 Displaced workers of 1979-83: how well have they fared? Of the 5.1 million who had been on their jobs at least 3 years before being let go due to plant closings or job cuts, 3.1 million were reemployed by January 1984 Andrew Clem 17 Commodity price volatility: trends during 1975-84 Analysis of 156 Producer Price Indexes confirms that prices of crude materials fluctuate the most, while the prices of finished goods are the most stable Albert E. Schwenk 22 Introducing new weights for the Employment Cost Index Beginning in June 1986, eci estimates will reflect employment counts for 1980 census; some occupational groups will be redefined, but disruptions to series will be slight James D. York 28 Productivity trends in the machine tool accessories industry In 1963-82, annual output per hour increased an average of 1.4 percent, which was somewhat below the rate of increase for manufacturing as a whole CONFERENCE PAPERS Daniel J. B. Mitchell 33 Gaps in monitoring wages and industrial relations Gary B. Hansen 34 Innovative approach to plant closings P. Cappelli, T. H. Harris 37 Airline union concessions in the wake of deregulation REPORTS Lawrence J. Fulco 40 Productivity and costs in 1984 Kent Kunze 44 Hours at work increase relative to hours paid https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEPARTMENTS 2 33 40 44 48 49 53 57 Labor month in review Conference papers Productivity reports Research summaries Major agreements expiring next month Developments in industrial relations Book reviews Current labor statistics Labor Month In Review NEW EMPLOYMENT BENCHMARK. With the release of data for May 1985, national estimates of employment, hours, and earnings from the Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly survey of establishments reflect March 1984 benchmark employment counts, the most recent available. As is the usual practice with the introduction of updated benchmarks, the Bureau has also revised the seasonally adjusted series for the previous 5-year period and has introduc ed new seasonal adjustment factors. Adjustment procedure. Monthly employ ment estim ates from the es tablishment survey are based on informa tion provided by a sample of establishments. Each year, the “bench marking” procedure adjusts these estimates to accord with those based on comprehensive counts of employment. The comprehensive counts are primarily derived from summations of the man datory unemployment insurance reports filed by employers with their State employment security agencies. Because estimates of hours and earnings are weighted by employment estimates, they are also subject to change as a result of benchmarking. The current revision affects unad justed series from April 1983 (the month following the previous benchmark) for ward to the current month’s estimate. Revision of the seasonal adjustment fac tors affects seasonally adjusted series from January 1980 forward. Effects of current adjustment. The March 1984 benchmark for total nonagricultural employment—92.6 million—was 353,000 above the cor responding sample-based estimate, a dif ference of 0.4 percent. A downward revision of 172,000 in manufacturing was more than offset by upward revi sions of 262,000 in retail trade and 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 120,000 in construction. Within the 255 3-digit Standard In dustrial Classification industry groups for which employment estimates are published, 48 were revised by 5 percent or more. As has generally been the case in the past, the largest industries in terms of employment tended to have the smallest percentage revisions. Why the differences? Differences be tween benchmarks and estimates result from both sampling and nonsampling error. Sampling error occurs any time a sample is used to make inferences about a universe. As with any sample-based estimate, a certain amount of error is to be expected in the estimation of employ ment, hours, and earnings from the establishment survey. There are three major sources of non sampling error which also can cause the estimate to differ from the benchmark: (1) the estimates can be biased, especial ly with regard to employment increases stemming from the creation of new firms; (2) changes in the quality of source data can affect the benchmark; and (3) changes in the industrial classifica tion of individual establishments will affect the estimates for individual in dustries, but not the total. Effects on other series. Benchmarks for series on women workers, produc tion or nonsupervisory workers, and earnings are not available. The series for women and for production or nonsuper visory workers are revised by applying ratios derived from the sample to the revised all-employee figures. Revisions at the basic cell level are then added to become the summary level revisions. The production or nonsupervisory worker employment estimates for the basic cells are used as weights for the hours and earnings estimates for broader industry groupings. Adjustments of the bls all-employee estimates to new bench marks may alter the weights, which in turn may change the estimates for hours and earnings of production and non supervisory workers at higher levels of aggregation. To influence the estimates for a broader group, employment changes have to be relatively large and must affect industries which have substantially different hours or earnings averages than the other industries in their group. This occurred in the current revision, where there were relatively large changes in average hourly earnings in construction and in the tobacco manufacturing industry. adjustm ent. Each year, employment, hours, and earnings data from the new benchmark are incor porated into the calculation of updated seasonal adjustment factors. The Bureau uses the X-l 1 a r i m a seasonal ad justment methodology, an adaptation of the standard ratio-to-moving average method, which provides for “ moving” adjustment factors to take account of changing seasonal patterns. Seasonal Revised estimates for detailed industry categories of employment, hours, and earnings appear in the June issue of Employment and Earnings, along with a more complete discussion of the benchmarking procedure, entitled “ b l s Establishment Estimates Revised to March 1984 Benchmarks.” Estimates reflecting the new benchmark will ap pear in the Current Labor Statistics sec tion of the Monthly Labor Review beginning with the July issue. The Bureau also plans a publication contain ing all of the historical estimates revised as a result of the benchmark, as well as the seasonal adjustment factors that will be used for the period April 1985 through March 1986 for all published series. □ Displaced workers of 1979-83: how well have they fared? A total o f 5.1 million had worked at least 3 years before being let go because o f plant closings or jo b cuts; about 3.1 million had become reemployed by January 1984 , although often earning less than in their previous jobs P aul O. F laim and E llen S ehgal What happens to workers when recessions close their plants or severely curtail operations? And what happens to those who lose their jobs because of structural problems of the type that have recently affected some of our key manufac turing industries? How many of these workers manage to return to the same or similar jobs as economic conditions improve? How many remain without jobs or eventually set tle for different and usually lower paying jobs? In an attempt to obtain answers to these questions in connection with the 1980-81 and 1982-83 recessions, two agencies of the U.S. Department of Labor arranged for a special household survey in January 1984. Among the prin cipal findings: • A total of 11.5 million workers 20 years of age and over lost jobs because of plant closings or employment cut backs over the January 1979-January 1984 period. Those who had worked at least 3 years on their jobs— the focus of this study— numbered 5.1 million. • About half of the 5.1 million workers reported they had become displaced because their plants or businesses closed down or moved. Two-fifths reported job losses due to “ slack work” (or insufficient demand), and the rest said their shifts or individual jobs had been abolished. • About 3.5 million of the displaced workers had collected unemployment insurance benefits after losing their jobs. Nearly one-half of these reported they had exhausted their benefits. • Many no longer had health insurance coverage, including some who subsequently found work. • Of the 5.1 million displaced workers, about 3.1 million had become reemployed by January 1984, but often in different industries than in the ones they had previously worked. About 1.3 million were looking for work, and the remaining 700,000 had left the labor force. • Of the 3.1 million displaced workers who were reem ployed, about half were earning as much or more in the jobs they held when surveyed than in the ones they had lost. However, many others had taken large pay cuts, often exceeding 20 percent. • Blacks accounted for about 600,000 of the 5.1 million displaced workers, and Hispanics made up 300,000. The proportion reemployed as of January 1984 was relatively small for both of these groups— 42 percent for blacks and 52 percent for Hispanics. Conversely, the proportions looking for work were relatively high— 41 percent for blacks and 34 percent for Hispanics. These data are discussed in detail below, as are the concepts of displacement and how they were applied in this special survey. The concept and the measurement Paul O. Flaim is chief of the Division of Data Development and Users’ Services, Office of Employment and Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Ellen Sehgal is a senior economist in the same division. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Concern over displaced workers began to grow during the early 1980’s when it was feared that a large part of the 3 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 employment cutbacks taking place in some industries might be permanent, leaving many of the affected workers with little hope of reemployment in the same industry. The steel industry and the auto industry were prime examples of this type of situation. And many other manufacturing industries, particularly in the hard goods sector, were similarly affected by a combination of cyclical factors and such deep-seated structural problems as plants that were no longer competitive in the face of foreign imports. Table 1. Employment status of displaced workers by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin, January 1984 [In percent] C haracteristic N u m b er (th o u s an d s)1 Total E m ployed U nem ployed Not In the la b o r force 5,091 100.0 60.1 25.5 14.4 342 100.0 70.4 20.2 9.4 3,809 100.0 64.9 25.4 9.6 748 100.0 40.8 31.8 27.4 191 100.0 20.8 12.1 67.1 3,328 100.0 63.6 27.1 9.2 6.1 Total Total, 20 years and over . . . . 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over . . . . M en Total, 20 years and over . . . . 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over . . . . 204 100.0 72.2 21.7 2,570 100.0 68.2 26.8 5.0 22.3 461 100.0 43.6 34.1 92 100.0 16.8 12.9 70.3 1,763 100.0 53.4 22.5 24.2 138 100.0 67.8 18.0 14.2 1,239 100.0 58.0 22.6 19.4 287 100.0 36.3 28.0 35.7 99 100.0 24.6 11.3 64.1 4,397 2,913 1,484 100.0 100.0 100.0 62.6 66.1 55.8 23.4 25.1 20.2 13.9 8.8 24.1 602 358 244 100.0 100.0 100.0 41.8 43.9 38.8 41.0 44.7 35.6 17.1 11.4 25.6 282 189 93 100.0 100.0 100.0 52.2 55.2 46.3 33.7 35.5 30.0 14.1 9.3 23.6 W om en Total, 20 years and over . . . . 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over . . . . W h ite Total, 20 years and over . . . . Men .......... Women . . . Black Total, 20 years and over . . . . Men .......... Women . . . H ispanic origin Total, 20 years and over . . . . Men .......... Women . .. 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. Note: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because data for the “ other races” group are not presented and Hispanics are included in both the white and black population groups. 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Given this situation, it was feared that a large number of workers who had spent many years in relatively high-paying jobs would suddenly find themselves without work and with little hope of finding similar employment. These are the persons generally referred to as “ displaced (or dislocated) workers.” While there has never been a precise definition of such workers, the term is generally applied to persons who have lost jobs in which they had a considerable in vestment in terms of tenure and skill development and for whom the prospects of reemployment in similar jobs are rather dim .1 Because there were only widely different estimates of a rather speculative nature as to the number of such workers as of late 1983, the Employment and Training Administra tion contracted with the Bureau of Labor Statistics to design a special survey to identify and count them. The survey was planned as a supplement to the Bureau of the Census’ Cur rent Population Survey (which provides the monthly esti mates of unemployment). It was first of all decided to identify all adult workers who had lost a job over the 1979-83 period because of “ a plant closing, an employer going out of busi ness, a layoff from which . . . (the worker in question) was not recalled, or other similar reasons.” For these workers, a series of questions would then follow to determine the precise reason for the job loss, the nature of the job in terms of industry and occupation, how long the workers had held the job, how much they had been earning, and whether they had been covered by group health insurance. Other questions focused on the period of unemployment which might have followed the job loss, including the receipt and possible exhaustion of unemployment insurance benefits, and the possible loss of health insurance coverage. If the worker in question was again employed at the time of the interview, additional information was sought on the earnings on the current job. This sequence of questions yielded information that al lowed much flexibility in deciding who among these workers could properly be considered as “ displaced.” Different cut offs could be made in terms of the years of tenure on the job lost, the period of unemployment resulting, the extent of the cut in wages incurred in taking a new job, and other possible factors. In publishing the preliminary results of the survey,2 and in conducting the more detailed analysis discussed in this article, the only cutoffs that were made were those deemed absolutely necessary in order not to stray too far from the general consensus as to who is and who is not a displaced worker. Thus, an exclusion was first made with regard to workers whose job losses could not be categorized defini tively as displacements— those attributed either to seasonal factors or to a variety of miscellaneous reasons that could not be easily classified. An additional exclusion was made with regard to all workers with less than 3 years in the jobs they had lost. T a b le 2. E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s o f d is p la c e d w o rk e rs b y in d u s try a n d c la ss o f w o rk e r o f lo s t jo b , J a n u a ry 198 4 [In percent] Number (thousands)1 Industry Total Employed Unemployed Not In the labor force Total, workers 20 years and over2 ....................................................................................... 5,091 100.0 60.1 25.5 14.4 Nonagricultural private wage and salary w orke rs.................................................................................... 4,700 100.0 59.8 25.8 14.4 Mining ................................................................................................................................................. Construction.......................................................................................................................................... 150 401 100.0 100.0 60.4 55.0 31.0 30.7 8.6 14.3 Manufacturing....................................................................................................................................... Durable g oo d s.................................................................................................................................. Lumber and wood products ........................................................................................................ Furniture and fixtures.................................................................................................................... Stone, clay, and glass products................................................................................................... Primary metal industries............................................................................................................... Fabricated metal products............................................................................................................ Machinery, except electrical ....................................................................................................... Electrical machinery...................................................................................................................... Transportation equipment............................................................................................................ Automobiles............................................................................................................................. Other transportation equipment................................................................................................ Professional and photographic equipment .................................................................................. Other durable goods industries ................................................................................................... 2,483 1,675 81 65 75 219 173 396 195 354 224 130 54 62 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 58.5 58.2 67.9 27.4 28.9 19.1 14.1 12.9 13.0 Nondurable goods ........................................................................................................................... Food and kindred p rod u cts.......................................................................................................... Textile mill products ................................................................................................................... Apparel and other finished textile products.................................................................................. Paper and allied products............................................................................................................ Printing and publishing ............................................................................................................... Chemical and allied products....................................................................................................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products............................................................................... Other nondurable goods industries.............................................................................................. 808 175 80 132 60 103 110 100 49 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0 0 0 Transportation and public u tilitie s ....................................................................................................... Transportation.................................................................................................................................. Communication and other public u tilitie s......................................................................................... 336 280 56 100.0 100.0 100.0 57.9 58.8 26.8 30.5 15.3 10.7 0 0 0 Wholesale and retail tra d e ................................................................................................................... Wholesale tra d e ............................................................................................................................... Retail tra d e ....................................................................................................................................... 732 234 498 100.0 100.0 100.0 61.4 69.6 57.6 21.6 22.0 21.5 16.9 8.4 20.9 Finance, insurance, and real e sta te ..................................................................................................... Services .............................................................................................................................................. Professional services ...................................................................................................................... Other service industries................................................................................................................... 93 506 187 318 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 78.5 65.0 64.0 65.6 12.4 20.5 19.8 20.9 9.1 14.5 16.1 13.5 Agricultural wage and salary workers ..................................................................................................... Government w orke rs................................................................................................................................ Self-employed and unpaid family workers .............................................................................................. 100 248 25 100.0 100.0 100.0 69.9 63.3 22.9 18.7 7.2 18.0 0 0 0 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. Summarizing the results of the survey, a total of 13.9 million workers 20 years of age and over were initially identified as having lost a job over the January 1979-January 1984 period because of plant closings, employers going out of business, or layoffs from which they had not been recalled. Further probing disclosed that about 2.4 million of this total had lost their jobs because of seasonal causes or a variety of other reasons which could not be easily classified. These were dropped from the universe to be examined. Of the remaining 11.5 million workers, a large proportion had only been at their jobs for a relatively short time before they were dismissed. For example, 4.4 million had been at their jobs a year or less. To focus only on workers who had developed a rather firm attachment to their jobs, the universe to be studied was limited to those with at least 3 years of tenure on the jobs they lost. As noted, these numbered 5.1 million. Had a more liberal cutoff of 2 years been used as a parameter, the count of displaced workers would have been https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (3) 0 0 47.5 45.7 62.0 62.3 48.2 62.6 62.9 62.1 30.5 38.7 32.2 27.4 34.5 26.0 24.0 29.4 22.0 15.6 5.8 10.3 17.3 11.4 13.1 8.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 59.1 52.5 59.8 63.0 24.2 32.6 26.2 14.2 16.7 15.0 13.9 22.8 0 0 0 58.0 64.0 62.8 22.9 27.3 18.3 19.1 8.7 18.8 2Total includes a small number who did not report industry or class of worker. 3[3ata not shown where base is |ess than 75 000 raised to 6.9 million. On the other hand, the imposition of a 5-year cutoff would have lowered the total to 3.2 million. Not all of the 5.1 million workers deemed to have been displaced should be regarded as having suffered serious eco nomic consequences. While a great majority were indeed either still unemployed or had taken jobs entailing a drop in pay, or had left the labor force, there were also many for whom the job loss had been only a temporary setback. Some had apparently been out of work for only a very short period and, as already noted, many were actually earning more when surveyed than in the jobs they had lost. In short, while all of the 5.1 million workers had clearly been dis placed from a job at some point over the 1979-83 period, not all could be properly regarded as being still “ displaced” when surveyed in January 1984. And even among the ma jority for whom the “ displaced” label was still applicable when surveyed, there were many who probably found suit able employment in subsequent months. 5 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 Who were the displaced? A large number of the 5.1 million workers who had been displaced from their jobs fit the conventional description. They were primarily men of prime working age, had lost typical factory jobs, were heavily concentrated in the Mid west and other areas with heavy industry, and, if reem ployed, were likely to have shifted to other industries. However, the universe also included persons from practi cally all industry and occupational groups, a large number of whom were women. Age-sex-race-Hispanic origin. As shown in table 1, men 25 to 54 years of age accounted for nearly 2.6 million of the displaced workers, or slightly more than one-half. There were 200,000 men age 20 to 24, about 460,000 men 55 to 64, and 90,000 in the 65-and-over group. The younger the workers, the more likely they were to have found new jobs after their displacement. As shown in table 1, the proportion reemployed as of January 1984 ranged from a high of 72 percent for men age 20 to 24 to a low of 17 percent for those 65 years of age and over. Most of the men in the latter age group had apparently retired after losing their jobs. The women who had been displaced from their jobs num bered nearly 1.8 millon, with 1.2 million of them in the 25 to 54 age group. As indicated by table 1, these women were less likely than the displaced men to have returned to work as of January 1984 and were far more likely to have left the labor force regardless of their age. About 600,000 of the displaced workers were black, and less than half of them were reemployed when interviewed (42 percent). The proportion unemployed was almost as large (41 percent). Hispanic workers accounted for about 280,000 of the displaced. For them, the proportion re employed (52 percent) was higher than for blacks but con siderably lower than for whites. Of the whites who had been displaced, over three-fifths were reemployed and less than a quarter were unemployed. Industry and occupation. Nearly 2.5 million of the dis placed workers, or almost one-half of the total, had lost jobs in manufacturing, an industry group that now accounts for less than one-fifth of total employment. Some of the key durable goods industries which were most severely affected by the recessionary contractions of demand as well as by more fundamental structural problems figured most prom inently as the sources of displacements. There were, for example, about 220,000 workers who had lost jobs in the primary metals industry, 400,000 who had worked in ma chinery (except electrical), and 350,000 had been in the transportation equipment industry, with autos accounting for 225,000 of the latter. (See table 2.) Reflecting primarily the long-lasting nature of the prob lems of the steel industry— and of the areas where its plants are (or were) located— less than one-half (46 percent) of 6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis the workers who had been displaced from primary metal jobs were reemployed when surveyed. About 39 percent were unemployed, and 16 percent had left the labor force. However, the reemployment percentage for workers dis placed from jobs in the nonelectrical machinery industry (62 percent) and the transportation equipment industry (63 percent) was considerably higher. But even among these workers, many were now working in different industries, and usually at lower wages. While these troubled durable goods industries figured most prominently as sources of workers’ displacements, it should be noted that other industries, both within and outside the manufacturing sector, had also contributed heavily to the problem. For example, 800,000 workers had been displaced from jobs in the various nondurable goods industries, 500,000 had been in retail sales, another 500,000 in services, and 400,000 in construction. In terms of their occupational distribution, a large number of displaced workers (1.8 million) had lost jobs as operators, fabricators, and laborers— the typical jobs on a factory floor. But all occupational groups had contributed to the displace ment problem. There were, for example, 700,000 persons who had lost managerial and professional jobs, 1.2 million who had been in technical, sales, and administrative jobs, and slightly over 1 million who had been in precision pro duction, craft, and repair jobs. (See table 3.) In general, the more skilled the occupation the more likely was the displaced worker to be reemployed. Thus, about 75 percent of those who had been in managerial and profes sional jobs were back at work when interviewed. In contrast, among the workers who had lost low-skill jobs as handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers, less than onehalf were working in January 1984. Regional distribution. While displaced workers were found in all regions of the country, a particularly large number (about 1.2 million) was found to reside in the East North Central area, which includes the heavily industrialized States of the Midwest. (See table 4 for regional data and area definitions.) Another large concentration of such workers (800,000) was found in the Middle Atlantic area, which consists of New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. The severity of the job losses incurred in these two areas during 1979-83 was denoted not only by the relatively large numbers of displaced workers found within them in January 1984, but also by the fact that the proportion that had man aged to return to work— either in their former jobs or en tirely new ones— barely exceeded 50 percent. As a further indication of the seriousness of the displacement problem in the East North Central area, this region was found to contain nearly one-third of the displaced workers who were unemployed in January 1984 (400,000 out of 1.3 million), and almost one-half of them were reported as having been jobless 6 months or more. Table 3. Employment status of displaced workers by occupation of lost job, January 1984 [In percent] N um ber (th o u san d s)1 Occupation Total E m ployed U nem ployed Not in the la b o r force Total, workers 20 years and over2 .............................................................................................. 5,091 100.0 60.1 25.5 14.4 Managerial and professional specialty..................................................................................................... Executive, administrative, and managerial............................................................................................ Professional specialty........................................................................................................................... 703 444 260 100.0 100.0 100.0 74.7 75.7 72.9 16.6 15.6 18.2 8.8 8.7 8.9 Technical, sales, and administrative support........................................................................................... Technicians and related s u p p o rt.......................................................................................................... Sales occupations ................................................................................................................................ Administrative support, including clerical ........................................................................................... 1,162 122 468 572 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 60.6 67.9 66.7 54.1 21.1 25.3 14.6 25.5 18.3 6.8 18.7 20.5 Service occupations ................................................................................................................................ Protective service ................................................................................................................................ Service, except private household and protective ............................................................................... 275 32 243 100.0 100.0 100.0 51.0 (3) 53.0 24.1 (3) 23.6 24.9 (3) 23.4 Precision production, craft, and repair ................................................................................................... Mechanics and repairers...................................................................................................................... Construction trades ............................................................................................................................. Other precision production, craft, and re p a ir....................................................................................... 1,042 261 315 467 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 61.6 61.3 63.2 60.8 26.1 29.3 23.8 25.8 12.3 9.4 13.0 13.4 Operators, fabricators, and laborers........................................................................................................ Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors.................................................................................. Transportation and material moving occupations ............................................................................... Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers ........................................................................ Construction laborers ...................................................................................................................... Other handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers............................................................ 1,823 1,144 324 355 55 300 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 54.6 56.0 63.8 41.8 (3) 42.0 31.6 27.5 28,7 47.6 (3) 47.0 13.7 16.5 7.5 10.6 (3) 11.0 Farming, forestry, and fis h in g ................................................................................................................. 68 100.0 (3) (3) (3) 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. Tenure on jobs lost. Many of the displaced workers had been at their jobs for many years. As seen below, of the 5.1 million total— all of whom had worked at least 3 years on the jobs they had lost— nearly one-third had spent at least 10 years in their jobs. Another third had been at their jobs from 5 to 9 years. The remaining third had lost jobs at which they had worked either 3 or 4 years. Not surpris ingly, the older the displaced workers the more likely they were to report a relatively longer period of service in the jobs they had lost. This is clearly shown in the tabulation below, which gives the percent distribution of the displaced by age and years of tenure on the lost job: Age Total, 20 years and over........... 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over 3 to 4 Total years 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 36.2 37.9 15.5 14.6 Median 5 to 9 10 years 20 years years years or more or more of tenure 33.6 36.9 23.2 31.1 30.2 25.1 61.3 54.2 8.8 4.7 27.9 30.0 6.1 5.8 12.4 11.9 As shown, while the overall median job tenure for the entire 5.1 million total was 6.1 years, median tenure for those 55 to 64 years of age was 12.4 years. Nearly one-third of the workers in this age group reported they had lost jobs in which they had spent 20 years or more. The displacements and their aftermath Various questions concerning the reasons for the dis placements and what occurred in their aftermath were also https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Total includes a small number who did not report occupation. 3 Data not <.hown whprp hasp ¡_ ,p<!<; than 7r nnn uata not snown wnere Dase ls less than 75’000' asked as part of the January 1984 survey. The data obtained through these questions are the focus of the following sections. Reasons fo r dismissals. About one-half of the 5.1 million displaced workers reported they had lost their jobs because their plant or business had closed down or moved. Another two-fifths cited “ slack work” as the reason (an answer which may be translated as insufficient demand for the prod ucts or services of the employer). The remainder reported simply that their individual jobs, or the entire shift on which they had been working, had been abolished. (See table 5.) Older workers were most likely to have lost their jobs due to plant closings. Evidently, while their seniority pro tected their jobs in the face of such problems as “ slack work,” it afforded little protection against the shutdown of their plants or the folding of their companies. The younger displaced workers, however, were about as likely to have lost their jobs due to slack work as due to plant closings. Notification o f dismissal. More than one-half of the dis placed workers reported that they had received an advance notice of their dismissal, or that they had expected it. How ever, only 1 in 10 of these had apparently left their jobs before the actual dismissal occurred. (See table 6.) Workers who reported that they lost their jobs because the plant or company closed or moved (61 percent) were more likely than workers who reported other reasons for job loss (52 percent) to respond that they received advance 7 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 fifths of those who moved were working again, a substan tially higher proportion than for nonmovers. Although the data point up the employment benefits of relocation, it should be recognized that there are important reasons for the reluctance of workers to move. Many have established community ties; they may own homes which are particularly hard to sell if located in a depressed area; and there may be family members who are still employed lo cally, thereby adding to the costs of a move. They may also not have sufficient information about job opportunities in other areas. Finally, it has been found that a sizable pro portion of workers who do relocate are likely to return.3 A recently published guidebook for employers on man aging plant closings estimates that only about 20 percent or fewer workers in a plant would consider relocating as part of their “ reemployment strategy.’’ The authors mention, for example, that only 20 percent of laid-ofif steelworkers from a Youngstown steel plant had moved out of the area; that only 20 percent of enrollees in the Job Search and Relocation Assistance Pilot Program of the U.S. Department of Labor, and only 6 percent of enrollees for Trade Ad justment Assistance, used the relocation assistance which was offered them.4 notice or had expected a dismissal. But even among those whose plants had closed, only a little more than one-tenth reported that they had left their jobs before they ended. Of the displaced workers who did leave their jobs before they were to be laid off, a substantially higher proportion were reemployed in January 1984 (79 percent) than was the case among those who were informed but stayed on (60 percent). The evidence here, therefore, adds some support for policies to encourage firms to provide early notification of layoffs; but, as noted, most workers remained on their jobs even with the advance notification. Moving to another area. Only a small minority of the 5.1 million displaced workers (680,000) moved to a different city or county to look for work or to take a different job. However, of those who did move, a higher proportion were reemployed in January 1984— almost 3 in 4, in contrast to 3 in 5 of the nonmovers. (See table 7.) Men were more likely to move than women, and of the male movers, pro portionately more were reemployed (77 percent) than was the case for their women counterparts (60 percent). Rela tively few older workers relocated— only 6 percent among those 55 and over. However, even among them, about three- Table 4. Employment status and area of residence in January 1984 of displaced workers by selected characteristics [Numbers in thousands] C haracteristic T o ta l1 N ew England M id d le A tlantic East North Central W e st North Central South A tlantic East South C entral W e st South C entral M o u n tain P acific 5,091 3,328 1,763 260 155 105 794 530 264 1,206 772 434 426 282 145 664 428 236 378 236 143 484 347 137 211 152 59 667 427 241 2,492 1,970 629 118 106 36 410 269 115 556 513 138 208 164 54 339 236 89 204 132 42 231 211 42 103 83 26 323 256 88 481 2,514 1,686 828 16 158 94 64 68 414 260 154 88 658 514 145 36 210 137 73 81 296 175 122 34 189 107 82 63 215 142 73 30 58 40 18 63 315 218 97 352 740 648 84 272 14 41 22 2 5 61 100 122 10 20 83 182 133 22 40 34 68 45 5 28 34 132 70 13 38 33 40 32 4 45 41 54 54 8 49 19 32 39 5 27 32 90 132 16 19 3,058 1,299 22.1 38.8 733 171 48 0 0 41 428 225 24.1 36.8 141 621 400 21.2 47.2 185 276 96 13.0 47.5 54 461 117 29.4 25.5 85 209 113 17.3 51.7 56 344 85 25.4 29.8 55 148 33 0 0 30 399 181 18.4 28.0 86 W orkers w ho lost jobs T o ta l................................................... Men .............................................. Women ......................................... R eason fo r job loss Plant or company closed down or moved .................................. Slack work .................................... Position or shift abolished ............ Industry of lost job Construction .................................. Manufacturing ............................... Durable goods ........................... Nondurable g o o d s ...................... Transportation and public utilities ....................................... Wholesale and retail trade ............ Finance and service industries . . . . Public administration...................... Other industries2 ........................... E m ploym ent status In Jan uary 1 98 4 Employed ....................................... Unemployed .................................. Percent less than 5 weeks.......... Percent 27 weeks or more . . . . Not in the labor force ................... 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. includes a small number who did not report industry. 3Data not shown where base is less than 75,000. Note: The following list shows the States which make up each of the geographical divisions used in this table: New England— Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Middle Atlantic— New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania; East North Central— Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wiscon sin; West North Central— Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; South Atlantic— Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia; East South Cen tral— Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee; West South Central— Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas; Mountain— Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Pacific— Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington. How long without work? On average, the displaced work ers had spent nearly 6 months without work after they had lost their jobs. That is, the median period without work— which need not have been a continuous spell and could have included time spent outside the labor force— was 24.1 weeks. However, it should also be noted that about one-fourth of these 5.1 million workers were still jobless when surveyed. For many of them, the period of unemployment would ob viously extend beyond the January 1984 survey period. As has historically been the case for the unemployed in general, older workers were without work longer than their younger counterparts. For workers 55 years and over, the median period without a job was 30 weeks, while for work ers 25 to 34 it was 22 weeks. Workers who were no longer in the labor force in January 1984 had been without work many more weeks, on average, than those who were still looking for work (57 versus 32 weeks), while workers who were reemployed had spent far fewer weeks without a job (13). (See table 8.) Receipt o f unemployment insurance. The economic diffi culties of most of the displaced workers were alleviated by their receipt of unemployment insurance benefits. Yet, while 3.5 million of the 5.1 million displaced workers had received such benefits, almost one-half had exhausted them by Jan uary 1984. (See table 9.) Understandably, the probability of exhausting one’s benefits was closely tied to the length of one’s period of unemployment, being very high for work ers reporting more than 6 months (27 weeks) without work and much lower for those with only a short spell of job lessness. A larger percentage of the workers who were unemployed in January 1984 had received unemployment insurance ben efits— 80 percent— than their counterparts who were either reemployed or had left the labor force— 65 percent for both. Of the workers who had received benefits, the proportion that had exhausted them by January 1984 was about 50 percent for those still unemployed, 40 percent for those reemployed, and 70 percent for those no longer in the labor force. Loss o f health insurance. Because a large proportion of the displaced workers had held relatively “ good” jobs in terms of pay and other benefits, a large majority of them had participated in a group health insurance program on these jobs. As shown in table 10, many of them no longer were covered under any plan when surveyed in January 1984. Of the 3.1 million persons who were working again in January 1984, 2.5 million had been covered by group health insurance coverage on their lost jobs. Even among these, about 1 in 4 were no longer covered under a health plan in January 1984. For the 1.3 million displaced workers who were jobless in January 1984 and who previously had been covered by https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 5. Displaced workers by reason for job loss and by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin [In percent] C h aracteristic N u m b er (th o u s an d s)1 Total P lant or com pany closed dow n or m oved S lack w ork P osition or shift abolish ed 5,091 342 3,809 748 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 49.0 47.1 46.3 57.8 38.7 47.1 41.0 28.2 12.4 5.8 12.7 14.0 191 100.0 70.8 18.1 11.1 3,328 204 2,570 461 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 46.0 39.5 43.9 55.6 42.9 59.6 44.8 30.5 11.1 .9 11.3 14.0 92 100.0 68.7 15.7 15.5 1,763 138 1,239 287 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 54.6 58.3 51.1 61.4 30.8 28.7 33.3 24.5 14.6 12.9 15.6 14.1 99 100.0 72.8 20.3 6.9 4,397 2,913 1,484 100.0 100.0 100.0 49.6 46.0 56.7 37.9 42.6 28.7 12.5 11.4 14.6 602 358 244 100.0 100.0 100.0 43.8 44.9 42.2 44.7 46.4 42.2 11.6 8.8 15.7 282 189 93 100.0 100.0 100.0 47.4 48.1 46.2 45.2 43.8 48.1 7.3 8.1 5.7 Total Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over ................. M en Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over ................. W om en Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... 20 to 24 years . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 to 64 years . . . 65 years and over ................. W h ite Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... Men ...................... W om en................. Black Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... Men ...................... W om en................. H ispanic origin Total, 20 years and o v e r ...................... Men ...................... W om en................. 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. Note: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because data for the “ other races” group are not presented and Hispanics are included in both the white and black population groups. group health insurance, 60 percent no longer had any cov erage at the time of the survey. For black unemployed work ers previously covered, the uncovered proportion was 75 percent when surveyed. In general, women were less likely than men to be left without any health insurance coverage after displacement, even if unemployed. This is probably because many of them had spouses who were working, and thus were likely to have been covered under the spouse’s plan. Among the previously covered displaced workers who were out of the labor force when surveyed, about 40 percent were not covered under any plan in January 1984. Again, for blacks the proportion who had lost ajl coverage was much larger— 67 percent. Some additional information on this topic is provided by 9 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 a University of Michigan survey conducted in 1983 in the Detroit area. This survey found that, of those persons who had been without work for only 3 months or less, about 30 percent had no health insurance coverage. In contrast, the uncovered proportion among those without work for more than 2 years was 55 percent. Almost four-fifths of those workers had previously had health insurance when em ployed. The male workers were more likely than their female counterparts to be without health insurance at the time of the survey.5 525,000 had been in managerial and professional specialty occupations at their lost jobs. Of these, only about half were reemployed in such jobs. Similarly, about 640,000 had been in precision production, craft, and repair work at their lost jobs; among them only 360,000 were working again in these occupations in January 1984. (See table 12.) Reemployed workers not only were working in different occupations, but also in different industries. For example, of the 980,000 displaced workers who had been in durable goods manufacturing, only about 40 percent were reem ployed in these industries in January 1984. Similarly, about 35 percent of 493,000 workers were reemployed in non durable goods manufacturing. In wholesale and retail trade, 50 percent of 455,000 were reemployed and in service in dustries, 46 percent of 347,000. The tabulation below shows the percentage reemployed by key industry group: The new jobs Of the 5.1 million displaced workers, 2.8 million who had been displaced from full-time wage and salary jobs were reemployed in January 1984. Among them, 2.3 million were again working at full-time wage and salary jobs, about 220,000 were in other types of full-time employment (mainly selfemployment), and about 360,000 were holding part-time jobs. (See table 11.) Many reemployed workers were in occupations different from those they previously had held. For example, among the workers who were employed in January 1984, about NonDurable durable D urable goods ........... N ondurable goods . . . W holesale trade ......... Retail trade ................. Service .......................... O ther industries ........ 40 6 5 12 16 22 14 35 4 9 19 19 Trade Services 9 6 10 40 17 18 8 4 5 15 46 22 Table 6. Displaced workers1 by age, whether they received advance notice or expected layoff, selected reason for job loss, and employment status, January 1984 [Numbers in thousands] Total w ho lost jobs P la n t or com pany closed dow n or m oved E m ploym ent status in Jan uary 1 9 8 4 C haracteristic Total A ll oth er reaso ns E m ploym ent status in J an u ary 1 9 8 4 U nem ployed Not In the lab o r force Total E m ployed 5,091 3,058 1,299 733 2,870 318 2,532 1,715 250 1,450 709 23 683 2,221 1,343 2,034 E m p lo ym en t status in J an u ary 1 9 8 4 U nem ployed Not in the la b o r force Total E m ployed 2,492 1,547 509 437 446 45 399 1,525 185 1,331 945 151 787 297 7 290 590 287 967 602 1,330 504 200 885 1,160 146 1,004 771 117 643 274 11 264 114 17 97 874 558 230 2,118 1,384 1,183 137 1,040 E m ployed U n em p lo yed N ot in the la b o r force 2,599 1,512 791 296 283 27 254 1,346 133 1,202 770 99 664 412 16 393 163 18 145 211 154 1,253 741 378 134 615 184 86 1,148 715 320 114 550 74 470 393 61 325 100 3 96 58 9 48 609 72 534 379 57 319 174 7 167 56 8 48 85 335 222 84 28 539 336 146 57 534 200 1,039 714 203 122 1,079 670 331 78 784 112 668 284 10 272 115 15 100 626 85 541 439 73 367 115 3 112 71 9 62 557 52 499 345 40 302 169 7 160 43 6 37 935 599 250 85 413 274 87 51 522 325 163 34 939 345 261 334 568 218 122 229 371 127 139 105 82 82 154 9 143 179 9 169 47 3 44 69 2 66 63 4 59 40 75 192 80 70 42 A ll persons 2 0 years and over Total1 .............................................. Received advance notice or expected layoff ................... Left before job ended.............. Did not leave before job ended . Did not receive advance notice or expect la y o ff........................ 20 to 3 4 years T o ta l................................................ Received advance notice or expected layoff ................... Left before job ended.............. Did not leave before job ended . Did not receive advance notice or expect la y o ff........................ 35 to 54 years T o ta l................................................ Received advance notice or expected layoff ................... Left before job ended.............. Did not leave before job ended . Did not receive advance notice or expect la y o ff........................ 55 yea rs and over T o ta l................................................ Received advance notice or expected layoff ................... Left before job ended.............. Did not leave before job ended . Did not receive advance notice or expect layoff ................... 528 35 489 160 21 139 151 2 148 217 12 203 349 26 320 412 186 109 117 219 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a full-time wage and salary job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings 10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 113 18 95 105 — or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts, Table 7. Displaced workers by whether they moved to a different city or county to find or take another job, by age, sex, and current employment status, January 1984 [Numbers in thousands] Nonm overs M overs E m ploym ent status In Jan uary 1 98 4 Age and sex Total E m ploym ent status In J an u ary 1 9 8 4 U nem ployed Not In the la b o r force Total E m ployed 4,374 3,234 1,370 1,055 809 880 2,537 2,044 864 706 473 312 1,157 859 365 267 227 246 680 332 141 81 109 321 2,784 2,114 936 671 507 510 1,700 1,399 616 459 324 191 800 609 270 189 150 155 1,590 1,120 434 384 303 369 837 645 249 247 149 121 357 250 94 78 77 92 E m ployed U nem ployed Not In the la b o r force 682 556 318 158 80 53 500 413 221 125 67 32 134 108 71 26 11 12 48 34 26 6 2 9 284 107 50 23 33 164 519 440 262 117 61 38 401 342 191 98 54 24 96 78 55 18 5 12 21 19 16 2 2 2 397 225 91 58 76 157 163 116 56 41 19 14 99 71 30 27 13 8 38 30 15 9 6 — 27 15 11 5 Total: Total, 20 years and over1 ................................................................. 25 to 54 y e a rs ................................................................... 25 to 34 years ............................................................... 35 to 44 years ............................................................... 45 to 54 years ............................................................... 55 years and o v e r.............................................................. M en: Total, 20 years and over ................................................................. 25 to 54 y e a rs ................................................................... 25 to 34 years ............................................................... 35 to 44 years ............................................................... 45 to 54 years ............................................................... 55 years and o v e r.............................................................. W om en: Total, 20 years and over ................................................................. 25 to 54 y e a rs ................................................................... 25 to 34 years .............................................................. 35 to 44 years .............................................................. 45 to 54 years .............................................................. 55 years and o v e r.............................................................. 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the As shown, even among the nearly half a million reem ployed who had been displaced from nondurable goods in dustries, only about one-third were again working in this industry group in January 1984. In fact, generally more than one-half of the displaced workers who were reemployed in January 1984 were no longer in the industry group from which they had been displaced. Understandably, the workers who had been displaced from high-wage industries were most likely to have suffered a drop in earnings in taking a new job. For example, as seen below, for the 980,000 who had previously been in durable goods manufacturing, the median weekly earnings on the old jobs had been $344. In contrast, the median for the jobs they held in January 1984 was only $273. And it should be noted that these numbers, which are shown below for a few illustrative industries, understate the actual loss in purchas ing power as they are stated in “ current” dollars, that is, they do not take into account the effects of inflation: Industry of lost jobs Reemployed workers (in thousands) Durable goods............... Primary metals .......... Transportation equipment ............. Nondurable goods ........ Textile mill products .. Apparel and other finished textile products ................. Median weekly earnings Job held in Lost job January 1984 980 100 $344 407 $273 246 222 493 48 399 264 181 319 254 187 83 202 197 As shown, workers who had been displaced from jobs https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis — 7 abolishment of their positions or shifts. nondurable goods manufacturing (made up primarily of lower paying industries) showed only slight declines, if any, be tween their earnings on their new and old jobs. For example, the median weekly earnings on their lost jobs were $202 for workers in apparel and other finished textile products, while their earnings on their new jobs were $197; for work ers in textile mill products, their median earnings on their lost jobs were $181, and on their new jobs, $187. Among the individual displaced workers who had pre viously been in full-time jobs in durable goods industries and who were again working full time in January 1984, about 40 percent had seen their weekly earnings drop by 20 percent or more. Yet, as seen in table 11, for those who had been displaced from jobs in other industries, the earn ings in the new jobs compared more favorably with those in the old jobs. Of the entire universe of about 2 million workers who were in full-time wage and salary jobs both before displace ment and when surveyed— and who reported the earnings both for their old and new jobs— more than one-half (55 percent) were making as much or more in January 1984 than before displacement. These workers could, therefore, be seen as having readjusted rather well after their initial job losses. However, among these 2 million workers, there were also 900,000 who had taken some pay cuts, and for about 600,000 of these the cut was in the range of 20 percent or more. In addition to the workers who had taken pay cuts al though they were again working in full-time jobs, there were also, as already noted, a considerable number— about 11 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 360,000— who had gone from a full-time to a part-time job. Needless to say, these workers were even more likely to have suffered a considerable drop in weekly earnings after their displacement. When these are added to our universe, we can conclude that at least one-half of the displaced work ers who were reemployed in January 1984 were earning less than in the jobs they had lost. Among the findings from other studies on displacement which have dealt with earnings differences between the dis placed workers’ old and new jobs,6 are the following: • Older workers and workers with less education are more likely to experience earnings losses. • Because there are fewer job opportunities available, earn ings losses are larger in areas of high unemployment and in small labor markets. • Earnings losses are particularly large for workers dis placed from well-paying unionized industries such as au tos and industrial chemicals. A special assessment of Department of Labor funded programs in six local areas that provided training and other services to displaced workers in 1982-83, found that for the program participants who were reemployed, the average wages at their new jobs had dropped substantially from their pre-layoff wages: The mean hourly wage at the new jobs was in the $7 or $8 range, while the mean wage at layoff ranged from approximately $9 to $11 an hour.7 And in addition to the losses in wages, there were obviously some Table 8. Displaced workers1 by weeks without work, age, and employment status, January 1984 W e ek s w ith o u t w ork C haracteristic Less than 5 w eeks M ore 5 to 14 1 5 to 26 2 7 to 52 than 52 w eeks w eeks w eeks w eeks M e d ia n w eeks w ithout w ork Total: Age 20 and over ............ 1,173 25 to 54 years ............ 856 25 to 34 years . . . . 399 35 to 44 years . . . . 268 45 to 54 years . . . . 189 55 years and over . . . . 203 912 729 347 228 154 109 707 538 214 200 125 122 983 745 349 220 177 179 1,211 871 359 278 234 302 24.1 23.1 21.9 22.3 25.8 29.8 Employed: Age 20 and over ............ 25 to 54 years ............ 25 to 34 years . . . . 35 to 44 years . . . . 45 to 54 years . . . . 55 years and over . . . . 910 705 322 223 160 119 657 540 252 185 103 65 453 364 147 134 83 52 590 486 222 150 114 63 393 334 129 130 74 41 13.1 13.4 12.5 15.4 15.3 12.4 Unemployed: Age 20 and over ............ 25 to 54 years ............ 25 to 34 years . . . . 35 to 44 years . . . . 45 to 54 years . . . . 55 years and over . . . . 166 124 64 40 21 25 201 156 75 37 43 31 201 142 57 50 35 50 264 185 81 57 46 65 447 348 153 106 90 88 32.2 32.6 33.8 30.9 32.5 33.3 Not in the labor force: Age 20 and over ............ 25 to 54 years ............ 25 to 34 years . . . . 35 to 44 years . . . . 45 to 54 years . . . . 55 years and over . . . . 98 27 14 6 8 59 55 34 20 7 7 14 53 33 10 17 7 19 130 74 46 13 16 51 370 189 77 42 69 173 56.8 57.6 53.0 54.7 96.2 61.2 ’ “ Displaced” refers to persons whose jobs were lost because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. 12 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis losses of fringe benefits relative to those enjoyed on the previous jobs. A focus on steel and automobile workers Much of the public discussion about workers’ displace ments in recent years has focused on the steel and auto industries. This is probably because any plant shutdowns or mass layoffs in these two industries have a particularly large impact on the geographic areas where they are con centrated, as well as a large multiplier effect on the other sectors of the economy. Moreover, the two industries were not only hard hit by the recessions of the early 1980’s, but also had to retrench and alter their production methods be cause of foreign competition and other structural factors. These developments led to large reductions in employment, with the payrolls in both of these industries being consid erably lower in January 1984— even after some rapid re covery from the latest recession— than they had been 5 years earlier. Specifically, over this 5-year period, employment had dropped by about 400,000 (or nearly one-third) in the primary metals industry and by about 200,000 (or one-fifth) in the motor vehicles industry. Of course, many other du rable goods industries also underwent large reductions in employment over this period, but because their plants are generally not as concentrated in certain areas, nor as dom inant in the local economies as are steel and automobile plants, their cutbacks received less nationwide publicity. Steel workers. Of the 5.1 million displaced workers in January 1984, about 220,000 had worked in primary metals industries (largely steel). Forty percent of them reported they lost their jobs because their plants had closed down, and most of the others cited slack work as the reason for job loss. Reflecting the deep-seated problems of this industry and the generally depressed conditions of some of the areas where its plants are (or were) located, less than half (46 percent) of these displaced workers were working again in January 1984. Nearly 40 percent were still looking for work, while 16 percent were no longer in the labor force. Among those who had lost their jobs because of plant closings, almost one-fourth had left the labor force. Thus, the em ployment status of the workers displaced from primary met als jobs was far worse than that for the entire universe of displaced workers. Not surprisingly, of the former steel (and other primary metals) workers who were again employed when surveyed, most had left the primary metals industry. Only 25,000 of them were working in durable-goods industries in January 1984. Of the others, some 20,000 were in services indus tries, 15,000 in construction, and another 15,000 in retail trade. Having had to find work in generally new fields, the displaced workers who had previously held jobs in primary metals industries reported a larger decline in earnings at their new jobs (40 percent) than workers from any other industry group. As already indicated, median earnings of Table 9. Workers who lost jobs in past 5 years1 by duration of joblessness, receipt of unemployment insurance, whether benefits exhausted, weeks without work, and employment status, January 1984 [Numbers in thousands] Lost a job In last 5 years W e ek s w ith o u t w o rk and e m p lo y m e n t status A ll other reasons P lant or com pany closed down or m oved Total R eceived unem p lo ym en t benefits Exhausted benefits Total R eceived unem p lo ym en t benefits Exhausted benefits Total R eceived u n e m p lo y m e n t benefits Exhausted benefits Both sexes: All persons: Total1 ....................................... Less than 5 weeks .............. 5 to 14 weeks ...................... 15 to 26 weeks ................... 27 to 51 weeks ................... 52 weeks or more .............. 5,091 1,173 912 707 656 1,538 3,497 298 687 604 583 1,273 1,670 44 59 165 316 1,064 2,492 665 419 325 309 724 1,589 144 297 270 270 584 755 21 19 63 157 482 2,599 508 494 381 347 814 1,908 155 391 334 313 689 915 23 40 102 160 582 Employed: T o ta l......................................... Less than 5 weeks .............. 5 to 14 weeks ...................... 15 to 26 weeks ................... 27 to 51 weeks ................... 52 weeks or more .............. 3,058 910 657 453 368 615 1,973 182 499 389 342 533 802 18 44 111 182 436 1,547 546 313 204 190 269 904 98 225 171 169 228 357 8 16 43 98 186 1,512 364 343 249 178 346 1,068 84 274 218 172 305 445 9 28 69 84 251 Unemployed: T o ta l......................................... Less than 5 weeks .............. 5 to 14 weeks ...................... 15 to 26 weeks ................... 27 to 51 weeks ................... 52 weeks or more ............... 1,299 166 201 201 199 512 1,043 69 167 174 176 447 541 9 11 38 93 387 509 61 75 88 72 206 390 15 59 75 64 174 203 2 3 12 34 151 791 105 126 113 127 306 653 54 108 99 112 273 338 7 8 26 59 236 Not in the labor force: T o ta l......................................... Less than 5 weeks .............. 5 to 14 weeks ...................... 15 to 26 weeks ................... 27 to 51 weeks ................... 52 weeks or more .............. 733 98 55 53 89 411 481 48 22 40 65 294 327 17 3 16 41 241 437 58 30 33 47 249 294 30 13 24 37 182 195 10 296 40 24 20 42 162 187 18 9 17 28 112 132 7 3 8 16 96 'Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the these reemployed workers were $246 at their new jobs ver sus $407 at their old ones. Such earnings losses must have caused substantial changes in the consumption pattern of these workers and their families. Automobile workers. About 225,000 auto workers had been displaced from their jobs during the January 1979-January 1984 survey period. Of these, 44 percent reported they had lost their jobs because their plants had closed, while 46 percent reported slack work as the reason for job loss. Re flecting partly the fact that the industry had enjoyed a sub stantial recovery by January 1984, nearly two-thirds of these workers were again employed when surveyed. However, while some automobile workers had gone back to their for mer jobs, many others had apparently switched to differ ent— and generally lower paying—jobs in other industries. As indicated above, for all those who were reemployed, the median weekly earnings for the jobs they held in January 1984 were substantially lower than the median for the auto industry jobs they had lost. It is also important to note that 25 percent of the displaced auto workers were still looking for work in January 1984 and that 13 percent had left the labor force. For those who lost their jobs because their plant closed, the proportions unemployed or out of the labor force in January 1984 were even a bit higher. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis — 8 25 145 abolishment of their positions or shifts. Of course, an additional number of automobile workers were recalled to their jobs during 1984. Employment in the motor vehicles and equipment industry increased from about 850.000 (seasonally adjusted) in January 1984 to about 900.000 by the year’s end. So, the displacement problem in this industry was likely to have been alleviated consid erably during the year following the survey. Other studies of displaced workers In addition to the data from the January 1984 survey, special case studies evaluating the effectiveness of Depart ment of Labor programs for displaced workers, particularly displaced auto and steel workers, are another valuable source of information on this topic. In order to obtain information on the effectiveness of various types of assistance which might be provided to dis placed workers, the Department of Labor funded a series of pilot projects in 1980-83. One project, the Downriver Community Conference Economic Readjustment Program, served laid-ofif automotive workers from the Detroit met ropolitan area.8 Among the findings from this demonstration study are the following: 1. The displaced workers were predominantly men, aged 25 to 44, and married. Most had graduated from high school; however, when tested in the program, one-fifth scored below 13 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 a sixth grade literacy level. They had, on average, worked more than 10 years on the lost job— and they had earned about $10 an hour. 2. Depending upon the particular plant from which they had been laid off, the workers were found to have received either unemployment insurance benefits, or unemployment insurance coupled with company-funded supplemental un employment benefits, or, in some cases, both of these ben efits as well as trade adjustment assistance, which was paid to those whose jobs were deemed to have been lost because of imports. Therefore, some of the workers had their prelayoff earnings almost entirely replaced by benefits, at least for a time. 3. Although resources were made available to the work ers for job search and relocation outside their area, only 8 percent of the program enrollees relocated. About 20 percent of those who relocated subsequently returned. 4. Two years after the job loss, only about 50 percent of the workers in the program had found another job. The Table 10. Displaced workers by health insurance coverage and employment status, January 1984 [Numbers in thousands] Covered by group health insurance on lost job C haracteristic T o ta l1 Total Not covered under N ot covered on lost job any plan in Jan uary 1 9 8 4 N um ber P ercent 5,091 3,977 3,058 2,454 1,299 1,037 733 486 1,381 573 612 196 34.7 23.4 59.0 40.3 1,033 554 236 242 3,328 2,757 2,117 1,780 903 743 307 235 985 413 469 102 35.7 23.2 63.1 43.6 507 301 139 67 1,763 1,220 941 675 294 396 426 251 396 160 142 93 32.4 23.7 48.4 37.2 526 253 98 175 4,397 3,433 2,754 2,203 822 1,031 613 408 1,118 516 452 150 32.6 23.4 55.0 36.7 902 509 192 201 Total Total, 20 years and o v e r .............. Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not In the labor force .............. M en Total, 20 years and o v e r............... Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not in the labor force .............. W o m en Total, 20 years and o v e r .............. Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not In the labor force .............. W h ite Total, 20 years and o v e r .............. Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not in the labor force .............. Black Total, 20 years and o v e r .............. Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not In the labor force .............. 602 252 247 103 468 208 193 67 239 50 144 45 51.0 23.9 74.5 66.7 117 38 44 34 282 147 95 40 193 111 60 22 66 29 33 5 34.2 25.6 55.5 20.5 83 32 33 17 reemployment rate declined the longer the workers remained in the program, and this reflected in part the worsening labor market conditions in the Detroit area during that particular period. 5. On average, the earnings of participants who became reemployed were more than 30 percent below their pre layoff earnings. The Department of Labor had also funded a pilot program in Buffalo, New York (among other sites), the aim of which was to assist displaced workers, largely from auto and steel jobs. In this demonstration, it was found that the reemployed workers were placed in jobs paying a mean wage of about $6.50 an hour, a decline from a mean pre-layoff hourly wage of more than $10 an hour. The program participants were primarily men, between their mid-20’s and mid-40’s, most with a high school education. Nearly 70 percent of the participants were reemployed at the time of the project’s termination, with the younger workers being slightly more likely to be placed in jobs than were the others.9 Some additional data on displaced workers are available from a sample of 379 workers from a population of about 11,000 workers on indefinite layoff from a major automobile manufacturer in April 1983.10 The survey, which was funded by the Department of Commerce, was conducted by the University of Michigan from November 1983 to January 1984. Among the findings are the following: • Auto workers who were recalled to jobs with their pre vious employer reported a mean hourly wage of $12.26, with a weekly gross pay of $490.42. In contrast, the other reemployed workers cited a mean hourly wage of $7.42 and an average weekly gross pay of $314.70. • Of the 379 respondents, 30 percent had been recalled to their old jobs at the time of the survey, 25 percent were employed elsewhere, about 35 percent were looking for work, and 10 percent were no longer in the labor force. • Compensation payments (for example, unemployment in surance and trade adjustment assistance benefits) had cov ered, on average, about 30 percent of the displaced workers’ income loss since they had been laid off. The proportion of lost income offset by such benefits was lower the longer the layoff period, dropping from about 55 percent for workers laid off less than 1 year to about 13 percent for those laid off more than 2 years. • Workers with more than 10 years’ seniority at their old jobs had received benefits that replaced larger proportions of their lost wages. However, these workers also reported relatively lower earnings when they were reemployed. H ispanic origin Total, 20 years and o v e r .............. Employed .................................. Unemployed ............................. Not in the labor force ............... 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the abolishment of their positions or shifts. 14 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Summary The two recessions of the early 1980’s, coupled with more deep-seated structural problems affecting certain industries, took a heavy toll among American workers. About 5.1 million who had worked at least 3 years on their jobs found Table 11. Displaced full-time workers by industry, by reemployment in January 1984, and by comparison of earnings between new and old jobs [In thousands] F u ll-tim e w ag e and sala ry job P art-tim e job Displaced after 3 years or more on job2 ................... Construction .......................................................... Manufacturing ........................................................ Durable goods ................................................... Primary metals industries ............................. Steel3 .......................................................... Other primary m etals.................................. Fabricated metal products ............................. Machinery, except electrical........................... Electrical machinery ....................................... Transportation equipment ............................. Automobiles .............................................. Other transportation equipment ................. Nondurable g o o d s .............................................. 2,841 357 253 1,418 954 98 78 20 102 244 94 219 141 77 464 26 151 106 14 14 Transportation and public utilities ........................ Wholesale and retail trade .................................... Finance and service industries............................... Public administration.............................................. Other industries4 ................................................... 191 399 378 48 153 Industry of lost job T o ta l1 20 percent or m ore below B elow , but w ith in 2 0 percent Equal or above, but w ithin 2 0 percent 621 48 366 281 40 33 7 30 77 26 66 43 23 85 320 30 171 102 5 3 2 6 34 12 22 16 6 69 571 47 286 181 22 14 9 21 39 14 42 21 21 105 533 61 247 155 5 5 12 17 10 30 19 11 45 2,266 199 1,200 797 77 59 18 81 215 84 174 115 59 403 15 72 58 4 31 154 296 270 42 104 40 61 59 11 36 22 41 35 5 16 44 79 83 7 24 27 85 74 18 22 11ncludes 221,000 persons who did not report earnings on lost job. 2 0 percent or m ore above 218 28 67 51 7 4 2 9 12 16 40 22 34 26 8 92 14 7 7 16 22 31 50 2 18 includes blast furnaces, steelworks, rolling and finishing mills, and iron and steel 2Data refer to persons who lost or left a full-time wage and salary job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or abolishment of their positions or shifts. Table 12. S elf e m p lo y m e n t or oth er fu ll-tim e job Earnings re la tiv e to those of lost job Total reem p lo yed Jan uary 1984 foundries. includes a small number who did not report industry, Reemployed workers by occupation in January 1984 and by occupation of job lost in preceding 5 years [Numbers in thousands] O ccupation on job held In Jan uary 1 9 8 4 M a n a g e ria l and professional sp ecialty O ccupation on job lost Total, 20 years and over . . . . Managerial and professional specialty............................. Executive, administrative, and managerial ........................ Professional specialty............ Technical, sales, and administrative support . . . . Technicians and related support ............................. Sales occupations ................. Administrative support, including clerical................. Total em ployed Executive, a d m in is tra tiv e, and m a n a g e rial 3,058 O perators, fab ric a to rs , and laborers T e c h n ic a l, s ale s,an d a d m in is tra tive support S ervice occu pations P recision production, M ach ine craft, operators, and a ss e m b le rs , re p a ir and inspectors F a rm in g , fo restry, and fishing T ran s portation and m a te ria l m oving occupations H a n d le rs , eq u ip m en t c le a n ers, h e lp ers, and lab o rers 387 223 183 38 11 11 6 2 27 11 7 4 7 4 3 3 2 — 56 50 27 19 16 3 6 18 6 30 6 10 1 11 6 6 P rofes sional sp ecialty Techni cians and related support S ales occu pations A d m in i strative support, including c le ric a l 282 194 73 359 364 320 621 525 153 116 16 62 79 31 336 189 141 12 26 91 10 6 43 18 57 22 12 19 704 70 38 41 197 188 83 312 3 34 10 15 39 — 4 159 4 27 52 — 2 309 34 13 2 34 157 32 14 11 7 4 1 Service occupations................... 140 1 6 2 10 8 81 18 4 5 5 — Precision production, craft, and re pa ir.................................. 642 33 19 4 28 25 35 359 64 27 40 9 995 18 14 10 58 64 118 145 277 159 107 26 640 6 10 8 37 44 94 98 248 35 50 9 207 4 2 1 14 7 6 19 12 107 24 9 148 7 2 1 8 13 16 28 16 16 33 8 47 5 3 0 0 9 4 4 9 13 Operators, fabricators, and laborers ............................. Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors,. Transportation and material moving occupations .......... Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers.......... Farming, forestry, and fishing . . - - 1Data refer to persons with tenure of 3 years or more who lost or left a job between January 1979 and January 1984 because of plant closings or moves, slack work, or the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis abolishment of their positions or shifts. 15 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Displaced Workers, 1979-83 themselves without employment over the 1979-83 period due to plant closings, payroll curtailments, or companies going out of business. In some cases, these job losses were only temporary, entailing little sacrifice in terms of unem ployment and lost income. In many other cases, the read justment to the job loss has been much more painful. Some of the workers displaced from their jobs over this 5-year period had returned to work after a relatively short time, and their earnings when surveyed in January 1984 were as high or higher than they had been before the job loss. Many others had found different jobs, but frequently at much lower wages than in the jobs from which they had been displaced. About one-fourth were still unemployed when surveyed, though some may have been employed dur ing part of the period since their displacement. Finally, about 15 percent had left the labor force. Given the resiliency of the U.S. economy and the rapid advances which it posted during most of 1984, it is quite likely that many of the displaced who were still jobless in January 1984 were either recalled to their old jobs or man aged to find new ones during the year. But even as the year came to a close, some industries— steel being a prime ex ample— were still plagued by serious structural problems. This, in turn, was reflected by the still high jobless rates in some geographic areas where the displacement problem had taken a particularly large toll. For many of the workers displaced from long-held jobs in these areas, the prospects of reemployment were obviously not very bright— unless they were willing to relocate to new areas and to search in new fields. £] ■FOOTNOTES One writer s rather typical description of displaced (or dislocated) work ers reads: “ Dislocated workers are individuals with established work histories who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own and who are likely to encounter considerable difficulty finding comparable employ ment. Such individuals are commonly thought to have lost their jobs be cause the industries or occupations in which they worked are in long-term decline. . . . However, while it may be conceptually appealing to distin guish between long-term and cyclical declines, as a practical matter such a distinction is not very meaningful when cyclical declines last several years. Moreover, an industry may be growing overall but declining in particular geographic or subindustry segments.” Quoted from Lynn E. Browne, “ Structural Change and Dislocated Workers,” New England Economic Review, January-February 1985, p. 21. Also see reports on topic by Marc Bendick and Steven Sheingold. Reports on Displaced Workers,” U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Press Release, Nov. 30, 1984. 2“ b ls Managing Plant Closings and Occupational Readjustments: An Employer’s Guidebook (National Center on Occupa 3Richard P. Swigart, ed., tional Readjustment, Inc., 1984), p. 48. Also see Walter Corson, Rebecca Maynard, and Jack Wichita, Process and Implementation Issues in the Design and Conduct of Programs to Aid the Reemployment of Dislocated Workers (Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., October 1984), p. 79. 4Swigart, Managing Plant Closings, p. 49. 5S E. Berki, Leon Wyszewianski, Richard Lichtenstein, and others, Insurance Coverage of the Unemployed (The Department of Medical Care Organization, School of Public Health, The University of Michigan, Jan 15, 1985). Losses to Work ers Displaced by Plant Closure or Layoff: A Survey of the Literature Uhalde refers to research, for example, by Arlene Holen, (Alexandria, v a , The Public Research Institute, Center for Naval Analysis, November 1976); Louis Jacobson and Janet Thomason, Earnings Loss Due to Displacement (Alexandria, v a , The Public Research Institute, Cen ter for Naval Analysis, August 1979); Glen Jenkins and Claude Montmarquette, “ Estimating the Private and Social Opportunity Cost of Displaced Workers,” Review of Economics and Statistics, August 1979, pp. 342-53; and Robert Crosslin, James Hanna, and David Ste vens, Economic Dislocation: Toward a Practical Conceptual Approach (Carson City, n v , Employment Security Department, September 1983). Also see “ Former Steelworkers’ Income Falls by Half,” The New York Times, Oct. 31, 1984. 7Corson, Maynard, and Wichita, pp. 64, 81, and 83. Process and Implementation Issues, 8Jane Kulik, D. Alton Smith and Ernst W. Stromsdorfer, The Down river Community Conference Economic Readjustment Program: Final Evaluation Report (Abt Associates Inc., Sept. 30, 1984). 9L. M. Wright, Jr., Case Study, Buffalo Worker Reemployment Cen ter, Buffalo, New York ( c s r , Incorporated, under subcontract to Mathe matica Policy Research, January 1984), pp. 7, 8, and 50; Marcia C. Jerrett, Robert Jerrett, III, Jane Kulik, John Tilney, and Jeffrey Zomitsky, Serving the Dislocated Worker: A Report on the Dislocated Worker Dem onstration Program (Abt Associates, Inc., December 31, 1983), pp. 28, 46, and 47; and William Corson, Sharon Long, and Rebecca May nard, ‘‘An Impact Evaluation of the Buffalo Dislocated Worker Program (Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., March 12, 1985), pp. 38 and 116. 6 Raymond Uhalde, “ Job Displacement and Employment Security: A Jeanne P. Gordus, Sean P. McAlinden, and Karen Yamakawa, Workplace Perspective” in Kevin Hollenbeck, Frank C. Pratzner, and Labor Force Status, Program Participation and Economic Adjustment of Howard Rosen, eds., Displaced Workers: Implications for Educational Displaced Auto Workers (Ann Arbor, mi, Industrial Development Division, and Training Institutions, (Columbus, o h , The National Center for Re Institute of Science and Technology, The University of Michigan, Nov' search in Vocational Education, Ohio State University, 1984), pp. 24-27. 15, 1984.) 16 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Commodity price volatility: trends during 1975-84 Analysis o f 156 Producer Price Indexes confirms that prices fluctuate most fo r crude materials and are most stable fo r finished goods; the volatility index fo r food consistently exceeds the corresponding index fo r nonfood items A ndr ew C lem It has long been observed that commodity prices exhibit wide ranges of variability. Some prices persistently fluctuate sharply from month to month because of special supply or demand factors (or both) relating to respective commodity markets. In such cases, supply and demand are said to be “ price inelastic,” meaning that a small shift in supply or in demand results in a large price change. This occurs most frequently in competitive markets for goods which have only limited substitutes. For example, agricultural products and their derivatives are subject to sharp price changes because of the influence of weather on production and marketing. Demand (and hence prices) for basic materials traded in ternationally may change rapidly because of exchange rate movements, political turmoil, or large purchases by gov ernments. These are the primary factors which have been cited as causing commodity price instability. (Note that we are dis cussing microeconomic factors relating to particular prod ucts, not macroeconomic factors.) It is believed that these factors affect certain commodities more than others. Like wise, the volatility of prices for these commodities is gen erally regarded as persistent. We intend to test these widely held beliefs by analyzing short-term price movements for a broad range of goods over a 10-year period. A judgmental sample of 156 Producer Andrew Clem is an economist in the Office of Prices and Living Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Price Indexes for commodity groupings was chosen for this purpose.1 For each index series, monthly percent changes were computed from January 1975 to December 1984 (sea sonally adjusted data were used if available between 1979 and 1984). Data were excluded for the pre-1975 period, which was marked by a series of major grain- and oil-related “ shocks.” 2 Measurement methods Our choice of a mathematical tool to measure volatility depends on how we define volatility. If the definition “ not ing or subject to constant or sharp fluctuation” 3 is used, a logical measure would be the mean o f the absolute values o f the monthly percent changes. Because this measure im plicitly assumes a flat price level as a reference standard, we call it the “ static volatility index” in this article. In the context of substantial inflation, however, prices for most goods will show a persistent upward trend. In such a case, the static volatility index is biased because it inap propriately counts the more-or-less regular price increases as though they were irregular deviations. To distinguish the trend of a time series from the truly random movements that characterize its volatility per se, we need to modify the above definition to read: “ noting or subject to constant or sharp fluctuations that are serially independent.” Accordingly, we will place primary emphasis on an al ternative measure of volatility, namely, the standard de viation o f the monthly percent changes. This measure focuses 17 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Commodity Price Volatility on the variability of the rate of price changes, as opposed to the variability of the price level. We call this measure the “ dynamic volatility index” to indicate that its magnitude is not affected by any underlying trend in the time series. The dynamic index will be used for making ordinal com parisons between commodities. The static volatility index, although flawed, does convey useful information and plays a subsidiary role in the analysis. The absolute or cardinal magnitude of the static index carries more meaning than does that of the dynamic index; the static index value may be used to judge the significance of a given monthly change for a particular commodity in a historical context. To produce objective indices of price volatility, the values of the commodities were combined to yield unweighted averages (that is, each commodity counts the same) for various Producer Price Index stage-of-processing catego ries. There were two major issues to resolve: Which types of commodities tend to be most volatile and what are their patterns of volatility? Does price volatility (or stability) per sist for certain commodities over time? To answer the second question, the volatility index for each series was calculated for two subperiods: the 1979-81 period of high inflation and the 1982-84 period when the rate of inflation deceler ated. Volatility indices: the results Table 1 shows the dynamic and the static indices for the 156 commodity groupings studied for the full 1975-84 pe riod. Commodities are ranked from most to least volatile according to the dynamic index. For the two subperiods 1979—81 and 1982—84, only the dynamic indices are shown. Unless otherwise stated, references to volatility indices in this article are for the dynamic measure for the 1975-84 period. As expected, the volatility indices vary widely. Over the entire interval studied, 1975-84, the least volatile reading was 0.4 percent; the most volatile was 16.5 percent. The unweighted mean value of all the volatility indices was 2.4. However, when these values are distributed by frequency, we see that a substantial majority of the cases fall below 2.0 percent. (See exhibit 1.) The value associated with the largest number of cases (14), that is, the mode, is 0.8, while the median value is 1.1 percent (that is, just as many cases show readings larger than 1.1 as those showing smaller readings). The reason the mean is much higher than the median is that the frequency distribution is skewed, with several observations showing very high values. An inter esting aspect of this distribution is that it conforms roughly to the classical Chi-Square distribution. For the most part, rankings of commodities according to volatility were similar whether the dynamic or the static indices were used. The dynamic volatility indices were gen erally larger, but this itself has no significance, given that different quantities are being measured. What is notable is that the correlation coefficient for the two sets of indices is 18 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Exhibit 1. Frequency distribution of commodity price volatility indices Standard deviation of monthly percent changes, 1975-84 Number of cases 0 .0 - 0 .4 0 .5 - 0 .9 1 .0 - 1 .4 1 .5 - 1 .9 .......................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... 7 58 22 13 2 2 3 3 .0 .5 .0 .5 -2 -2 -3 -3 .4 .9 .4 .9 ............................................................. .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... 2 9 6 5 4 4 5 5 .0 .5 .0 .5 -4 -4 -5 -5 .4 .9 .4 .9 ..................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... 5 5 2 5 6 .0 -6 .4 6 .5 -6 .9 7 .0 -7 .4 7.5 - 7 . 9 ............................................................... ............................................................... .................................................................... ............................................................... 3 2 4 1 8 . 0 - 8 . 4 ............................................................ 8.5 - 8 . 9 .................................................................... 9 . 0 - 9 . 4 ............................................................... 9.5 and o v e r ............................................................ 1 1 3 2 .981, a very high reading. There were only two cases where one index was three times as great as the other: photographic supplies (5.2 dynamic versus 1.5 static) and primary nickel (3.0 versus 0.9). Both these cases were marked by a few isolated months of extreme price change. It would appear, then, that the static index may be useful as far as indicating when volatility in a given series is less “ typical,” that is, limited to a relatively few periods. It is commonly observed that when many statistical series are aggregated into a single measure, the volatile fluctua tions of the components tend to cancel each other out. Other things being equal, the more components a series contains, the more stable the group will be. In this article, the volatility of the three principal stage-of-processing groups and their components were computed in two ways: (1) by simply averaging the volatility measures of the commodities within each stage-of-processing group; and (2) by measuring the volatility of the groups themselves. Because of the statistical phenomenon described earlier, the second method of com putation resulted in lower volatility indices, compared with the first method of simple unweighted averaging. Further more, the relative differences between these two methods were generally more pronounced in those stage-of-processing categories with many commodities, for example, in the intermediate goods group. The stabilizing impact of aggregation also has an inde terminate effect on the results shown for many of the com modity price volatility indices. Some “ commodities” in this study are more broadly defined than others. For example, both apparel and electronic components include many spe cific items and are quite stable, as would be expected. Table 2 shows volatility indices for the three major stageof-processing categories and their principal components, each calculated under both methods. The results of the sec ond method (shown in parentheses) illustrate how the ag- gregation process imparts a stabilizing influence. Because the volatility of the stage-of-processing categories as mea sured by the second method depends so heavily on the number of items they include, the following discussion is based on results of the first method, that is, the average of the component series’ volatility. (These average volatility indices for the stage-of-processing categories are shown in table 1.) Patterns and trends. The results shown in table 2 permit some general inferences. First, prices for crude materials are consistently the most volatile. This was true in all three periods, and in both food and nonfood categories. This result was expected, partly because of the predominance of ag ricultural products within the crude materials category and partly because demand for basic industrial materials fluc tuates relatively sharply in response to real and perceived changes in demand for manufactured goods. Second, prices for finished goods tend to be more stable than those for either intermediate or crude materials. This pattern held for Table 1. food as well as nonfood categories, and in all periods. Within the finished goods category, prices for capital equipment items were the least volatile. Because purchase orders for most types of machinery are placed several months ahead of delivery, demand does not exhibit as much short-term fluctuation as does demand for consumer goods or materials; therefore, prices change less often. From these two obser vations, we may conclude that the price volatility of a particular good is likely to be strongly correlated with its level in the production chain; crude goods being the most volatile, and finished goods, the least. Another pattern confirmed in table 2 is that food prices are consistently more volatile than nonfood goods prices at all stages of processing and during each period. This follows from the earlier observation that weather and marketing peculiarities cause agricultural product prices to fluctuate more than industrial products. The volatility in processed food prices (particularly in meats) simply reflects the rela tively high proportion of total manufacturing costs ac counted for by the foodstuff inputs. Dynamic and static price volatility indices for selected commodities, by stage of processing 1 9 7 9 -8 1 1 9 7 5 -8 4 Finished goods1.......... D ynam ic S tatic D ynam ic D ynam ic 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.5 Finished consumer foods1 ............ 3.5 2.5 3.2 3.3 Fresh and dried vegetables . . . . Eggs............................................ Fresh fr u its ............................... Processed poultry...................... Pork........................................... Beef and ve al............................. F ish ........................................... 9.1 7.0 6.3 4.8 4.4 4.1 4.1 7.4 5.2 4.9 3.3 3.4 3.1 2.8 9.3 7.2 4.9 6.4 4.6 3.5 2.7 10.6 7.7 7.1 2.5 3.9 2.5 6.3 Roasted coffee.......................... Shortening and cooking o ils .. . . Confectionery end products. . . . Soft drinks.................................. Other cereals............................. Processed fruits and vegetables . Dairy products........................... Bakery products........................ 3.6 3.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 .9 .8 .6 2.2 1.8 .7 .7 .6 .7 .7 .6 2.8 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 .9 .6 .5 .8 4.0 1.5 .6 .7 .7 .4 .4 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.2 Platinum and karat gold jewelry . Natural g a s ............................... Fuel oil # 2 .................................. Gasoline.................................... Tobacco products...................... Small arms, ammunition............ Cosmetics, and so fo rth ............ Tires and tubes........................... 5.7 3.7 3.0 2.6 2.1 1.4 1.3 1.1 3.7 2.7 2.2 2.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 .8 7.1 1.8 3.4 2.8 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.0 3.7 1.8 3.3 2.7 3.1 1.8 1.6 .7 Home electronic equipment Sanitary papers, and so fo rth .. . Passenger cars.......................... Soaps, synthetic detergents Luggage and small leather goods Textile housefurnishings............ Footwear.................................... Toys, games, and so forth .9 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .7 .7 .6 .7 .7 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 1.0 .9 1.0 1.0 .8 .8 .9 .8 .7 .6 .8 .7 1.0 .6 .6 .6 Floor coverings.......................... Sporting, athletic goods............ Prescription drugs...................... Over-the-counter drugs.............. Alcoholic beverages................... Household furniture................... Household appliances................. Apparel....................................... .7 .6 .5 .5 .5 .4 .4 .4 .5 .5 .7 .7 .5 .5 .4 .4 .8 .7 .6 .7 .6 .4 .4 .3 .7 .5 .7 .3 .5 .3 .3 .4 Finished consumer goods, excluding foods1 ............... 1 9 7 5 -8 4 1 9 8 2 -8 4 1 9 7 9 -8 1 1 9 8 2 -8 D ynam ic D ynam P roducer P rice Index P roducer P rice Ind ex y n a m ic Static .8 .7 .8 .7 Heavy tru c k s ............................. Light tru cks............................... Photographic equipment............ Fixed wing utility aircraft............ Chemical industry machinery . . . Food products machinery.......... Oilfield and gasfield machinery. . Mining machinery and equipment 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.1 .9 .9 .9 1.2 1.2 .8 1.0 .7 .8 .8 .8 1.2 1.6 .7 1.9 1.2 .9 .8 .7 2.0 1.6 2.4 1.0 .5 .8 .5 .4 Printing trades machinery.......... Transformers and power regulators Woodworking machinery............ Metal forming machine tools . . . Commercial furniture................. Railroad equipment................... Pumps and compressors............ Textile m achinery...................... Metal cutting machine tools. . .. .8 .8 .8 .7 .7 .6 .6 .6 .5 .7 .7 .6 .7 .6 .6 .6 .5 .7 1.0 1.0 .9 .7 .7 .6 .6 .7 .5 .9 .6 .5 .4 .5 .6 .3 .5 .4 .5 .6 .5 .3 C a p ita l e q u ip m e n t1 . Construction machinery and equipm ent...................... Industrial material handling equipm ent...................... Agricultural machinery and equipment...................... Integrating and measuring instruments...................... Office and store machines. . .5 .5 .5 .2 .4 .6 .3 .4 .4 .4 .5 .4 .5 .5 .3 .3 In te rm ed ia te goods1 . 2.2 1.5 2.6 1.7 In te rm ed ia te foods and fee d s 1 5.4 3.5 5.0 3.6 9.1 7.3 4.4 3.2 2.8 6.4 3.6 3.1 2.3 1.9 4.5 11.1 3.5 3.4 2.7 9.9 1.2 2.6 3.3 1.0 Crude vegetable oils. . . Refined sugar.............. Prepared animal feeds . Confectionery materials. Flour............................. Interm ediate goods, excluding foods. Primary Primary Primary Primary Inedible silver.......... g o ld .......... lead............ tin .............. fats and oils 2.0 1.4 2.4 1.6 16.5 9.4 7.0 5.7 5.5 9.8 5.8 4.8 4.0 4.1 26.4 13.6 9.3 3.9 6.0 13.3 8.4 6.9 7.2 4.2 See footnote at end of table. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 19 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Commodity Price Volatility Table 1. Continued— Dynamic and static price volatility Indices for selected commodities, by stage of processing 1975-84 Producer Price Index Dynamic 1979-81 1982-84 Dynamic Dynamic Intermediate goods, excluding foods— Continued: Photographic supplies................... Primary copper............................... Liquefied petroleum g a s ................. Residual fuel . . . . T...................... Leather .................................. Primary zinc.................................... Primary nickel.................................. Kerosene ......................................... 5.2 4.6 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.0 2.8 1.5 33 2.7 26 2.4 2.4 9 2.2 8.4 64 36 48 5.6 3.5 4.3 3.1 .8 42 37 25 1.8 4.0 n 3.2 Diesel fu e l....................................... Softwood lumber............................. Plywood......................................... Commercial jet fu e l........................ Paving mixtures and blocks............ Asphalt felts and coatings.............. Nonferrous wire and cable.............. Glass containers............................. 2.8 2.5 25 2.5 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.8 20 20 19 1.7 1.2 1.4 1.1 1.1 32 30 30 3.3 3.1 2.3 2.6 1.6 31 2.2 1.6 .9 .9 1.6 .7 1.1 Woodpulp....................................... Gypsum products........................... Plastic construction products.......... Motor vehicle p a rts ........................ Coke oven products........................ Mixed fertilizers............................... Refractories.................................... Plastic resins and materials............ 18 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 9 1.3 1.1 .8 .6 .9 19 1.2 1.3 2.6 2.0 2.0 2.3 1.5 2.0 .7 1.2 .9 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.1 .8 Paint materials............................... Hardwood lum ber........................... Synthetic rubber............................. M illw ork......................................... Nonferrous mill shapes................... Metal containers............................. Industrial chemicals........................ Plastic parts and components . . . . 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 .8 .9 .9 .9 .9 .8 .8 .6 .6 .6 .9 1.0 Flat glass......................................... Steel mill products........................... Portland cem ent............................. Paperboard.................................... Gray fabrics.................................... Processed yards and threads .......... Synthetic fibers............................... Unsupported plastics...................... 1.1 1.0 .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 .9 .6 .8 .9 .8 .7 .7 .7 .5 .7 .6 .8 1.4 .7 Electric power.................................. Clay construction products, excluding refractories................. Switchgear and switchboards.......... Paper boxes and containers............ Prepared paints............................... Abrasive products.......................... .8 .9 .7 .7 .8 .8 .7 .9 1.1 1.0 1.2 .6 .6 1.5 1.3 .8 .8 .7 1975-84 Producer Price Index Static .7 .6 .6 .5 .7 Dynamic Static 1979-81 1982-84 Dynamic Dynamic Motors and generators................... Foundry and’ forge shop products Plastic packaging............................. Internal'combustion engines.......... Electronic components and accessories.................................. .7 .7 .7 .6 .7 .6 .5 .7 .7 .6 .9 .5 .6 .3 3 .7 .6 .6 .6 .4 Wiring devices............................... Cutting tools and accessories.......... Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings Paper Finished fabrics................................ Concrete products........................... .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .5 .6 .6 .6 .6 .5 .6 .6 .8 .6 .6 .5 .5 .3 .3 .6 .7 .4 .4 .5 .5 .5 .6 .6 .5 .5 .4 .5 .4 .3 .3 .5 .4 .5 .5 .5 .5 .4 .4 5.0 3.5 5.4 3.5 Crude foodstuffs and fee d s tu ffs 1 . . . . 6.1 4.3 6.5 4.0 Raw cane sugar ............................. Cocoa beans.................................... Green coffee.................................... Oilseeds......................................... Hogs................................................ 11.5 8.4 7.3 6.6 6.5 7.6 6.1 4.2 4.7 4.9 15.9 6.0 8.2 5.2 7.6 1.2 5.8 5.7 Live poultry.................................... Corn................................................ Wheat.............................................. Cattle.............................................. Fluid milk......................................... 6.3 5.3 4.1 4.0 1.1 4.7 4.0 3.0 3.0 .8 7.6 5.5 4.8 3.6 .9 5.5 5.1 2.3 2.7 .4 Mechanical power transmission equipment.................................. Hardware......................................... Fabricated structural metal products Air conditioning and refrigeration equipm ent.................................. Heating equipment........................... Crude materials1 ............... .5 3.5 7.5 1.4 .5 1.2 1.0 .9 1.1 1.4 .9 1.2 1.0 .9 .6 .9 .9 1.0 1.2 .6 Crude nonfood m a te ria ls 1 ................. 4.1 2.9 4.5 3.1 1.3 Cattle h id e s.................................... Aluminum base scrap...................... Raw c o tto n .................................... Copper base scrap.......................... Iron and steel scrap........................ Crude natural ru bb e r...................... 8.7 4.4 5.9 5.7 4.8 4.1 4.2 3.1 11.3 7.4 6.1 7.1 6.1 5.6 3.7 7.1 4.5 4.4 3.8 3.7 4.3 3.0 2.9 2.6 1.5 1.0 .5 2.8 1.6 1.9 1.7 .6 .6 .6 3.8 4.2 1.8 2.2 1.8 .5 .5 4.5 1.2 3.7 2.0 .6 .5 .4 .7 .5 .9 .4 .9 .5 .5 .5 .7 Wastepaper.................................... Crude petroleum............................. Potash............................................ Leaf tobacco.................................... Iron ore........................................... Coal................................................ Sand, gravel, and so forth.............. 7.7 6.1 5.7 5.5 Unweighted averages of the commodity volatility indexes within each stage-of-processing category. An additional salient feature discerned in table 2 is the stabilizing trend in prices which occurred between 1979— 81 and 1982-84. Except for finished consumer foods, all of the stage-of-processing categories showed reduced av erage volatility indices in the latter period. (Actually, the differences for the finished goods categories were negligible, compared with the differences among crude and intermediate goods.) These results are consistent with the expectation that a trend toward greater price stability at the aggregate level would be mirrored by a similar trend at the commodity level. This hints at another statistical pattern: Although most of the stage-of-processing categories showed marked de creases in price volatility between the 1979-81 and 1982— 84 periods, they maintained roughly the same relative po sition in each period. In other words, those categories which were most volatile in the 1979-81 period were also most 20 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis volatile in the 1982-84 period; the least volatile categories exhibited the same pattern. Persistent volatility. Is price volatility persistent among particular commodities? A casual examination of the data for 1979-81 and 1982-84 intervals does seem to indicate a strong degree of persistence of volatility. The coefficient of correlation between the two intervals for the volatility indexes for all 156 commodities included in this study was .748, meaning that more than 50 percent (R-squared = .560) of the variation in volatility among commodities in the later period could be explained by relative differences in volatility in the earlier period. This would seem to confirm that price volatility is to a large extent a long-term char acteristic of certain commodities. In many cases, the change in commodity volatility during the 1979-81 and 1982-84 periods was caused by special market conditions. Nearly all cases of major shifts (that is, when one index was at least three times greater than the other) involved decreases from the earlier period to the latter. For example, prices for both refined sugar and raw cane sugar rose very sharply during 1980 because of poor harvests in Cuba, the Soviet Union, and elsewhere. Like wise, prices for photographic supplies have been fairly sta ble in recent years, in contrast to the drastic changes that occurred in early 1980 in response to similar convulsions in world silver markets. These and other cases demonstrate that there are always instances where market abnormalities can cause temporary surges in price volatility. Table 2. Volatility indices for selected stage-ofprocessing groupings 1 9 7 9 -8 1 1 9 8 2 -8 4 D ynam ic S tatic D ynam ic D ynam ic 1.7 ( -4) 1.3 ( -5) 1.6 ( .4) 1.5 ( -3) 3.5 ( -9) 2.5 ( -8) 3.2 ( -9) 3.3 ( -7) 1.3 ( .6) 1.0 ( -7) 1.3 ( -7) 1.2 ( -4) Capital equipment................. .8 ( -3) .7 ( -5) .8 ( -3) .7 ( -2) Intermediate g o o d s ................. 2.2 ( -5) 1.5 ( .6) 2.6 ( -6) 1.7 ( -2) Summary of findings Intermediate foods and feeds 5.4 (2.4) 3.5 (1.7) 5.0 (2.5) 3.6 (1.3) The category with the highest average volatility (6.1 per cent) was crude foodstuffs and feedstufifs. Prices for raw cane sugar, cocoa beans, and green coffee beans (all of which are traded internationally) registered volatility indices of more than 7 percent. In contrast, fluid milk prices showed a volatility of only 1.1 percent, probably reflecting the sta bilizing effect of Federal price supports. The indices for all other foodstuffs and feedstufifs range from 4 to 7 percent. At the intermediate level, prices for foods and feeds were somewhat more stable than at the crude level, except for vegetable oils (9.1 percent). For the finished consumer foods category, price changes registered an average standard deviation of 3.5 percent. Farm produce items (eggs, fresh fruits, and fresh vegetables) showed the most volatility, falling in the 6- to 9-percent range. Meats, poultry, and fish were in the neighborhood of 4 to 5 percent, while roasted coffee and shortening and cooking oils were between 3 and 4 percent. Other consumer foods were much less volatile. Crude nonfood material prices averaged a 4.1-percent volatility. The commodities which fluctuated the most (more than 5 percent) were cattle hides, raw cotton, and scrap metal. Prices were relatively stable, at 0.5 to 1.5 percent, for coal, iron ore, and sand and gravel. Price volatility averaged 2.0 percent for intermediate ma terials other than foods and feeds. The sharpest movements were for silver, gold, lead, tin, inedible fats and oils, and photographic supplies (all at least 5 percent). Volatility in dices averaged between 2 and 4 percent for most interme diate energy goods, while coke oven products and electric power were somewhat more stable. In addition, volatility Intermediate goods, excluding fo o d s............................... 2.0 ( -5) 1.4 ( -6) 2.4 ( -6) 1.6 ( -2) Crude materials........................ 5.0 (1.5) 3.5 (1.3) 5.4 (1.6) 3.5 ( 9) Crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs........................ 6.1 (2.3) 4.3 (1.9) 6.5 (2.5) 4.0 (1.8) Crude nonfood materials . . . 4.1 (1.4) 2.9 (1.1) 4.5 (1-5) 3.1 ( -7) 1This sample includes nearly all of the indexes shown in table 2 (plus a few others) of the monthly Producer Price Index news release and the detailed report. Items were omitted if they carried negligible weight or if there were fewer than 6 years of historical data. 2For comparison purposes, the same calculations were also made for https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1 9 7 5 -8 4 Stage of processing Finished goods........................ Finished consumer foods. . . Finished consumer goods, exeluding foods................... Note: The indices other than those in parentheses are from table 1, and are the unweighted averages of the commodity volatility Indices within each stage-of-processing category. Indices in parentheses reflect the volatility of the stage-of-processlng groupings themselves. indices were at least 2.5 percent for copper, zinc, nickel, leather, plywood, and softwood lumber. Price movements for finished consumer goods excluding foods exhibited an average standard deviation of 1.3 per cent. The most volatile component was platinum and karat gold jewelry, which averaged 5.7 percent. Natural gas, home heating oil, and gasoline were somewhat less volatile, rang ing from 2.6 to 3.7 percent. Tobacco products led the re mainder of consumer nonfood goods with an average of 2.1 percent. Many other items in this category were much more stable, such as apparel and household appliances (0.4 per cent each). The most stable category of all was capital equipment, where price fluctuations registered an average 0.8-percent standard deviation. Items within this grouping showed a fairly uniform set of volatility readings, with half recording standard deviations ranging from 0.6 to 0.9 percent. The most volatile components were trucks (light and heavy), photographic equipment, fixed wing utility aircraft, and chemical industry machinery. □ the unadjusted time series. As expected, the unadjusted indexes tended to be more volatile, but the differences were generally minor. 3Taken from the R andom H ou se C o lleg e D ictio n a ry, R e v ise d E dition , copyright 1980, p. 1474. 21 Introducing new weights for the Employment Cost Index Beginning in June 1986, ECI estimates will reflect employment counts from the 1980 census; while the change also involves some redefinition o f occupational groups, disruptions to the historical series are expected to be slight A lbert E. S chwenk The Employment Cost Index (eci), an employment-weighted Laspeyres index, is a measure of change over time in the cost of employing a fixed set of labor inputs. The weights currently used are employment counts by industry and oc cupation from the 1970 Census of Population. The weights of most Laspeyres indexes are periodically updated, and the eci is no exception. Beginning in June 1986, the eci will be calculated using employment weights from the 1980 cen sus. This article reviews the eci and its purposes, explains why the 1970 employment weights are to be replaced with 1980 weights, and discusses how the change in weights will affect what the index is measuring. The ECI and its uses The eci was developed in the early 1970’s to meet the needs of economic analysts and policymakers who required a conceptually sound measure of the change in the cost of labor as a factor of production.1 The eci was designed: • To be a timely and comprehensive measure covering all elements of employee compensation (wages, salaries, and benefit costs) and all employees in the U.S. civilian economy; • To be a fixed-weight index free from the influence of employment shifts among occupations, industries, and Albert E. Schwenk is an economist in the Office of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 22 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis establishments with different wage and compensation levels; • To include internally consistent subseries (for example, occupational and industry groups) that describe the forces contributing to aggregate wage and compensation change. At the time that the e c i was developed, a number of series prepared by the Bureau provided information on wage or compensation levels or changes, but none had all of the features desired for an economy-wide measure of wage and compensation change. Thus, analysts and policymakers of that inflationary period had to deal with wage and price increases without an adequate measure of labor cost change.2 The e c i is a quarterly series that relates to payroll periods including the 12th of March, June, September, and Decem ber. e c i estimates, first published for the period SeptemberDecember 1975, initially covered only wage and salary change for the private nonfarm economy. Changes for broad occupational and industrial groups, as well as changes by union status, geographic region, and area size were also presented. In 1980, rates of compensation change were pub lished for the private nonfarm economy and for a selected number of subindexes. In 1981, wage and compensation indexes for State and local governments were added, as well as indexes for the combined private nonfarm and State and local government work force. A comprehensive list of the e c i subindexes currently published is presented in tables 33-35 of the Current Labor Statistics section of this issue. The eci will continue to expand in the future. The number of indexes available for the service-producing industries will increase over the next 5 years, as part of a governmentwide initiative to develop more information on this growing sector of the economy. In 1985, quarterly rates of wage and salary and compensation change for the following industry groups will be published for the first time: C iv ilia n n o n f e d e r a l w o r k e r s : Health services P r i v a t e in d u s tr y w o r k e r s : Transportation and public utilities* Transportation Public utilities W holesale and retail trade* Finance, insurance, and real estate* Service industries* Health services S ta te a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s : Health services *Wage and salary indexes are currently published. As envisioned by its developers, the eci is today used in analysis of inflation, in determining monetary policy, and in other studies requiring measures of change in labor cost. The index serves administrative purposes as well, because its clear definition and firm foundation in economic theory make it a valuable tool for such functions as adjusting the labor cost portion of long-term contracts or adjusting wage and compensation rates between labor negotiations. As more detail for service-sector industries becomes available over the next few years, the eci can be used to examine issues such as the impact of deregulation on com pensation change. Relationships between government sub sidies to industries such as health care and education and changes in compensation cost also can be studied. Introducing the new weights Fixed weights in the ECI. The eci measures the change in cost of employing a fixed set of labor inputs by applying fixed employment weights at the level of the occupation within an industry. The industry structure of the eci is based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification (sic) system, as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. For the eci , most industry categories for the private industry sector are specified at the 2-digit sic level, such as textile manufacturing or personal services. The industry categories for State and local governments vary from specific 3-digit sic’s, such as elementary and secondary schools, to broader major industry divisions, such as public administration. The current occupational categories for the eci are based on the structure developed for the 1970 census. This struc ture defined 442 detailed jobs within 12 major occupational groups. The scope of the eci is restricted to 414 of those jobs in 9 major groups. Within each industry, the eci oc cupational categories may range in detail from one specific census occupation to all occupations in a major group. A sampling procedure is used in each establishment to select https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis a specific job to represent each occupational category de fined for the industry. It is for those specific jobs that wage and benefit information is collected in the initial visit to the establishment and updated each quarter. The fixed employ ment weights, however, apply to the occupational category which the specific jobs represent. Reasons for reweighting, eci measures are used in essen tially three different types o f analysis: • Measurement of the total change in labor cost from the base period to any subsequent period; • Comparisons of changes in labor costs over different sub periods (for example, comparison of the change between December 1983 and December 1984 with that between December 1982 and December 1983; • Measurement of the current rate of labor cost increase. No single index can be ideal for all three types of analysis. Specifically, an index that is appropriate for analysis of longrun change will not be the best for measuring the current rate of labor cost increases, and vice versa.3 If the eci were used only to measure the long-run change in labor costs, the weights would seldom need to be updated. Similarly, the value of the eci in comparing changes in labor costs over different subperiods depends on holding the weights fixed for extended periods. The unchanging weights are necessary in these cases to ensure that the same set of labor inputs is being priced over time. In contrast, if the eci is to be used to measure the recent rate of labor cost increases, the weights should be as current as possible. With current weights, the index of labor cost would measure the change between December 1984 and March 1985 in the cost of purchasing the set of labor inputs employed in December 1984. The index with current weights differs from the existing eci Laspeyres index which would estimate current labor cost increases as the change between December 1984 and March 1985 in the cost of purchasing the set of labor inputs employed at the time of the 1970 census. In general, the accuracy of a Laspeyres index as a measure of current labor cost change varies inversely with the magnitude of shifts in employment among industries and occupations since the reference period of the employment counts. If the eci ’s employment weights were changed every quarter to improve the measurement of current rates of labor cost increases, it would be possible to derive a type of Laspeyres index by multiplying together quarter-to-quarter changes (expressed as ratios).4 Such a “ chain” index would provide a better estimate than the present eci of the rate of labor cost increase for each quarter. The chain index would not, however, provide the change in the cost of a fixed set of workers for periods longer than one quarter, and changes for different subperiods would not be for the same set of labor inputs. The eci is a compromise between a pure Laspeyres index 23 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • New Weights fo r the ECI and an index that uses new weights each quarter— that is, the e c i ’s weights are changed periodically, after remaining fixed for a number of years. Because the e c i ’s employment weights remain fixed for long periods, there arises the pos sibility that the index could lose its value as a measure of current change. Fortunately, a number of price index studies have shown that the period-to-period change in a fixed-weight Laspeyres index is relatively insensitive to the weights used, when the weights vary within the range common to many economic variables. The quarter-to-quarter changes calculated using a Laspeyres index are apt to be quite close to the quarterto-quarter changes using the previous quarter’s employment weights.5 For this reason, the e c i has employed one set of weights for a number of years. This preserves the analytical value of the Laspeyres index as a measure of change in labor costs over the long run and over different subperiods. Empirical evidence presented below suggests that the age of the weights has not seriously affected the accuracy of the index as a measure of current rates of change. As the weights become older, however, the danger grows that current rates of change using the fixed weights could differ from those based on more recent weights by an amount great enough to be important in economic analysis. To en sure that the e c i will continue to provide a good approxi mation of the current rate of labor cost increase, more recent weights are introduced. Consequences of reweighting Aggregate index. The new weights alter what the e c i is measuring when comparisons are made between estimates based on different sets of employment weights. That is, any change calculated by dividing an e c i index number based on new weights by an index number using earlier weights is not a proper Laspeyres estimate. Re weighting improves the currency of the index, but disrupts historical continuity. The meaning of a reweighted index as a measure of change can best be explained by a brief example of how the re weighted e c i will be linked to the old index. Assume that in March 1986 the e c i using weights from the 1970 census has a value of 133.0 (June 1981 = 100). Also assume that between March and June 1986 the e c i rises 2 percent, based on weights from the 1980 census. The June 1986 index would be computed as 133.0 x 1.02 = 135.7, the product of the March 1986 index value, based on 1970 weights, and the relative increase in labor cost from March 1986 to June 1986, based on 1980 weights. Thus, the relative difference in the index level between any two periods before March 1986 is the change in the cost of employing the 1970 work force. For any two periods after March 1986, the relative difference will be the change in the cost of employing the 1980 work force. But as in dicated earlier, the ratio of an index for a period after March https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Exhibit 1. and 1980 Census Mtgor Occupational Groups, 1970 1970 Managers and administrators Professional and technical workers Salesworkers Clerical workers Craft and kindred workers Operatives, except transport Transport operatives Nonfarm laborers Service workers 1980 Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations Professional specialty and technical occupations Sales occupations Administrative support occupations, including clerical Precision production, craft, and repair occupations Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors Transportation and material moving occupations Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers Service occupations 1986 and one for a period before March 1986 cannot be interpreted in terms of the cost of employing any fixed work force— that is, it is not a Laspeyres index number. The change between June 1981 and June 1990, for example, would simply be the change between June 1981 and March 1986 in the cost of employing the 1970 work force, times the change between March 1986 and June 1990 in the cost of employing the 1980 work force.6 Subindexes. Considered separately, the impact of re weighting on each e c i subindex is the' same as on the ag gregate index. The re weighting will cause the change in cost for the subindex to be closer to the change in current cost, but it will also result in a disruption of the index as a measure of long-run change and of change between periods before and periods after the new weights are introduced. Two additional issues are raised, however, when reweighted subindexes are introduced. One concerns the relationship between the change in the subindexes and the change in the aggregate index, and the other, the occupational composi tion of each subindex. The aggregate Laspeyres index can be expressed as a weighted sum of any set of exhaustive and mutually exclu sive Laspeyres subindexes, where the weights sum to unity.7 This is a very desirable property, for two reasons. First, it guarantees that the change in the aggregate index will fall within the range of changes in the subseries; the change in the aggregate index cannot be greater than the largest change among the subindexes, or less than the smallest. Second, the property also makes it possible to assign the increase in the aggregate index to the subseries— that is, one can de termine how much of the change in the aggregate was “ caused” by the change in each subseries. For comparisons spanning the date on which the new weights are introduced, however, the property that the ag gregate Laspeyres index can be expressed as the weighted sum of any set of exhaustive and mutually exclusive sub indexes is lost. It is possible, for example, that the change in the aggregate index between September 1985 and Sep tember 1986 might be larger, or smaller, than the change in any of the subindexes. The second issue concerned solely with subindexes is the coverage of workers by each occupational subindex. As noted earlier, the 1970-based e c i weights used employment counts for more than 400 individual occupational titles as given by the 1970 Census of Population occupational clas sification system. The census aggregated these individual occupations within the scope of the e c i into nine major occupational groups, and e c i occupational indexes currently correspond to those occupational groups. There were a num ber of criteria used by the Census Bureau in deciding which occupational titles to combine in forming the groups, but the most important was the similarity of work performed. The Standard Occupational Classification (soc), a new occupational classification system developed during the 1970’s, was used for the 1980 census. The 1980 census classification system, like that for the 1970 census, com bined individual occupations into aggregate groups. And, again, the most important concern in defining the groups was similarity of work performed. However, there are dif ferences between the two classification systems because some occupations disappeared during the 1970’s while new oc Table 1. cupations appeared, and because there were changes in the definitions of the groups and in the way occupational clas sification experts viewed the various jobs. At the level at which e c i occupational indexes are pub lished, the 1980 census definitions of the major occupational groups are similar to those for the 1970 census (exhibit 1). It is clear that the work performed by the jobs classified in the groups for 1980 is similar to that of jobs classified in the corresponding 1970 groups. Beginning in March 1986, the e c i occupational indexes will reflect the 1980 census definitions. These will be linked to the occupational indexes based on the 1970 definitions in the fashion described earlier for the aggregate index. It must be noted that some detailed occupations that were defined in both 1970 and 1980 were shifted to a different major occupational group between the two years. For in stance, cashiers were included with clerical workers in the 1970 system, but with sales occupations in the 1980 system. Hand packers and packagers were included with operatives, except transport, in 1970 but with handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers in 1980. A list of the large categorical shifts is presented in table 1. To aid in interpreting the table, consider the entry for cashiers. Had they remained in the clerical worker category in 1980, they would have accounted for 11.3 percent of total employment of the group. Instead, they were moved to the sales occupations category, where they accounted for 19.9 percent of the total in that group. In both 1970 and 1980, the work performed by cashiers had much in common with that done by clericals and by Major changes in occupational classification between the 1970 and 1980 censuses 1 97 0 classificatio n Occupation M a jo r occupational group Cashiers............................................................................. Clerical workers Accountants and a uditors.................................................. Professional and technical workers Hand packers and packagers.............................................. Operatives, except transport 1 9 8 0 c lassificatio n P ercent of 1 98 0 e m p lo y m e n t1 11.3 8.2 5.7 M a jo r occupational group Sales occupations Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers Professional specialty and technical occupations Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers P ercent of 1 9 8 0 e m p lo y m e n t 19.9 10.2 12.6 Licensed practical n urse s................................................... Service workers 3.8 Garage and service station related occupations................. Operatives, except transport 3.1 Personnel, training, and labor relations specialists............ Professional and technical workers 3.1 Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations 3.7 Butchers and meat cutters ................................................ Operatives, except transport 2.9 Precision production, craft, and repair occupations 2.5 Printing machine operators................................................ Craft and kindred workers 2.4 2.9 Cranemen, derrickmen, and hoistmen............................... Craft and kindred workers 1.1 Excavating, grading, and road machine operators ............ Craft and kindred workers 0.9 Locomotive operating occupations .................................... Craft and kindred workers 0.6 Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors Transportation and material moving occupations Transportation and material moving occupations Transportation and material moving occupations 1The figures in this column refer to the percentage of 1980 employment the occupation would have accounted for had it remained in the 1980 census equivalent of Its 1970 census major occupational group. Thus, for example, had cashiers been classified in administrative support, including clerical, they would have accounted for 11.3 percent of the employment https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4.1 6.8 3.2 2.7 1.7 in that group, Note: The percentages shown in this table are only approximate, because in many cases the 1980-census occupation was not identical to the 1970-census occupation. 25 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • New Weights fo r the ECI salesworkers. The reclassification does not necessarily im ply that the work performed by cashiers changed over the 1970-80 period so that it became closer to that performed by salesworkers. It is also possible that the tasks of sales workers or of clerical workers in general changed, so that the work of salesworkers became more like that of cashiers. Certainly, recent experience in collecting e c i data for retail trade supports the classification of cashiers and sales workers in the same group. Frequently, employers them selves do not distinguish between the two occupations; their staffs carry out the duties of both salespersons and cashiers. Thus, the occupational classification system for the 1970 census, based on similarity of work performed at that time, became less appropriate as duties and work covered by individual job titles changed over the decade. The 1980 reweighting provides the opportunity to regroup the indi vidual job titles into aggregates that are more meaningful for economic analysis. Sources of new weights In deriving employment weights for the reweighted e c i , two sources of employment data were available— the Bureau’s Occupational Employment Statistics ( o e s ) Survey and the 1980 Census of Population. The b l s data are obtained from a pe riodic mail survey conducted by State employment security agencies of a sample of nonfarm establishments to obtain wage and salary employment by occupation. For the re weighting, main reliance was placed on a 7-percent sample from the 1980 census, weighted up to represent all workers within scope of the e c i . Census data were used primarily because the occupational categories defined for that survey were based on soc. (Beginning in 1983, o e s also defined occupations on the basis of soc; because o e s is on a 3-year cycle, however, data will not be available on that basis for all industries until 1986.) In some cases it was necessary to supplement census data using o e s ; for example, because the census grouped all construc tion industries together, o e s data were used to apportion the employment among the three broad construction indus tries. Table 2. Distribution of employment within scope of the e c i in private Industry, by occupational category and major Industry group, 1970 and 1980 [In percent] O ccupational category or Industry group All workers .................................. 26 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1980 100.0 100.0 46.1 43.3 10.6 51.0 37.3 11.6 1.1 6.2 34.5 7.9 1.4 6.1 29.8 7.6 5.5 19.9 7.5 22.2 O ccupational category White-collar workers .......................... Blue-collar workers ............................. Service w orkers.................................... Industry group M ining................................................... Construction......................................... Manufacturing....................................... Transportation and public utilities . . . . Wholesale trade.................................... Retail trade........................................... Finance, insurance, and real estate . . . Service industries ............................... S ource: 5.3 19.3 6.2 19.5 1970 and 1980 Censuses of Population. the percentage that is employed in manufacturing declined from 34.5 percent to 29.8 percent. How much difference would it make for published rates of change in compensation cost if estimates for 1981-85 had been derived using 1980, rather than 1970, weights? Table 3 presents evidence that, had more current weights been used, the impact for private industry workers would have been slight. For example, the estimated change in compensation cost over the year ended December 1984 based on 1980 weights (4.7 percent) is only 0.2 percentage point lower than the change derived using 1970 weights. The 3month changes never differ by more than three-tenths of a percentage point, and the index levels as of March 1985 are virtually identical. The closeness of the percentage changes indicates that there is little, if any, systematic relationship between the Table 3. Index levels and percent changes in compensation costs for private industry workers, 1970 weights and 1980 weights [June 1981 =100] Based on 1 97 0 w eights 1 2m onth change Q uarter Index level 3-m onth change June 1981 ........................ September 1 9 8 1 .............. December 1981 ............... 100.0 102.0 104.0 2.0 2.0 — March 1982 ...................... June 1982 ........................ September 1982 .............. December 1982 .............. 105.8 107.2 109.3 110.7 1.7 1.3 2.0 1.3 — March 1983 ...................... June 1983 ........................ September 1983 .............. December 1983 ............... 112.6 113.9 115.6 117.0 March 1984 ...................... June 1984 ........................ September 1984 .............. December 1984 .............. March 1985 ...................... Based on 1 98 0 w eights 12month change Index level 3-m onth change 100.0 102.0 104.1 2.0 2.1 7.2 7.2 6.4 105.7 107.2 109.3 110.6 1.5 1.4 2.0 1.2 — — 7.2 7.2 6.2 1.7 1.2 1.5 1.2 6.4 6.3 5.8 5.7 112.8 114.2 115.9 117.2 2.0 1.2 1.5 1.1 6.7 6.5 6.0 6.0 119.0 120.1 121.1 122.7 1.7 .9 .8 1.3 5.7 5.4 4.8 4.9 119.1 120.2 121.3 122.7 1.6 .9 .9 1.2 5.6 5.3 4.7 4.7 124.2 1.2 4.4 124.3 1.3 4.4 Testing the effects of new weights As noted above, studies have found that Laspeyres price indexes typically are insensitive to moderate changes in the set of weights used. To evaluate the impact on the e c i of using 1980 weights in place of those for 1970, a test was conducted estimating rates of change for 1981-85 using 1980 census weights, and comparing the results with the published figures based on 1970 census weights. Some effect would be expected because there have been shifts over time in the distribution of employment among occupational categories and among industries, as shown in table 2. For example, the percentage of private industry wage and salary employment that is white-collar rose from 46.1 percent to 51.0 percent between 1970 and 1980, while 1 97 0 — — Note: Estimates based on 1980 weights were derived by applying the new weights at the industry and major occupational group level. change in compensation cost and the change in employment by industry and occupation. In general, the 1980-weighted index will be greater than the 1970-weighted index if com pensation costs for those occupations and industries for which employment has risen the most— for example, white-collar workers and service industries— increase more than those in industries and occupations where employment has risen the least. ■FOOTNOTES 1For descriptions of the eci, see: Victor J. Sheifer, ‘‘Employment Cost Index: a measure of change in the ‘price of labor’, ’’ Monthly Labor Review, July 1975, pp. 3-12; Victor J. Sheifer, “ How benefits will be incor porated into the Employment Cost Index," Monthly Labor Review, January 1978, pp. 18-26; and bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bu reau of Labor Statistics, 1982), pp. 78-85. For a more theoretical dis cussion of labor cost measurement, see: Jack E. Triplett, “ Introduction: an essay on labor cost,” in Jack E. Triplett, ed., The Measurement of Labor Cost (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, 1983). 2Comparisons of the eci with other measures of wage and compensation change since 1975 show that those other series, if used as measures of compensation change, frequently could be very misleading. See G. Donald Wood, “ The Employment Cost Index and Related Series on Wage and Compensation Change,” in American Statistical Association, Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, 1983, pp. 466-69. 3Jack E. Triplett, ‘‘Reconciling the cpi and the pce Deflator,’’ Monthly https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Labor Review, September 1981, pp. 10-11. 4An index of this type is called a chain-weight index. The ECI can be considered a Laspeyres chain-weight index, but with the “ chaining” oc curring every 10 to 15 years, rather than every quarter. 5For example, Jack Triplett compared the year-to-year changes in price inflation as measured by the 1972 expenditures-weighted Laspeyres index of personal consumption expenditures with changes in die personal consumption expenditures chain-weight index. The largest difference was for 1980— the 1972 fixed-weighted index gave a change of 11.0 percent, while the chainweight index gave a change of 10.6 percent. See Triplett, “ Reconciling the cpi,” p. 8. 6In general, the index value for any time t in the future will be the index value of March 1986, based on 1970 weights, times the index value at time t, relative to March 1986, based on 1980 weights. 7See G. Donald Wood, “ Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost Index,” Monthly Labor Review, May 1982, pp. 40-42. 27 Productivity trends in the machine tool accessories industry During 1 963-82, annual productivity increased an average o f 1 A percent, somewhat below manufacturing as a whole; continued improvements have characterized the industry Ja m es D . Y ork As measured by output per employee-hour, productivity in the machine tool accessories industry grew at an average annual rate of 1.4 percent during the 1963-82 period, some what below the growth rate of 2.4 percent for all manufac turing.1 During this period, the annual rate of increase in output was 2.4 percent and the rate of increase in hours was 1.0 percent. (See table 1.) Continued improvements in pro duction machinery and the adoption of numerical control equipment to run the machinery have enabled productivity to improve at a gradual rate for the past two decades. During the first half of the 1963-82 period, productivity growth rose at an average annual rate of 2.4 percent from 1963 to 1973. Output averaged 2.1 percent a year, while hours declined at an average rate of 0.3 percent. During the second half of the period, 1973-82, productivity declined at an average annual rate of 0.7 percent. Output grew at a rate of 0.9 percent, but this growth was exceeded by the 1.7 percent annual average increase in hours. Year-to-year fluctuations in output per employee-hour have been influenced by cyclical trends in the economy. The output of the machine tools accessories industry is consumed by such producers as automobile and aircraft manufacturers and by individual consumers. Consequently, changes in these markets can affect movements in output and hours. Shifts in industry output have often been quite sharp. However, corresponding adjustments in employee hours have acted to James D. York is an economist in the Division of Industry Productivity and Technology Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 28 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis dampen swings in productivity. As noted earlier, the most rapid productivity growth oc curred from 1963 to 1973. Output per employee-hour ex hibited sharp fluctuations in individual years as shifts in the economy affected industry markets which, in turn, had an impact in industry output and hours. In 1970, for example, as the economy experienced a downturn, productivity de clined 7.8 percent. This drop reflected sharp declines in output (18.8 percent) and hours (11.9 percent). The largest increase was in 1971, when industry productivity rose by 12.7 percent. Industry output actually declined by 8.2 per cent, but this was more than offset by a large reduction in employee hours of 18.5 percent. Productivity continued to improve in 1972, rising by 8.3 percent. Underlying this increase in productivity was a large increase in output: 18.2 percent, twice the increase in employee hours. In the 1972-82 subperiod, average annual growth in out put was 1.9 percent, outpacing the earlier years. However, the growth in employee hours exceeded the growth in out put, and output per employee-hour declined on an average annual basis. Employee hours declined in 1975, 1981, and 1982. In 1975, the economy was in recession and both industry output and hours posted steep declines. However, the decline in output (16.3 percent) exceeded the decline in hours (13.5 percent), and productivity declined by 3.2 per cent. In 1981, the drop in hours of 3.9 percent exceeded the decline in output of 0.7 percent, and productivity rose by 3.4 percent. The largest productivity decrease of the entire study period occurred in 1982, also a year of reces- Table 1. Productivity and related indexes for the machine tool accessories industry, 1963-82 [1977 = 100] Output p e r e m p lo y ee hour E m ployee hours NonNonOutput A ll Production A ll Production production production e m p lo yees w orkers em p lo yees w orkers w orkers w orkers Y ear 1963.. . 1964.. . 80.0 81.2 78.2 79.2 85.3 86.7 62.9 68.5 78.6 84.4 80.4 86.5 73.7 79.0 1965. . 1966.. 1967.. 1968. . 1969. . . . . . . 82.0 82.0 85.2 83.0 88.9 78.5 77.1 81.1 81.8 87.4 92.8 98.7 97.9 86.6 93.3 78.8 90.7 94.7 87.5 91.6 96.1 110.6 111.2 105.4 103.0 100.4 117.7 116.8 107.0 104.8 84.9 91.9 96.7 101.0 98.2 1970. 1971. 1972. 1973. 1974. . . . . . . . . . . 82.0 92.4 100.1 105.7 104.2 82.3 96.2 101.0 102.7 101.5 81.4 83.7 97.8 115.0 112.4 74.4 68.3 80.7 103.0 108.6 90.7 73.9 80.6 97.4 104.2 90.4 71.0 79.9 100.3 107.0 91.4 81.6 82.5 89.6 96.6 1975. 1976. 1977. 1978. 1979. . . . . . . . . . . 100.9 98.8 100.0 104.0 101.7 102.8 100.1 100.0 103.5 100.3 96.2 95.6 100.0 105.5 105.6 90.9 90.7 100.0 113.6 120.1 90.1 91.8 100.0 109.2 118.1 88.4 90.6 100.0 109.8 119.8 94.5 94.9 100.0 107.7 113.7 1980. . . 1981. . . 1982. . . 100.3 103.7 91.5 100.4 105.5 99.8 100.1 99.4 75.2 120.3 119.5 86.8 119.9 115.2 94.9 119.8 113.3 87.0 120.2 120.2 115.5 A verag e annual rates of change (In percent) 1963 -8 2 . . 1977 -8 2 . . 1.4 1.8 0.5 2.4 1.0 0.6 1.9 - 1 .3 0.1 -4 .6 - 1 .6 - 0 .2 - 1 .7 3.2 sion. Industry output was hit hard by the economic downturn and dropped by 27.4 percent, more than offsetting a 17.6percent decline in hours. The resulting drop in productivity was 11.8 percent. The decrease in productivity during 1972— 82 appears to reflect, in large part, the effects of the reces sion years, 1974, 1975, 1980, and 1982 which saw pro ductivity declines of 1.4 (1974), 3.2 (1975), 1.4 (1980), and 11.8 percent (1982). Employment and plant size From 1963 to 1982, industry employment grew by 28 percent, from 46,200 to 59,000. The average annual rate of increase was 1.2 percent. The employee hours increased at a rate of 1.0 percent, reflecting a slight decline in average weekly hours. At an average annual rate of 1.7 percent, the number of women employees has been increasing at a faster rate than total employment. As a result, the proportion of women employees increased from 18.0 percent in 1963 to 19.7 percent in 1982. Production workers increased 18 per cent during this period, equivalent to an average annual increase of 0.9 percent. Consequently, production workers have declined slightly as a percent of total employment— from 72.9 percent in 1963 to 67.1 percent in 1982. The average weekly hours of production workers decreased dur ing 1963-82, declining at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent. Employment growth was not steady, and exhibited large year-to-year fluctuations. During the 1968-71 period, em ployment dropped annually, with the largest decline— 16.9 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis percent— occurring in 1971. These declines caused em ployment to register average annual reductions during 1963— 72. The largest increase, 17.2 percent, occurred in 1973. There was another large increase in 1974, followed by a sharp drop in 1975, a recession year. Increases occurred in 1977-80, however, and during 1972-82, employment rose at an average annual rate of 2.8 percent. Most of the industry’s employment is concentrated in small and mid-sized establishments. About 38 percent of industry employment is in establishments with 100 to 499 employees, despite the fact that they constitute only about 7 percent of the total number of establishments. However, they produce about 35 percent of total industry shipments. Another 30 percent of the employment is concentrated in establishments with 20 to 99 employees. These establish ments are more numerous, account for about 27 percent of the industry total, and produce about 30 percent of industry shipments. The largest establishments (500 employees or more) are also important. Even though they represent less than 1 percent of all establishments, they produce 25 percent of industry shipments and employ 21 percent of the work force. There has been a slight trend away from large plants. Establishments employing 500 employees or more consti tuted 1.3 percent of the total number in 1963, compared with less than 1 percent in 1977. Those employing 100499 employees declined from 8 percent of the total in 1963 to 7 percent in 1977. The average number of employees per establishment declined from 45 in 1963 to 38 in 1977. Diverse industry markets The machine tool accessories industry produces a wide range of products. The industry’s largest product group is cutting tools, which accounted for over 60 percent of all product shipments in 1977. Cutting tools include drills, broaches, countersinks and counterbores, reamers, hobs, milling cutters, slitting saws, and taps. In addition to sales to the industrial market, many cutting tools are sold to consumers. Foreign producers have made inroads into the consumer end of the market in such high volume items as twist drills. The industry’s other two product groups are precision measuring tools (which include such instruments as dial indicators, micrometers, and calipers) and attachments and accessories for machine tools and metalworking machinery. The latter group includes such devices as turning tool holders and chucks. No individual segment of the market has been predominant in determining trends in industry output, but some segments do stand out in relative importance such as the motor vehicle industry and the aerospace industry. The motor vehicle and related industries have been the largest consumers of machine tool accessories. Data for consumption of machine tool cutting tools by individual industry are available back to 1967, and these data indicate that the motor vehicles and equipment industry has been the largest single purchaser of the industry’s output over the 29 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Productivity in Machine Tool Accessories Industry years. From 1963 to 1978, the output of the motor vehicles and equipment industry increased fairly rapidly, at an av erage annual rate of 4.3 percent, and as a consequence helped to promote output growth in the machine tool ac cessories industry. In 1980, however, the motor vehicle industry felt the effects of both a cyclical downturn and increased foreign competition which have continued to have a depressing effect on this market subsequently. Another very large market consists of manufacturers of aerospace equipment. This has generally been the second largest market, but it has been growing in relative impor tance. This group includes manufacturers engaged in the production of aircraft, guided missiles, space vehicles, and related components and parts. Metal cutting tools for this market must often meet very demanding tolerances. The machine tool industry, which manufactures both metal form ing and metal cutting equipment, is another major consumer of industry output. This industry uses the various machine tool accessories as parts in the manufacture of complete machine tools. It is a very important market, but its output declined, on an average annual basis, during 1963-82, and its consumption of machine tool accessories has conse quently been declining. A major growth market has been the internal combustion engine industry. Its purchase of machine tool cutting tools increased more than fivefold (in current dollars) during the 1967-77 period. Other industries which have been major purchasers of machine tool accessories include construction machinery and power driven handtools. The oilfield ma chinery industry is also an important market, and its pur chases of metal cutting tools increased by about 160 percent during 1967 to 1977. Competition from imports has been increasing in recent years. Data for metal cutting tools indicate that imports as a percent of new supply (domestic shipments plus imports) increased considerably during the 1972-82 decade, rising from slightly over 2 percent to nearly 5 percent in 1982. However, the export market has shown some relative im provement during this same period. Exports as a percent of domestic product shipments rose from 3.5 percent in 1972 to about 4.5 percent in 1982.2 Capital expenditures The gradual rate of modernization in this industry is re flected in the modest level of capital expenditures and the trend in those expenditures. Capital expenditures per em ployee were much lower throughout the 1963-82 period than for all manufacturing. In 1963, such expenditures amounted to only $485 per employee for the industry com pared with $700 per employee for all manufacturing. By 1981, the industry’s expenditures had risen to $3,130 per employee, but the all-manufacturing total was $4,156 per employee. From 1963 to 1981, the rate of growth of capital expenditures and capital expenditures per employee was faster for all manufacturing than for the machine tool ac 30 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis cessories industry. The average annual rate of increase in capital expenditures was 8.8 percent for the industry, and the annual rate of growth of capital expenditures per em ployee was 7.9 percent. By comparison, the rate of increase for all manufacturing was 10.2 percent for capital expen ditures and 9.5 percent for capital expenditures per em ployee. Technological improvements Productivity in the manufacture of machine tool acces sories has benefited greatly from advances in controls for certain types of production machinery. Numerical control has provided an important source of improvement in the machine tools used to produce the industry’s output. Nu merical control provides automatic operation of machine tools by means of electronic devices and coded instructions on tape. This automation reduces downtime for setup and greatly contributes to a reduction in the labor time required to produce the final output.3 Numerical control also provides important advantages in flexibility where small volume pro duction is involved. Before its advent, changes in the pro duction runs necessitated many changes in hardware. The shift to numerical control meant that the same hardware could, in some cases, be used when changing production runs since tapes with new cutting instructions replace old tapes. The advantages of numerical control have contributed importantly to productivity growth. Improvements in com puter technology have provided a solution to problems as sociated with tape preparation. Early computers were too slow in their processing speeds and too expensive to be useful in controlling machine tools. Instead, they were used to prepare tapes to operate numerically controlled machine tools. As computer speeds and storage capacity increased (and their costs declined), it became feasible to use them to provide direct control of machine tools, without the in tervention of tapes. When the desired parameters are fed into the computer, it can make the necessary computations for operating the machine tools. The adoption of direct computer control for machine tools by some manufacturers has benefited productivity by eliminating tape preparation and by providing greater speed and flexibility of operation.4 Multipurpose machine tools, or machining centers, have also aided productivity gains. The machining center is a machine tool that can perform a variety of operations on a part. This contrasts with more conventional techniques where the part is transferred from one machine to another with each performing a specialized function. Machining centers provide more complete machine utilization, since more time is spent cutting metal. They require less skilled operators and reduce operator errors. One machining center can re place a number of specialized machines and their operators, thereby significantly increasing productivity.5 Electrochemical and electrical discharge machining have both contributed to productivity gains. Electrochemical ma- chining uses a reverse electroplating process to remove metal. In grinding a workpiece, an electrolytic solution is squirted on a grinding wheel and allowed to flow between the wheel and the workpiece. The solution conducts electricity, which deplates (strips) the workpiece. Electrochemical machining provides increased speed in metal removal and offers good performance in the grinding of carbide products. Electrical discharge machining utilizes the eroding action of an elec trical spark on metal to produce the desired shape. The desired final shape of the product can be put on the electrode. This is particularly advantageous for complex shapes, since the necessary metal removal can take place at once, rather than requiring many different motions as would be the case with more conventional cutting tools. Both electrochemical and electrical discharge machining are useful in situations where a fine tolerance is required, and they are also useful in applications which would be uneconomical or very dif ficult for conventional machining processes. Grinding operations have benefited from the substitution of the cubic boron nitride grinding wheel for the aluminum oxide wheel. These wheels are very good for grinding heat treated steel. They cut cleaner, run cooler, and last longer, thus reducing downtime. In the production of drill bits, the substitution of grinding for milling, where feasible, has speeded the production process because grinding can be done faster. Evolutionary improvements in conventional machines have aided productivity growth. These improvements include in creased power and faster operating speeds and reductions in setup time and downtime. The capacity of some machines has been increased. Improvements in some milling ma chines, for example, permit them to cut more workpieces simultaneously while still maintaining the necessary toler ances. However, the contribution of such improvements has been limited. They have taken place gradually and reflect an improvement in the quality of production machinery rather than any major innovations. The use of automated materials handling systems, where feasible, has boosted productivity. Productivity has also benefited where the layout of production machinery has been improved to speed the workflow. Mechanical equipment which moves production pieces through the different stages of the heat treatment process— preheating, heating, and quenching— has improved efficiency in this operation. Outlook for productivity Productivity should continue to benefit from a trend to ward more direct computer control of production machinery. The increasing capability of computers, combined with their declining cost, is making their use for production tasks increasingly affordable. The development of microproces sors, which provide the necessary computer capabilities in a more compact and affordable package, has been an im portant step in this regard. As computer control of produc tion machinery becomes more widespread, productivity should increase. The integration of computers and machine tools offers the possibility of substantial productivity gains.6 The continued development and adoption of robot devices ap pears likely and should further reduce the labor requirements involved in the manufacturing process. Much of the tech nology for a more automated production operation already exists and may be increasingly adopted in the future.7 Ev olutionary improvements in production machinery should also continue to take place and enhance productivity growth. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufactur ing ( c a d - c a m ) systems are already popular in some in dustries, and should gain increasing acceptance in the machine tool accessories industry as they continue to become cheaper and easier to use. This technology enables designers and engineers to improve their productivity by automating the mechanical aspects of design.8 Engineers can create and alter designs electronically. These systems will reduce de sign time and also encourage experimentation since some computer programs can analyze designs to see how they respond to changes in certain variables.9 Some producers have been shifting their emphasis from the consumer end to the industrial end of the market, where they can often compete more effectively with foreign pro ducers. Many of these industrial products may involve shorter production runs. Flexible manufacturing systems, which in tegrate numerically controlled machine tools, computer aided design, and automated materials handling systems, are ex pected to be adopted in an effort to keep unit production costs down where small volume production is involved. The high cost of such systems is a barrier to their adoption but changing circumstances, for example, increasing competi tion from foreign producers, make their adoption a real possibility.10 Q ■FOOTNOTES 1 The machine tool accessories industry is composed of establishments 2U.S. Industrial Outlook (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1984), primarily engaged in manufacturing cutting tools, machinist’s precision p. 20 -9 . measuring tools, and attachments and accessories for machine tools and 3See Lloyd T. O’Carroll, “ Technology and Manpower in Nonelectrical for other metalworking machinery. The industry is designated as sic 3545 Machinery,” Monthly Labor Review, June 1971, pp. 58. in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972. All average annual 4U.S. Industrial Outlook, pp. 20 -6 , 20-7. rates of change are based on the linear least squares trends of the logarithms s O’Carroll, “ Technology and Manpower,” pp. 58-60. of the index numbers. Extension of the indexes will appear in the annual 6 See Sari Horwitz, “ Chalk Embarks on Venture With Computerized BLS Bulletin, Productivity Measures for Selected Industries. Tools,” Washington Business, Aug. 20, 1984, p. 27. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 31 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Productivity in Machine Tool Accessories Industry 7Gene Bylinsky, “ The Race to the Automatic Factory,” F ortune, Feb. 21, 1983, pp. 52-60. 8See “ IBM’s Grand Design to Become a Force in the Factory,” B usiness W eek, May 7, 1984, pp. 142 C, F, and J. APPENDIX: Measurement techniques and limitations Indexes of output per employee-hour measure changes in the relation between the output of an industry and employeehours expended on that output. An index of output per employee-hour is derived by dividing an index of output by an index of industry employee-hours. The preferred output index for manufacturing industries would be obtained from data on quantities of the various goods produced by the industry, each weighted (multiplied) by the employee-hours required to produce one unit of each good in some specified base period. Thus, those goods which require more labor time to produce are given more impor tance in the index. In the absence of adequate physical quantity data, the output index for this industry was constructed by a deflated value technique. The value of shipments of the various product classes was adjusted for price changes by appro priate Producer Price Indexes and Industry Sector Price 32 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 9 See Bob Davis, “ Computers Speed the Design of More Workaday Products,” The W all S tre e t Jou rn al, Jan. 18, 1985, p. 25. 10Bylinsky, “ The Race,” pp. 52-60. See also U .S . Industrial O utlook (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1983), p. 20-5 and 1984, p. 20-5. Indexes to derive the real output measures. These, in turn, were combined with employee-hour weights to derive the overall output measure. These procedures result in a final output index that is conceptually close to the preferred output measure. Employment and employee-hour indexes were derived from b l s data. Employees and employee-hours are each considered homogeneous and additive, and thus do not re flect changes in the qualitative aspects of labor such as skill and experience. The indexes of output per employee hour do not mea sure any specific contributions, such as that of labor or capital. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of factors such as changes in technology, capital investment, capacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and effort of the work force, managerial ability, and labor-management relations. Conference Papers The following excerpts, closely related to the work of are adapted from papers presented at the Thirty-Sev enth Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association, December 1984, in Dallas. The full text of the papers appears in the copyrighted irra publication, Proceedings o f the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meetings, available from ir r a , University of Wisconsin, Soicial Science Building, Madison, wi 53706. bls, Gaps in monitoring wages and industrial relations D aniel J. B. M itchell In recent years, academic researchers and other users of Bureau of Labor Statistics’ data on wages and industrial relations have become increasingly concerned about the fu ture availability of such information. The Industrial Rela tions Center Directors— an informal group of more than 60 university research programs— protested impending budget cutbacks at bls in 1982.1 Although the worst of the budget problems that befell bls are past, issues about priorities still remain. Influence of macro-economics Following World War II, macro-economic policy came into ascendency. Policy makers needed aggregate indicators of unemployment, productivity, labor costs, and inflation. bls was able to accommodate these needs, while also ex panding its offerings of traditional wage and industrial re lations data. In retrospect, the late 1970’s were a golden age in which the two needs— macro and micro— both re ceived adequate funding. But when the budget pressures of the early 1980’s developed, a “ revealed preference” for the macro side became apparent. The traditional price series were protected, a program of import and export price in dexes was expanded, and productivity measures were re fined. Those wage and industrial relations data which were Daniel J.B. Mitchell is a professor, Graduate School of Management, and is the Director of the Institute of Industrial Relations, University of Cal ifornia, Los Angeles. The title of his full ir r a paper is “ Monitoring Wages and Industrial Relations: The b ls at 100 Years.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis macro-oriented were preserved and expanded, but micro level indicators were cut back or eliminated. The macro-policy influence is clearly illustrated by the development of the Employment Cost Index (eci) in the mid-1970’s. Through the 1960’s, hourly and weekly earn ings data from the establishment survey were the prime measure of wage costs available from b l s . These data cov ered only production and nonsupervisory workers and omit ted fringe benefits. They were affected by shifts of employment between industries and occupations and by changes in the mix of overtime and regular hours. For econometricians interested in aggregate wage-change equations, these defi ciencies were unfortunate. One solution was to use the more comprehensive measure of hourly compensation which included all occupations and fringe benefits. But this index, too, suffered from employ ment shift and overtime effects. Initially, the bls offered its hourly earnings index (hei) as a partial solution. The hei controlled for interindustry shift and overtime effects in manufacturing. But the more-refined Employment Cost In dex ( eci) paints a different picture of wage trends than any of its predecessors. The total compensation eci shows a lower peak wage inflation rate in 1980 than the more volatile compensation per hour index and a higher peak than the indexes which omit fringes. It also shows a higher rate of wage inflation by 1983 (after the economic slump had taken its toll) than the alternative indexes. With the addition of public-sector data in 1982, the eci is the best macro indicator of wage change available. Series abandoned Prior to the eci , the only time series available with a union/nonunion cut was a series on wage developments in manufacturing (w dm ). But this series was seriously flawed. In the nonunion sector, the omission of “ merit” pay ad justments was known to bias its estimate of wage inflation downward. But it also apparently underestimated union wage increases. Because the series covered adjustments in small union units as well as the “ major” (1,000 workers or more) agreements, it created the impression that “ minor” union agreements were not keeping up with their major counter parts. After the eci became available, this impression was contradicted. MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Conference Papers Given its inaccuracies, it is not surprising that b l s aban doned the wage development series after 1978. But the series did offer information on the dispersion of wage decisions at the micro level not available from the e c i . For the non union sector and smaller union bargaining units, lack of dispersion information is an important gap in monitoring wage developments. The abandonment of the wage development series was based on its deficiencies rather than on budgetary consid erations. But other wage series, particularly in the union sector, were dropped because of the budget crunch. And it could not be said for these that superior alternatives had become available. For example, the now-abandoned series on union wage-rate changes in construction can be compared with the still-available series on effective wage adjustments in “ major” construction union agreements. During the latter half of the 1970’s, construction wage settlements went through a period of comparative moderation after two earlier wage explosions. A comparison of the two series indicates that the wage moderation was more dramatic in the agreements covering relatively small numbers of workers. Construction has been a center of concession bargaining in the 1980’s, but now it is impossible to make such comparisons with b l s data.2 Also lost during the crunch was the wage chronology series. It provided useful information on wages and other conditions in selected union-employer settlements. As econ ometricians became more interested in the micro side of wage decisions, the chronologies were used to provide in sights not available from aggregate Phillips curves. Without the chronologies, researchers must use the original contracts (not always easy to obtain retroactively) or other less-de tailed sources such as Current Wage Developments. Re search efforts— in short— have been and will be impeded. As of 1980, almost 8 of 10 private-sector wage earners were not in unions. Thus, if any criticism could be leveled at the wage chronology series, it would be for the neglect of nonunion companies. Research interest in the personnel practices of large, nonunion firms grew in the 1970’s. Thus, a widening of the chronologies to include such employers— rather than their abandonment— was indicated. gies— cannot be retrieved retroactively. Using the Current Population Survey ( c p s ) as a substitute source is not sat isfactory. c p s estimates of individuals not at work, or forced to work part time, due to an industrial dispute, fell well below the prior work stoppage survey’s estimates. More over, the c p s sample is too thin to provide industrial detail and contains no information on the issue of the dispute or the other information categories previously collected. Also with the budget crunch, b l s dropped its union mem bership survey. The Bureau first published union directories in the 1920’s, and during the post-World War II period, substantial statistical detail on union membership was added. Because the data were based on claimed membership, their accuracy was questioned. In 1980, for example, the c p s estimate of labor organization membership was 20.1 million compared with a claimed membership of 23.9 million. How ever, the claimed membership data provided the only tab ulation of membership by organization. In addition, no c p s data on union membership have been published since the May 1980 survey. Fortunately, the Bu reau of National Affairs has maintained part of the directory, but statistical detail has been lost.3 Ironically, this loss of information came at a time when union membership fell dramatically, b l s ’ own estimates of the number of workers under major private union agreements fell from 9.3 million in 1979 to 7.9 million in 1983. Thus, at a critical period for the collective bargaining sector, an important data source was dropped. D --------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1Discussions of the ir r a Executive Board are reported in the P ro ceed in g s of December 1981 and 1982. The Board considered a resolution urging continued statistical service in industrial relations at b ls and other agencies. Although the Board voted to approve the resolution by 11 to 3, no official action was taken due to opposition by management members. The Industrial Relations Center Directors’ letter appears in the May 1982 ir r a N e w sle tte r. 2Related specialized wage series in other industries were also eliminated. 3Courtney D. Gifford, ed., D ire c to ry o f U .S . L a b o r O rg a n iza tio n s, 1984-85 edition (Washington, The Bureau of National Affairs, 1984). Another directory has been advertised by Industrial Relations Data and Information Services but was not available at the time this paper was prepared. (After this paper was given, b ls released cps-based estimates of union membership for 1983-84.) Further curtailments Collection of data on strikes dates back to the late 19th century. Regular (annual) surveys of such information began in the World War I period. The data gathered were not limited to aggregate tabulations. Detailed tables were avail able by industry, issue of the dispute, means of settlement, and so on. In 1982, however, reporting was cut back to disputes involving 1,000 workers or more and detailed anal yses were eliminated. Limiting coverage to disputes in volving 1,000 workers or more is in keeping with the macro emphasis. Abandonment of comprehensive strike surveys has caused a loss of information which— unlike the wage chronolo 34 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Innovative approach to plant closings: the UAW-Ford experience at San Jose G ary B . H a nsen A systematic approach to plant closings and worker retrain ing was developed by the Ford Motor Co. and the United Gary B. Hansen is professor of economics and director, Business and Economic Development Services, Utah State University. The title of his full ir r a paper is “ An Innovative Approach to a Plant Closing: The u a w Ford Retraining and Job Assistance Program at the San Jose Assembly Plant.’’ Auto Workers union ( u a w ) in the fall of 1982, when Ford announced the impending shutdown of its San Jose assembly plant. This joint labor-management initiative provided as sistance to dislocated workers in the form of orientation sessions, assessment and testing, basic education, voca tional exploration courses, in-plant seminars, targeted vo cational retraining, prepaid tuition assistance, on-the-job training, job search training and placement, and preferential placement. The decision to close the San Jose assembly plant was announced on November 18, 1982. Company officials be lieved it would be unfair to employees to hold out hope for jobs in the future. They promised San Jose workers sub stantial termination benefits and help with finding new jobs. When possible, Ford would relocate workers to other com pany plants. The date of the official closing of the plant was set for 6 months later, May 20, 1983. When the plant closing was announced, the eight-member local Employee Development and Training Program Com mittee, recently created under the provisions of the uawFord 1982 national agreement, moved into action. Jointly chaired by the plant’s industrial relations manager and the u a w local 560 bargaining chairman, the committee worked closely with a representative of the California Economic Adjustment Team, a statewide “ rapid response” unit cre ated by the governor in March 1981 to coordinate the re sponses of State agencies to plant closings. Together, the State’s Economic Adjustment Team and the plant’s Em ployee Development and Training Committee convened a community task force. Within a week, plans were under way to mobilize the necessary resources to provide services to San Jose workers. The local Employee Development and Training Program Committee and Ford management established an Employ ment and Retraining Center in the plant 4 days after the announcement of the plant closing. Two supervisors and two hourly paid union members were assigned to serve as training coordinators and respond to the needs of the work ers. Ford paid the salaries and wages of the Employee De velopment Training Program Committee members and the Employment and Retraining Center employees. The com pany also agreed to provide space at the plant to house other public agencies, such as the California Employment De velopment Department (which provided job service coun seling) and Milpitas Adult Education. The delivery of services to the workers began immediately, and some services con tinued for more than a year after the plant was shut down. In the 4 weeks following the November 1982 plant shut down announcement, procedures were established and ser vices organized under the direction of the local Employee Development Training Program Committee with the assis tance of the California Employment Development Depart ment and other agencies. In addition to providing four full time training coordinators, the Committee organized and coordinated a variety of programmatic responses. Most of https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis the services were delivered onsite during and after work hours. Orientation and benefits. Systematic orientation meetings were held to inform workers what was happening, what services were available, what benefits they could expect to receive, and what procedures were necessary to participate in various programs. In addition, Ford prepared and dis tributed “ personalized” information for each worker about what his or her benefit situation would be at the time of shutdown. Most of the workers were eligible for 52 to 104 weeks of supplemental unemployment benefits. They also received continuation of company-paid health insurance for up to 25 months, and nearly all were eligible for either immediate retirement or subsequent vested pension benefits upon reach ing age 55 or 62. Assessment and testing. All workers who wished to par ticipate in remedial education courses and targeted voca tional retraining programs were required to undergo testing to assess their education and retraining needs. California Employment Development Department counselors ex plained the test results and channeled workers into adult basic education, vocational training, or job search, as ap propriate. During the next 12 months, more than 1,600 Ford workers took the tests and 2,000 had a skills assessment and employability plan prepared by the Employment De velopment Department counselors. Adult basic education. The Milpitas Adult Education of fice provided courses in basic math, reading, english as a second language, and general education development ( g e d ) classes. The classes were taught in the plant after work. The first round of classes lasted 3 weeks, but due to their popularity, five additional sections were offered, each last ing 12 weeks. Several hundred workers participated in each section, with a total attendance of more than 900, repre senting 531 individuals, g e d courses were taken by 183 workers, who subsequently passed the g e d examination. Vocational exploration courses. Beginning in January 1983, courses lasting from 2 days to 2 weeks were taught in-plant by experienced Ford personnel during periods of assembly line downtime to help workers begin thinking about training and decide if they were seriously interested in learning a particular trade. The courses included personal computers, welding, statistical quality control, auto mechanics, uphol stery, programmable logic control, forklift operation, metal repair, and basic electricity. If workers were interested in pursuing one of these trades, they could enter formal vo cational training courses. More than 2,100 workers enrolled for the vocational exploration courses conducted by plant personnel from January to July 1983. Seminars and programs. A variety of other in-plant sem inars was offered by outside providers from January to June 35 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Conference Papers 1983. Some of these had a vocational orientation— small business, real estate, armed security guard— and others were designed to meet personal needs— financial counseling and a loan seminar. These seminars were attended by 691 work ers. Targeted vocational retraining. Area education and tech nical training institutions were invited to submit proposals for classroom targeted vocational retraining courses. The 140 proposals received were evaluated and considered against criteria related to the availability of job openings in demand occupations. Those which met the criteria and elicited suf ficient interest among the workers were offered. The Cali fornia Employment Development Department staff approved the courses and the applicants’ eligibility for unemployment insurance, while the plant’s Employment Retraining Center staff helped enroll workers and monitor their progress. Most targeted vocational retraining contracts were performancebased— specifying that the course provider must place a substantial percentage of the workers in jobs in order to receive payment. More than 500 workers enrolled in over 30 targeted vo cational retraining courses, including microwave technician training, machine tool technology, auto service technician, computer repair, welding, machinist, plant maintenance me chanic, computer-aided design drafting, electronic techni cian, heating and air conditioning, landscaping, and semiconductor mask design. Funds to pay for these courses were provided by the UAW-Ford National Development and Training Center of the “ Nickel Fund’’ (as outlined in the parties’ 1982 agreement), Job Training Partnership Act Title III, Trade Adjustment Act, and the California Employment and Training Panel. Prepaid tuition assistance. A program set up by the u a w and Ford under the 1982 national agreement and called the National Vocational Retraining Assistance Plan provided prepaid tuition assistance for certain laid-off employees. It covered tuition and fees up to $1,000 a year at an approved educational institution and, depending on seniority, up to 4 years for self-selected education and training. Nearly 200 workers took advantage of this program. On-the-job training program. Through the persistent and coordinated efforts of the company’s Employee Develop ment and Training Program committee and its political al lies, a $638,000 grant was obtained from the California Employment and Training Panel to fund an on-the-job train ing program for 360 workers. The Panel was created by the California legislature to divert 0.1 percent of unemployment insurance funds from positive-reserve employers (approxi mately $55 million per year) for retraining purposes over a 4-year period. All training provided by these funds is di rected toward specific jobs, and there must be a commitment by the employer to hire the trainees. Payment is made to the trainer or employer only if the trainees go to work. 36 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis At San Jose, the funds were used to hire a team of job developers; determine skill shortages and demand occupa tions; develop job sites and training opportunities among demand employers; identify, select, and place Ford workers in the on-the-job training slots; and monitor the progress of the trainees in their new jobs. The job developers were experienced Ford production personnel who were able to talk the same language as the laid-off workers, understand the needs of employers, and sell the virtues of the workers to prospective employers. More than 360 Ford workers were placed in training in the first 6 months. Job search training and job placement. Two-day job search training workshops were conducted by California Employ ment Development Department staff for workers who were ready to begin the search for new jobs. As the plant closing date approached, additional workshops were offered. A total of 438 employees went through a job search skills workshop. The plant’s Employee Development and Training Pro gram Committee started job development and placement efforts early, and did not rely wholly on the job services offered by the California Employment Development De partment. A staff member was assigned to contact area em ployers, tell them about the skills possessed by Ford workers, and invite them to the plant to see the skills being used. As the closure drew near, these activities were formalized and an expanded job placement center was opened. In addition, a job club, complete with phone banks, was organized. Preferential placement. Under the 1982 national agree ment with the u a w , Ford allows qualified employees to move to other locations where openings are available. Ford assists them in making the transfer and allows them to return to San Jose after a trial period without losing their benefits. A total of 117 San Jose hourly workers elected to relocate to other Ford plants nationwide. Results of the program A number of very positive outcomes were achieved by the UAW-Ford program at San Jose. The workers’ high participation rates in assessment and testing, basic education and remedial training, targeted vocational retraining, onthe-job training, and job search training all suggest a much higher “ take-up rate” than normally occurs in such pro grams. The 70-percent workers’ participation rate in testing and assessment and the 30-percent participation rate in ed ucation and training courses were much higher than those reached in other plant closures, according to available data. In fact, the 25-percent participation rate in adult basic ed ucation programs is unique. Equally significant is the low rate of dropouts in the targeted vocational retraining pro grams— fewer than 10 percent— indicating good prepara tion and high motivation of the students. There was also a lower incidence of social pathologies (drug abuse, alcohol abuse, child and spouse abuse, and suicides) than in similar shutdowns. Job placement, the ultimate objective of programs of this kind, appears to be quite high. Although final statistics are not yet in, more than 80 percent of the employees who took training courses are now employed. To date, more than 83 percent of those who reentered the labor market have secured employment, many in skilled jobs paying wages approach ing their Ford earnings. Twenty-one percent of the San Jose work force are retired or are expected to retire. Considering the high levels of available Ford benefits— which may have delayed the need for reentry into the labor market for some workers— the reemployment rates are impressive. Airline union concessions in the wake of deregulation Peter C appelli and T im o t h y H . H a r r is While most commentators would agree that deregulation has had an important influence on airline industrial relations, close inspection of developments in the industry suggests that the connection between deregulation and recent union concession agreements may not be obvious. The initial changes in the airline industry created by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 seem to have increased union bargaining power. The industry’s Mutual Aid Pact was banned, and any new strike fund now must meet a much more restrictive set of guidelines. In addition, the end of the Civil Aeronautics Board’s control over routes and schedules means that there is now no guarantee that any of a carrier’s business will survive a strike; competitors can come into one’s markets during a strike and lure those passengers away.1 At smaller carriers, however, the surfeit of pilots and other skilled personnel during the recession made it possible for carriers to threaten to break strikes by hiring replacements, possibly shifting some bargaining power back to management.2 The carriers’ increased vulnerability to strikes and the threat they may present to employment has raised the stakes associated with industrial action, and both sides are now extremely reluctant to engage in it. Indeed, one of the main developments in industrial relations since deregulation has been a very sharp drop in strike activity. The most recent data suggest that industrial action is at the lowest level in 16 years;3 a remarkable statistic given that the industry in general and labor relations in particular are going through the most traumatic changes in their history. Of course, the most important change created by dere gulation is that carriers are now free to compete for markets on the basis of fares and schedules. By itself, competition Peter Cappelli is assistant professor and Timothy H. Harris is a graduate student at the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Their full ir r a paper is entitled “ Airline Industrial Relations in Transition.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis should not necessarily lead to pressures for concessions; after all, the highest union wages and most stable industrial relations have historically been in industries with compet itive product markets, some of which were extremely com petitive. John R. Commons argued in 1909 that in order for unions to raise wages above the market level, they must “ take wages out of competition” by enforcing uniform con tracts across the entire product market so that no competitor will have a labor cost advantage that can be turned into a competitive price advantage.4 Where the unions were able to do this, wages were protected no matter how competitive the product markets were. In air transport, the unions have historically covered virtually the entire product market. The major and national carriers, all of which are at least partially unionized, still fly more than 90 percent of all revenue passenger miles; the remainder goes to intrastate and “ up start” carriers, many of which are at least partially union ized. The nonunion share of the air transport market is therefore roughly 5 to 7 percent, and these airlines often do not compete with the trunk carriers in the same markets.5 It would seem reasonable, therefore, to conclude about deregulation as did Hendricks, Feuille, and Szerszen that “ the industry and unionization characteristics that devel oped over 40 years of regulation have created a bargaining environment that should not change substantially in the fu ture.” 6 If unions still cover the product market, then why the pressure for union concessions? No uniform contracts Despite their coverage of the product market, unions never enforced uniform contracts across the product market and therefore never took wages out of competition through col lective bargaining. Civil Aeronautics Board restrictions on routes and fares served that purpose, however, by preventing labor cost advantages from being translated into lower fares and a competitive advantage. Because of this Civil Aero nautics Board protection, there was no pressure forcing the evolution of industrywide bargaining of the sort that had occurred in manufacturing. The unions, therefore, directed their efforts toward other goals— meeting the varying needs of members at the different carriers. They did this by giving the locals almost complete autonomy, especially in collec tive bargaining. As a result, the bargaining structure in airlines has always been single craft-single employer. This type of bargaining structure was encouraged by the Railway Labor Act’s requirement that representation be by craft, leading to a plethora of unions in the industry. Edward B. Shils points out that significant industrial disputes in the industry generally involved only one union, and disputes across carriers were virtually nonexistent.7 This bargaining structure remains despite the creation of a special coordi nating committee of air transport unions within the a f l c io . As soon as the Civil Aeronautics Board regulations ended and fares became competitive, wages also came under com37 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Conference Papers petition. Because bargaining is carrier-specific, there is no mechanism to prevent the different local unions from un dercutting each other’s labor costs. Financially vulnerable carriers were able to secure concessions and lower labor costs from locals hoping to reduce expected employment losses; their competitors were then placed at a cost disad vantage (one carrier estimated that 78 percent of its con trollable costs were labor related), so they also demanded concessions.8 Soon, the industry’s wage structure came apart.9 Nevertheless, there are many ways to reduce labor costs, and the contract concessions secured by the carriers span a variety of areas in addition to wage cuts and freezes. The most important concessions in the industry, especially for flight crews and attendants, concern schedules. About 45 percent of contract concessions in 1981-84 dealt with sched uling issues. In contrast to other industries, there have been fewer efforts to broaden job classifications in airlines, pre sumably because of the resistance generated from rivalries between craft unions. For many carriers, the issue has been whether contract concessions can achieve the permanent restructuring of labor costs necessary to meet growing competition from nonunion carriers which are currently hiring new employees at roughly half the pay of their more senior colleagues at the trunk carriers. The solution has been to introduce two-tier or “ b ” wage scales which provide lower pay for new hires. Ob viously, two-tier rates reduce average labor costs only as fast as the carrier can hire new workers— expanding the work force or at least generating turnover. For the unions, two-tier scales represent a concession that costs the current membership nothing and which creates incentives to hire new workers. (The existence of two-tier scales raises po tential problems for union governance, however.) Variations by work group Perhaps the most interesting issue in airline industrial relations is the distribution of contract changes by work group. How interested a work group is in making conces sions depends not only on the probability that concessions will save jobs but also on the value of those jobs— how do they compare to alternatives elsewhere? In addition, the ability of local unions to grant concessions may depend on their autonomy from the interests of the international and on the extent of competition from other unions for their members. As Arthur M. Ross argues, unions may feel com pelled to take a harder line in bargaining when they face competition from other unions.10 Together, these arguments provide a good explanation of the pattern of contract conces sions outlined below. Pilots. Taken as a group, pilots have made more conces sions than all other work groups combined. In almost every case, they have been the first group to make concessions and have given up the most. The reason for this seems clearly to be because pilots have the most to lose from 38 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis layoffs. First, alternative employment with other carriers would result in a sharp pay cut. Pilots who switch carriers lose their seniority and move to the bottom of the seniority pay scale at their new carrier. During the most recent reces sion, as many as 5,000 pilots were laid off, suggesting that the ability to move to a new carrier was remote. Second, there are almost no employment prospects outside of the airline industry that would make use of their skills. With respect to union characteristics, many argue that pilots iden tify with management and have more understanding of their problems than do other work groups. In addition, the tre mendous autonomy that the locals have in bargaining im plies that they are free from pressure to maintain some industry pattern. Further, the fact that the Air Line Pilots Association faces almost no competition from other unions seeking to represent pilots makes it easier to take sometimes unpopular decisions such as granting concessions. Flight attendants. The situation facing flight attendants is, perhaps surprisingly, quite different from that of pilots. While there is no market outside of air transport for these specific skills, flight attendants have less to lose from layoffs than pilots because their wages are considerably less and sen iority-based pay scales are less steep, making it easier to move to a different carrier.11 Perhaps most importantly, flight attendants have historically had less attachment to their jobs than pilots; if one is expecting to move to a different job, there is less interest in making sacrifices to save the current one. The characteristics of flight attendant unions also differ from the pilots. There are as many as 11 unions representing flight attendants, and the rivalry among them is intense. Mark L. Kahn noted, for example, that between 1976 and 1979, flight attendants at six carriers changed their representation.12 As a result, the flight attendant unions have taken much tougher lines in bargaining across the carriers and have agreed to fewer, less significant concessions (18 percent of the total) than have the pilots. Mechanics. Mechanics have been the work group the least inclined to agree to concessions. Only 11 percent of all concessions in the industry were granted by mechanics, and these were typically far less significant changes than for other groups. From the employers’ point of view, the labor cost differential associated with mechanics is not great rel ative to the nonunion competition because the mechanical work for the latter is typically done under contract by the larger unionized carriers. Further, alternative employment is much more available at other carriers and outside air transport (in manufacturing, for example) at wages com parable to those paid by the trunk carriers. Perhaps most importantly, the structure of the International Association of Machinists which represents the vast majority of airline mechanics works to limit concessions.13 The international has the ability to nullify local agreements and has used that power to prevent concessions at individual carriers.14 The International Association of Machinists has a strong incen tive to avoid concessions altogether in order to prevent them from spreading to its negotiations outside of air transport where similar settlement patterns are followed. In many cases unions are able to secure improvements in some aspects of employment relations in return for granting concessions. These quid pro quos typically are secured in areas which do not raise current labor costs, often expanding negotiations into new areas outside of the current contract. Whether unions are able to secure these improvements de pends on how badly management needs union cooperation; in short, whether the unions have bargaining power.15 As argued above, the airline unions still have considerable bar gaining power, and it is therefore not surprising to find that they have secured an important array of improvements. The pressures generated by carrier-specific bargaining in competitive product markets tie the interests and prospects of union members to the performance of the carrier, and the quid pro quos strengthen that relationship. In addition to the fact that employment prospects are closely linked to carrier per formance, participation in corporate decisionmaking helps cre ate commitment on the part of the work force to the goals of the airline; profit-sharing, stock ownership, and other arrange ments provide financial incentives to pursue those goals. To gether, these arrangements will further the attachment of airline employees to their employers, perhaps making it more difficult for their unions to achieve the industry-wide structure that manufacturing unions have historically used to counter wage cutting pressures. □ ------- FOOTNOTES------Acknowledgment: Thanks to Jim Conway and Jerry Glass of the Airline Industrial Relations Conference (AiRCon) for providing the contract data analyzed in this study. 'For example, United’s markets were apparently so severely damaged by its 58-day machinist strike in 1979 that it initiated half-fare coupons to try and win some of its business back; this move sparked the industry’s first major fare war which had disasterous consequences for all participants. See “ Fare Wars,” Forbes, Sept. 1, 1981, p. 36. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2Continental replaced some striking mechanics and pilots in 1983 and unilaterally imposed lower pay rates as part of its bankruptcy reorganization plan. Mark L. Kahn notes that Century Airlines took somewhat similar action in 1931. It took advantage of the surplus of pilots and the need to cut costs and prices by forcing its pilots to resign and reapply for their jobs at half pay. This action led to alpa’s first strike. See Mark L. Kahn and Gerald Somers, eds., “ Airlines,” Collective Bargaining: Contem porary American Experience (Madison, wi, Industrial Relations Research Association, 1980). 3Forty-Ninth Annual Report (Washington, National Mediation Board, 1983). 4John R. Commons, “ American Shoemakers, 1648-1895: A Sketch of Industrial Evolution,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1919. 5These calculations are based on statistics on carrier market shares from the Civil Aeronautics Board, 1982. Richard B. Freeman and James L. Medoff’s 1979 estimates suggest that 89 percent of air transport production workers were covered by collective bargaining agreements in 1969-72. Coverage of the product market was virtually complete because the or ganized carriers flew far more flights and typically did not compete with the nonunion carriers, who were concentrated on intrastate routes. 6Wallace Hendricks, Peter Feuille, and Carol Szerszen, “ Regulation, Deregulation and Collective Bargaining in the Airlines,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, October 1980, pp. 67-81. 7Edward B. Shils, “ Union Fragmentation: A Major Cause of Trans portation Labor Crises,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, October 1971, pp. 32-52. 8“ As Continental Takes Bankruptcy Step, Rivals Plan to Move In,” The Wall Street Journal, July 29, 1983. 9The great irony now is that during the early years of the industry, the carriers had pushed for industry-wide bargaining that would have taken wages out of competition but were rebuffed in these efforts by the unions. Brief experiments in multicarrier bargaining with the International Asso ciation of Machinists in the 1960’s were abandoned. See Mark Kahn, “ Wage Determination for Airline Pilots,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, April 1953, pp. 317-36; and Mark L. Kahn “ Airlines.” 10Arthur M. Ross, Trade Union Wage Policy, (Berkeley, ca , Uni versity of California Press, 1948). 11 “ Competition and the Airlines: An Evaluation of Deregulation” (Washington, Civil Aeronautics Board, December 1982). 12Mark L. Kahn, “ Airlines.” 13For example, the International Association of Machinists took one of its locals to court recently in an effort to prevent a concession agreement from being approved at Branifif. See “ Machinists’ Concessions at Branifif Held Binding,” Daily Labor Report, Sept. 11, 1984, p. 1. 14“ Airline Wages are Set for a Long Slide,” Business Week, Apr. 9, 1984, p. 127. 15Peter Cappelli, “ Union Gains Under Concession Bargaining,’’ Pro ceedings of the Industrial Relations Research Association 36th Annual Meeting (Madison, wi, Industrial Relations Research Association, 1984), pp. 297-305. 39 Productivity Reports Productivity and costs in 1984 L aw rence J. F ulco The strongest productivity advances in some years were registered by major Bureau of Labor Statistics measures during 1984.1 Output per hour of all persons— labor pro ductivity— reflected the continuation of the economic ex pansion that began during the first quarter of 1983. Although output, hours, and employment grew strongly in major sec tors, continued moderation in the advance of hourly com pensation contributed to slow growth of unit labor costs. Prices for the goods and services which make up the output of these sectors reflected this slow growth, as well as damp ened rates of increase in other costs and in unit profits. The expansion has been predictably uneven, with employment advancing fastest in goods-producing industries during the last year. The following tabulation shows the changes during 1984 in productivity and related measures. Additional information appears in tables 29-32 of the Current Labor Statistics sec tion of this issue. Sector Business .......................... Nonfarm business ....... Manufacturing................. Durable........................ Nondurable ................. Nonfinancial corporations Productivity ... 3.2 ... 2.7 ... 3.5 ... 4.8 ... 1.5 ... 2.3 Output Hours 8.8 8.5 10.5 14.4 4.9 9.0 5.4 5.7 6.7 9.1 3.3 6.6 Business sector Business, the most comprehensive sector for which bls prepares quarterly productivity measures, accounted for 79 percent of gross national product in 1984.2 Annual changes in productivity are generally thought to reflect two com ponents: short-run effects of the business cycle and other transitory influences, and long-run, or secular, effects of shifts in the underlying composition of output, the labor force, and the stage of economic development. Productivity Lawrence J. Fulco is a supervisory economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 40 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis growth usually accelerates in the recovery-expansion phase of the business cycle, and 1984 encompassed the fifth through eighth quarters of the current expansion. Table 1 presents the annual rates of growth in productivity and related measures during the recovery periods that fol lowed the troughs of postwar business cycles. This table shows that productivity advances over the 2-year recoveryexpansion from the 1982 business cycle trough have been lower than average. However, the gains in output, hours, and employment have been very high by historical stan dards. In addition, the rate of growth of compensation per hour has been a good deal slower than has been typical of like recovery periods, and has contributed to much smaller increases in unit labor costs. In fact, unit labor costs in manufacturing have actually declined in the current recov ery. The 1984 productivity gains probably reflected the cy clical rebound. However, it is possible that some of these gains reflect a movement back to the higher secular growth rate in productivity noted before 1973. Whether this is so will not be evident until data for additional years can be analyzed. Chart 1 shows the relationship between produc tivity, hourly compensation, and unit labor costs since 1973. Productivity increased 3.2 percent in the business sector in 1984, as output increased 8.8 percent and hours rose 5.4 percent. The increase in productivity was the largest since 1976 and the gain in hours— which reflects changes in both employment and average weekly hours— was the largest ever recorded for that series. Most of these gains took place in the first two quarters; productivity, output, and hours all grew more slowly during the second half of the year. Output increased at an 11.3percent annual rate during the first two quarters but grew at only a 3.4-percent rate during the remaining quarters. The rate of increase in hours and productivity similarly slowed during the last half of 1984. Because very high growth rates such as those experienced during the first half of the year are not likely to be sustainable for an extended period, growth in future quarters may not be as vigorous. Gains in hourly compensation during the current recovery have been smaller than the recent trend, and smaller than the gains observed during similar recovery-expansion pe riods. These outlays, which include employer expenditures for wages, salaries, supplements, and all other employee benefit plans, posted gains during 1983 and 1984 which were the smallest in nearly two decades. Real hourly com pensation, which is adjusted for changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers ( c p i - u ) , was un changed in 1984. Unit labor costs— compensation per unit of output— re spond to changes in both productivity and hourly compen sation. During 1984, these costs registered their smallest annual increase since 1965. In both 1983 and 1984, prices of the goods and services which comprise the output of the business sector posted the smallest gains since 1967. Business payrolls numbered about 84.3 million positions in 1984, compared with 80.6 million in 1983. Nonfarm business Nonfarm business is nearly as large as the business sector, because farm employment accounts for only 3.5 percent of the business total.4 However, the weather and changes in foreign supplies of and demand for agricultural commodities often lead to wide swings in farm productivity and related measures. By focusing on the nonfarm portion of the busi ness sector, analysts can study data which are unaffected by these external influences, but which are nearly as com prehensive as the business measures. In 1984, nonfarm busi ness productivity increased 2.7 percent, as output grew 8.5 Table 1. Changes in productivity and related measures eight quarters after the trough of postwar recessions [Percent change at compound annual rate] Change over e ig h t posttrough quarters Trough q u arter H ourly com pen sation U nit labor costs 3.0 3.1 2.6 0.7 2.7 2.6 1.9 8.7 4.2 4.6 4.6 6.5 8.1 9.3 2.9 1.4 1.8 0.2 2.4 4.0 6.4 2.5 3.9 6.1 2.1 3.9 0.8 8.3 4.7 4.3 3.9 6.6 7.7 9.5 3.4 2.0 1.9 0.0 2.3 3.9 7.4 2.9 5.9 2.3 4.0 4.1 1.0 9.1 4.7 4.2 3.3 5.6 8.1 8.4 4.1 2.4 0.9 - 2 .7 - 0 .5 2.2 2.8 Produc tivity Output Hours IV .............. I I ................. I I ................. I ................. IV .............. I ................. III1 .............. 5.6 2.8 2.7 4.4 4.0 3.8 2.7 8.8 5.9 5.7 5.2 6.7 6.4 4.5 3.1 3.0 2.9 0.8 2.5 2.5 1.7 Average . . . 1982 IV .............. 3.9 6.5 7.9 2.5 3.1 4.6 1949 1954 1958 1961 1970 1975 1980 IV .............. I I ................. I I ................. I ................. IV .............. I ................. III1 .............. 4.7 2.6 2.3 3.8 4.3 3.7 2.0 9.4 6.2 6.0 5.5 7.0 6.6 3.8 4.5 3.6 3.6 1.6 2.6 2.8 1.8 4.1 3.3 3.2 1.4 2.6 2.9 2.0 Average . . . . 1982 IV .............. 3.6 6.8 3.1 8.0 3.1 4.7 E m ploy m ent Business 1949 1954 1958 1961 1970 1975 1980 N onfarm business M anufacturing 1949 1954 1958 1961 1970 1975 1980 IV .............. I I ................. I I ................. I ................. IV .............. I ................. III1 .............. Average . . . . 1982 IV .............. 4.8 2.3 3.4 6.2 6.2 5.8 5.5 13.8 6.0 8.4 9.7 10.0 9.5 7.9 8.5 3.6 4.9 3.3 3.6 3.4 2.3 4.8 9.6 4.6 3.5 5.8 1.1 3.8 9.8 5.7 4.2 3.4 - 0 .5 'Percent change over four posttrough quarters. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 7.4 2.8 3.9 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.0 Table 2. Hours by industry, fourth-quarter 1982 and fourth-quarter 1984 Hours (b illio n s ) Industry 1 98 2 IV 1 9 8 4 IV Total ................................................... 170.452 185.004 Goods producing ............................................ 52.641 58.680 Farm .......................................................... 6.293 6.537 Mining ........................................................ 2.221 2.260 Construction .............................................. 7.288 8.627 Manufacturing ........................................... 36.839 41.256 Non-goods producing .................................... 117.811 Transportation, communications, and public u tilitie s ......................................... 10.160 T ra d e .......................................................... 33.997 Finance, Insurance, and real estate .............................................. 10.101 Services ..................................................... 32.849 Government enterprises ............................. 30.704 A nnualized rate of growth 1 98 2 IV —1 9 8 4 IV (percent) 4.2 5.6 1.9 0.9 8.8 5.8 126.324 3.6 10.711 37.094 2.7 4.5 10.899 36.236 31.384 3.9 5.0 1.1 percent and hours of all persons engaged in the sector in creased 5.7 percent. As in the more comprehensive business sector, growth was much stronger during the first two quarters. Hourly compensation increased 4.1 percent, and real hourly compensation declined 0.1 percent over the year. Unit labor costs were 1.4 percent higher in 1984 than in 1983. As in the more comprehensive business sector, this gain was mod est by historical standards; the increases in unit labor costs during 1983 and 1984 were the smallest since 1961-65, when gains were less than 0.6 percent each year. Prices of nonfarm output increased 3.1 percent in 1984, compared with a 3.2-percent advance in 1983. These were the smallest increases since 1972. The nonfarm business sector provided 81.3 million jobs in 1984, compared with 77.6 million during the previous year. Manufacturing Productivity increased 3.5 percent in manufacturing in 1984, as output rose 10.5 percent and hours, 6.7 percent. The gains were the largest since the 1950’s. Unlike the more comprehensive business sectors, manufacturing showed vig orous growth in productivity and output through the third quarter of 1984, but in the fourth quarter both measures declined. Hourly compensation increased 3.6 percent, compared with a 3.4-percent rise in 1983. These were the two smallest annual increases in hourly compensation since 1965. Cou pled with the strong productivity gains, the modest increases in hourly compensation held unit labor costs in both years below those recorded in 1982; it was the first period of such decline since 1962-65. Real hourly compensation declined 0.6 percent in 1984. Durable goods manufacturing, which accounts for about 60 percent of all manufacturing employment, tends to be more volatile during periods of economic change. In 1984, output and employee hours in durables industries grew al most three times as fast as in nondurables. Productivity also 41 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Productivity Report increased faster in durable goods manufacturing, and unit labor costs fell more than 1.5 percent. The decline in these costs during 1983 and 1984 were the first such drops since the mid-1960’s. Total manufacturing employment averaged 20 million in 1984, down slightly from the 21.4 million peak in 1979. Nonfinancial corporations Productivity increased 2.3 percent in nonfinancial cor porations in 1984, compared with a 3.3-percent rise during 1983. These concerns, which employ 70 percent of the business work force, include all corporations doing business in the United States with the exception of banks, brokers, and insurance companies. Output and hours grew strongly during 1984, while hourly compensation advanced mod estly. Since 1980, nonfinancial corporations have registered progressively smaller annual increases in hourly compen sation; in 1984, such outlays rose 3.5 percent. Again, the slowing of advances in hourly compensation has been re flected in unit labor costs, which rose 1.1 percent in 1984 and 0.8 percent in 1983. These were the smallest increases since 1961-65. Profits rose 37.3 percent in 1984, and profit per unit of output increased 25.9 percent. Prices rose a modest 3.0 Chart 1. Productivity and related measures in four sectors of the economy, first-quarter 1973 to fourth-quarter 1984 1973 1975 42 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1977 1979 1981 1983 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 250 230 210 190 170 150 130 110 90 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 percent in the nonfinancial corporate sector, reflecting the dampened increases in unit labor costs, nonlabor costs, and profits. This advance and the 3.1-percent rise in 1983 were the smallest price gains for the sector since 1972. There were about 59 million employees of nonfinancial corpora tions in 1984. Increase in hours The rebound from the trough of the recession has been felt in every segment of the economy. Hours of all persons (employment multiplied by average weekly hours) grew at a 4.2-percent annual rate over the eight-quarter period. The most rapid growth occurred in the construction industry, which is part of the goods-producing sector. Hours in these businesses increased at a 5.6-percent annual rate during the recovery, compared with a 3.6-percent rate of growth among non-goods producers. The smallest gains were reported in mining (0.9 percent) and government enterprises (1.1 per cent). Table 2 shows hours by industry for the fourth quar ters of 1982 and 1984, as well as the compound annual rate of growth over the eight-quarter span. ■FOOTNOTES 1Annual changes in this article refer to movements in the average of the four quarterly values from one year to the next. This is not the same as comparing yearend (fourth-quarter) values from year to year. Both annual changes and changes from the same quarter of the preceding year can be found in tables 32 and 34 (respectively) of the Current Labor Statistics section of the R eview . 3Nonfarm business productivity growth averaged 2.0 percent from 1947 to 1981; before 1973, growth averaged 2.5 percent annually, but subse quently fell to only 0.6 percent a year. The slowdown in labor productivity growth has been long studied and discussed; see, for example, Jerome A. Mark and William H. Waldorf, “ Multifactor productivity: a new b ls measure,” M on th ly L a b o r R e view , December 1983, pp. 3-15. 2Business sector output is equal to gross national product, less the restof-the-world sector, general government, output of paid employees of private households and nonprofit institutions, and the statistical discrepancy in computing the national income accounts. Corresponding exclusions are also made in labor input. 4 Employment continued to shift away from agriculture after World War II, and this movement of workers to highly productive industrial jobs contributed to rapid productivity growth. The percentage of business em ployment in farms was 11.8 percent in 1954, 7.8 percent in 1964, 4.6 percent in 1974, and 3.5 percent in 1984. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 43 Research Summaries Hours at work increase relative to hours paid K ent K unze The ratio of hours at work to hours paid in nonagricultural establishments increased slightly in 1983, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics’ survey of hours at work completed for production and nonsupervisory workers. (See table 1.) Output per hour (labor productivity) of all persons in nonfarm businesses increased 3.5 percent during 1983 based on hours paid.1 When this measure is adjusted for the change in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid, it shows an annual increase of 3.1 percent.2 Initiated by bls in 1982, the Hours at Work Study now contains annual and quarterly data for the 1981-83 period. The ratio of hours at work to hours paid measures the time workers are actually on the job site or at the workplace compared with the hours for which they are paid. Paid hours include the paid leave time employees use: this comprises vacation time, sick leave, holidays, and other personal leave. Hours at work include rest periods and coffee breaks. For workers who received, say, 2 weeks of paid vacation, no paid sick leave, and 10 paid holidays the hours at work to hours paid ratio would be .923. The purpose of the survey is to compare differences in the trends and cyclical movements of total hours of labor input based on both an hours at work definition and an hours paid definition. The hours at work definition is more ap propriate for measuring labor input as a factor of production and hence, more appropriate for inclusion in a measure of productivity change. On the one hand, the hours at work definition is often inaccurate if the data are collected based on a survey week (as in the case of the measures from the Current Establishment Statistics (ces ) Survey), because hol idays and other paid leave time may not be evenly distributed over the month. Hours paid measures, on the other hand, which are not as sensitive to the survey week, provide more consistent measures when the data are collected in this man ner. Kent Kunze is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis no oi a a a o Nonagricultural establishments During 1983, the ratio of hours at work to hours paid in nonagricultural establishments increased from .926 to .930 (table 1). This increase reflects two different effects. One is the increase in overall employment (from 68.9 million in 1982 to 69.4 million in 1983) which generally means a larger proportion of junior employees who do not receive as much paid leave time.3 Consequently, the average hours at work as a percent of all hours paid per employee rose. The other effect— what is called a composition change— resulted from employment increasing faster in those indus tries which have higher than average ratios of hours at work to hours paid. From 1982 to 1983 there was a shift from employment in manufacturing to nonmanufacturing. In manufacturing, which has a ratio of .914, employment ac tually decreased in 1983 by about 300,000 workers, while for nonmanufacturing industries, with a ratio of .936, em ployment increased by about 800,000 workers. Table 2 presents the quarterly changes in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid. While these ratios are of interest with respect to productivity measures, quarter-to-quarter changes are highly sensitive to seasonal patterns and therefore require seasonal adjustment. At present, as there are only 3 years of data, it is not possible to compute seasonal factors for the ratios. Manufacturing In manufacturing establishments, the ratio of hours at work to hours paid increased from .909 in 1982 to .914 in 1983. However, the 1981 level was .912; thus, the 1983 level was only slightly higher than the pre-1982 recession level. There was a similar pattern for both durable and nondurable manufacturing establishments. In durable man ufacturing establishments, the ratio was .905 in 1982 and .911 in 1983; it was .907 in 1981. In nondurable manufac turing establishments, the 1983 ratio was .918, compared with .916 in 1982; it was .920 in 1981. The largest absolute increase in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid among manufacturing industries in 1983 oc curred in primary metals, which rose from .879 to .901. The largest absolute decrease was in instruments, which declined from .904 to .886. Of the 29 industry divisions in the survey, 11 experienced decreases in the ratio of hours Table 1. Ratio of hours at work to hours paid for production and nonsupervisory employees, by industry, 1 9 8 1 -8 3 1983 1982-83 change Industry 1981 1982 1981-82 change Nonagricultural business............................................................................................................................. Mining...................................................................................................................................................... Construction............................................................................................................................................ .924 .937 .978 .926 .925 .982 .002 -.0 1 2 .004 .930 .916 .980 .004 -.0 0 9 -.0 0 2 Manufacturing.......................................................................................................................................... Durable................................................................................................................................................. Lumber............................................................................................................................................ Furniture and fixtures...................................................................................................................... Stone, clay, g la s s ........................................................................................................................... Primary m etals................................................................................................................................ Fabricated metals............................................................................................................................. .912 .907 .935 .941 .906 .891 .919 .909 .905 .929 .931 .903 .879 .912 -.0 0 3 -.0 0 2 -.0 0 6 -.0 1 0 -.0 0 3 -.0 1 2 -.0 0 7 .914 .911 .944 .936 .910 .901 .919 .005 .006 .015 .005 .007 .022 .007 Machinery (except electrical).......................................................................................................... Electrical equipment........................................................................................................................ Transportation equipment............................................................................................................... Instruments..................................................................................................................................... Miscellaneous manufacturing.......................................................................................................... .900 .906 .893 .907 .927 .906 .899 .898 .904 .921 .006 -.0 0 7 .005 -.0 0 3 -.0 0 6 .902 .909 .908 .886 .919 -.0 0 4 .010 .010 -.0 1 8 -.0 0 2 Nondurable......................................................................................................................................... Food and kindred products............................................................................................................... Tobacco............................................................................................................................................ Textile m ills ..................................................................................................................................... Apparel............................................................................................................................................ Paper .............................................................................................................................................. .920 .927 .892 .943 .948 .883 .916 .924 .853 .937 .939 .890 -.0 0 4 -.0 0 3 -.0 3 9 -.0 0 6 -.0 0 9 .007 .918 .921 .865 .944 .937 .897 .002 -.0 0 3 .012 .007 -.0 0 2 .007 Printing and publishing.................................................................................................................... Chemical.......................................................................................................................................... Petroleum and coal products.......................................................................................................... Rubber and plastic products............................................................................................................ Leather............................................................................................................................................ .905 .895 .899 .918 .931 .915 .882 .892 .906 .930 .010 -.0 1 3 -.0 0 7 -.0 1 2 -.001 .919 .886 .878 .916 .936 .004 .004 -.0 1 4 .010 .006 Transportation......................................................................................................................................... Communications....................................................................................................................................... Electric, gas, water.................................................................................................................................. Wholesale trade....................................................................................................................................... Retail trade.............................................................................................................................................. Finance, insurance, real esta te ............................................................................................................... Services................................................................................................................................................... .875 ,887 .876 .934 .947 .914 .920 .871 .883 .873 .936 .959 .905 .936 -.0 0 4 -.0 0 4 -.0 0 3 .002 .012 -.0 0 9 .016 .879 .881 .882 .928 .960 .901 .948 .008 -.0 0 2 .009 -.0 0 8 .001 -.0 0 4 .012 Table 2. - Ratio of hours at work to hours paid for production and nonsupervisory workers, by quarter and industry, 1982 and 198 2 198 3 C hange, 1 9 8 2 - 8 3 Industry I II III IV 1 II III IV I II III IV Nonagricultural business............................................................... M in in g ....................................................................................... Construction................................................................................ .941 .947 .989 .930 .919 .990 .908 .904 .981 .921 .923 .981 .944 .933 .983 .934 .905 .982 .914 .911 .976 .927 .913 .979 .003 -.0 1 4 -.0 0 6 .004 -.0 1 4 -.0 0 8 .006 .007 -.0 0 5 .006 -.0 1 0 -.0 0 2 Manufacturing............................................................................. Durable.................................................................................. Lumber............................................................................... Furniture and fixtures.......................................................... Stone, clay, glass............................................................... Primary metals................................................................... Fabricated m etals............................................................... .934 .929 .955 .957 .924 .906 .942 .912 .907 .931 .930 .899 .875 .904 .888 .880 .914 .914 .881 .852 .893 .900 .896 .928 .921 .894 .864 .908 .936 .932 .957 .957 .925 .904 .942 .919 .914 .936 .940 .911 .906 .927 .898 .894 .937 .920 .905 .884 .904 .908 .906 .940 .929 .899 .909 .909 .002 .003 .002 .0 .001 -.0 0 2 .000 .007 .007 .005 .010 .012 .031 .023 .010 .014 .023 .006 .024 .032 .011 .008 .010 .012 .008 .005 .045 .001 Machinery (except electrical).............................................. Electrical equipment............................................................ Transportation equipment................................................... Instruments........................................................................ Miscellaneous manufacturing.............................................. .936 .918 .915 .928 .949 .924 .900 .896 .918 .916 .861 .872 .890 .867 .896 .894 .892 .886 .894 .920 .930 .937 .930 .908 .950 .905 .912 .909 .904 .931 .877 .883 .904 .870 .883 .904 .902 .893 .890 .914 -.0 0 6 .019 .015 -.0 2 0 .001 -.0 1 9 .012 .013 -.0 1 4 .015 .016 .011 .014 .003 -.0 1 3 .010 .010 .007 -.0 0 4 -.0 0 6 Nondurable............................................................................. Food and kindred products................................................ Tobacco ............................................................................. Textile m ills........................................................................ Apparel............................................................................... Paper.................................................................................. .941 .940 .933 .967 .970 .921 .920 .927 .832 .936 .956 .892 .900 .918 .844 .918 .920 .867 .904 .905 .818 .929 .932 .878 .941 .944 .931 .970 .955 .924 .924 .932 .836 .948 .952 .892 .904 .919 .873 .922 .915 .880 .912 .919 .824 .937 .925 .895 .0 .004 -.0 0 2 .003 -.0 1 5 .003 .004 .005 .004 .012 -.0 0 4 .0 .004 .001 .029 .004 -.0 0 5 .013 .008 .014 .006 .008 -.0 0 7 .017 Printing and publishing..................................................... Chemicals........................................................................... Petroleum and coal products.............................................. Rubber and plastic products.............................................. Leather................................................................................ .938 .907 .905 .937 .959 .924 .881 .901 .909 .928 .901 .862 .884 .886 .907 .906 .877 .871 .888 .927 .938 .910 .894 .941 .966 .930 .888 .882 .916 .940 .904 .870 .866 .898 .918 .913 .880 .869 .913 .921 .0 .003 -.011 .004 .007 .006 .007 -.0 1 9 .007 .012 .003 .008 -.0 1 8 .012 .011 .007 .003 -.0 0 2 .025 -.0 0 6 Transportation........................................................................... Communications........................................................................ Electric, gas, w a te r................................................................... Wholesale tra d e ........................................................................ Retail tra d e ................................................ .............................. Finance, insurance, real estate................................................... Services.................................................................................... .861 .888 .893 .959 .974 .915 .947 .847 .885 .889 .944 .967 .910 .941 .839 .858 .860 .922 .951 .870 .915 .846 .864 .852 .931 .966 .901 .931 .891 .904 .899 .938 .969 .926 .956 .876 .896 .893 .935 .961 .913 .952 .859 .864 .870 .915 .940 .869 .935 870 .881 .867 .918 .965 .898 .944 .030 .016 .006 -.021 -.0 0 5 .011 .009 .029 .011 .004 -.0 0 9 -.0 0 6 .003 .011 .020 .006 .010 -.0 0 7 -.011 -.001 .020 .024 .017 .015 -.0 1 3 -.0 0 1 -.0 0 3 .013 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 45 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Research Summaries Table 3. Output per hour for nonfarm business and manufacturing based on hours paid and hours at work, 19831 P ercent change from sam e q u a rte r a y e a r ago 1 II III P erce n t change IV 1 9 8 2 -8 3 Industry Hours paid Hours at w ork Hours paid Hours at w ork Hours paid Hours at w ork Hours paid H ours at w o rk Hours paid H ours at w ork Nonfarm business ........................................................................................................ 1.8 1.5 4.3 3.8 3.9 3.2 3.9 3.3 3.5 3.1 Manufacturing............................................................................................................... Durable .................................................................................................................... Nondurable............................................................................................................... 3.4 4.7 1.4 3.2 4.4 1.5 4.3 5.7 2.2 3.6 4.9 1.8 4.3 5.5 2.7 3.2 3.8 2.3 4.9 6.1 3.3 4.0 5.1 2.4 4.3 5.6 2.4 3.8 4.9 2.1 1Changes in ratio of hours at work to hours paid are based on survey of production and nonsupervisory employees. Adjustment is applied to all the hours of all persons which includes supervisors, nonproduction workers, and proprietors. of work to hours paid; 18 had increases between 1982 and 1983 as opposed to 21 decreases and 8 increases from 1981 to 1982. Again these changes mostly reflect the cyclical nature of different industries caused by employers respond ing to the changing economic conditions. Productivity measures As previously noted, the annual change in output per hour (labor productivity) in nonfarm business between 1982 and 1983 was 3.5 percent by using the hours paid method and 3.3 percent based on hours at work. (See table 3.) Similarly, for manufacturing, productivity based on hours paid in creased 4.3 percent from 1982 to 1983; after adjusting for the change in hours at work to hours paid, the increase in output per hour at work was 3.8 percent. These comparisons indicate that seemingly small changes in the ratio translate into significant adjustments in productivity growth rates. As mentioned earlier, it is not possible to adjust quarterly changes in output per hour for the changes in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid because there are no seasonal factors presently available. However, changes from the same quarter a year ago will not be affected by seasonal fluctua tions unless there is a change in seasonal patterns. Table 3 shows there are differences between output per hour based on hours paid and hours at work compared with the same quarter a year ago. This is so for nonfarm business, total manufacturing, and durable and nondurable goods manu facturing. The largest percent changes were generally in the third quarter and the smallest were in the first quarter. The largest single quarterly difference was for durable manu facturing in the third quarter of 1983, when the hours at work labor productivity measure was 1.7 percentage points lower than the hours paid measure. The smallest difference was for nondurable manufacturing in the first quarter. □ ------- FOOTNOTES------1The difference between nonfarm and nonagricultural establishments is that the latter does not include agricultural services. 2The adjustment to the b ls measure of multifactor productivity would be smaller. The annual growth rate in multifactor productivity resulting from the change in the ratio of hours at work to hours paid is equal to the percentage share of labor compensation in output (about 65 percent) times the change in the ratio. 46 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 3 Similarly, during a recession junior employees are usually the first to be laid off and consequently the ratio of hours at work to hours paid goes up. See Kent Kunze “ A new b ls survey measures the ratio of hours worked to hours paid,” M on th ly L a b o r R e view , June 1984, pp. 3-7 . Occupational earnings and benefits in making nonelectrical machinery Occupational earnings in nonelectrical machinery manufac turing industries varied considerably among 23 metropolitan areas surveyed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in Novem ber 1983.1 This was due, in part, to the diversity of skills required to manufacture a variety of products, ranging from hedge trimmers and meat grinders to large, complex en gines, turbines, construction equipment, and oil drilling rigs. Occupations selected as representative of production jobs in these industries accounted for one-half of the 252,900 production and related workers covered by the study. Among the jobs surveyed, tool and die makers usually had the highest hourly earnings in an area. Average pay in this occupation ranged from $10.40 an hour in Atlanta to $14.38 in Los Angeles-Long Beach, but typically was be tween $11 and $13 an hour. In 6 of the 11 areas that could be compared, workers producing tools and dies for internal use (those employed in other than jobbing shops) averaged more than workers producing tools and dies for sale (those employed in jobbing shops). The differential was usually 5 percent or less. Machine-tool operators on production work were the larg est occupational group studied. They performed their work on conventional equipment or numerically controlled ( n / c ) machines, which use coded instructions to direct the ma chine through a sequence of operations. Conventional op erators were classified into three groups for wage study purposes. Operators who set up their own machines and perform a variety of operations to close tolerances (class a ) averaged from $8.39 per hour in Atlanta to $13.24 in San Francisco-Oakland. Average earnings for the intermediate group of operators (class b ) ranged from $7.31 in Atlanta to $11.37 in Milwaukee; and for operators who do routine and repetitive work but do not set up machines (class c), the averages ranged from $5.31 in Newark to $10.22 in Milwaukee. Average pay for operators of n /c machines who set up work and operate machines ranged from $7.13 in Atlanta to $14.72 in Los Angeles-Long Beach. In 9 of 20 areas for which comparisons could be made, these N/c operators averaged more per hour than class a conventional machinetool operators, and in eight other areas, their pay levels fell between the averages for class a and class b operators. Assemblers, the second largest employee group, usually accounted for between one-tenth and one-fourth of the pro duction work force in an area. Average earnings for work requiring fitting of parts and decisions regarding proper per formance of parts or units (class a ) typically ranged between $9 and $11 an hour. Workers assembling in accordance with standard and prescribed procedures (class b ) typically av eraged between $7 and $9, while those performing shortcycle, repetitive assembling operations (class c) generally averaged between $6 and $8. Janitors, among the lowest paid occupations in the survey, averaged between $5.57 in New York and $10.08 in Detroit. They averaged less than $8 in 15 of the 22 areas for which data could be presented. Except in Milwaukee, nearly nine-tenths or more of the production workers were paid on a time-rated basis, usually under formal plans that provided a range of rates for specific occupations. In most areas, progression within individual ranges usually was based on length of service or a combi nation of length of service and merit review. Incentive plans applied to two-fifths of the workers in Milwaukee, and to approximately one-tenth in Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, and Hartford. Pay levels rose 14.8 percent, or 5.0 percent a year, be tween January 1981 and November 1983, according to an index developed for this survey series.2 This contrasted sharply to the 10.2-percent annual rate recorded for the preceding 3 years. The wage and salary component of the Bureau’s Employment Cost Index for durable goods manufacturing also showed a similar pattern— 6.2 percent annually be tween December 1980 and December 1983 and 9.1 percent between December 1977 and December 1980. As pay levels in nonelectrical machinery manufacturing increased at a slower pace, survey wide employment dropped 36 percent— from 393,000 production workers in January 1981 to 252,900 in November 1983. Proportionally, the declines were largest (50 to 59 percent) in Cleveland, Hous ton, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and Portland, and ranged from 20 to 40 percent in 15 other areas. The only area reporting increased employment was Atlanta— up 19 percent to 2,827 workers. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Virtually all production workers covered by the survey were provided paid holidays, vacations, and several types of insurance plans. Most workers had provisions for 9 to 12 holidays annually, and 1 or 2 weeks of vacation pay after 1 year of service, 2 or 3 weeks after 5 years, 3 weeks after 10 years, and 4 weeks or more after 20 years. In most of the areas, life, hospitalization, surgical, and basic medical insurance applied to nearly all production workers; while major medical, accidental death and dismemberment, and sickness and accident insurance covered at least a large majority. Retirement pension plans were available to fourfifths or more of the production workers in 16 areas, and to between one-half and three-fourths in the remaining seven areas. Employers typically paid the entire cost of the health, insurance, and pension plans. One-half of the production workers were in establish ments with collective bargaining agreements covering a ma jority of such workers. Most of the contracts were with the International Association of Machinists, the United Auto Workers, or the United Steelworkers of America. At least two-thirds of the production workers in Buffalo, Cleveland, Milwaukee, New York, San Francisco-Oakland, and St. Louis were covered by union contracts, compared with less than one-fifth of the workers in Denver-Boulder and Worcester. A comprehensive report on the survey— Industry Wage Survey: Nonelectrical Machinery, November 1983 ( b l s Bul letin 2229)— may be purchased from any of the Bureau’s regional sales offices or the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 20402. □ ------- FOOTNOTES------1The 23 areas for which data have been developed are Standard Met ropolitan Statistical Areas as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget through October 1979. They are: Northeast— Boston, Buf falo, Hartford-New Britain-Bristol, Newark, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Worcester; South— Atlanta, Baltimore, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, and Tulsa; North Central— Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Mil waukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and St. Louis; and West— Denver-Boul der, Los Angeles-Long Beach, Portland, and San Francisco-Oakland. Earnings data exclude premium pay for overtime and for work on week ends, holidays, and late shifts. 2Earnings trend data are limited to the 21 machinery centers surveyed since 1955. Tulsa was first studied in the winter 1970-71 and Atlanta in the 1973 study. The index is based on the straight-time hourly earnings of production workers in the following occupations: Assemblers (classes a , b , and c); maintenance electricians; inspectors (classes a , b , and c); janitors, porters, and cleaners; material handling laborers; production machine-tool operators (classes a , b , and c); production machinists; tool and die makers (other than jobbing); and class A hand welders. For accounts of the two previous studies, see Industry Wage Survey: Machinery Man ufacturing, January 1981, and January 1978, Bulletins 2124 and 2027, respectively (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982 and 1979). See also, “ Area pay levels vary widely in machinery manufacturing,” Monthly Labor Re view, November 1979, pp. 51-52. 47 Major Agreements Expiring Next Month This list of selected collective bargaining agreements expiring in July is based on information from the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering 1,000 workers or more. Private industry is arranged in order of Standard Industrial Classification. Em ployer and location Private industry L abor organization1 N um ber of w orkers Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. (Saginaw, mi) .................. Missouri River Basin agreement (Interstate) .................................................... Mechanical Contractors Association ( U ta h ) ....................................................... Agripac, Inc. (Oregon) ......................................................................................... Armstrong Rubber Co. (Interstate) ..................................................................... Construction .............................. Construction .............................. Construction .............................. Food products ........................... Rubber ........................................ C arpenters........................................... B oilerm akers..................................... P lu m b ers............................................. Teamsters (Ind.) .............................. Rubber W o rk e rs................................ 1,300 2,300 1,000 3,500 2,700 Babcock and Wilcox Co. (Interstate) ................................................................. Mirro Corp. (Manitowoc, wi) ............................................................................. Eltra Corp., Prestolite Division (Interstate) ....................................................... Westinghouse Electric Corp., salaried employees (Interstate) ...................... Fabricated metal products . . . . Fabricated metal products . . . . Electrical products .................... Electrical products .................... B oilerm akers..................................... Steelworkers ...................................... Auto Workers ................................... Westinghouse Independent Salaried Unions (Ind.) 4,000 1,500 2,000 11,100 Westinghouse Electric Corp. (In tersta te )........................................................... Whirlpool Corp. (St. Paul, mn ) .......................................................................... Hughes Helicopter Corp. (Los Angeles, ca ) .................................................... Rockwell International, Automotive Group (In terstate)................................... Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. (Jacksonville, fl) ............................................... Electrical products .................... Electrical products .................... Electrical p ro d u c ts .................... Transportation equipment . . . . Transportation equipment . . . . V a rio u s ............................................... Teamsters (Ind.) .............................. C arpenters........................................... Auto Workers ................................... B oilerm akers...................................... 39,700 1,100 1,500 5,200 2,500 Fairchild Republic Co. (Farmingdale, ny ) ......................................................... Freightliner Corp. (Portland, or ) ........................................................................ Western Union Telegraph Co. (In tersta te )......................................................... New York State Electric and Gas Corp. (New Y o r k ) ..................................... Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. (Pennsylvania).......................................... Transportation equipment . . . . Transportation equipment . . . . Communication ......................... U tilities........................................ U tilities........................................ M achinists........................................... M achinists........................................... Telegraph W o rk e rs............................ Electrical Workers (ibew ) ............... Electrical Workers (ibew ) ............... 3,500 1,700 8,800 2,900 4,800 Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric Co. (Ohio) .......................................... Jewel, a &p , Dominick’s, Eagle Discount, Kohl’s (Chicago, il ) ................. East Bay Restaurant Association, Inc. (San Francisco, ca ) ........................... U tilities........................................ Retail trade ................................ Restaurants ................................ Electrical Workers (ibew ) ............... Food and Commercial Workers . . . Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees 1,500 2,700 3,000 G overnm ent activity L abor organization1 N um ber of w orkers Arizona: Phoenix Police D e p artm e n t............................................................ Police protection ...................... Phoenix Law Enforcement Association (Ind.) 1,200 California: Riverside County, support services ............................................. Orange County, supervisory management unit ......................... General g o vernm ent................. General g o vernm ent................. 2,050 1,200 Orange County, clerical unit ......................................................... General governm ent.................. 3,050 Orange County, general u n i t ......................................................... General g o vernm ent.................. Supporting Services Unit ............... Orange County Employees Association Orange County Employees Association Orange County Employees Association Kansas: Wichita Board of Education, teachers and professionals.......... Education ................................... Education Association ( I n d .) .......... 2,950 Ohio: Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, o p e ra to rs...................... Transportation ........................... Transit Union 2,500 'Affiliated with a f l - c io except where noted as independent (Ind.). 48 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ................................... 2,850 Developments in Industrial Relations Pan Am accords In talks involving four unions, Pan American Airways won some contract changes designed to reverse its unprof itable operation. The company has lost more than $750 million since 1980, which it attributed primarily to the growth of lower cost foreign and domestic competitors as a result of the deregulation of the industry. The first settlement involved 1,500 members of the Air Line Pilots Association. The 32-month agreement, running to August 31, 1987, provided for payment of the scheduled 26-percent pay increase the pilots had forgone in 1982 to aid Pan Am. This will be accomplished in stages, over the term. Later, 6,000 members of the Transport Workers Union struck after rejecting a Pan Am offer that included a 20percent pay increase over 3 years, including the 14.5-percent in scheduled wage increases that had been deferred from 1982. The stoppage lost some effect when the pilots im mediately crossed the picket lines and continued flying. Afterward, the 800-member Flight Engineers International Association returned to work, leaving only the 6,000-mem ber International Association of Flight Attendants and 6,200member Teamsters units off the job in support of the Trans port Workers. However, an increasing number of the flight attendants returned to work after Pan Am began hiring re placements for the attendants and fired 157 of them for refusing to resume work. This led the leaders of the flight attendants’ union to order all the attendants to return to work, and a few days later, the Transport Workers agreed on a contract. A factor in the union’s decision to settle was the dwindling support from the other unions. Another factor was concern over the possibility of permanent cuts in employment. Early in the strike, Pan Am had sold commissary operations in several cities, ending employment for 700 members of the Transport Workers union. Chief union negotiator John Ker rigan said, “ The issue is whether continuation of the strike is in the interest of our members. We believe it is not.” He explained that a prolonged strike would inflict “ heavy losses” to both sides and could result in the “ total destruction of both.”____________________________________________ “ 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 The accord provided for: • Wage increases of 5 percent on January 1 and November 1 of 1985 and in November of 1986 and 1987. The 20percent total increase included the 1982 deferred amount of 14.5 percent, which the union had contended should have been restored in total on January 1, 1985. • One-time bonuses of $1,000 for mechanics, dispatchers, and flight simulators and $600 for other workers, payable in November 1985. • A new pay progression schedule requiring new workers to serve for 7 years before attaining the maximum rate for their grade. Previously, they waited 3 or 4 years. • Broadening of job assignments to permit greater utiliza tion of employee skills. • Adoption of a new pension plan financed by company payments equal to 3.5 percent of employee earnings plus company stock equal to 2 percent of the earnings. Ad dition of $5,000 or $10,000 bonuses to induce employees to retire early. • New jobs, as they open, for the 700 former commissary workers or optional severance payments ranging from $10,000 to $30,000. All of these employees on the payroll on January 1, 1986, will be guaranteed permanent em ployment. • Cuts in health insurance benefits, and a new requirement that workers pay part of premium costs. • Permission for Pan Am to hire workers for a 5-day work week of 5 hours per day, at reduced pay rates, to help with operating peaks. These part-timers cannot exceed 15 percent of the workers in the Transport Workers’ bar gaining unit. Following the Transport Workers settlement, the Flight Attendants agreed to a 3-year contract that included: • A 21.5-percent pay increase over the term, including a 12-percent pay increase scheduled under prior agreements but deferred to aid the company. • A new “ b scale” pay progression schedule for new em ployees under which they will start at $784 a month (com pared with the previous $1,236 starting rate) and remain below the rates for workers already on the payroll. • A new provision permitting Pan Am to hire up to 150 foreign nationals for flights beginning and ending outside the United States. These attendants, who would not be 49 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Developments in Industrial Relations members of the union, would be paid $225 to $773 a month, compared with a range of $1,900 to $2,250 for union members already on the payroll, according to a union official. Bargaining was continuing with the 6,000 reservations, fuel haulers, and other types of workers represented by the Teamsters. Kaiser employees accept concession contract In a move to aid Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. in overcoming operating losses, 6,500 members of the United Steelworkers union agreed to a new 3-year contract that reduced their compensation by an average of $4.50 an hour. Kaiser, which lost $53.9 million in 1984, attributed its fi nancial difficulties to depressed conditions in the world alu minum market, poor results from aluminum futures, and high energy costs. According to the company, it was losing 15 cents on every pound of aluminum produced at its Mead, w a , smelter. The contract was effective April 1, superseding the bal ance of a 3-year accord that had been scheduled to expire in May 1986. It established a plan to give the employees shares of a new issue of Kaiser Aluminum stock that will be held in trust and redeemable at $50 a share upon retire ment or termination. Employees also may choose to keep the shares and receive annual dividends of $5 a share. The shares are non voting, but the union was given one seat on Kaiser’s board of directors. According to a union official, the value of the shares will equal 85 percent of the wage and benefit cuts. The $4.50 an hour concession consisted of a cut in hourly wages averaging $1.84, cuts in paid vacations and health benefits, and elimination of three paid holidays. The pro vision for automatic quarterly cost-of-living pay adjustments was revised to provide 1 cent an hour for each 0.3-point rise in the Consumer Price Index (was 0.26 point) and the money will be applied to stock purchases. At the time of settlement, pay at Kaiser’s 12 facilities ranged from $11.40 to $14.76 an hour and averaged $13.11. At plants in the Northwest, Kaiser was continuing efforts to minimize energy costs by negotiating with the Bonneville Power Administration on long-term credits against electric ity bills in return for extensive conservation measures. The 12 facilities are located in Washington, Louisiana, West Virginia, and Ohio. the modifications of the current agreement, which runs to July 31, 1986. Under the accord, the workers will no longer receive incentive pay. Instead, they could receive the “ first dollar’’ of daily incentive earnings from a profit-sharing plan and they will receive shares of preferred Bethlehem stock equiv alent to the balance of daily incentive earnings. They also will receive preferred stock (which will be given to them at age 62) equivalent to the other concessions, which include: • Elimination of 2 weeks of paid vacation, beginning in 1986. • Termination of dental and vision care insurance, effective July 1, 1985. • Elimination of an earnings protection plan, under which employees bumped into lower paying jobs received tem porary pay supplements. • Reduction of Sunday work pay to time and one-quarter (from time and one-half) and holiday work pay to double time (from double time and one-half). • Reduction of shift premium pay. • Broadened job assignments to permit better utilization of the work force. • Elimination of a provision of the 1983 contract calling for restoration in 1986 of a $1.20 an hour cut in wages and benefits. The accord also provided for lump-sum payments to in duce older employees to retire by July 31, 1985. The pay ments range from $4,800 for workers age 61 years and 1 month to $400 for those age 62 or over. Despite the concessions, more than 500 of the 2,900 workers were expected to lose their jobs as part of the effort to reduce costs. More than 400 of the 800 nonunion salaried employees also were expected to be terminated. In the legal area, Bethlehem settled a lawsuit by agreeing to make no postretirement changes in life insurance pro grams for retired supervisory employees and to establish a new health care plan for the retirees and their dependents. The settlement, which covered nearly 20,000 retirees, was initiated by a retiree (later joined by 3,000 others) who contended that Bethlehem had broken a pledge to continue the health benefits after they retired. The settlement does require retirees to begin paying a premium, fixed for life, toward the cost of the coverage. Steel producer seeks protection under Chapter 11 Steel workers forgo increases for profit sharing About 2,900 employees of Bethlehem Steel Corp.’s un profitable bar, rod, and wire plants in Johnstown, p a , and Lackawanna, n y , have agreed to wage and benefit conces sions in exchange for preferred stock and a profit-sharing plan. According to the president of United Steelworkers Local 2632 in Lackawanna, the company would probably have closed the operations if the workers had not accepted 50 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp., the industry’s seventh largest producer, filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code. The move to continue op erating under court protection from creditors came after the United Steelworkers union refused to accept a debt restruc turing plan. The union had apparently agreed to accept cuts in wages and benefits to aid the ailing company, but objected to a lenders’ demand for a lien on Wheeling-Pittsburgh’s $300 million of current assets. The union leaders apparently believed that the stretch-out of principal payments and some reduction in interest payments to the lending institutions were not enough to save the company, which would leave the union in an untenable position if the company were subsequently liquidated. After the filing, Wheeling-Pittsburgh announced that it would start bargaining soon with the Steelworkers on re ducing wage and benefit costs, which average about $21.40 an hour. (Under the proposed debt restructuring plan, these costs would have been cut to about $19.) If the required bargaining is unsuccessful, the parties will move into largely untested areas of the 1984 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code. One is a provision requiring that a company may only propose contract modifications that are “ necessary to assure that all creditors, debtors and other affected parties are treated fairly and equitably.” Another allows the bank ruptcy court to terminate a labor agreement if it finds that the union has rejected concessions “ without good cause.” A complicating factor was the possibility that WheelingPittsburgh would terminate its pension plan, which might require the Federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to assume payments to the 10,000 retirees. A company official said that Wheeling-Pittsburgh would be unable to make a scheduled $60 million payment to its pension fund in the fourth quarter. The company employs about 8,200 workers at nine mills in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio. Union uses apprentices as organizers In an effort to help reverse the general decline in union membership, the Sheet Metal Workers union is experi menting with using apprentices as organizers. Union pres ident Edward J. Carlough said prospects for success were good because apprentices are in the same young age group as the employees targeted for organizing, and “ unions haven’t been speaking the language of the young.” Under the national 3-month pilot program, financed by the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association and the union, 200 fourth-year apprentices will work full time on organizing. The goal is to extend the apprentice program to 5 years, with the entire third year devoted to organizing. This would put an estimated 2,000 apprentice-organizers in the field. The new organizing approach was initiated in Atlanta, g a , where some apprentices volunteered to recruit new members on their own time after attending an organizing seminar. Tuna cannery moves against foreign competitors A tuna fish canning company and the United Industrial Workers Union and the Seafarers International Union agreed on a plan for competing with foreign firms, which have won control of the domestic tuna market. The first part of the plan came when the 1,400 workers of the cannery, located https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in Terminal Island, c a , agreed to wage and benefit reduc tions to narrow the cost advantage of overseas competitors. The cannery is owned by Pan Pacific, a division of C.H.B. Foods, Inc., which indicated that it would open a cannery closed for 3 years if the plan is successful, providing jobs for 1,000 workers. The second part of the plan is a joint advertising campaign emphasizing that Pan Pacific is the only tuna canned ex clusively in the United States. Reportedly, employment in the domestic tuna industry has declined from 15,000 to 3,000 workers in California and Puerto Rico, which union and industry officials attribute to the lower costs of foreign processors stemming, in part, from subsidies from their governments. Budd workers get lump-sum payments More than 6,000 employees of the Budd Co. were covered by a settlement that provided lump-sum payments rather than the wage increases they had received under past agree ments. The first payment was a flat $180 per employee, to be followed by annual payments each April equal to 2 per cent of the individual’s earnings during the preceding 12 months. In another change, the provision for automatic quarterly cost-of-living pay adjustments was revised to pro vide for the accrued amounts to be paid in lump sums at the end of each quarter. Previously, the allowance was in cluded in regular weekly paychecks. Also, the entire pay ment for the third quarter and 2 cents per hour from each of the other quarterly payments will be diverted to help meet the cost of benefits. Other terms negotiated by the Auto Workers included an additional paid holiday, a $2.05 increase in future retirees’ monthly pension rate for each year of credited service and a 50-cent increase for current retirees and two $125 lump sum payments to current retirees. The accord also broadened the number of health insurance coverage options and added cost control provisions similar to the General Motors Corp. settlement with the union (see Monthly Labor Review, November 1984, pp. 46-49). The six Budd plants, which produce equipment for the auto industry, are located in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. California Nurses Association settles A threatened strike by 5,100 nurses in Northern California was averted when Kaiser Permanente, which provides health care services, and the California Nurses Association agreed on a contract. Kaiser had been seeking several concessions, including a 20-percent pay cut, but the accord only provided for one— elimination of one of two premium pay options for nurses who work on a holiday. The contract which runs to December 1, 1987, provides for an initial pay increase of 4 percent, followed by increases of 5 percent in January 1986 and 4 percent a year later. Other terms included a new annuity plan permitting em51 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Developments in Industrial Relations ployees to defer up to 20 percent of their income, thus sheltering the income from taxes; a requirement that retired nurses must now have 15 years of service to be eligible for supplemental medicare coverage; and elimination of the 90day limit on carryover of sick leave from year to year. DuPont’s ‘early out’ offer successful Nearly twice the expected number of DuPont Co. em ployees have accepted an early retirement offer, posing some 52 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis difficulties for the company. DuPont had expected 6,500 workers to accept the offer, which was made to streamline operations (s&&Monthly Labor Review, April 1985, p. 61). DuPont vice president John R. Mallory called the program a “ huge success,” but admitted that the company will lose some people it wanted to keep. Company officials said that the unexpectedly large number of departures would force DuPont to hire employees in certain areas and that some key employees had been induced to stay through bonuses and raises. □ A note on communications The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be considered for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not po lemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212. Book Reviews Labor transformation in one industry The Electrical Workers: A History of Labor at General Electric and Westinghouse, 1923-1960. By Ronald W. Schatz. Champaign, i l , The University of Illinois Press, 1983. 279 pp. $22.95. Ronald W. Schatz’s book is a fascinating history of 37 years of labor relations in the two largest electrical com panies in the United States. This history not only details the organization of the unions but also discusses the philo sophical ideology of the unions’ leaders. In many ways electrical workers are a group apart from other American workers. In the early 1920’s, they were involved in creating products that were on the leading edge of technology. Their skills were many and varied— from the molding of huge electrical turbines to the winding of gossamer wires into electrical coils; from sheet metal craft ing of generator housings to assembly-line work on electrical appliances. Men performed the heavier tasks, women, much of the delicate work. Early in the period studied, electrical workers turned to labor organizations to represent them in their quest for a better working life. Interestingly, General Electric ( g e ) and Westinghouse did not discourage union representation. Electrical company managers adopted a “ corporatist” phi losophy of managing— that management should strike a balance between the interests of the stockholders and the workers and not subjugate one to the benefit of the other. Thus, g e and Westinghouse “ fashioned a set of labor pol icies intended to achieve the unity of labor and capi tal . . . ” Paradoxically, the labor organization that resulted from the benevolent management policies was heavily influenced by Communist and Socialist officers. That organization, the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America ( u e ) , got its start at g e plants in Schenectady, n y , and Lynn, m a , and Westinghouse factories in East Pittsburgh and Phil adelphia, p a , in the early 1930’s. The founders were men like James Matles, head of the metals branch of the Com munist-led Steel and Metal Workers Industrial Union; Hor ace Hunt, a member of the Communist party in Erie, p a ; Frederick Steele, who represented the Communist-led Trade Union Unity League; and George Bush, a veteran Socialist community leader in East Pittsburgh. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Another founder, James Carey, had been a leader in a Philco Corp. local union in Philadelphia. Carey was a staunch anti-Communist, but acquiesced in the political beliefs of the others at the formation of the union. He became president of the United Electrical Workers, with Matles as director of organizing, and several other avowed Communists in leadership positions in the union. Initially, the United Electrical Workers unsuccessfully sought a charter from the American Federation of Labor. The a f l told Carey to enroll his members with the Inter national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) . But when the i b e w offered nonvoting “ Class b ” membership to Carey, he refused. The United Electrical Workers later became an affiliate of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (cio). In the book’s preface, Schatz points out that his research showed that the Communist-led unions did not slow down war production during World War II. This “ revelation’’ is well-documented with statements of the “ change of heart” of the Communist union leaders after Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Prior to the invasion, when Germany and the Soviet Union had a “ nonaggression” pact in force, Communist union leaders obstructed war production in tended for Britain on the grounds that the United States was supporting an “ imperialist war.” After World War II, and with the advent of the cold war, Communist union leaders began to have problems. A pro vision of the Taft-Hartley Act required union officers to sign an affidavit stating that they were not members of the Communist party. Many u e officers refused to sign the affidavits. Opposition to Communist presence in unions also came from the Catholic church and from anti-Communists within the unions. In 1949, James Carey formed a rival union, the Inter national Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers ( i u e ) which was chartered by the cio, while the u e was expelled from the Federation because of alleged Communist domination. The i u e and u e then embarked on certification campaigns to gain control of the local unions. The resulting strife left the two unions in command of fewer workers than the u e had represented before the split. Other unions such as the Machinists ( i a m ) , the Auto Workers ( u a w ) , the Elec trical Workers ( i b e w ) , and the Teamsters ( i b t ) gained rep resentation rights over some of the former u e locals. The fractionation of the union allowed the electrical companies 53 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Book Reviews to redesign jobs and manufacturing facilities and ultimately to disperse their facilities around the Nation, rather than concentrating them in the Northeast. Another result of the unions’ weakness emerged as “ Boulwareism,” a bargaining strategy in which an employer attempts to persuade the employees that his or her initial offer is in their best interests, thus bypassing the union, and changes this offer only if he or she receives new information or persuasive arguments from the union. Author Schatz has developed many other themes in his presentation, such as the role of women in the unions, sen iority, and incentive pay. A criticism of the Industrial Re lations Research Association’s book of 1980, Collective Bargaining: Contemporary American Experience, was that the day-to-day life in the workplace and practices in the work settings were virtually ignored. That should not be a criticism of this book. — Ja m e s K . M c C o l l u m Associate Professor University o f Alabama, Huntsville Publications received Agriculture and natural resources Economic Council of Canada, Connections: An Energy Strategy for the Future. Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Can ada, 1985, 207 pp. $9.95, Canada; $11.95, other countries. Jobin, Jacques, Farm Income Instability on the Prairies. Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Canada, 1984, 116 pp. (Dis cussion Paper, 273.) Lee, Chinkook and David W. Culver, “Agricultural Develop ment in Three Asian Countries: A Comparative Analysis,” Agricultural Economics Research, Winter 1985, pp. 8-13. “ Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the American Agri cultural Economics Association, Held in Ithaca, N. Y., Aug. 5-8, 1984,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, December 1984, pp. 541-967. Economic and social statistics Chiappori, Pierre-André, “Distribution of Income and the ‘Law of Demand,’” Econometrica, January 1985, pp. 109-27. Engels, Richard A. and Richard L. Forstall, “Metropolitan Areas Dominate Growth Again,” American Demographics, April 1985, beginning on p. 22. Levy, Frank and Richard C. Michel, “Are Baby Boomers Sel fish?” American Demographics, April 1985, pp. 38-41. Pótscher, Benedikt M. and Ingmar R. Prucha, A Class of Par tially Adaptive One-Step M-Estimators for the Nonlinear Regression Model. College Park, md, University of Mary land, Department of Economics and Bureau of Businesr and Economic Research, 1985, 30 pp. The Japan Institute of Labour, Japanese Working Life Profile: Statistical Aspects. Tokyo, Japan, 1985, 80 pp. 54 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Education Furth, Dorotea, “Beyond Compulsory Schooling: Problems of the 16-19 Year Olds,” The o e c d Observer, January 1985, pp. 7-11. Istance, David, “Continuity and Change,” The o e c d Observer, January 1985, pp. 11-13. Lowe, John, “Quality in Education: More Than a New Watch word,” The o e c d Observer, January 1985, pp. 4-6. Stanley, William B., ed., Issues in Social Studies Education— A 50-Year Retrospective: “Indoctrination and the Study of Social Problems: A Re-Examination of the 1930s Debate in the Social Frontiers,” by S. Samuel Shermis and James L. Barth; “Commitment to Values and the Study of Social Prob lems in Citizenship Education,” by James P. Shaver, Social Education, March 1985, pp. 190-97. Health and safety Aaron, Henry J. and William B. Schwartz, “Hospital Cost Con trol: A Bitter Pill to Swallow,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1985, pp. 160-67. Edmondson, Brad, ‘‘The Home Health Care Market,’’American Demographics, April 1985, beginning on p. 28. Gelb, Betsy D., “Preventive Medicine and Employee Produc tivity,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1985, be ginning on p. 12. Verbrugge, Lois M. and Jennifer H. Madans, “Women’s Roles and Health,” American Demographics, March 1985, pp. 3639. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Projections of Physician Supply in the U.S., March 1985. Rockville, md, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Bu reau of Health Professions, Office of Data Analysis and Man agement, 1985, 39 pp. (odam Report, No. 3-85.) Industrial relations Australian Department of Employment and Industrial Rela tions, “A Comparison of Trade Union Response to Tech nological Change in Britain and Australia,” by Ray Markey, Work and People, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1984, pp. 29-37. ----- “Japanese Industrial Relations from a Western European Perspective, ” by Friedrich Fiirstenberg, Work and People , Vol. 10, No. 2, 1984, pp. 11-14. ----- “Occupational Health and Safety and Industrial Democracy: Some Legal and Practical Considerations,” by W. Breen Creighton, Work and People, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1984, pp. 39. Bain, George Sayers and Peter Elias, ‘‘Trade Union Membership in Great Britain: An Individual-Level Analysis, ’’British Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1985, pp. 71-92. Ballagh, James H., ed., Employee Relations Outlook: Impact of Foreign and Domestic Competition. Los Angeles, University of California, Institute of Industrial Relations, 1985, 48 pp. Bamber, Greg, “ Unionism Among Managerial and Professional Employees,” Labour and Society, January 1985, pp. 63-82. Barbash, Jack, The Elements of Industrial Relations. Madison, wi, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1984, 153 pp. $17.50. Bureau of National Affairs, Unions Today: New Tactics to Tackle Tough Times. Washington, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1985, 140 pp. $30, paper. Edwards, Christine and Edmund Heery, “Formality and Infor mality in the Working of the National Coal Board’s Incentive Scheme,” British Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1985, pp. 25-45. Erd, Rainer and Christoph Scherrer, ‘‘Unions—Caught Between Structural Competition and Temporary Solidarity: A Critique of Contemporary Marxist Analysis of Trade Unions in Ger many,” British Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1985, pp. 115-31. Evans, Stephen, “The Use of Injunctions in Industrial Dis putes,” British Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1985, pp. 133-37. Femer, Anthony, “Political Constraints and Management Strat egies: The Case of Working Practices in British Rail,” British Journal of Industrial Relations, March 1985, pp. 47-70. Fisher, Roger, “ He Who Pays the Piper,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1985, pp. 150-59. Freeman, Richard B., Casey Ichniowski, Harrison Lauer, Col lective Bargaining Laws and Threat Effects of Unionism in the Determination of Police Compensation. Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 33 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1578.) $2, paper. Hammerman, Herbert, A Decade of New Opportunity: Affirma tive Action in the 1970s. Washington, The Potomac Institute, Inc., 1984, 100 pp. Hart, R. A., Shorter Working Time: A Dilemma for Collective Bargaining. Washington, Organization for Economic Co operation and Development, 1984, 92 pp. $12, paper, oecd Publications and Information Center. Ivancevich, John M., Michael T. Matteson, Edward P. Richards III, “Who’s Liable for Stress on the Job?” Harvard Busi ness Review, March-April 1985, beginning on p. 60. Princeton University, How the Changing Bankruptcy Laws Have Affected Labor Relations. Prepared by Richard Johnson. Princeton, nj, Princeton University, Industrial Relations Sec tion, 1984, 4 pp. (Selected References, 223.) ------- Labor Relations in the Entertainment Industry. Prepared by Alice Kirikian and Katherine Bagin. Princeton, N.J., Princeton University, Industrial Relations Section, 1984, 4 pp. (Selected References, 222.) “ Recent Developments in Labour Legislation in France, Italy, and Great Britain: Recent Trends in the Statutory Regulation of Industrial Relations in France,” by Yves Delamotte; “Re cent Developments of Italian Labour Law,” by Tiziano Treu; “The New Industrial Relations Laws in Great Britain,” by Lord Wedderbum, Labour and Society, January 1985, pp. 561. Zax, Jeffrey S., Labour Relations, Wages and Nonwage Com pensation in Municipal Employment. Cambridge, ma, Na tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 27 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1582.) $2, paper. Industry and government organization “Entrepreneurship and the Dilemma of Small Business in Amer ica,” The Center Magazine, January-February 1985, pp. 27-40. Scarfe, Brian L. and Edwin R. Rilkoflf, Financing Oil and Gas Exploration and Development Activity . Ottawa, Ontario, Eco nomic Council of Canada, 1984, 106 pp. (Discussion Paper, 274.) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis International economics Bingham, T. R. G., “ Financial Innovation and Monetary Pol icy,” The o e c d Observer, January 1985, pp. 24-26. “Breaking the Logjam in U.S.-Japan Trade Relations: An Inter view with David Packard,” Dun’s Business Month, April 1985, pp. 36-38. de Macedo, Jorge Braga, Collective Pegging to a Single Cur rency: The West African Monetary Union. Cambridge, ma , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 59 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1574.) $2, paper. ----- and David Meerschwam, Exchange Rate Flexibility and the Transmission of Business Cycles. Cambridge, ma, Na tional Bureau of Economic Research, In c., 1985, 34 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1573.) $2, paper. Drobnick, Richard, Debt Problems, Trade Offensives and Pro tectionism: The Uncharted International Economic Environ ment of the 1980s. Washington, The American Council of Life Insurance, Trend Analysis Program ( t a p ), February 1985, 22 pp. Fairlamb, David, ‘‘Europe Struggles to C atch Up,’’ Dun’s Busi ness Month, April 1985, pp. 70-75. Feldman, Mark B., “Waiver of Foreign Sovereign Immunity by Agreement to Arbitrate: Legislation Proposed by the Amer ican Bar Association,” The Arbitration Journal, March 1985, pp. 24-32. Guttentag, Jack M. and Richard J. Herring, The Current Crisis in International Lending. Washington, The Brookings Insti tution, 1985, 55 pp. $6.95, paper. “ Highlights from the oecd Economic Outlook, December 1984, ” The o e c d Observer, January 1985, pp. 30-33. Krislov, Joseph and Chris Leggett, “ Singapore’s Industrial Ar bitration Court: Changing Roles and Current Prospects,” The Arbitration Journal, March 1985, pp. 18-23. McClelland, Arden C., “ A Survey of Pacific Rim Commercial Arbitration,” The Arbitration Journal, March 1985, pp. 317. “ U.S.A.-Hungarian Trade Assisted by New Arrangements for Arbitration in Vienna,” The Arbitration Journal, March 1985, pp. 33-38. Labor force Australian Department of Employment and Industrial Relations, “New Technology, Old Jobs,” by Toby D. Wall and others, Work and People, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1984, pp. 15-21. Ben-Porath, Yoram, Market, Government, and Israel’s Muted Baby Boom. Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 51 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1569.) $2, paper. Darby, Michael R., John Haltiwanger, Mark W. Plant, Un employment-Rate Dynamics and Persistent Unemployment Under Rational Expectations. Cambridge, ma, National Bu reau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 55 pp. (nber Work ing Paper Series, 1558.) $2, paper. Great Britain, Department of Employment, Part-Time Employ ment and Sex Discrimination Legislation in Great Britain. By Olive Robinson and John Wallace. London, England, Department of Employment, 1985, 53 pp. (Research Paper, 43.) ------- Women’s Work Histories: An Analysis of the Women and Employment Survey. By Shirley Dex. London, England, 55 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Book Reviews Department of Employment, 1985, 129 pp. (Research Paper, 46.) Postner, Harry H. and Lesle M. Wesa, Employment Instability in Western Canada: A Diversification Analysis of the Man ufacturing and Other Sectors. Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Canada, 1985, 227 pp. (Discussion Paper, 275.) Management and organization theory Blake, Robert R. and Jane S. Mouton, The Managerial Grid III. Houston, tx , Gulf Publishing Co., 1984, 244 pp. $15.95. Walton, Richard E., “ From Control to Commitment in the Workplace,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1985, pp. 76-84. Monetary and fiscal policy Carron, Andrew S., Reforming the Bank Regulatory Structure. Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1984, 52 pp. $6.95, paper. Kaufman, William W., The 1986 Defense Budget. Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1985, 59 pp. $6.95, paper. Litterman, Robert B. and Laurence Weiss, “ Money, Real In terest Rates, and Output: A Reinterpretation of Postwar U.S. Data,” Econometrica, January 1985, pp. 129-56. on Employment and Unemployment Insurance, 1984. New York, State Advisory Council on Employment and Unem ployment Insurance, 1985, 82 pp. The Staff of Hewitt Associates, Salaried Employee Benefits Pro vided by Major U.S. Employers: A Comparison Study, 1979 Through 1984. Lincolnshire, il, Hewitt Associates, 1985, 31 pp. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, A rea Wage Surveys: Sacramento, California, Metropolitan Area, December 1984 (Bulletin 3025-66, 28 pp., $1.75); Denver-Boulder, Col orado, Metropolitan Area, December 1984 (Bulletin 302567, 40 pp., $2.25); Salt Lake City-Ogden, Utah, Metro politan Area, November 1984 (Bulletin 3025-68, 46 pp., $2.25); Trenton, New Jersey, Metropolitan Area, Novem ber 1984 (Bulletin 3025-69, 41 pp., $2.25); Seattle-Everett, Washington, Metropolitan Area, December 1984 (Bulletin 3025-70, 29 pp., $1.75); Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, Met ropolitan Area, December 1984 (Bulletin 3025-71, 41 pp., $2.25); Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota— Wisconsin, Metropolitan Area, January 1985 (Bulletin 3030-1, 43 pp., $2.25); Huntsville, Alabama, Metropolitan Area, February 1985 (Bulletin 3030-2, 27 pp., $1.75). Available from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402, gpo book stores, or bls regional offices. ------- Industry Wage Survey: Motor Vehicles and Parts, May Wages and compensation Ehrenberg, Ronald G. and Paul L. Schumann, Compensating Wage Differentials for Mandatory Overtime ? Reprinted from Economic Inquiry, October 1984, pp. 460-78. Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985. (nber Reprint Series, 564.) $2, paper. Freedman, Audrey, The New Look in Wage Policy and Employee Relations. New York, The Conference Board, Inc., 1985, 33 pp. (Conference Board Report, 865). Johansen, Elaine, Comparable Worth: The Myth and the Move ment. Boulder, co, Westview Press, 1984, 173 pp., bibli ography. $24.50, paper. State of New York, Annual Report of the State Advisory Council 56 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Prepared by Harry B. Williams. Washington, 1985, 126 pp. (Bulletin 2223.) Stock No. 029-001-02837-7. $4.75, Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402. 1983. Welfare programs and social insurance Gustman, Alan L. and Thomas L. Steinmeier, A Disaggregated, Structural Analysis of Retirement by Race, Difficulty of Work and Health. Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 21 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1585.) $2, paper. Mitchell, Olivia S. and Rebecca A. Luzadis, Firm-Level Policy Toward Older Workers. Cambridge, ma, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1985, 33 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1579.) $2, paper. Current Labor Statistics Notes on Current Labor Statistics.............................................................................................................................................. 58 Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series ....................................................................................... 58 Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes ..................................................................... 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-84 ............................... Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted . . . . Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted .................. Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted................................................................................................................ Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted............................................................................................................ Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ..................................................... Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted ............................................................................... Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted......................................................................................................................... Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes 59 59 60 61 62 62 63 63 63 . Employment, by industry, selected years, 1950-84 .................................................................................................................. Employment, by State .................................................................................................................................................................... Employment, by industry, seasonally adjusted........................................................................................................................... Average hours and earnings, by industry, 1968-84 ................................................................................................. ................. Average weekly hours, by industry, seasonally adjusted.......................................................................................................... Average hourly earnings, by industry .......................................................................................................................................... Hourly Earnings Index, by industry.............................................................................................................................................. Average weekly earnings, by industry.......................................................................................................................................... Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted........................................................ 64 65 65 66 67 68 69 69 70 70 Unemployment insurance data. Definitions................................................................................. 71 18. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations ............................................................................................... 71 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Price data. Definitions and notes 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. ................................................................................................................................................ Consumer Price Index, 1967-84 ................................................................................................................................................... Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected ite m s................................................................. Consumer Price Index, cross-classification of region and population size c la s s ................................................................... Consumer Price Index, selected areas .......................................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing ......................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings ..................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by special commodity groupings........................................................................................................ Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ....................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries ............................................................................... Productivity data. Definitions and notes 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. ............................................................................................................................... Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures,selected years, 1950-83 ............................................... Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,selected years, 1950-84 ........................ Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1974-84 .................................................. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted ............................ Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs,and p rices............... Wage and compensation data. Definitions and notes 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. ................................................................................................. Employment Cost Index, by occupation and industry group ................................................................................................... Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group ............................................................... Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size ..................................... Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1980 to d a te .................................................... Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1980to date ..................... Work stoppage data. Definition .................................................................................................................................................. 38. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date ........................................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 72 73 73 79 80 81 82 84 84 85 86 87 87 88 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 94 95 95 57 NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS This section of the R e v ie w presents the principal statistical series collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A brief introduction to each group of tables provides definitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually found in footnotes. Readers who need additional information are invited to consult the b l s regional offices listed on the inside front cover of this issue of the R e v ie w . Some general notes applicable to several series are given below. quarter to quarter are published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series. However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U.S. average All Items c p i . Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are available for this series. Adjustments for price changes. Some data are adjusted to eliminate the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of 150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is $2 ($3/150 x 100 = $2). The resulting values are described as “ real,” “ constant,” or “ 1967” dollars. Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate the effect of such factors as climatic conditions, industry pro duction schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short-term movements of the statistical series. Tables containing these data are identified as “ sea sonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are computed each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for several preceding years. Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 3 -8 were revised in the February 1985 issue of the Review, to reflect experience through 1984. Beginning in January 1980, the b ls introduced two major modifications in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new procedure called X—11/ a r i m a , which was developed at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard X - l l method. A detailed description of the procedure appears in The X - l l a r im a Seasonal Adjustment Method by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 12-564E, January 1983). 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 his torical 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, 15, and 17 were made in July 1984 using the X - l l a r im 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 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 household and establishment surveys is provided in Employment and Earnings, a monthly publication of the Bureau. Comparable household information is published in a two-volume data book— Labor Force Statistics Derived From the Current Population Survey, Bulletin 2096. Comparable establishment information appears in two data books— Employment and Earnings, United States, and Employ ment and Earnings, States and Areas, and their annual supplements. More detailed information on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining appears in the monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments. More detailed price information is published each month in the periodicals, the c p i Detailed Report and Producer Prices and Price Indexes. Symbols p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series, pre liminary figures are issued based on representative but in complete returns. r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability of later data but may also reflect other adjustments, n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified. Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series Series Release date Period covered Release date Period covered Release date Period covered MLR table number Employment situation ............................. June 7 May July 5 June August 2 July 1-11 Producer Price Index ............................. June 14 May July 12 June August 9 July 23-27 Consumer Price Index............................. June 20 May July 23 June August 22 July 19-22 Real earnings......................................... June 20 May July 23 June August 22 July 12-16 August 27 2nd quarter 29-32 Productivity and costs: Nonfarm business and manufacturing . . . July 25 29-32 Major collective bargaining settlements . . . . July 25 36-37 Employment Cost Index.......................... July 30 58 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2nd quarter 33-35 EMPLOYMENT DATA FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY Employment data in this section are obtained from the Current Population Survey, a program of personal interviews conducted monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of about 59,500 households selected to represent the U.S population 16 years of age and older. House holds are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months. Definitions Employed persons include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any time during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and (2) those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. Members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the em ployed total. A person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at which he or she worked the greatest number of hours. Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The overall unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the labor force, including the resident Armed Forces. The unemployment 1. rate for all civilian workers represents the number unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force. The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. Persons not in the labor force are those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes persons who are retired, those engaged in their own housework, those not working while attending school, those unable to work because of long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because of personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years of age and older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions, sani tariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members 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. Notes on the data From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjustments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for estimating errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect the compara bility of historical data presented in table 1. A description of these ad justments and their effect on the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m ploym en t a n d E arn ings. Data in tables 2 -8 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal ex perience through December 1984. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-84 [Numbers inthousands] Labor torce Year 1950 1955 1960 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... Noninsti tutional population 106,164 111,747 119,106 128,459 130,180 132,092 134,281 136,573 139,203 142,189 145,939 148,870 151,841 154,831 157,818 160,689 163,541 166,460 169,349 171,775 173,939 175,891 178,080 Employed Number 63,377 67,087 71,489 76,401 77,892 79,565 80,990 82,972 84,889 86,355 88,847 91,203 93,670 95,453 97,826 100,665 103,882 106,559 108,544 110,315 111,872 113,226 115,241 Percent of population 59.7 60.0 60.0 59.5 59.8 60.2 60.3 60.8 61.0 60.7 60.9 61.3 61.7 61.6 62.0 62.6 63.5 64.0 64.1 c64.2 64.3 64.4 64.7 Total 60,087 64,234 67,639 73,034 75,017 76,590 78,173 80,140 80,796 81,340 83,966 86,838 88,515 87,524 90,420 93,673 97,679 100,421 100,907 102,042 101,194 102,510 106,702 Unemployed Civilian Percent of population Resident Armed Forces Total 56.6 57.5 56.8 56.9 57.6 58.0 58.2 58.7 58.0 57.2 57.5 58.3 58.3 56.5 57.3 58.3 59.7 60.3 59.6 59.4 58.2 58.3 59.9 1,169 2,064 1,861 1,946 2,122 2,218 2,253 2,238 2,118 1,973 1,813 1,774 1,721 1,678 1,668 1,656 1,631 1,597 1,604 1,645 1,668 1,676 1,697 58,918 62,170 65,778 71,088 72,895 74,372 75,920 77,902 78,678 79,367 82,153 85,064 86,794 85,845 88,752 92,017 96,048 98,824 99,303 100,397 99,526 100,834 105,005 Agriculture Nonagricultural industries Number Percent of labor force 7,160 6,450 5,458 4,361 3,979 3,844 3,817 3,606 3,463 3,394 3,484 3,470 3,515 3,408 3,331 3,283 3,387 3,347 3,364 3,368 3,401 3,383 3,321 51,758 55,722 60,318 66,726 68,915 70,527 72,103 74,296 75,215 75,972 78,669 81,594 83,279 82,438 85,421 88,734 92,661 95,477 95,938 97,030 96,125 97,450 101,685 3,288 2,852 3,852 3,366 2,875 2,975 2,817 2,832 4,093 5,016 4,882 4,355 5,156 7,929 7,406 6,991 6,202 6,137 7,637 8,273 10,578 10,717 8,539 5.2 4.3 5.4 4.4 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.4 4.8 5.8 5.5 4.8 5.5 8.3 7.6 6.9 6.0 5.8 7.0 7.5 9.5 9.5 7.4 Not in labor force 42,787 44,660 46,617 52,058 52,288 52,527 53,291 53,602 54,315 55,834 57,091 57,667 58,171 59,377 59,991 60,025 59,659 59,900 60,806 61,460 62,067 62,665 62,839 c = corrected. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 59 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 2. Household Data Employment status of the population, Including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted [Numbers inthousands] Employment status and sex Annual average 1983 1984 1985 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. TOTAL Noninstitutional population1'2 ............... Laborforce2 .............................. Participation rate3 ................. Total employed2 Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident ArmedForces1 ............. Civilianemployed..................... Agriculture ........................ Nonagricultural Industries......... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate5 ............... Not Inlaborforce ........................ 175,891 113,226 64.4 102,510 58.3 1,676 100,834 3,383 97,450 10,717 9.5 62,665 178,080 115,241 64.7 106,702 59.9 1,697 105,005 3,321 101,685 8,539 7.4 62,839 177,662 114,895 64.7 106,095 59.7 1,693 104,402 3,379 101,023 8,800 7.7 62,767 177,813 115,412 64.9 106,852 60.1 1,690 105,162 3,367 101,795 8,560 7.4 62,401 177,974 115,309 64.8 107,081 60.2 1,690 105,391 3,368 102,023 8,228 7.1 62,665 178,138 115,566 64.9 107,075 60.1 1,698 105,377 3,333 102,044 8,491 7.3 62,572 178,295 115,341 64.7 106,860 59.9 1,712 105,148 3,264 101,884 8,481 7.4 62,954 178,483 115,484 64.7 107,114 60.0 1,720 105,394 3,319 102,075 8,370 7.2 62,999 178,661 115,721 64.8 107,354 60.1 1,705 105,649 3,169 102,480 8,367 7.2 62,940 178,834 115,773 64.7 107,631 60.2 ■1,699 105,932 3,334 102,598 8,142 7.0 63,061 179,004 116,162 64.9 107,971 60.3 1,698 106,273 3,385 102,888 8,191 7.1 62,842 179,081 116,572 65.1 108,088 60.4 1,697 106,391 3,320 103,071 8,484 7.3 62,509 84,064 64,580 76.8 58,320 69.4 1,533 56,787 6,260 9.7 85,156 65,386 76.8 60,642 71.2 1,551 59,091 4,744 7.3 84,953 65,200 76.7 60,289 71.0 1,548 58,741 4,911 7.5 85,024 65,304 76.8 60,578 71.2 1,545 59,033 4,726 7.2 85,101 65,348 76.8 60,758 71.4 1,545 59,213 4,590 7.0 85,179 65,412 76.8 60,687 71.2 1,551 59,136 4,725 7.2 85,257 65,357 76.7 60,766 71.3 1,563 59,203 4,591 7.0 85,352 65,589 76.8 60,959 71.4 1,571 59,388 4,630 7.1 85,439 65,558 76.7 61,018 71.4 1,557 59,461 4,540 6.9 85,523 65,657 76.8 61,155 71.5 1,552 59,603 4,502 6.9 85,607 65,814 76.9 61,252 71.6 1,550 59,702 4,562 6.9 85,629 65,822 76.9 61,213 71.5 1,549 59,664 4,609 7.0 85,692 85,764 85,827 65,818 65,923 65,986 76.8 76.9 76.9 61,226 61,427 61,405 71.4 71.5 71.6 1,554 1,553 1,553 59,672 59,874 59,852 4,592 4,495 4,582 6.8 6.9 7.0 91,827 48,646 53.0 44,190 48.1 143 44,047 4,457 9.2 92,924 49,855 53.7 46,061 49.6 146 45,915 3,794 7.6 92,709 49,695 53.6 45,806 49.4 145 45,661 3,889 7.8 92,789 50,108 54.0 46,274 49.9 145 46,129 3,834 7.7 92,873 49,961 53.8 46,323 49.9 145 46,178 3,638 7.3 92,958 50,154 54.0 46,388 49.9 147 46,241 3,766 7.5 93,039 49,984 53.7 46,094 49.5 149 45,945 3,890 7.8 93,132 49,895 53.6 46,155 49.6 149 46,006 3,740 7.5 93,222 50,163 53.8 46,336 49.7 148 46,188 3,827 7.6 93,311 50,116 53.7 46,476 49.8 147 46,329 3,640 7.3 93,397 50,348 53.9 46,719 50.0 148 46,571 3,629 7.2 93,452 50,750 54.3 46,875 50.2 148 46,727 3,875 7.6 93,527 50,970 54.5 47,162 50.4 149 47,013 3,807 7.5 179,219 116,787 65.2 108,388 60.5 1,703 106,685 3,340 103,345 8,399 7.2 62,432 179,368 117,215 65.3 108,820 60.7 1,701 107,119 3,362 103,757 8,396 7.2 62,153 179,501 117,073 65.2 108,647 60.5 1,702 106,945 3,428 103,517 8,426 7.2 62,428 Men, 16 years and over Noninstitutional population1’2 ............... Laborforce2 .............................. Participation rate3 ................. Total employed2 ......................... Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident ArmedForces1 ............. Civilianemployed..................... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate5 ............... Women, 16 years and over Noninstitutional population1-2 ............... Laborforce2 .............................. Participation rate3 ................. Total employed2 ........................ Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident ArmedForces1 ............. Civilianemployed..................... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate5 ............... 1The populationandArmed Forces figures are not adjustedforseasonal variation. includes members of the ArmedForces stationed inthe UnitedStates. 3Laborforce as apercent of the noninstitutional population. 60 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 93,603 51,293 54.8 47,392 50.6 148 47,244 3,900 7.6 4Total employedas apercent of the noninstitutlonal population. Unemployment as apercent of the laborforce (includingthe resident Armed Forces). 93,674 51,086 54.5 47,242 50.4 149 47,093 3,844 7.5 3. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted [Numbers inthousands] Employment status Annual average 1984 1985 1983 1984 174,215 111,550 64.0 100,834 57.9 10,717 9.6 62,665 176,383 113,544 64.4 105,005 59.5 8,539 7.5 62,839 175,969 113,302 64.3 104,402 59.3 8,800 7.8 62,667 176,123 113,722 64.6 105,162 59.7 8,560 7.5 62,401 176,284 113,619 64.5 105,391 59.8 8,228 7.2 62,665 176,440 113,868 64.5 105,377 59.7 8,491 7.5 62,572 176,583 113,629 64.3 105,148 59.5 8,481 7.5 62,954 176,763 113,764 64.4 105,394 59.6 8,370 7.4 62,999 176,956 114,016 64.4 105,649 59.7 8,367 7.3 62,940 74,872 58,744 78.5 53,487 71.4 2,429 51,058 5,257 8.9 76,219 59,701 78.3 55,769 73.2 2,418 53,351 3,932 6.6 75,973 59,474 78.3 55,387 72.9 2,446 52,941 4,087 6.9 76,073 59,572 78.3 55,663 73,2 2,443 53,220 3,909 6.6 76,176 59,668 78.3 55,861 73.3 2,448 53,413 3,807 6.4 76,269 59,730 78.3 55,846 73.2 2,444 53,402 3,884 6.5 76,350 59,771 78.3 55,935 73.3 2,406 53,529 3,836 6.4 76,451 59,892 78.3 56,075 78.3 2,414 53,661 3,817 6.4 76,565 76,663 76,753 76,760 59,913 59,994 60,131 60,033 78.3 78.3 78.3 78.2 56,182 56,269 56,372 56,234 73.4 73.4 73.4 73.3 2,334 2,434 2,494 2,417 53,848 53,835 53,878 53,817 3,731 3,725 3,759 3,798 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.3 76,829 76,904 76,988 60,061 60,152 60,177 78.2 78.2 78.2 56,287 56,421 56,370 73.3 73.4 73.2 2,362 2,326 2,390 53,926 54,095 53,980 3,774 3,731 3,807 6.3 6.2 6.3 84,069 44,636 53.1 41,004 48.8 620 40,384 3,632 8.1 85,429 45,900 53.7 42,793 50.1 595 42,198 3,107 6.8 85,168 45,685 53.6 42,524 49.9 613 41,911 3,161 6.9 85,272 46,130 54.1 43,003 50.4 603 42,400 3,127 6.8 85,380 45,958 53.8 42,986 50.3 611 42,375 2,972 6.5 85,488 46,131 54.0 43,001 50.3 580 42,421 3,130 6.8 85,581 46,092 53.9 42,878 50.1 573 42,305 3,214 7.0 85,688 45,950 53.6 42,906 50.1 590 42,316 3,044 6.6 85,793 46,264 53.9 43,091 50.2 569 42,522 3,173 6.9 85,897 46,279 53.9 43,252 50.4 580 42,672 3,027 6.5 85,995 46,463 54.0 43,511 50.6 595 42,916 2,952 6.4 86,015 46,771 54.4 43,610 50.7 592 43,018 3,161 6.8 86,086 86,181 86,274 46,894 47,193 47,155 54.5 54.8 54.7 43,768 44,014 43,958 50.8 51.1 51.0 614 659 651 43,153 43,355 43,307 3,126 3,179 3,197 6.7 6.7 6.8 15,274 8,171 53.5 6,342 41.5 334 6,008 1,829 22.4 14,735 14,828 7,943 8,043 53.9 54.2 6,444 6,491 43.7 43.8 309 320 6,135 6,171 1,499 1,552 18.9 19.3 14,778 14,728 14,683 14,653 14,624 8,020 7,993 8,007 7,766 7,922 54.3 54.3 54.5 53.0 54.2 6,496 6,544 6,530 6,335 6,413 44.0 44.4 44.5 43.2 43.9 321 309 309 285 315 6,175 6,235 6,221 6,050 6,098 1,524 1,449 1,477 1,431 1,509 19.0 18.1 18.4 18.4 19.0 14,598 7,839 53.7 6,376 43.7 266 6,110 1,463 18.7 14,575 14,557 7,801 7,870 53.5 54.1 6,411 6,390 44.0 43.9 320 296 6,091 6,094 1,390 1,480 17.8 18.8 14,610 8,072 55.2 6,547 44.8 311 6,236 1,525 18.9 14,600 8,129 55.7 6,630 45.4 364 6,266 1,499 18.4 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. TOTAL Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participationrate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... Not inlaborforce ......................... 177,135 114,074 64.4 105,932 59.8 8,142 7.1 63,061 177,306 114,464 64.6 106,273 59.9 8,191 7.2 62,842 177,384 114,875 64.8 106,391 60.0 8,484 7.4 62,509 177,516 115,084 64.8 106,685 60.1 8,399 7.3 62,432 177,667 115,514 65.0 107,119 60.3 8,396 7.3 62,153 177,799 115,371 64.9 106,945 60.1 8,426 7.3 62,428 Men, 20 years and over Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participation rate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture............................ Nonagricultural industries ........... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... Women, 20 years and over Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participationrate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture............................ Nonagricultural industries ........... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... Both sexes, 16 to 19 years Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce........................ Participation rate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture............................ Nonagricultural industries ........... Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... 14,582 8,169 56.0 6,684 45.8 377 6,307 1,485 18.2 14,538 8,039 55.3 6,617 45.5 387 6,230 1,422 17.7 White Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participation rate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... 150,805 152,347 152,178 152,229 152,295 152,286 152,402 152,471 152,605 152,659 152,734 153,103 153,191 153,296 153,388 97,021 98,492 98,419 98,749 98,690 98,627 98,223 98,426 98,631 98,630 99,005 99,496 99,711 100,035 99,805 64.3 64.7 64.6 64.9 64.8 64.8 64.4 64.6 64.6 64.6 64.8 65.0 65.1 65.3 65.1 88,893 92,120 91,852 92,330 92,516 92,389 91,951 92,177 92,407 92,587 92,884 93,124 93,552 93,785 93,544 58.9 60.5 60.4 60.7 60.7 60.7 60.3 60.5 60.6 60 6 60.8 60.8 61.1 61.2 61.0 8,128 6,372 6,567 6,419 6,174 6,238 6,272 6,249 6,224 6,043 6,121 6,372 6,159 6,250 6,262 8.4 6.5 '6.7 6.5 6.3 6.3 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.2 6.2 6.3 Black Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participation rate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... 18,925 19,348 19,274 19,302 19,330 19,360 19,386 19,416 19,449 19,481 19,513 19,518 19,542 11,647 12,033 11,898 11,968 11,959 12,083 12,142 12,082 12,208 12,276 12,306 12,315 12,309 61.5 62.2 61.7 62.0 61.9 62.4 62.6 62.2 62.8 63.0 63.1 63.1 63.0 9,375 10,119 9,913 10,053 10,138 10,079 10,222 10,260 10,340 10,426 10,462 10,475 10,301 49.5 52.3 51.4 52.1 52.4 52.1 52.7 52.8 53.2 53.5 53.6 53.7 52.7 2,272 1,914 1,985 1,915 1,821 2,004 1,920 1,822 1,868 1,850 1,844 1,840 2,008 19.5 16.7 15.9 16.0 15.2 16.6 15.8 15.1 15.3 15.1 15.0 14.9 16.3 19,569 12,280 62.8 10,412 53.2 1,869 15.2 19,594 12,403 63.3 10,508 53.6 1,894 15.3 10,795 11,164 11,088 6,884 7,247 7,113 63.8 64.9 64.2 5,943 6,469 6,294 55.1 57.9 56.8 940 778 819 13.7 10.7 11.5 11,425 7,365 64.5 6,615 57.9 750 10.2 11,457 7,336 64.0 6,577 57.4 759 10.3 Hispanic origin Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ......... Civilianlaborforce......................... Participation rate................... Employed .............................. Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed............................ Unemployment rate ............... 1The populationfigures are not seasonallyadjusted. ¿Civilianemployment as apercent of the civiliannoninstitutional population. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11,118 11,148 7,170 7,267 64.5 65.2 6,402 6,519 57.6 58.5 768 748 10.7 10.3 11,180 11,209 11,240 7,264 7,299 7,353 65.0 65.1 65.4 6,503 6,521 6,573 58.2 58.2 58.5 761 778 780 10.5 10.7 10.6 11,270 7,384 65.5 6,574 58.3 810 11.0 11,301 7,394 65.4 6,636 58.7 758 10.3 11,332 7,472 65.9 6,698 59.1 774 10.4 11,363 7,255 63.8 6,487 57.1 768 10.6 11,394 7,330 64.3 6,621 58.1 709 9.7 NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origln groups will not sumto totals because data for the "other races" groups are not presented and Híspanles are included in both the white and black populationgroups. 61 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 4. Household Data Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted [Inthousands] Annual average 1983 1984 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. 1985 Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 105,394 59,388 46,006 39,071 25,715 5,429 105,649 59,461 46,188 39,054 25,897 5,378 105,932 59,603 46,329 39,337 25,995 5,396 106,273 59,702 46,571 39,443 26,122 5,396 106,391 59,644 46,727 39,441 25,912 5,584 106,685 59,672 47,013 39,357 26,108 5,525 107,119 59,874 47,244 39,531 26,195 5,631 106,945 59,852 47,093 39,434 26,058 5,622 CHARACTERISTIC Civilianemployed, 16 years andover ............. Men............................................ Women........................................ Marriedmen, spouse present................. Marriedwomen, spouse present ............. Womenwho maintainfamilies ............... 100,834 105,005 104,402 105,162 105,391 105,377 105,148 56,787 59,091 58,741 59,033 59,213 59,136 59,203 44,047 45,915 45,661 46,129 46,178 46,241 45,945 37,967 39,056 39,012 39,060 39,060 39,123 39,073 24,603 25,636 25,468 25,658 25,734 25,719 25,772 5,091 5,465 5,482 5,606 5,622 5,626 5,496 MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS OF WORKER Agriculture: Wage andsalaryworkers ..................... Self-employedworkers ....................... Unpaidfamilyworkers......................... Nonagricultural industries: Wage andsalaryworkers ..................... Government.............................. Private industries......................... Private households ................. Other ................................ Self-employedworkers ....................... Unpaidfamilyworkers......................... 1,579 1,565 240 1,555 1,553 213 1,627 1,545 215 1,580 1,549 239 1,578 1,566 211 1,519 1,557 220 1,453 1,562 209 1,565 1,555 195 1,511 1,487 187 1,593 1,555 204 1,733 1,485 212 1,596 1,531 227 1,611 1,503 242 1,610 1,502 263 1,705 1,491 231 89,500 15,537 73,963 1,247 72,716 7,575 376 93,565 15,770 77,794 1,238 76,556 7,785 335 92,908 15,765 77,143 1,280 75,863 7,812 341 93,780 15,744 78,036 1,327 76,709 7,745 323 93,845 15,713 78,132 1,297 76,835 7,815 347 93,768 15,639 78,129 1,238 76,891 7,744 318 93,680 15,758 77,922 1,199 76,723 7,807 321 94,140 15,881 78,259 1,198 77,061 7,752 318 94,415 15,997 78,418 1,213 77,205 7,782 314 94,442 15,785 78,657 1,228 77,429 7,731 357 94,725 15,858 78,867 1,257 77,610 7,786 357 95,068 15,738 79,330 1,374 77,956 7,783 343 95,348 16,009 79,339 1,304 78,035 7,673 340 95,756 16,004 79,752 1,210 78,542 7,809 320 95,617 15,968 79,649 1,208 78,441 7,696 304 6,266 2,833 3,099 12,911 5,744 2,430 2,948 13,169 5,758 5,625 5,831 5,759 5,582 5,690 5,710 5,623 5,814 5,628 5,335 5,664 5,664 2,390 2,286 2,326 2,373 2,371 2,461 2,514 2,449 2,596 2,431 2,212 2,599 2,580 3,085 3,042 2,984 2,832 2,743 2,943 2,879 2,855 2,873 2,848 2,835 2,744 2,755 13,326 13,250 13,090 13,248 13,210 13,144 13,126 13,142 13,239 13,355 13,647 13,624 13,278 5,997 2,684 2,993 12,417 5,512 2,291 2,866 12,704 5,520 5,377 5,549 5,482 5,384 5,449 5,483 5,413 5,596 5,389 5,077 5,400 5,374 2,255 2,153 2,160 2,214 2,254 2,306 2,364 2,319 2,473 2,287 2,040 2,405 2,390 2,982 2,949 2,911 2,756 2,675 2,847 2,821 2,782 2,793 2,749 2,751 2,649 2,668 12,924 12,799 12,621 12,786 12,747 12,669 12,679 12,670 12,778 12,861 13,157 13,137 12,834 PERSONS AT WORK PART TIME1 All industries: Part time foreconomic reasons................. Slackwork.................................... Couldonlyfind part-time work............... Voluntarypart time.............................. Nonagricultural industries: Part timeforeconomic reasons................. Slackwork.................................... Couldonlyfind part-time work............... Voluntarypart time.............................. 1Excludes persons “withajobbut not at work"duringthe surveyperiodforsuch reasons as vacation, illness, orindustrial disputes. 5. Selected unemployment Indicators, seasonally adjusted [Unemployment rates] 1984 Annual average Selected categories 1985 1983 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 9.6 22.4 8.9 8.1 8.4 19.3 20.2 18.3 7.9 6.9 19.5 48.5 48.8 48.2 18.1 16.5 13.7 6.5 7.0 12.2 9.5 10.4 3.8 10.9 7.5 18.9 6.6 6.8 6.5 16.0 16.8 15.2 5.7 5.8 15.9 42.7 42.7 42.6 14.3 13.5 10.7 4.6 5.7 10.3 7.2 9.3 2.4 8.6 7.8 19.3 6.9 6.9 6.7 16.2 16.8 15.7 5.9 6.0 16.7 44.3 42.9 45.9 15.6 . 13.6 10.7 4.7 5.8 10.5 7.5 9.3 2.5 8.8 7.5 19.0 6.6 6.8 6.5 16.2 16.9 15.5 5.7 5.8 16.0 44.4 41.4 48.1 14.3 13.7 10.3 4.6 5.8 10.0 7.2 9.4 2.5 8.6 7.2 18.1 6.4 6.5 6.3 15.8 16.6 15.1 5.4 5.6 15.2 37.1 38.2 35.8 14.6 12.6 10.5 4.6 5.7 9.8 6.7 10.0 2.3 8.4 7.5 18.4 6.5 6.8 6.3 15.2 17.4 12.9 5.5 5.8 16.6 42.3 42.3 42.2 15.5 13.8 10.7 4.5 5.8 9.8 7.2 9.6 2.3 8.5 7.5 18.4 6.4 7.0 6.4 16.0 16.7 15.4 5.5 5.9 15.8 41.3 40.5 42.2 14.1 13.8 10.6 4.5 5.8 10.3 7.1 9.6 2.3 8.5 7.4 19.0 6.4 6.6 6.3 16.3 17.0 15.5 5.5 5.7 15.1 41.9 41.0 43.0 13.5 12.6 11.0 4.6 5.7 10.1 7.1 9.3 2.3 8.5 7.3 18.7 6.2 6.9 6.3 15.9 16.6 15.2 5.4 5.8 15.3 40.2 43.8 36.2 13.4 13.4 10.3 4.5 5.7 10.4 7.1 9.1 2.2 8.4 7.1 17.8 6.2 6.5 6.1 15.1 16.2 13.9 5.4 5.5 15.1 41.2 42.0 40.2 12.8 13.5 10.4 4.4 5.4 10.8 6.9 8.6 2.1 8.2 7.2 18.8 6.3 6.4 6.2 15.9 16.2 15.5 5.4 5.5 15.0 42.1 43.8 40.1 13.3 12.7 10.6 4.4 5.4 9.6 6.9 8.8 2.1 8.3 7.4 18.9 6.3 6.8 6.4 15.8 15.9 15.8 5.5 5.9 14.9 42.1 45.3 38.5 12.7 12.8 9.7 4.6 5.7 10.0 7.1 9.3 2.0 8.2 7.3 18.4 6.3 6.7 6.2 15.2 17.0 13.4 5.4 5.6 16.3 43.1 41.1 45.3 14.4 13.9 9.7 4.4 5.4 11.0 7.1 8.7 2.1 8.2 7.3 18.2 6.2 6.7 6.2 15.1 15.2 14.9 5.4 5.9 15.2 41.9 40.9 43.1 13.3 12.9 10.2 4.2 5.9 10.2 6.9 9.6 2.1 8.2 7.3 17.7 6.3 6.8 6.3 14.9 15.3 14.3 5.5 5.8 15.3 39.0 38.5 39.5 13.6 13.2 10.3 4.3 5.9 10.8 6.9 9.7 2.1 8.2 9.9 17.0 18.4 11.2 12.1 10.0 7.4 10.0 7.2 5.3 16.0 7.4 10.0 14.3 7.5 7.2 7.8 5.5 8.0 5.9 4.5 13.5 7.7 10.1 14.4 7.7 7.5 8.0 5.5 8.7 6.1 4.4 12.7 7.3 8.8 14.7 7.2 7.1 7.3 5.7 8.0 5.7 4.7 13.8 7.0 7.5 14.6 7.3 7.2 7.5 5.3 7.3 5.5 4.2 12.3 7.4 7.7 14.6 7.5 6.9 8.5 5.9 7.8 5.9 4.5 14.3 7.4 10.2 14.1 7.4 6.9 8.1 5.9 7.7 6.0 4.4 13.1 7.3 8.6 13.9 7.4 6.9 8.1 5.9 8.0 5.6 4.5 14.7 7.2 10.5 13.7 7.3 6.9 7.8 5.3 7.9 5.7 4.4 13.7 7.2 11.7 14.2 7.2 7.0 7.4 5.2 7.6 5.8 4.3 11.2 7.2 10.7 13.7 7.2 7.1 7.2 5.0 7.5 5.9 4.4 12.2 7.3 10.1 13.4 7.6 7.2 8.1 4.9 7.7 5.9 4.1 15.5 7.3 10.9 13.4 7.5 7.1 8.2 5.5 7.7 5.7 3.9 13.6 7.2 11.0 13.3 7.7 7.4 8.1 4.6 7.5 5.7 3.9 12.2 7.3 10.9 13.3 8.0 7.8 8.3 5.4 7.3 5.7 3.7 13.1 CHARACTERISTIC Total, all civilianworkers.......................... Bothsexes, 16to 19 years................... Men, 20 years andover....................... Women, 20years andover................... White, total.................................... Bothsexes, 16to 19years ............. Men, 16to 19years ............... Women, 16to 19years ........... Men, 20years andover................. Women, 20 years andover ............. Black, total.................................... Bothsexes, 16to 19years ............. Men, 16to 19years ............... Women, 16to 19years ........... Men, 20years andover................. Women, 20years andover ............. Hispanic origin, total.......................... Marriedmen, spouse present................. Marriedwomen, spouse present............. Womenwho maintainfamilies ............... Full-time workers.............................. Part-time workers ............................ Unemployed 15 weeks andover ............. Laborforce time lost1 ........................ INDUSTRY Nonagricultural privatewage andsalaryworkers . . Mining ........................................ Construction .................................. Manufacturing ................................ Durable goods .......................... Nondurable goods ....................... Transportationandpublic utilities............. Wholesale and retail trade..................... Finance andservice industries ............... Government workers .............................. Agricultural wage andsalaryworkers ............. 1Aggregate hours lost bythe unemployedandpersons onpart timeforeconomic reasons as apercent of potentiallyavailable laborforce hours. 62 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6. Unemployment rates by sex and age, seasonally adjusted [Civilianworkers] Sex and age Annual average 1984 1985 1983 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Total, 16years andover . . . . 16to 24 years ............. 16to 19years........... 16to 17years......... 18to 19years......... 20 to 24 years........... 25years andover ......... 25 to 54years......... 55 years andover . . , . 9.6 17.2 22.4 24.5 21.1 14.5 7.5 8.0 5.3 7.5 13.9 18.9 21.2 17.4 11.5 5.8 6.1 4.5 7.8 14.5 19.3 22.1 17.6 12.1 6.0 6.3 4.3 7.5 14.1 19.0 20.6 17.9 11.6 5.8 6.0 4.5 7.2 13.2 18.1 20.1 16.8 10.8 5.7 5.8 4.5 7.5 13.6 18.4 20.7 16.7 11.2 5.8 6.1 4.5 7.5 13.9 18.4 21.2 16.7 11.7 5.7 6.0 4.5 7.4 13.9 19.0 20.9 17.7 11.4 5.6 5.9 4.5 7.3 13.5 18.7 20.2 17.8 11.0 5.7 5.9 4.7 7.1 13.2 17.8 20.0 16.8 10.9 5.5 5.8 4.4 7.2 13.5 18.8 21.0 17.7 10.9 5.5 5.8 4.1 7.4 13.6 18.9 7.3 13.7 18.4 21.2 20.0 17.4 7.3 13.5 18.2 20.9 16.5 7.3 13.3 17.7 20.7 15.8 11.2 11.1 11.0 Men, 16 years andover . . 16to 24 years......... 16to 19years . . . . 16to 17years . . . 18to 19years . . 20 to 24 years , . . . 25years andover . . . . 25to 54years . . . 55 years andover . 9.9 18.4 23.3 25.2 22.2 15.9 7.8 8.2 5.6 7.4 14.4 19.6 21.9 18.3 11.9 5.7 5.9 4.6 7.7 14.9 19.7 23.3 17.7 12.6 5.9 6.2 4.5 7.4 14.3 19.5 21.7 18.1 11.7 5.7 5.9 4.6 7.2 13.9 18.9 22.4 17.0 11.5 5.5 5.7 4.5 7.4 14.5 20.4 22.6 18.5 11.6 5.6 5.8 4.6 7.2 14.3 18.8 22.2 16.6 12.1 5.5 5.7 4.6 7.2 14.6 19.7 21.0 18.7 12.2 5.5 5.6 4.8 7.1 13.8 19.8 21.3 18.9 10.9 5.4 5.6 4.7 7.0 13.7 18.9 20.3 18.3 11.2 5.4 5.6 4.7 7.1 14.1 19.4 19.8 19.3 11.5 5.4 5.6 4.4 Women, 16years andover 16to 24 years......... 16to 19years . . . . 16to 17years . . . 18to 19years . . . 20 to 24years . . . . 25 years andover . . . . 25 to 54 years . . . 55 years andover . 9.2 15.8 21.3 23.7 19.9 12.9 7.2 7.7 4.7 7.6 13.3 18.0 20.4 16.6 10.9 6.0 6.3 4.2 7.8 14.0 18.8 20.8 17.6 11.4 6.0 6.4 4.0 7.7 13.9 18.4 19.4 17.7 11.5 5.9 6.2 4.3 7.3 12.5 17.3 17.6 16.5 10.0 5.9 6.0 4.5 7.5 12.7 16.4 18.7 14.7 10.8 6.0 6.4 4.2 7.8 13.5 18.1 20.3 16.7 11.1 6.1 6.5 4.3 7.5 13.2 18.3 20.9 16.6 10.5 5.9 6.2 4.0 7.7 13.2 17.4 19.0 16.5 11.1 6.0 6.2 4.8 7.3 12.6 16.6 19.7 15.1 10.7 5.7 6.1 3.9 7.2 12.8 18.1 22.3 16.0 10.2 5.6 6.0 3.7 7. 17.4 10.9 5.8 6.1 4.2 7.2 13.8 19.1 5.6 5.9 3.9 18.0 7.1 14.4 19.5 20.7 18.6 11.2 11.8 21.2 5.5 5.8 4.3 7.7 13.3 18.6 21.2 16.7 10.5 6.1 6.4 4.2 5.6 5.9 4.0 7.0 13.9 18.1 7.5 12.9 17.3 19.4 16.2 10.6 5.9 6.3 3.8 6.1 4.0 15.7 11.7 5.3 5.6 3.8 7.1 13.6 18.2 21.5 16.2 11.3 5.5 5.8 3.9 7.6 13.2 18.2 19.5 17.4 10.5 7.5 12.9 17.1 19.8 15.5 10.7 22.2 5.4 5.6 4.0 5.7 6.0 6.4 4.2 6.0 6.3 4.2 Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers inthousands] Reason for unemployment Joblosers .............................. Onlayoff .................................. Otherjob losers .............................. Jobleavers........................... Reentrants...................................... Newentrants.............................. Annual average 1984 1985 1983 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 6,258 1,780 4,478 830 2,412 1,216 4,421 1,171 3,250 823 2,184 1,110 4,531 1,117 3,414 792 2,301 1,197 4,373 1,187 3,186 812 2,184 1,170 4,271 1,162 3,109 809 1,989 1,134 4,475 1,165 3,310 850 2,111 1,092 4,227 1,146 3,081 833 2,294 1,088 4,188 1,110 3,078 841 2,254 1,057 4,261 1,151 3,110 829 2,150 1,060 4,141 1,068 3,073 869 2,161 1,024 4,176 1,070 3,106 858 2,218 1,011 4,313 1,229 3,084 884 2,244 1,049 4,251 1,240 3,011 865 2,233 1,035 4,158 1,163 2,995 848 2,341 1,090 4,228 1,208 3,019 838 2,312 1,072 100.0 58.4 16.6 41.8 7.7 22.5 11.3 100.0 51.8 13.7 38.1 9.6 25.6 13.0 100.0 51.4 12.7 38.7 9.0 26.1 13.6 100.0 51.2 13.9 37.3 9.5 25.6 13.7 100.0 52.1 14.2 37.9 9.9 24.2 13.8 100.0 52.5 13.7 38.8 10.0 24.8 12.8 100.0 50.1 13.6 36.5 9.9 27.2 12.9 100.0 50.2 13.3 36.9 10.1 27.0 12.7 100.0 51.3 13.9 37.5 10.0 25.9 12.8 100.0 50.5 13.0 37.5 10.6 26.4 12.5 100.0 50.5 12.9 37.6 10.4 26.8 12.2 100.0 50.8 14.5 36.3 10.4 26.4 12.4 100.0 50.7 14.8 35.9 10.3 26.6 12.3 100.0 49.3 13.8 35.5 10.0 27.7 12.9 100.0 50.0 14.3 35.7 9.9 27.4 12.7 5.6 .7 2.2 1.1 3.9 .7 1.9 1.0 4.0 .7 2.0 1.1 3.8 .7 1.9 1.0 3.8 .7 1.8 1.0 3.9 .7 1.9 1.0 3.7 .7 2.0 1.0 3.7 .7 2.0 .9 3.7 .7 1.9 .9 3.6 .8 1.9 .9 3.6 .7 1.9 .9 3.8 .8 2.0 .9 3.7 .8 1.9 .9 3.6 .7 2.0 .9 3.7 .7 2.0 .9 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION Total unemployed.......................... Joblosers ............................ Onlayoff ................................ Otherjob losers .......................... Job leavers.......................... Reentrants......................... Newentrants........................ PERCENT OF CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE Joblosers ........................ Jobleavers................................ Reentrants............................ Newentrants.......................... 8. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers inthousands] Weeks of unemployment Less than 5weeks................. 5to 14 weeks..................... 15weeks andover .......................... 15to 26 weeks............................ 27 weeks andover.......................... Meanduration inweeks............................ Mediandurationinweeks....................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Annual average 1984 1985 1983 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 3,570 2,937 4,210 1,652 2,559 20.0 10.1 3,350 2,451 2,737 1,104 1,634 18.2 7.9 3,407 2,485 2,842 1,102 1,740 18.7 8.1 3,275 2,440 2,833 1,173 1,660 18.5 8.3 3,229 2,303 2,630 1,012 1,618 18.1 7.5 3,409 2,449 2,672 1,088 1,584 18.0 7.6 3,513 2,406 2,621 1,116 1,505 17.6 7.6 3,313 2,533 2,605 1,106 1,499 17.3 7.6 3,395 2,406 2,527 1,092 1,435 16.7 7.3 3,352 2,324 2,428 990 1,438 17.4 7.3 3,282 2,516 2,374 972 1,402 17.3 7.4 3,662 2,552 2,243 941 1,302 15.3 6.7 3,524 2,469 2,416 1,076 1,340 15.9 7.2 3,590 2,478 2,400 1,065 1,335 15.9 7.1 3,558 2,525 2,377 1,022 1,354 16.1 6.7 63 EM PLOYM ENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA FROM ESTABLISHMENT SURVEYS Employment, hours, and earnings data in this section are com piled from payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by over 200,000 establishments representing all industries except agriculture. In most industries, the sampling probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An establishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for example, or warehouse.) Selfemployed persons and others not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the survey because they are excluded from establishment records. This largely accounts for the difference in employment figures between the household and establishment sur veys. Definitions Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holiday and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 percent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establishment which reports them. Production workers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker su pervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with produc tion operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 12-16 include production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construc tion; and nonsupervisory workers in transportation and public utilities; in wholesale and retail trade; in finance, insurance, and real estate; and in services industries. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private nonagricultural payrolls. Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers re ceive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special payments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (cpi- w). The Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from average hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two types of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments: fluctuations in overtime premiums 64 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes and seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and low-wage industries. Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsuper visory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the portion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular hours and for which overtime premiums were paid. The Diffusion Index, introduced in table 17 of the May 1983 issue, represents the percent of 185 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 Bureau practice, data for the 3-, 6-, and 9-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while that for the 12-month span is unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measuring the dispersion of economic gains or losses and is also an eco nomic indicator. Notes on the data Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are pe riodically adjusted to comprehensive counts o f employment (called “benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release of May 1984 data, published in the July 1984 issue of the Review. Con sequently, data published in the Review prior to that issue are not necessarily comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to April 1982; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January 1979. Unadjusted data from April 1983 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1980 forward are subject to revision in future bench marks. Earlier comparable unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a Supplement to Employment and Earnings (unadjusted data from April 1977 through February 1984 and seasonally adjusted data from January 1974 through February 1984) and in Employment, Hours, and Earnings, United States, 1909-84, bls Bulletin 1312-12 (for prior peri ods). A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “ Com paring employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” Monthly Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9-20. See also BLS Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). 9. Employment, by industry, selected years, 1950-84 [Nonagricultural payroll data, inthousands] Goods-producing Year Private sector Total Total Mining Service-producing Construc tion Manufac turing Total Transpor tation and public utilities Whole sale trade Retail trade Finance, insurance, Services and real estate Government Total Federal State Local 1950 ..................... 1955 ..................... I9602 ................... 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 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 (1) 1,168 1,536 1,856 1,996 (1) 3,558 4,547 5,392 5,700 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 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 2,141 2,302 2,442 2,533 2,664 6,080 6,371 6,660 6,904 7,158 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 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 2,747 2,859 2,923 3,039 3,179 7,437 7,790 8,146 8,407 8,758 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 23,352 779 24,346 813 25,585 851 26,461 958 25,658 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 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 3,273 3,377 3,474 3,541 3,610 8,865 9,023 9,446 9,633 9,765 1981..................... 1982 ..................... 1983 ..................... 1984 ..................... 91,156 89,566 90,138 94,156 75,126 73,729 74,288 78,187 25,497 23,813 23,394 24,904 4,188 3,905 3,940 4,316 20,170 18,781 18,497 19,590 65,659 65,753 66,744 69,254 5,165 5,082 4,958 5,170 5,358 5,278 5,259 5,526 15,189 15,179 15,545 16,261 5,298 5,341 5,467 5,665 18,619 19,036 19,665 20,662 16,031 15,837 15,851 15,969 2,772 2,739 2,752 2,783 3,640 3,640 3,660 3,702 9,619 9,458 9,439 9,483 1,139 1,128 957 998 1Not available. 2DataincludeAlaskaandHawaii beginning in1959. 10. NOTE: See “Notes onthe data”foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. Employment, by State [Nonagricultural payroll data, inthousands] State March 1984 February 1985 March 19858 State March 1984 February 1985 March 198SP Alabama.................................... Alaska...................................... Arizona .................................... Arkansas .................................. California ................................ 1,362.1 211.9 1,161.2 769.6 10,405.8 1,384.5 218.7 1,240.1 782.3 10,709.6 1,382.6 221.5 1,254.7 789.2 10,769.0 Montana.................................... Nebraska .................................. Nevada .................................. NewHampshire............................ NewJersey................................ 272.7 615.3 415.4 423.8 3,236.0 279.0 631.9 437.5 449.8 3,339.9 279.6 637,3 441.9 456.2 3,363.0 Colorado .................................. Connecticut................................ Delaware .................................. District of Columbia ....................... Florida...................................... 1,371.9 1,487.7 270.6 603.0 4,187.8 1,390.0 1,533.2 282.1 613.2 4,400.0 1,404.0 1,543 2 284.6 616.1 4,418.2 NewMexico................................ 493.2 507.3 509.6 NorthCarolina ............................ NorthDakota.............................. Ohio........................................ 2,528.5 246.6 4,150.5 2,585.8 249.5 4,242.3 2,598.4 249.8 4,272.7 Georgia.................................... Hawaii...................................... Idaho ...................................... Illinois...................................... Indiana .................................... 2,385.3 413.5 320.3 4,587.8 2,072.9 2,536.7 419.7 323.7 4,603.9 2,131.7 2,560.5 421.2 324.5 4,633.3 2,151.3 Oklahoma.................................. Oregon .................................... 1,181.1 985.8 1,175.9 1,002.9 1,183.9 1,011.1 Rhode Island.............................. SouthCarolina ............................ 403.4 1,240.8 410.2 1,299.5 412.0 1,312.8 Iowa........................................ Kansas .................................... Kentucky .................................. Louisiana .................................. Maine...................................... 1,053.7 947.6 1,179.9 1,578.3 426.8 1,048.4 960.6 1,215.5 1,584.7 436.9 1,052 6 971 3 1,229.7 1,584.1 437.5 Texas ...................................... Utah..................... ............... Vermont.................................... 6,382.3 587.2 211.7 6,517.1 611.4 218.7 6,539.7 616.2 218.9 Maryland .................................. Massachusetts ............................ Michigan .................................. Minnesota.................................. Mississippi ................................ Missouri.................................... 1,759.3 2,780.9 3,311.4 1,759.8 812.4 1,988.3 1,818.2 2,888.3 3,354.2 1,832.9 834.9 1,996.5 1,845.2 2,920.0 3,381.0 1,839.7 838.3 2,019.5 Virginia .................................... 2,268.3 1fi1? fi 583.7 1,887.8 194.6 2,351.8 2,374.4 West Virginia.............................. Wisconsin.................................. 577.9 1,933.8 188.2 584.2 1,940.8 (11 VirginIslands.............................. 37.6 36.6 36.9 1Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis p = preliminary. 65 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 11. Establishment Data Employment, by industry, seasonally adjusted [Nonagricultural payroll data, inthousands] Annual average Industry division and group 1983 90,138 74,288 23,394 GOODS-PRODUCING 957 Mining ......................................................................... 600 Oil andgas extraction........................ 3,940 ............................................................ Construction 1,015 General buildingcontractors................... 18,497 M anu facturing............................................................ Productionworkers .......................... 12,581 10,774 Durable goods .......................................................... 7,151 Productionworkers .......................... 658 Lumberandwood products ................... 447 Furnitureandfixtures.......................... 573 Stone, clay, andglass products ............... 838 Primarymetal industries ....................... 343 Blast furnaces andbasic steel products . . . . 1,374 Fabricated metal products....................... 2,038 Machinery, except electrical ................... 2,024 Electrical andelectronic equipment............. Transportationequipment....................... 1,756 758 Motorvehicles andequipment ............... 695 Instruments and related products ............. 371 Miscellaneous manufacturing................... 7,724 Nondurable goods ................................................... 5,430 Productionworkers .......................... 1,622 Foodandkindredproducts..................... 69 Tobaccomanufactures ........................ 744 Textile mill products............................ 1,164 Apparel andothertextile products............. 662 Paperandallied products....................... 1,296 Printingand publishing......................... 1,047 Chemicals andallied products ................. 195 Petroleumandcoal products................... 718 Rubberandmiscellaneous plastics products . . Leatherandleather products................... 208 66,744 SERVICE-PRODUCING................................................... 4,958 Transportation and public u tilitie s ......................... 2,739 Transportation.................................. 2,219 Communicationandpublic utilities............. 5,259 Wholesale t r a d e ......................................................... 3,064 Durable goods1 ................................ 2,195 Nondurable goods1 ............................ 15,545 Retail trade ................................................................ 2,161 General merchandise stores ................... 2,560 Foodstores .................................... 1,667 Automotive dealers andservice stations....... 5,007 Eatinganddrinking places ..................... 5,467 Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ...................... 2,740 Finance.......................................... 1,721 Insurance ...................................... 1,005 Real estate...................................... 19,665 Services ...................................................................... 3,539 Business services.............................. Healthservices ................................ 5,973 Government ................................................................ 15,851 2,752 Federal......................................... 3,660 State ........................................... 9,439 Local........................................... TOTAL ................................................................ PRIVATE SECTO R................................................... 1984 94,156 78,187 24,904 998 627 4,316 1,128 19,590 13,455 11,635 7,846 710 484 605 874 337 1,476 2,214 2,234 1,928 867 723 387 7,954 5,610 1,643 67 753 1,202 682 1,361 1,061 188 796 202 69,254 5,170 2,895 2,276 5,526 3,254 2,271 16,261 2,289 2,649 1,754 5,212 5,665 2,850 1,757 1,058 20,662 4,003 6,068 15,969 2,783 3,702 9,483 93,449 77,546 24,760 984 612 4,246 1,110 19,530 13,443 11,551 7,799 714 482 604 879 345 1,459 2,189 2,212 1,905 857 719 388 7,979 5,644 1,648 67 766 1,226 680 1,348 1,057 189 790 208 68,689 5,129 2,862 2,267 5,473 3,215 2,258 16,095 2,251 2,635 1,743 5,154 5,640 2,851 1,742 1,047 20,449 3,912 6,062 15,903 2,771 3,693 9,439 May 93,768 77,864 24,851 995 619 4,286 1,126 19,570 13,465 11.598 7,826 711 482 605 887 347 1,469 2,203 2,228 1,906 848 722 385 7,972 5,639 1,643 67 762 1,217 681 1,356 1,057 188 795 206 68,917 5,144 2,871 2,273 5,492 3,235 2,257 16,166 2,273 2,630 1,751 5,183 5,662 2,863 1,746 1,053 20,549 3,979 6,073 15,904 2,767 3,699 9,438 June 94,135 78,241 24,974 1,002 623 4,343 1,135 19,629 13,492 11,652 7,860 712 485 605 884 345 1,479 2,226 2,237 1,917 855 723 384 7,977 5,632 1,644 67 759 1,209 685 1,362 1,062 188 797 204 69,161 5,163 2,883 2,280 5,502 3,249 2,253 16,245 2,295 2,641 1,751 5,199 5,676 2,854 1,752 1,066 20,681 4,014 6,064 15,894 2,777 3,699 9,418 1UnderWholesale trade, dataforDurablegoods andNondurable goods have beencorrectedinthis tableas of theApril 1985 issue of theMonthly Labor Review. 66 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1985 1984 Apr, July 94,350 78,422 25,059 1,007 629 4,356 1,133 19,696 13,541 11,702 7,899 708 485 606 880 342 1,490 2,242 2,252 1,926 858 727 386 7,994 5,642 1,655 66 755 1,206 687 1,368 1,064 187 801 205 69,291 5,175 2,896 2,279 5,528 3,268 2,260 16,283 2,301 2,648 1,762 5,211 5,676 2,854 1,759 1,063 20,701 4,035 6,079 15,928 2,779 3,697 9,452 Aug. 94,523 78,566 25,098 1,017 636 4,356 1,132 19,725 13,558 11,758 7,945 706 484 603 879 334 1,491 2,252 2,267 1,961 894 726 389 7,967 5,613 1,642 65 751 1,200 686 1,371 1,067 187 800 198 69,425 5,202 2,924 2,278 5,544 3,278 2,266 16,295 2,303 2,640 1,758 5,238 5,679 2,850 1,763 1,066 20,748 4,069 6,034 15,957 2,785 3,714 9,458 Sept. 94,807 78,698 25,010 1,020 642 4.374 1,140 19,616 13,448 11,696 7,876 703 481 603 865 324 1,485 2,243 2,263 1,939 864 726 388 7,920 5,572 1,630 69 744 1,181 680 1,375 1,063 186 798 194 69,797 5,213 2,937 2,276 5,588 3,293 2,295 16,342 2,318 2,648 1,755 5,255 5,684 2,856 1,766 1,062 20,861 4,085 6,085 16,109 2,804 3,725 9,580 Oct. 95,157 79,054 25,080 1,012 643 4,382 1,140 19,686 13,497 11,752 7,915 710 487 606 866 320 1,495 2,255 2,269 1,945 865 729 390 7,934 5,582 1,640 69 735 1,178 684 1,380 1,065 185 805 193 70,077 5,225 2,951 2,274 5,612 3,301 2,311 16,468 2,334 2,677 1,763 5,280 5,705 2,865 1,774 1,066 20,964 4,110 6,087 16,103 2,793 3,719 9,591 Nov. 95,497 79,371 25,123 1,009 648 4,396 1,146 19,718 13,505 11,776 7,925 713 492 606 865 320 1,498 2,251 2,274 1,957 877 731 389 7,942 5,580 1,644 67 731 1,178 683 1,386 1,066 185 810 192 70,374 5,226 2,953 2,273 5,623 3,317 2,306 16,644 2,391 2,696 1,772 5,303 5,725 2,874 1,778 1,073 21,030 4,142 6,104 16,126 2,809 3,724 9,598 Dec. 95,681 79,618 25,258 1,000 646 4,457 1,159 19,801 13,571 11,834 7,969 717 495 612 859 318 1,502 2,253 2,281 1,993 904 732 390 7,967 5,602 1,658 69 727 1,186 684 1,386 1,068 184 814 191 70,423 5,249 2,974 2,275 5,641 3,328 2,313 16,626 2,331 2,710 1,777 5,327 5,749 2,886 1,785 1,078 21,095 4,151 6,115 16,063 2,809 3,711 9,543 Jan. 96,045 79,971 25.338 1,000 641 4,530 1,186 19,808 13,569 11,844 7,965 715 497 614 860 319 1,498 2,248 2,282 2,010 912 731 389 7,964 5,604 1,660 69 728 1,185 684 1,390 1,065 184 812 187 70,707 5,266 2,984 2,282 5,665 3,340 2,325 16,707 2,368 2,714 1,780 5,390 5,764 2,900 1,786 1,078 21,231 4,193 6,140 16,074 2,807 3,713 9,554 Feb. Mar.P Apr.P 96,161 80,073 25,235 1,001 636 4,492 1,171 19,742 13,491 11,797 7,902 708 497 608 855 316 1,494 2,241 2,276 2,001 891 733 384 7,945 5,589 1,656 69 720 1,179 684 1,392 1,064 183 813 185 70,926 5,281 3,002 2,279 5,672 3,348 2,324 16,754 2,365 2,726 1,796 5,390 5,796 2,919 1,793 1,084 21,335 4,225 6,162 16,088 2,805 3,721 9,562 96,514 80,411 25,326 1,000 634 4,606 1,206 19,720 13,463 11,778 7,880 709 500 613 848 315 1,488 2,236 2,271 1,995 877 734 384 7,942 5,583 1,661 68 715 1,176 683 1,396 1,065 182 811 185 71,188 5,255 2,983 2,272 5,691 3,357 2,334 16,836 2,380 2,747 1,805 5,414 5,825 2,936 1,796 1,093 21,478 4,268 6,178 16,103 2,811 3,728 9,564 96,731 80,635 25,361 1,009 638 4,676 1,217 19,676 13,445 11,738 7,855 702 493 611 840 310 1,484 2,236 2,254 2,004 882 733 381 7,938 5,590 1,656 69 718 1,171 682 1,400 1,067 182 809 184 71,370 5,272 3,003 2,269 5,715 3,376 2,339 16,859 2,370 2,743 1,808 5,435 5,858 2,957 1,800 1,101 21,570 4,294 6,197 16,096 2,813 3,739 9,544 p = preliminary. NOTE: See "Notes onthe data”foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. 12. Average hours and earnings, by industry, 1968-84 [Production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls] Year Average weekly hours Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Private sector Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Mining Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Construction 1968 1969 1970 37.8 37.7 37.1 $2.85 3.04 3.23 $107.73 114.61 119.83 42.6 43.0 42.7 $3.35 3.60 3.85 $142.71 154.80 164.40 37.3 37.9 37.3 $4.41 4.79 5.24 $164.49 181.54 195.45 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 36.9 37.0 36.9 36.5 36.1 3.45 3.70 3.94 4.24 4.53 127.31 136.90 145.39 154.76 163.53 42.4 42.6 42.4 41.9 41.9 4.06 4.44 4.75 5.23 5.95 172.14 189.14 201.40 219.14 249.31 37.2 36.5 36.8 36.6 36.4 5.69 6.06 6.41 6.81 7.31 211.67 221.19 235.89 249.25 266.08 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 36.1 36.0 35.8 35.7 35.3 4.86 5.25 5.69 6.16 6.66 175.45 189.00 203.70 219.91 235.10 42.4 43.4 43.4 43.0 43.3 6.46 6.94 7.67 8.49 9.17 273.90 301.20 332.88 365.07 397.06 36.8 36.5 36.8 37.0 37.0 7.71 8.10 8.66 9.27 9.94 283.73 295.65 318.69 342.99 367.78 1981 1982 1983 1984 35.2 34.8 35.0 35.3 7.25 7.68 8.02 8.33 255.20 267.26 280.70 294.05 43.7 42.7 42.5 43.4 10.04 10.77 11.27 11.58 438.75 459.88 478.98 502.57 36.9 36.7 37.2 37.8 10.82 11.63 11.92 12.03 399.26 426.82 443.42 454.73 Manufacturing Transportation and public utilities Wholesale trade 1968 1969 1970 40.7 40.6 39.8 $3.01 3.19 3.35 $122.51 129.51 133.33 40.6 40.7 40.5 $3.42 3.63 3.85 $138.85 147.74 155.93 40.1 40.2 39.9 $3.05 3.23 3.44 $122.31 129.85 137.26 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 39.9 40.5 40.7 40.0 39.5 3.57 3.82 4.09 4.42 4.83 142.44 154.71 166.46 176.80 190.79 40.1 40.4 40.5 40.2 39.7 4.21 4.65 5.02 5.41 5.88 168.82 187.86 203.31 217.48 233.44 39.5 39.4 39.3 38.8 38.7 3.65 3.85 4.08 4.39 4.73 129.85 144.18 151.69 160.34 183.05 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 40.1 40.3 40.4 40.2 39.7 5.22 5.68 6.17 6.70 7.27 209.32 228.90 249.27 269.34 288.62 39.8 39.9 40.0 39.9 39.6 6.45 6.99 7.57 8.16 8.87 256.71 278.90 302.80 325.58 351.25 38.7 38.8 38.8 38.8 38.5 5.03 5.39 5.88 6.39 6.96 194.66 209.13 228.14 247.93 267.96 1981 1982 1983 1984 , 39.8 38.9 40.1 40.7 7.99 8.49 8.83 9.17 318.00 330.26 354.08 373.22 39.4 39.0 39.0 39.4 9.70 10.32 10.80 11.15 382.18 402.48 421.20 439.31 38.5 38.3 38.5 38.6 7.56 8.09 8.54 8.94 291.06 309.85 328.79 345.08 Retail trade Finance, Insurance, and real estate Services 1968 1969 1970 34.7 34.2 33.8 $2.16 2.30 2.44 $74.95 78.66 82.47 37.0 37.1 36.7 $2.75 2.93 3.07 $101.75 108.70 112.67 34.7 34.7 34.4 $2.42 2.61 2.81 $83.97 90.57 96.66 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 33.7 33.4 33.1 32.7 32.4 2.60 2.75 2.91 3.14 3.36 87.62 91.85 96.32 102.68 108.86 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.5 36.5 3.22 3.36 3.53 3.77 4.06 117.85 122.98 129.20 137.61 148.19 33.9 33.9 33.8 33.6 33.5 3.04 3.27 3.47 3.75 4.02 103.06 110.85 117.29 126.00 134.67 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 32.1 31.6 31.0 30.6 30.2 3.57 3.85 4.20 4.53 4.88 114.60 121.66 130.20 138.62 147.38 36.4 36.4 36.4 36.2 36.2 4.27 4.54 4.89 5.27 5.79 155.43 165.26 178.00 190.77 209.60 33.3 33.0 32.8 32.7 32.6 4.31 4.65 4.99 5.36 5.85 143.52 153.45 163.67 175.27 190.71 1981 1982 1983 1984 30.1 29.9 29.8 30.0 5.25 5.48 5.74 5.89 158.03 163.85 171.05 176.70 36.3 36.2 36.2 36.5 6.31 6.78 7.29 7.62 229.05 245.44 263.90 278.13 32.6 32.6 32.7 32.8 6.41 6.92 7.30 7.62 208.97 225.59 238.71 249.94 NOTE: See "Notes onthe data"foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 67 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 13. Establishment Data Average weekly hours, by industry, seasonally adjusted [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average Industry 1983 1984 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. 1985 Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.l1 Apr.F PRIVATE SECTOR ................................................ 35.0 35.3 35.4 35.3 35.3 35.2 35.2 35.4 35.1 35.2 35.3 35.2 35.0 35.2 35.1 MANUFACTURING.......................................................... 40.1 3.0 40.7 3.4 41.1 3.7 40.6 3.3 40.6 3.3 40.5 3.3 40.5 3.3 40.6 3.3 40.4 3.3 40.5 3.4 40.7 3.4 40.6 3.3 40.0 3.3 40.4 3.3 40.3 3.4 Overtime hours.......................... 40.7 3.0 41.4 3.6 41.8 4.0 41.3 3.5 41.2 3.5 41.2 3.5 41.2 3.4 41.5 3.5 41.3 3.5 41.2 3.6 41.4 3.6 41.4 3.6 40.6 3.6 41.1 3.5 41.0 3.5 Lumberandwood products................... Furnitureandfixtures ........................ Stone, clay, andglass products ............. Primarymetal industries....................... Blast furnaces and basic steel products . . . . Fabricatedmetal products..................... 40.1 39.4 41.5 40.5 39.5 40.6 39.9 39.7 42.0 41.6 40.6 41.4 40.4 39.7 42.3 42.2 41.0 41.8 39.6 39.7 42.1 42.1 41.6 41.4 39.4 39.1 41.8 41.7 41.1 41.3 39.3 39.8 41.9 41.5 39.9 41.3 39.4 39.1 41.7 41.0 39.6 41.1 40.2 39.9 42.0 41.3 40.0 41.5 39.7 39.6 41.8 41.3 40.1 40.3 39.5 39.8 41.8 41.5 40.8 41.1 40.0 39.6 41.7 41.2 39.7 41.4 40.0 40.5 41.6 41.0 39.7 41.4 38.8 39.4 41.4 40.8 40.6 40.6 39.5 39.4 42.1 41.1 40.8 41.2 39.5 39.0 42.1 41.1 40.5 41.3 Machinery, except electrical................... Electrical andelectronic equipment........... Transportationequipment..................... Motorvehicles andequipment............... Instruments and related products............. 40.5 40.5 42.1 43.3 40.4 41.9 41.0 42.7 43.7 41.3 42.3 41.3 43.5 44.8 41.4 41.9 41.0 42.4 42.9 40.7 42.0 40.8 42.3 43.1 41.3 41.8 40.8 42.2 42.4 41.3 42.0 40.9 42.4 43.3 41.1 42.0 41.2 42.8 43.9 41.5 41.9 40.9 42.4 43.3 41.2 41.7 41.0 42.4 43.4 41.5 41.8 41.0 43.0 44.4 41.8 41.7 40.8 43.3 44.6 41.2 41.0 40.1 41.7 42.2 40.6 41.6 40.7 42.4 43.4 41.0 41.2 40.3 42.7 43.7 40.9 Nondurable goods ................................................... Overtime hours.......................... 39.4 3.0 39.6 3.1 40.2 3.4 39.6 3.1 39.6 3.2 39.4 3.1 39.5 3.1 39.4 3.0 39.3 2.9 39.4 3.2 39.6 3.1 39.5 2.9 39.2 2.9 39.5 3.0 39.4 3.1 Foodandkindredproducts ................... Textile mill products.......................... Apparel andothertextile products ........... Paper andallied products..................... 39.5 40.5 36.2 42.6 39.8 39.9 36.4 43.1 40.1 41.2 37.4 43.2 39.7 40.0 36.5 43.1 39.8 40.0 36.4 42.9 39.5 39.8 35.8 43.3 39.7 39.4 36.0 43.1 39.6 39.2 35.9 43.1 39.6 38.7 35.9 43.0 39.7 39.0 36.0 43.2 40.1 39.2 36.4 43.1 39.8 39.3 36.2 43.1 39.6 38.8 35.7 42.8 39.8 39.1 36.2 43.1 39.7 39.3 35.9 42.9 Printingand publishing ....................... Chemicals andalliedproducts................. Petroleumandcoal products ................. Leatherandleather products ................. 37.6 41.6 43.9 36.8 37.9 41.9 43.7 36.8 38.2 42.0 43.7 37.5 38.0 41.8 43.5 36.5 37.7 41.9 43.1 36.7 37.7 41.9 43.2 37.0 37.8 42.0 43.9 36.0 37.9 41.8 43.1 36.5 37.8 41.6 43.5 36.4 37.9 41.7 43.5 36.4 37.7 41.9 42.9 36.9 37.9 42.0 43.4 37.0 37.6 41.9 43.5 36.2 37.6 42.2 43.6 36.9 37.6 41.9 44.0 37.1 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC U TILIT IE S ............. 39.0 39.4 39.5 39.4 39.6 39.8 39.4 39.8 39.1 39.4 39.2 ‘39.2 39.4 39.5 39.4 WHOLESALE TRADE 38.5 38.6 38.7 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.7 38.8 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.5 38.7 38.7 30.1 30.2 29.9 29.9 30.0 29.8 29.9 30.1 29.8 29.7 29.8 29.6 32.7 32.7 32.7 32.6 32.8 32.7 32.7 32.8 32.7 32.7 32.8 32.7 Overtime hours.......................... Durable goods .......................................................... ................................................... RETAIL TRADE................................................................ 29.8 30.0 30.0 SERVICES ...................................................................... 32.7 32.8 32.8 p = preliminary. 68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis NOTE: See “Notes onthe data”foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. 14. Average hourly earnings, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average Industry 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. F Apr. F Seasonallyadjusted....................... $8.02 (1) $8.33 <1) $8.29 8.31 $8.28 8.29 $8.29 8.33 $8.32 8.35 $8.30 8.34 $8.43 8.40 $8.40 8.38 $8.43 8.42 $8.46 8.47 $8.50 8.45 $8.53 8.51 $8.52 8.53 $8.55 8.57 .......................................................................... 11.27 11.58 11.62 11.56 11.57 11.57 11.57 11.66 11.52 11.57 11.64 11.79 11.83 11.81 11.73 11.97 12.01 12.15 12.14 12.01 12.17 12.22 12.26 12.17 12.18 PRIVATE SECTOR ................................................ MINING 1985 1984 1983 CONSTRUCTION............................................................. 11.92 12.03 11.95 11.99 11.94 MANUFACTURING.......................................................... 8.83 9.17 9.11 9.11 9.14 9.18 9.14 9.23 9.22 9.30 9.38 9.42 9.42 9.43 9.48 Durable g o o d s ....................................................... Lumberandwood products............. Furnitureandfixtures..................... Stone, clay, andglass products......... Primarymetal industries................. Blast furnaces andbasic steel products Fabricatedmetal products............... 9.38 7.79 6.62 9.27 11.34 12.89 9.11 9.72 7.99 6.86 9.56 11.43 12.99 9.36 9.67 7.89 6.76 9.51 11.51 13.12 9.34 9.66 7.92 6.80 9.54 11.49 13.09 9.33 9.69 8.04 6.84 9.58 11.46 13.02 9.33 9.70 8.01 6.88 9.64 11.45 13.02 9.33 9.68 8.05 6.90 9.62 11.34 12.90 9.30 9.77 8.15 6.95 9.64 11.39 13.01 9.41 9.76 8.06 6.95 9.63 11.31 12.86 9.38 9.82 8.01 6.96 9.66 11.44 12.99 9.42 9.94 8.04 7.01 9.67 11.44 12.95 9.55 9.97 8.05 7.03 9.69 11.50 13.07 9.57 9.97 8.05 7.03 9.72 11.65 13.42 9.56 9.98 8.02 7.06 9.72 11.62 13.27 9.60 10.01 8.00 7.10 9.79 11.62 13.34 9.64 Machinery, except electrical............. Electrical andelectronic equipment . . . . Transportationequipment ............... Motorvehicles andequipment......... Instruments and related products....... Miscellaneous manufacturing ........... 9.55 8.65 11.66 12.12 8.46 6.80 9.96 8.99 12.19 12.69 8.81 7.00 9.91 8.89 12.06 12.56 8.73 6.97 9.90 8.89 12.04 12.51 8.71 6.99 9.93 8.91 12.14 12.67 8.78 6.98 9.96 8.95 12.13 12.61 8.83 7.02 9.92 9.00 12.13 12.59 8.85 6.97 10.01 9.08 12.23 12.69 8.92 7.01 10.01 9.09 12.29 12.81 8.89 7.02 10.06 9.15 12.42 12.96 8.91 7.03 10.16 9.27 12.59 13.21 8.99 7.12 10.12 9.28 12.64 13.35 8.96 7.19 10.13 9.28 12.59 13.29 9.07 7.15 10.16 9.34 12.56 13.23 9.05 7.15 10.18 9.33 12.59 13.33 9.07 7.13 Nondurable g o o d s ................................................ 8.08 8.20 10.35 6.18 5.37 9.94 8.37 8.41 11.12 6.46 5.53 10.44 8.29 8.43 11.43 6.43 5.49 10.29 8.30 8.43 11.55 6.42 5.48 10.34 8.33 8.44 11.92 6.43 5.50 10.42 8.41 8.41 11.67 6.43 5.51 10.56 8.37 8.36 10.75 6.46 5.53 10.50 8.44 8.37 10.31 6.49 5.61 10.55 8.44 8.33 10.35 6.49 5.59 10.56 8.52 8.46 11.76 6.55 5.59 10.67 8.55 8.48 10.97 6.57 5.65 10.69 8.60 8.50 11.20 6.59 5.70 10.67 8.60 8.54 11.63 6.60 5.67 10.68 8.61 8.56 11.83 6.64 5.70 10.67 8.68 8.62 11.71 6.68 5.73 10.76 Printingandpublishing................... Chemicals andallied products........... Petroleumandcoal products ........... Rubberandmiscellaneous plastics products....................... Leatherandleather products ........... 9.11 10.59 13.29 9.39 11.11 13.45 9.29 10.97 13.44 9.31 11.02 13.32 9.30 11.03 13.33 9.36 11.12 13.27 9.42 11.13 13.32 9.51 11.23 13.54 9.48 11.32 13.52 9.54 11.35 13.67 9.56 11.37 13.63 9.57 11.42 13.97 9.59 11.42 14.01 9.60 11.40 13.90 9.59 11.50 14.10 7.99 5.54 8.27 5.70 8.25 5.68 8.20 5.68 8.23 5.67 8.30 5.70 8.28 5.67 8.31 5.72 8.31 5.72 8.39 5.76 8.43 5.80 8.50 5.82 8.47 5.79 8.45 5.81 8.51 5.82 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC U TILIT IE S ............. 10.80 11.15 11.07 11.03 11.07 11.18 11.17 11.27 11.23 11.29 11.32 11.31 11.31 11.28 11.31 Foodandkindredproducts ............. Tobacco manufactures................... Textile mill products ..................... Apparel andothertextile products....... Paperandalliedproducts ............... ................................................... 8.54 8.94 8.89 8.86 8.90 8.97 8.95 9.05 8.99 9.06 9.18 9.14 9.21 9.19 9.22 RETAIL TRADE................................................................ 5.74 5.89 5.90 5.88 5.88 5.87 5.84 5.89 5.88 5.94 5.89 5.99 6.01 6.00 6.00 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE 7.29 7.62 7.62 7.55 7.58 7.60 7.57 7.76 7.67 7.71 7.78 7.77 7.87 7.87 7.91 SERVICES ...................................................................... 7.30 7.62 7.60 7.55 7.53 7.56 7.53 7.69 7.69 7.74 7.82 7.82 7.85 7.84 7.85 WHOLESALE TRADE 1Not available. 15. p= preliminary. NOTE: See “Notes onthe data"foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. The Hourly Earnings Index, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls; 1977 = 100] Not seasonally adjusted Industry PRIVATE SECTOR (In current dollars) Mining Apr. 1984 Feb. 1985 Mar. 1985F Seasonally adjusted Apr. 1985F Percent change from: Apr. 1984 to Apr. 1985 Apr. 1984 Dec. 1984 Jan. 1985 Feb. 1985 Mar. 1985P Apr. 1985P 159.9 163.1 162.8 163.8 164.2 164.4 ............... 159.8 164.1 164.1 164.4 2.9 ..................................................................... 172.9 178.2 177.1 177.2 2.5 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) C o n s t r u c t io n .......................................................... 145.5 148.9 147.8 1.6 146.6 147.5 148.0 149.6 149.1 M a n u fa c tu rin g ....................................................... 161.6 166.7 167.0 167.7 3.8 161.6 165.1 165.9 166.6 167.1 167.7 Transportation and public utilities ............... 160.9 164.9 164.3 164.4 2.2 161.3 164.3 163.4 164.4 164.9 164.8 Wholesale t r a d e ................................................... 164.6 170.0 169.7 169.7 3.1 156.2 156.2 156.4 148.1 (1) (1) (1) (1) Retail t r a d e .............................................................. 154.2 1.5 153.7 155.4 154.8 155.8 ( 1) 156.1 Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ............... 165.8 170.2 170.3 170.7 2.9 Services ................................................................. 162.3 167.0 167.0 167.3 3.1 ( 1) 162.3 (1) 166.6 ( 1) 164.8 ( 1) 166.0 <1) 167.0 PRIVATE SECTOR (In constant d o lla rs )............. 95.4 94.9 94.5 <2) 95.3 94.7 94.4 94.6 94.4 (2) 1This series is not seasonallyadjustedbecausethe seasonal component is small relativetothetrendcycle, irregularcomponents, or both, andconsequentlycannot be separatedwithsufficient precision. 2Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Percent change from: Mar. 1985 to Apr. 1985 149.0 (1) 156.0 167.3 (1) (2) 0.1 (2) -.1 .3 -.1 ( 1) -.1 <1) .2 (2> P= preliminary, NOTE: See "Notes onthe data”foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. 69 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 16. Establishment Data Average weekly earnings, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average Industry 1983 1984 1985 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.P Apr.P PRIVATE SECTOR Current dollars................................ Seasonallyadjusted........................ Constant (1977) dollars....................... $280.70 $294 05 $292.64 $291.46 $294.30 $296.19 $294.65 $299.27 $295.68 $295.89 $300.33 $295.80 $295.99 $298.20 $298.40 294.17 292.64 294.05 293.92 293.57 297.36 294.14 296.38 298.99 297.44 297.85 300.26 300.81 (1) (1) 171.37 173.48 174.71 173.18 174.45 174.85 172.31 173.99 171.91 172.23 174.61 171.78 171.19 171.68 (1) 478.98 502.57 499.66 499.39 505.61 497.51 503.30 513.04 497.66 503.30 514.49 506.97 511.06 514.92 510.26 MINING 443.42 CONSTRUCTION......................................................... 454.73 448.13 458.02 460.88 462.04 462.39 467.78 461.32 449.17 457.97 444.81 448.72 457.59 459.19 MANUFACTURING Current dollars................................ Constant (1977) dollars....................... Lumberandwood products ................... Furnitureandfixtures........................... Stone, clay, andglass products ............... Primarymetal Industries ....................... Blastfurnaces andbasicsteel products....... Fabricatedmetal products....................... 354.08 373.22 372.60 369.87 372.91 369.95 369.26 375.66 373.41 378.51 386.46 379.63 373.97 380.97 380.15 216.17 220.19 222.45 219.77 221.05 218.39 215.94 218.41 217.10 220.32 224.69 220.46 216.29 219.33 (1) 381.77 402.41 402.27 399.92 402.14 396.73 396.88 405.46 403.09 406.55 418.47 409.77 401.79 411.18 408.41 312.38 318.80 317.18 317.59 324.01 316.40 322.00 329.26 320.79 313.99 319.99 313.15 308.32 315.19 314.40 260.83 272.34 267.02 268.60 270.86 269.70 273.24 278.70 279.39 279.10 284.61 276.98 271.36 277.46 275.48 384.71 401.52 401.32 404.50 407.15 406.81 405.96 408.74 405.42 405.72 403.24 392.45 392.69 404.35 411.18 459.27 475.49 488.02 481.43 480.17 472.89 462.67 472.69 462.58 473.62 475.90 471.50 475.32 479.91 479.91 509.16 527.39 549.73 540.62 536.42 524.71 506.97 524.30 506.68 524.80 516.71 517.57 544.85 540.09 550.94 369.87 387.50 387.61 386.26 388.13 380.66 381.30 389.57 387.39 389.05 403.01 394.28 386.22 395.52 395.24 Machineryexcept electrical..................... Electrical andelectronic equipment............. Transportationequipment....................... Motorvehicles andequipment............... Instruments and relatedproducts ............. 386.78 350.33 490.89 524.80 341.78 Durable goods .......................................................... M is c e lla n e o u s m a n u f a c t u r i n g .......................................... Nondurable goods ................................................... Foodandkindredproducts..................... Tobacco manufactures ......................... Textile mill products............................ Apparel andothertextile products............. Paperandallied products....................... Printingandpublishing......................... Chemicals andallied products ................. Petroleumandcoat products................... Rubberandmiscellaneous plastics products............................ Leatherandleather products................... 417.32 368.59 520.51 554.55 363.85 417.21 364.49 523.40 563.94 358.80 2 6 5 .8 8 2 7 5 .8 0 2 7 5 .3 2 318.35 323.90 387.09 250.29 194.39 423.44 331.45 334.72 432.57 257.75 201.29 449.96 329.94 332.99 451.49 260.42 202.03 442.47 413.82 363.60 514.11 546.69 354.50 417.06 365.31 519.59 557.48 362.61 411.35 361.58 508.25 537.19 361.15 411.68 366.30 504.61 532.56 362.85 420.42 374.10 517.33 548.21 371.07 417.42 371.78 521.10 554.67 365.38 422.52 376.98 530.33 562.46 371.55 434.85 387.49 552.70 593.13 380.28 422.00 377.70 543.52 590.07 367.36 415.33 371.20 522.49 556.85 368.24 2 7 4 .7 1 2 7 3 .6 2 2 7 3 .0 8 2 7 2 .5 3 2 7 7 .6 0 2 7 8 .6 9 2 7 9 .0 9 2 8 4 .0 9 2 7 7 .5 3 328.68 333.83 457.38 257.44 200.02 443.59 331.53 337.60 482.76 259.77 202.40 449.10 331.35 333.04 437.63 252.70 198.36 456.19 331.45 335.24 421.40 256.46 200.74 451.50 335.07 336.47 408.28 255.71 201.96 457.87 332.54 331.53 412.97 253.11 201.80 455.14 337.39 338.40 471.58 257.42 201.80 462.01 341.15 343.44 425.64 258.86 205.66 468.22 337.12 335.75 417.76 257.01 203.49 457.74 423.67 380.14 535.06 574.18 371.96 417.38 373.20 536.33 583.85 368.24 2 7 5 .2 8 2 8 0 .2 8 2 7 6 .6 4 333.68 333.06 434.96 254.76 201.29 453.90 338.37 336.41 444.81 258.30 205.77 456.68 338.52 337.04 404.00 257.85 202.27 459.45 342.54 355.88 353.02 351.92 349.68 351.94 357.02 362.33 358.34 363.47 367.10 358.88 357.71 361.92 358.67 440.54 465.51 460.74 460.64 463.26 463.70 464.12 471.66 470.91 475.57 482.09 478.50 477.36 479.94 481.85 583.43 587.77 590.02 580.75 579.86 579.90 584.75 598.47 590.82 597.38 584.73 597.92 595.43 592.14 623.22 329.19 344.86 347.33 341.94 344.84 341.96 342.79 344.87 344.03 349.02 354.06 351.90 343.04 347.30 348.06 203.87 209.76 210.16 209.59 213.76 212.61 206.39 208.21 207.64 210.82 215.18 211.85 207.28 210.90 213.01 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 421.20 439.31 WHOLESALE T R A D E ................................................... 328.79 345.08 342.27 342.00 344.43 348.04 347.26 351.14 347.91 350.62 357.10 350.98 351.82 353.82 354.97 435.05 432.38 440.59 447.20 443.45 449.67 440.22 445.96 447.14 439.96 442.22 443.30 443.35 RETAIL T R A D E ............................................................. 171.05 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE . . . . 263.90 278.13 278.13 274.07 275.15 278.92 275.55 284.02 279.96 280.64 285.53 283.61 286.47 286.47 288.72 176.70 175.82 176.40 178.75 180.21 178.70 177.29 174.64 176.42 180.23 174.31 174.89 176.40 176.40 SERVICES...................................................................... 238.71 249.94 248.52 246.13 247.74 250.24 248.49 252.23 250.69 252.32 256.50 254.15 255.13 255.58 255.91 1Not available. p = preliminary. NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” fo r a description of the m ost recent benchm ark revision. 17. Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted [In percent] Time span Over 1-month span Over 3-month span Over 6-month span Over 12-month span Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 1985 . . . . 54.3 71.1 58.4 46.5 73.2 47.3 60.8 67.0 P54.6 68.9 63.8 P51.9 69.5 64.1 64.6 63.0 74.3 62.4 68.6 57.6 69.5 40.8 75.4 65.7 69.7 51.9 73.8 63.5 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 1985 . . . . 46.8 82.2 57.6 57.3 80.5 P51.6 64.1 76.5 P48.1 75.1 71.1 75.7 68.4 77.8 68.9 74.1 63.5 81.6 58.1 80.8 58.6 78.9 53.5 79.5 64.9 77.6 61.9 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 1985 . . . . 50.8 81.9 P53.2 63.0 82.7 69.2 79.7 75.1 75.4 80.0 69.2 82.4 63.2 84.1 62.4 82.4 62.7 84.6 63.5 85.9 60.5 86.8 55.1 83.8 P59.7 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 49.5 86.5 54.3 81.9 61.9 78.9 71.1 76.8 77.3 74.3 79.5 73.8 83.8 71.1 88.1 63.2 86.8 P64.1 87.3 P60.3 85.4 87.3 p = preliminary. NOTE: Figuresarethepercentofindustrieswithemploymentrising. (Halfoftheunchangedcomponents 70 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis are countedas rising.) Dataarecenteredwithinthe spans. See the “Definitions" inthis section. See “Notes onthe data"foradescriptionof the most recent benchmarkrevision. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DATA N ational unemployment insurance data are compiled monthly by the Employment and Training Administration of the U.S. De partment of Labor from monthly reports of unemployment insur ance activity prepared by State agencies. Railroad unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board. excluded from the scope of the survey. Initial claims are notices filed by persons in unemployment insurance programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiving compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The rate of insured unemployment expresses the number of in sured unemployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a 12-month period. Average weekly seasonally adjusted insured unemployment data are computed by bls’ Weekly Seasonal Adjustment program. This procedure incorporated the X - l l Variant of the Census Method II Seasonal Adjust ment program. An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the beginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no application is required for subsequent periods in the same year. Number of payments are payments made in 14-day registration periods. The average amount of benefit payment is an average for all compensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or settlement of underpayments. However, total benefits paid have been adjusted. Definitions Data for all programs represent an unduplicated count of insured un employment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation for ExServicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act. The total may include persons receiving Federal-State Extended Benefits. 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 unemployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about 10 percent of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet earned benefit rights are 18. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations [All items except average benefits amounts are inthousands] 1984 Item Mar. Apr. May July June 1985 Aug. Sept. Nov. Oct. Jan.r Dee.r Mar.P Feb. F All programs: 2,327 2,184 2,149 2,441 3,361 3,339 2,290 2,166 2,083 2,778 2,958 2,613 Insured unemployment................. State unemployment insurance program:1 2,074 1,662 1,387 1,767 1,459 1,260 1,758 1,825 2,610 1,424 1,429 1,368 Initial claims2 .......................... Insured unemployment (average 2,129 2,023 2,072 2,355 2,691 3,264 3.239 2,215 2,111 2,270 2,843 2,515 weeklyvolume)....................... 2.4 2.7 2.6 25 2.3 3.1 3.7 3.6 2.9 2.6 2.5 3.3 Rateof insured unemployment......... 8,380 8,716 7,209 8,092 8,421 9,211 12,382 11,759 9,304 8,053 11,339 9,695 Weeks of unemployment compensated . . Average weeklybenefit amount $124.67 $125.26 $123.69 $121.96 $119.83 $120.24 $122.49 $123.19 $123.95 $125.36 $126.68 $127.28 fortotal unemployment ............. Total benefits paid ..................... $1,369,536 $1,173,601 $1,109,268 $948,381 $974,135 $1,017,804 $853,424 $962,856 $1,005,727 $1,114,781 $1,505,278 $1,450,239 State unemployment insurance program:1 (Seasonallyadjusteddata) Initial claims2 .......................... Insuredunemployment (average weeklyvolume)....................... Rate of insured unemployment......... 1,570 1,569 1,614 1,559 1,661 1,618 1,707 1,746 1,765 1,602 1,766 1,814 2,470 2.9 2,507 29 2,300 2.7 2,356 2.7 2,457 2.8 2,355 2.7 2,567 3.0 2,461 2.8 2,551 2.9 2,541 2.9 2,532 2.8 2,585 2.9 Unemployment compensationforexservicemen:3 Initial claims1 ........................... Insured unemployment (average weeklyvolume)....................... Weeks of unemployment compensated . . Total benefits paid ..................... 13 12 12 12 13 14 13 15 13 12 14 12 22 89 $11,813 20 78 $10,349 18 79 $10,577 18 71 $9,467 18 71 $9,573 19 79 $10,715 20 72 $9,820 21 86 $11,766 22 87 $11,984 23 88 $11,930 24 102 $13,901 22 86 $11,720 9 13 9 11 12 10 9 15 12 11 14 9 28 122 $14,778 23 98 $11,844 20 88 $10,529 19 76 $8,994 20 80 $9,489 19 83 $9,776 19 69 $8,198 21 85 $10,088 23 89 $10,830 24 94 $11,386 27 113 $14,017 26 101 $12,847 3 2 2 11 25 7 6 9 10 11 13 4 3 16 35 $189.06 $6,691 17 37 $197.85 $6,695 31 94 $206.99 34 74 $209.76 34 75 $209.66 Unemployment compensationfor Federal civilianemployees:4 Initial claims............................ Insuredunemployment (average weeklyvolume)....................... Weeksof unemployment compensated . . Total benefits paid ..................... Railroadunemployment insurance: Applications............................ Insuredunemployment (average weeklyvolume)....................... Numberof payments................... Average amount of benefit payment . . . Total benefits paid ..................... 41 99 $208.96 $20,112 Employment service:5 Newapplications andrenewals......... Nonfarmplacements ................... 8,231 1,469 27 70 $196.32 $13,356 19 54 $188.45 $10,233 16 38 $187.37 $7,039 9,517 1,810 11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the programfor Puerto Rican sugarcane workers. 2Excludes transitionclaims underState programs. 3Excludes dataonclaims andpayments madejointlywithother programs. 4Excludes dataor claims andpayments madejointlywithState programs. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 18 34 $196.15 $6,349 r4,803 r1,182 21 46 $195.20 $8,596 26 52 $198.85 29 61 $205.26 6,728 1,577 Cumulative total forfiscal year (October 1-September 30). Datacomputedquarterly. r= revised, p= preliminary. NOTE: Datafor Puerto RicoandtheVirginIslands included. Dashes indicate data not available. 71 PRICE DATA Price data are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from retail and primary markets in the United States. Price indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100, unless otherwise noted). Definitions The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure of the average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and services. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began pub lishing c p i ’ s for two groups of the population. It introduced a c p i for All Urban Consumers, covering 80 percent of the total noninstitutional pop ulation, and revised the c p i for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covering about half the new index population. The All Urban Consumers index covers in addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, managerial, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force. The c p i is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, trans portation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and serv ices that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only price changes will be measured. Data are collected from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000 tenants in 85 urban areas across the country. All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are included in the index. Because the c p i ’ s are based on the ex penditures of two population groups in 1972-73, they may not accurately reflect the experience of individual families and single persons with dif ferent buying habits. Though the c p i is often called the “ Cost-of-Living Index,” it measures only price change, which is just one of several important factors affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period. Producer Price Indexes measure average changes in prices received in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodities in all stages of processing. The sample used for calculating these indexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all commodities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial transactions in primary markets in the United States. Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products by degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure organizes products by sim ilarity of end-use or material composition. 72 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price Indexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the United States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. Most prices are ob tained directly from producing companies on a voluntary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month. In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the various commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights repre senting their importance in the total net selling value of all commodities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, durability of product groupings, and a number of special composite groupings. Price indexes for the output of selected sic industries measure average price changes in commodities produced by particular industries, as defined in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual 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 spec ified industry and weighted by the value of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive industrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Notes on the data Regional c p i ’ s cross classified by population size were introduced in the May 1978 Review. These indexes enable users in local areas for which an index is not published to get a better approximation of the cpi for their area by using the appropriate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified indexes are published bimonthly. (See table 20.) For details concerning the 1978 revision of the c p i , see The Consumer Price Index: Concepts and Content Over the Years, Report 517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978). As of January 1976, the Producer Price Index incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 values of shipments. Additional data and analyses of price changes are provided in the c p i Detailed Report and Producer Prices and Price Indexes, both monthly publications of the Bureau. For a discussion of the general method of computing producer, and industry price indexes, see bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 7. For consumer prices, see bls Handbook of Methods for Surveys and Studies (1976), chapter 13. See also John F. Early, “ Improving the measurement of producer price change,” Monthly Labor Review, April 1978. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “ Industry and Sector Price Indexes,” Monthly Labor Review, August 1965. 19. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-84 [1967 = 100] Food and beverages All Items Year Index Percent change Index Apparel and upkeep Housing Percent change Index Percent change Index Percent change Transportation Index Percent change Index Other goods and services Entertainment Medical care 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 5.1 100.0 105.2 110.4 115.8 5.2 4.9 5.8 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 121.3 125.3 133.1 147.7 161.2 4.3 3.3 6.2 11.0 9.1 118.3 123.2 139.5 158.7 172.1 3.1 4.1 13.2 13.8 8.4 123.4 128.1 133.7 148.8 164.5 4.4 3.8 4.4 11.3 10.6 119.8 122.3 126.8 136.2 142.3 3.3 2.1 3.7 7.4 4.5 118.6 119.9 123.8 137.7 150.6 5.2 1.1 3.3 11.2 9.4 128.4 132.5 137.7 150.5 168.6 6.5 3.2 3.9 9.3 12.0 122.9 126.5 130.0 139.8 152.2 5.3 2.9 2.8 7.5 8.9 122.4 127.5 132.5 142.0 153.9 4.8 4.2 3.9 7.2 8.4 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 170.5 181.5 195.3 217.7 247.0 5.8 6.5 7.6 11.5 13.5 177.4 188.0 206.2 228.7 248.7 3.1 8.0 9.7 10.9 8.7 174.6 186.5 202.6 227.5 263.2 6.1 6.8 8.6 12.3 15.7 147.6 154.2 159.5 166.4 177.4 3.7 4.5 3.4 4.3 6.6 165.5 177.2 185.8 212.8 250.5 9.9 7.1 4.9 14.5 17.7 184.7 202.4 219.4 240.1 287.2 9.5 9.6 8.4 9.4 11.3 159.8 167.7 176.2 187.6 203.7 5.0 4.9 5.1 6.5 8.5 162.7 172.2 183.2 196.3 213.6 5.7 5.8 6.4 7.2 8.8 1981 1982 1983 1984 ........... ........... ........... ........... 272.3 288.6 297.4 307.6 10.2 6.0 3.0 3.4 267.8 278.5 284.7 295.2 7.7 4.0 2.2 3.7 293.2 314.7 322.0 329.2 11.4 7.3 2.3 2.2 186.6 190.9 195.6 199.1 5.2 2.3 2.5 1.8 281.3 293.1 300.0 313.9 12.3 4.2 2.4 4.6 295.1 326.9 355.1 377.7 10.4 10.8 8.6 6.4 219.0 232.4 242.4 251.2 7.5 6.1 4.3 3.6 233.3 257.0 286.3 304.9 9.2 10.2 11.4 6.5 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 Consumere 1984 General summary Mar. Oct. Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1985 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Mar. Oct. 1985 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. All ite m s ................................................................................................................... 307.3 315.3 315.3 315.5 316.1 317.4 318.8 303.3 312.2 311.9 312.2 312.6 313.9 315.3 Foodand beverages ......................................................... Housing .................................................................... Apparel andupkeep......................................................... Transportation.............................................................. Medical care Entertainment .............................................................. Othergoods andservices................................................... 294.3 331.5 198.8 306.9 374.5 251.7 302.1 296.6 341.2 205.7 315.5 385 5 258.3 315.8 296.3 340.9 205.2 316.1 387.5 259.0 316.5 297.2 341.2 203.2 315.8 388.5 260.1 316.7 299.3 342.0 199.8 314.7 391.1 261.0 319.1 301.4 343.3 201.8 314.3 393.8 261.3 320.5 301.6 344.7 205.3 316.7 396.5 262.2 321.1 294.5 322.9 198.0 308.9 372.6 248.6 299.7 296.5 335.5 204.8 317.8 383.7 254.2 311.9 296.2 334.4 204.2 318.3 385.6 254.8 312.6 297.1 335.0 202.1 317.9 386.7 255.8 312.8 299.1 335.7 198.5 316.7 389.3 256.6 315.6 301.2 337.2 200.7 316.3 392.0 256.9 317.1 301.6 338.2 204.2 318.7 394.6 257.3 317.6 Commodities................................................................ Commodities less foodandbeverages................................ Nondurables less foodand beverages.............................. Durables............................................................. 278.7 266.6 274.2 262.2 283.1 272.1 278.6 269.3 283.0 272.2 278.2 270.0 282.8 271.4 277.0 269.8 282.7 270.0 274.4 270.2 284.0 270.7 274.7 271.4 285.3 272.8 277.9 271.9 278.1 266.4 276.1 257.1 283.1 272.5 280.3 264.6 282.8 272.3 279.9 264.5 282.7 271.8 278.7 264.6 282.5 270.3 275.8 264.9 283.5 271.1 276.2 266.2 285.2 273.1 279.4 266.7 Services .................................................................... Rent, residential ....................................................... Householdservices less rent of shelter (12/82 = 100)............... Transportationservices ............................................... Medical care services ................................................. Otherservices ......................................................... 356.5 244.8 105.8 315.4 405.3 290.4 369.7 253.8 109.9 327.5 416.5 304.2 369.9 254.8 108.8 328.9 418.5 305.2 370.6 256.1 108.5 330.1 419.3 306.1 372.1 257.1 108.9 331.8 422.4 307.1 373.5 258.4 108.9 332.2 425.3 307.8 375.0 259.2 111.5 333.2 428.1 308.6 349.9 366.3 365.9 366 8 368.3 369.6 244.1 253.1 254.0 255.3 256.3 257.5 100.4 100.4 311.6 323.7 325.1 326.1 327.7 328.1 402.7 414.1 416.1 417.0 420.1 423.1 287.6 300.6 301.5 302.3 303.5 304.2 371.0 258.4 101.1 328.8 425.7 304.9 Special indexes: All items less food........................................................... All items less homeowners' costs .......................................... All items less mortgage interest costs...................................... Commodities less food ..................................................... Nondurables less food ..................................................... Nondurables less foodandapparel......................................... Nondurables................................................................ Services less rent of shelter (12/82 = 100)................................ Services less medical care ................................................. Domesticallyproducedfarmfoods.......................................... Selectedbeef cuts........................................................... Energy ...................................................................... Energycommodities ..................................................... All items less energy ....................................................... All items less foodandenergy........................................... Commodities less foodandenergy.................................... Services less energy........................................................ Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967=$1 ..................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 306.8 316.1 316.2 316.2 316.3 317.4 319.1 302.4 105.1 107.6 107.6 107.6 107.8 108.2 108.7 291.3 264.4 269.8 269.9 269.2 267.8 268.6 270.6 264.3 269.3 273.6 273.3 272.2 269.7 270.2 273.2 271.3 310.3 313.5 313.4 312.8 310.9 310.8 313.5 311.6 285.5 288.8 288.5 288.3 288.0 289.6 291.0 286.4 106.5 110.6 110.5 110.6 111.1 111.3 111.9 349.0 362.3 362.3 363.0 364.3 365.5 366.9 342.1 279.9 279.7 278.8 279.9 282.1 284.8 284.2 278.6 279.7 271.0 271.6 276.0 276.2 275.2 275.0 281.3 418.1 426.7 421.8 418.9 414.5 411.4 416.6 418.2 410.7 408.2 407.2 404.1 395.7 391.3 398.3 411.3 299.2 307.1 307.7 308.2 309.2 310.9 312.0 294.0 296.7 306.1 306.9 307.3 307.9 309.5 310.8 290.7 249.9 256.8 257.0 256.7 256.5 258.1 259.3 247.2 350.7 362.7 364.0 365.0 366.4 368.0 369.4 343.3 SO.325 $0.317 10.317 $0.317 $0.316 $0.315 $0.314 $0.330 312.9 312.6 312.7 312.7 313.7 315.4 298.4 270.3 275.4 314.8 289.5 298.2 270.1 275.0 314.5 289.2 298.3 269.6 273.9 313.8 289.0 358.9 278.0 272.2 426.1 408.9 303.1 301.5 254.3 358.9 $0.320 358.2 277.2 273.0 421.5 407.8 303.2 301.6 254.2 359.4 $0.321 359.2 278.2 277.4 418.5 404.7 303.8 302.1 254.0 360.7 $0.320 268.2 271.2 311.8 288.6 100.5 360.4 280.4 277.5 413.8 396.2 304.7 302.7 253.8 362.0 $0.320 269.0 271.7 311.5 289.8 100.7 361.6 282.9 276.5 410.6 391.8 306.4 304 3 255.5 363.6 $0.319 271.0 274.7 314.4 291.6 101.2 362.8 282.5 276.6 416.0 399.0 307.4 305.5 256.6 364.9 $0.317 73 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 20. Consumer Prices Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers 1984 General summary Mar. FOOD AND BEVERAGES ...................................................................................... Oct. Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1985 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Mar. Oct. 1985 Nov. Dec. 294.3 296.6 296.3 297.2 299.3 301.4 301.6 294.5 296.5 296.2 297.1 Jan. 299.1 Feb. Mar. 301.2 301.6 Food ......................................................................................................................... 302.2 304.4 304.1 305.1 307.3 309.5 309.7 302.1 304.0 303.7 304.7 306.9 309.0 309.3 Foodat home .............................................................. Cereals andbakeryproducts .......................................... Cereals andcereal products (12/77 = 100) ..................... Flourandpreparedflourmixes (12/77 = 100)............. Cereal (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Rice, pasta, andcornmeal (12/77 = 100) ................. Bakeryproducts (12/77 = 100).................................. White bread................................................. Other breads (12/77 = 100)................................. Freshbiscuits, rolls, andmuffins (12/77 = 100) ......... Freshcakes andcupcakes (12/77 = 100) ................. Cookies (12/77 = 100) .................................... Crackers, bread, andcracker products (12/77 = 100) . . . Freshsweetrolls, coffeecake, anddonuts (12/77 = 100) . . Frozenandrefrigeratedbakeryproducts and fresh pies, tarts, andturnovers (12/77 = 100)......... 293.1 301.5 161.9 144.6 182.3 148.8 158.8 258.9 153.0 158.8 160.0 162.9 153.9 160.5 293.2 310.7 164.2 143.4 187.6 149.9 164.5 265.4 156.2 161.9 169.6 170.9 164.3 164.1 296.1 312.4 165.6 146.6 189.4 149.3 165.2 267.2 156.0 161.8 169.6 171.3 166.3 164.9 291.8 307.1 164.3 145.6 188.4 149.7 161.9 260.1 158.0 156.4 165.0 169.5 164.2 166.6 Meats, poultry, fish, andeggs ........................................ Meats, poultry, andfish.......................................... Meats ....................................................... Beef andveal............................................. Groundbeef otherthancanned......................... Chuckroast ........................................... Round roast........................................... Roundsteak........................................... Sirloinsteak........................................... Otherbeef andveal (12/77 = 100) ................... Pork....................................................... Bacon ................................................. Chops ................................................. Hamotherthancanned (12/77 = 100)............... Sausage ............................................... Canned ham ........................................... Otherpork(12/77 = 100) ............................ Othermeats ............................................. Frankfurters ........................................... Bologna, liverwurst, andsalami (12/77 = 100) . . . . Otherlunchmeats (12/77 = 100) ..................... Lambandorgan meats (12/77 = 100) ............... Poultry............................................................. Freshwhole chicken.................................... Freshandfrozen chickenparts (12/77 = 100)....... Otherpoultry(12/77 = 100).......................... Fishandseafood ........................................... Cannedfishandseafood .............................. Freshandfrozenfishandseafood (12/77 = 100) ... Eggs.............................................................. 269.6 272.6 268.8 279.9 260.9 286.6 251.2 261.6 278.7 172.2 248.6 258.9 229.6 112.2 315.2 251.5 137.8 265.1 264.2 153.1 136.3 137.2 223.2 232.6 150.7 127.9 385.3 132.1 155.4 237.2 263.5 270 4 267.1 271.3 252.4 276.6 236.5 251.3 273.9 168.5 255.0 271.1 235.9 117.2 319.0 252.6 139.0 270.0 269.6 156.2 139.4 138.2 214.0 213.8 141.4 135.1 390.6 132.9 158.2 177.8 Dairyproducts......................................................... Freshmilkandcream(12/77 = 100)............................ Freshwhole milk ........................................... Otherfresh milkandcream(12/77 = 100)................. Processed dairyproducts ........................................ Butter ....................................................... Cheese (12/77 = 100)...................................... Ice creamand relatedproducts (12/77 = 100)............. Otherdairyproducts (12/77 = 100) ...................... 250.8 136.5 222.9 137.3 149.2 254.4 146.3 155.3 146.9 Fruitsandvegetables ................................................. Freshfruits andvegetables ...................................... Freshfruits ................................................. Apples ................................................. Bananas ............................................... Oranges ............................................... Otherfreshfruits (12/77 = 100)....................... Freshvegetables ........................................... Potatoes............................................... Lettuce................................................. Tomatoes ............................................. Otherfreshvegetables (12/77 = 100)................. Processedfruits andvegetables.................................. Processedfruits (12/77 = 100)............................ Frozenfruit andfruit juices (12/77 = 100)........... Fruit juices otherthanfrozen(12/77 = 100)......... Cannedanddriedfruits (12/77 = 100)............... 74 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 293.4 308.7 163.6 145.2 186.2 148.5 163.3 264.3 155.7 160.7 167.4 168.3 162.7 163.8 292.4 309.0 163.8 143.9 186.7 149.3 163.4 265.8 155.4 161.1 166.4 168.5 160.9 163.9 298.6 313.7 167.0 148.2 191.9 149.0 165.6 267.1 158.1 164.1 168.9 171.5 167.9 165.0 298.4 314.4 168.1 148.9 193.0 150.5 165.7 266.8 158.6 163.3 169.4 171.9 168.6 163.8 291.9 300.0 162.6 145.1 184.4 150.0 157.5 254.6 155.2 154.9 158.1 163.7 155.2 163.3 290.9 307.4 164.4 144.4 189.0 150.5 162.1 261.3 157.6 157.0 164.1 169.6 162.4 166.7 291.7 309.0 164.7 143.6 189.8 151.0 163.1 261.0 158.4 157.5 167.3 171.9 166.0 166.9 297.0 311.9 167.5 148.4 194.1 150.2 164.2 262.8 160.5 159.7 166.8 172.5 169.2 167.7 296.9 312.7 168.7 149.1 195.2 151.7 164.4 262.5 161.0 158.8 167.4 172.9 170.2 166.9 171.7 172.9 172.4 174.2 157.0 162.7 163.8 164.3 165.5 164.9 166.8 262.4 269.4 266.1 271.9 254.3 280.9 234.1 248.4 271.6 168.8 251.2 266.5 232.7 115.6 315.3 246.8 137.0 269.4 265.0 155.8 138.6 141.1 213.1 215.4 140.4 132.6 389.2 133.0 157.3 175.6 265.9 272.5 269.6 276.2 257.2 286.1 239.0 255.7 276.2 171.2 254.6 270.5 234.1 120.9 316.6 248.8 137.3 270.2 266.6 156.2 139.2 140.8 213.8 210.4 140.4 138.9 392.2 133.4 158.9 185.7 266.6 275.0 270.8 276.4 256.0 281.5 240.7 258.8 272.7 172.6 258.5 276.9 236.3 120.0 324.5 255.3 140.4 269.8 267.6 155.6 138.2 141.5 217.4 214.3 141.7 142.4 406.1 134.4 166.7 161.3 267.0 274.8 270.6 275.6 256.5 284.7 239.2 258.4 272.6 170.9 258.9 278.9 240.5 118.0 321.9 258.2 139.8 270.5 269.2 156.8 138.2 141.1 219.5 216.5 143.3 143.2 401.4 133.5 164.3 169.7 266.1 273.7 269.5 275.3 256.4 280.0 240.2 257.1 274.7 171.1 256.5 278.6 233.7 119.5 320.2 257.4 137.3 268.6 266.9 156.4 137.0 140.2 217.3 215.7 140.9 141.6 403.3 133.7 165.4 172.1 269.0 272.0 268.3 280.8 262.1 295.8 254.5 261.3 280.9 171.0 248.0 262.7 227.8 109.1 315.6 256.3 137.1 264.6 263.0 152.9 134.3 140.5 221.2 229.8 148.7 127.6 383.9 131.7 155.2 238.7 262.9 269.7 266.6 271.9 253.5 285.1 240.3 248.3 275.3 167.2 254.3 275.0 234.0 113.8 319.6 258.4 138.5 269.5 268.0 156.0 137.5 141.0 211.6 211.4 139.2 134.3 389.1 132.5 157.9 178.7 261.8 268.7 265.5 272.5 255.7 289.9 237.9 246.4 273.6 167.3 250.3 270.4 230.4 112.5 315.5 250.4 136.4 268.6 263.3 155.7 136.7 143.9 210.9 213.0 138.4 131.9 388.2 132.5 157.3 176.4 265 3 271.7 268.9 276.9 258.2 294.7 242.3 253.6 279.1 170.0 253.7 274.1 232.1 117.7 316.7 253.9 136.7 269.4 265.1 156.1 137.3 143.4 211.3 208.0 138.2 138.0 391.4 132.9 159.1 186.5 266.0 274.2 270.2 277.0 257.0 290.6 244.3 256.3 274.5 171.2 257.6 280.9 234.2 116.7 325.0 259.2 139.8 269.2 266.6 155.6 136.2 144.4 215.1 212.0 139.5 141.8 405.3 134.0 166.9 162.0 266.3 274.0 270.0 276.2 257.7 293.9 242.2 256.4 273.7 169.5 258.0 282.6 238.5 114.9 322.1 262.9 139.1 269.6 268.0 156.6 136.2 143.6 217.0 214.0 141.3 142.3 401.2 133.2 164.9 170.2 265.6 273.0 268.9 276.2 257.7 288.9 244.2 254.5 276.3 170.0 255.8 282.2 232.1 116.5 320.3 261.9 136.6 267.8 265.7 156.4 134.9 142.7 214.8 213.2 138.8 140.7 403.1 133.3 166.0 172.7 256.1 138.7 226.8 139.0 153.3 268.8 149.5 160.0 150.0 257.2 139.8 228.7 140.0 153.3 268.7 150.1 158.1 150.9 258.4 140.4 229.6 140.7 154.1 269.4 150.1 160.1 152.5 258.8 140.4 229.6 141.0 154.5 266.4 150.3 162.3 153.0 259.2 140.7 229.8 141.5 154.8 264.9 150.8 162.6 153.0 258.9 140.6 229.7 141.2 154.4 263.9 150.5 162.1 152.8 249.8 135.8 221.9 136.7 149.4 256.9 146.6 154.3 147.4 255.1 137.9 225.6 138.3 153.7 271.4 149.9 159.0 150.4 256.2 139.1 227.5 139.3 153.6 271.5 150.5 157.1 151.3 257.3 139.6 228.4 139.9 154.4 272.3 150.5 159.0 152.8 257.8 139.7 228.4 140.3 154.8 269.1 150.6 161.3 153.3 258.3 140.0 228.7 140.8 155.1 267.6 151.3 161.7 153.4 257.8 139.8 228.5 140.5 154.7 266.6 150.9 161.1 153.2 323.2 344.3 300.5 298.6 264.1 309.6 159.1 385.4 363.5 290.5 318.5 249.4 318.4 329.3 354.3 298.0 242.1 538.4 172.7 306.0 324.3 363.6 255.1 158.7 314.8 323.4 343.9 302.8 234 9 473.6 175.3 304.4 313.1 350.5 245.3 164.3 309.7 312.6 331.6 297.5 225.2 428.0 174.3 294.8 327.3 276.0 232.4 167.4 320.8 332.7 341.5 304.1 248.6 429.7 180.0 324.5 331.5 385.6 238.0 177.3 333.0 354.1 362.6 318.5 268.9 448.6 193.0 346.3 335.7 339.7 282.4 205.0 332.1 352.1 362.9 321.4 281.6 437.4 193.2 342.0 338.3 306.7 322.4 199.5 319.4 339.0 290.8 298.7 262.2 284.2 153.4 382.7 357.7 292 6 322.7 247.0 312.3 319.9 337.4 299.9 240.6 489.1 165.2 304.2 318.4 365.1 259.9 157.0 308.9 314.6 329.3 304.5 232.7 434.1 168.1 301.5 305.1 349.2 249.7 162.6 303.9 303.9 317.6 299.3 224.0 390.2 167.0 291.6 320.4 274.4 236.0 165.2 314.9 323.6 326.1 304.9 246.7 388.9 172.0 321.5 323.5 386.6 240.6 175.2 327.1 344.9 347.0 319.5 267.9 408.7 184.6 343.2 327.5 341.7 285.6 202.8 326.8 344.2 348.3 322.4 281.0 399.0 185.4 340.7 331.0 311.9 326.0 198.0 302.8 159.5 159.4 160.8 144.9 309.2 164.5 166.3 168.0 159.2 308.0 163.5 165.0 166.8 158.7 309.3 164.5 166.6 168.3 158.7 310.6 165.2 167.4 168.1 160.3 312.7 166.9 170.0 170.1 160.9 313.0 167 6 172.3 169.9 161.3 300.2 159.0 158.6 159.7 143.6 306.5 164.0 165.6 167.1 159.3 305.2 162.9 164.2 165.7 158.8 306.5 164.0 166.0 167.3 158.7 307.9 164.7 166.7 167.1 160.5 309.9 166.4 169.3 169.1 161.1 310.0 166.9 171.4 168.7 161.3 163.8 170.0 171.1 294.5 310.7 166.2 146.8 191.7 150.3 163.8 263.0 158.1 157.6 167.3 172.3 167.8 167.7 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary 1984 Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 1985 1984 1985 Mar. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Mar. Oct. Nev. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. 144.9 153.5 148.2 138.8 349.7 384.8 156.0 172.5 156.5 280.7 280.1 153.7 145.2 443.5 319.1 153.2 367.6 359.8 144.9 282.1 143.6 156.0 163.3 162.9 156.6 155.0 151.6 146.5 157.1 149.8 139.4 356.1 393.3 161.3 172.5 160.2 294.9 297.5 157.5 153.3 446.8 319.8 149.9 377.7 371.9 148.9 287.8 146.5 162.9 167.8 166.2 159.3 155.9 151.9 146.1 156.9 149.7 138.9 355.0 390.9 161.6 170.3 158.0 293.0 292.9 157.3 152.7 445.5 317.3 148.8 376.0 372.7 150.5 287.5 148.1 162.6 167.4 164.9 158.8 155.6 152.1 146.5 156.9 150.8 139.0 354.6 391.7 162.3 169.4 159.1 293.7 295.6 158.7 152.1 443.4 316.4 146.8 376.7 373.8 149.7 287.7 148.7 162.2 166.4 165.9 159.9 155.4 152.7 147.1 158.9 150.7 139.3 358.0 394.5 162.8 171.9 160.0 295.9 298.2 160.2 153.1 449.4 324.3 147.9 376.2 373.7 151.3 289.6 149.9 163.6 167.6 167.6 160.9 156.3 152.8 147.5 159.6 150.0 140.1 359.8 394.8 162.9 171.5 160.9 295.1 296.8 159.7 152.8 452.7 325.9 149.8 379.5 375.5 152.4 291.5 150.7 165.3 169.5 168.1 161.1 157.1 153.6 147.1 159.0 150.2 139.6 360.5 394.8 163.4 170.8 160.6 294.9 297.6 159.9 152.3 454.0 326.4 149.7 381.4 376.5 153.6 292.2 149.8 165.7 169.5 168.0 161.6 159.6 153.6 143.6 155.2 145.5 137.1 350.2 384.5 155.9 173.7 154.2 280.2 278.1 151.6 145.6 444.9 316.1 150.7 362.0 359.1 145.2 283.7 145.5 155.1 165.4 161.9 158.4 155.1 152.8 145.3 158.9 147.2 137.8 356.5 392.8 161.2 173.7 157.7 294.4 295.0 155.3 153.8 448.2 317.0 147.7 371.5 371.2 149.3 289.3 148.3 162.0 170.0 165.2 161.2 156.0 153.0 145.0 158.7 147.1 137.3 355.3 390.5 161.5 171.7 155.5 292.5 290.6 155.3 153.2 446.7 314.4 146.6 369.8 371.9 150.8 288.8 149.8 161.5 169.7 164.0 160.7 155.6 153.1 145.3 158.7 148.0 137.4 354.9 391.4 162.2 170.7 156.7 293.1 292.6 156.6 152.8 444.7 313.9 144.3 370.3 372.9 150.1 289.1 150.4 160.9 168.7 164.8 161.8 155.4 153.8 146.0 160.9 148.0 137.8 358.3 394.0 162.6 173.2 157.5 295.3 295.5 158.1 153.6 450.9 321.6 145.4 369.9 372.9 151.5 290.9 151.6 162.2 169.9 166.6 162.8 156 3 154.0 146.4 161.6 147.4 138.5 360.2 394.4 162.7 172.8 158.4 294.7 294.0 157.6 153.5 454.2 323.2 147.4 373.3 374.5 152.7 292.9 152.5 164.0 172.0 167.1 162.9 157.1 154.9 146.0 160.9 147.5 138.1 361.0 394.2 163.2 172.0 158.1 294.3 294.5 157.7 153.0 455.5 323.6 147.4 375.2 375.6 154.0 293.7 151.7 164.4 171.9 167.1 163.4 159.7 154.9 Foodawayfromhome ..................................................... Lunch(12/77 = 100)................................................. Dinner (12/77 = 100)................................................. Othermeals andsnacks (1^/77 = 100).............................. 329.8 159.0 158.9 163.4 336.6 162.8 162.2 166.0 337.7 163.2 162.8 166.5 339.2 163.8 163.6 167.3 339.9 164.4 163.8 167.5 341.4 164.9 164.7 168.1 342.6 165.5 165.3 168.8 333.0 160.6 160.5 163.9 339.8 164.3 163.9 166.6 340.9 164.7 164.6 167.1 342.3 165.3 165.4 167.8 343.0 165.8 165.6 168.0 344.6 166.5 166.6 168.6 345.8 167.0 167.2 169.3 Alcoholic beverages 220.7 224.2 223.8 223.9 224.3 225.8 226.5 223.8 227.5 227.1 227.2 227.6 229.1 229.9 Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77 = 100) .............................. Beer andale ........................................................... Whiskey................................................................. Wine .................................................................. Otheralcoholic beverages (12/77 = 100)............................ Alcoholic beverages awayfromhome (12/77 = 100) ..................... 142.0 228.7 153.6 233.6 122.8 152.6 145.4 231.6 154.1 239.7 122.5 159.8 147.1 234.7 154.9 241.8 124.2 161.8 HOUSING................................................................................................................... 331.5 341.2 340.9 341.2 342.0 343.6 344.7 322.9 335.5 334.4 335.0 335.7 337.2 338.2 Shelter ( C P I- U ) ...................................................................................................... 355.5 367.8 106.5 110.7 244.8 253.8 364.5 382.6 105.6 109.1 105.5 109.1 107.1 108.7 355.3 361.6 405.9 414.4 259.3 262.9 Fruits andvegetables—Continued Processedvegetables (12/77 = 100)....................... Frozenvegetables (12/77 = 100) ..................... Cut cornandcannedbeans except lima(12/77 = 100). . . Othercannedanddriedvegetables (12/77 = 100) . . . . Otherfoods at home................................................... Sugarandsweets ............................................... Candyandchewing gum(12/77 = 100) ................... Sugarandartificial sweeteners (12/77 = 100)............. Othersweets (12/77 = 100)................................ Fats andoils (12/77 = 100) .................................... Margarine................................................... Nondairysubstitutes and peanut butter (12/77 = 100) . . . Otherfats, oils, and saladdressings (12/77 = 100)....... Nonalcoholic beverages .......................................... Coladrinks, excluding diet cola ............................ Carbonateddrinks, including diet cola (12/77 = 100) . . . . Roastedcoffee .............................................. Freeze driedandinstant coffee.............................. Othernoncarbonateddrinks (12/77 = 100) ............... Otherpreparedfoods.............................................. Cannedand packaged soup (12/77 = 100)................. Frozenpreparedfoods (12/77 = 100) ..................... Snacks (12/77 = 100)...................................... Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish(12/77 = 100) ... Othercondiments (12/77 = 100).......................... Miscellaneous preparedfoods (12/77 = 100) ............. Othercannedandpackagedpreparedfoods (12/77 = 100) . . ............................................................................................. Renters’costs............................................................... Rent, residential ....................................................... Other renters' costs ................................................... Homeowners’ costs......................................................... Owners’equivalent rent............................................... Household insurance................................................... Maintenance andrepairs ................................................... Maintenanceand repairservices ...................................... Maintenance and repaircommodities.................................. 143.7 232.7 154.6 234.8 123.2 157.7 143.2 231.9 154.3 233.0 123.5 158.2 143.2 232.5 154.0 232.2 122.8 158.5 143.5 232.9 154.1 233.3 123.2 158.6 144.3 234.5 154.8 234.4 124.3 160.2 368.9 370.1 371.2 373.3 110.9 111.3 111.8 112.4 254.8 256.1 257.1 258.4 379.1 375.1 378.5 381.9 109.4 109.8 110.0 110.7 109.4 109.8 110.0 110.7 108.8 108.9 109.0 109.5 362.9 364.4 366.0 366.8 412.6 414.2 414.7 415.8 266.5 267.7 269.9 270.5 144.8 235.9 154.9 234.2 124.5 160.4 144.1 227.8 153.8 241.5 122.8 153.9 145.8 231.7 154.9 242.5 122.9 159.1 145.4 230.7 154.6 241.3 123.3 159.5 145.7 232.0 154.1 241.0 122.9 159.9 146.5 233.4 154.7 242.0 123.7 161.5 374.3 112.9 259.2 386.1 110.8 110.9 110.4 370.0 422.2 270.6 Shelter (C P I-W )...................................................................................................... 342.0 358.3 357.7 359.0 360.0 362.0 363.0 Rent, residential............................................................. 244.1 253.1 254.0 255.3 256.3 257.5 258.4 Other renters’costs ......................................................... Lodging while out of town............................................. Tenants’ insurance (12/77 = 100).................................... Homeownership............................................................. Home purchase ....................................................... Financing, taxes, andinsurance........................................ Propertyinsurance............................................... Propertytaxes ................................................... Contractedmortgage interest costs.............................. Mortgage interest rates...................................... Maintenance andrepairs............................................... Maintenance and repair services.................................. Maintenance andrepaircommodities.................................. Paint andwallpaper, supplies, tools, and equipment (12/77 = 100)................................ Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77 = 100)....... Plumbing, electrical, heating, andcooling supplies (12/77 = 100) .................................... Miscellaneous supplies andequipment (12/77 = 100)....... 363.0 381.3 161.1 376.6 292.5 484.8 439.9 244.1 607.9 205.4 353.8 400.3 256.3 381.9 399.8 163.4 395.5 302.4 520.5 443.2 252.2 659.3 216.8 358.9 408.1 256.2 378.7 394.8 163.3 394.4 301.0 519.5 446.6 252.9 657.1 216.9 358.5 406.6 257.8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 374.6 388.3 163.5 395.9 301.4 522.4 447.6 254.4 661.0 217.6 359.8 407.7 259.3 377.8 380.8 385.3 393.4 397.8 404.3 163.5 164.2 166.2 360.9 361.5 364.3 407.8 408.8 414.8 260.8 261.1 261.6 147.3 147.0 149.1 151.0 152.5 152.2 152.1 124.3 123.1 122.4 122.5 128.4 127.8 128.3 .... I 138.6 141.5 142.0 142.0 141.0 143.5 146.1 144.0 144.0 145.5 145.2 144.8 145.2 145.5 75 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 20. Consumer Prices Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary 1984 Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 1985 1984 1985 Mar. Oct. Fuel and other u tilitie s ......................................................................................... 380.1 392.4 387.5 386.0 387.2 386.5 388.2 381.3 393.6 388.7 387.1 388.3 387.5 389.2 Fuels........................................................................ Fuel oil, coal, andbottledgas.......................................... Fuel oil ........................................................... Otherfuels (6/78 = 100) ........................................ Gas (piped) andelectricity............................................. Electricity......................................................... Utility(piped) gas ............................................... Other utilities and publicservices .......................................... Telephone services..................................................... Local charges (12/77 = 100).................................... Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) .............................. Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 100) .............................. Waterandsewerage maintenance...................................... 475.2 660.0 671.6 196.4 429.5 335.8 571.4 227.4 185.9 157.7 122.4 122.0 369.5 492.1 626.8 633.6 193.7 456.0 361.0 597.1 232.9 190.0 165.5 116.3 124.8 380.5 480.7 623.9 628.8 196.1 443.2 350.1 580.2 236.3 191.3 167.6 116.5 123.9 393.3 Household furnishings and operations ............................................................. Housefurnishlngs ........................................................... Textile housefurnishings............................................... Household linens (12/77 = 100) ................................ Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, andsewing materials (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Furnitureandbedding....................................................... Bedroomfurniture (12/77 = 100) .............................. Sofas (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Living roomchairs andtables (12/77 = 100)................... Otherfurniture (12/77 = 100) .................................. Appliances includingTVandsoundequipment ....................... Televisionandsound equipment ................................ Television ................................................... Soundequipment (12/77 = 100) .......................... Householdappliances ............................................ Refrigerators and home freezers............................ Laundryequipment.......................................... Otherhousehold appliances (12/77 = 100) ............... Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, andsewing machines (12/77 = 100).............................. Officemachines, small electricappliances, and airconditioners (12/77 = 100) ....................... Otherhouseholdequipment (12/77 = 100).......................... Floorandwindowcoverings, infants', laundry, cleaning, andoutdoor equipment (12/77 = 100)............. Clocks, lamps, anddecor items (12/77 = 100)................. Tableware, serving pieces, andnonelectric kitchenware (12/77 = 100).................................... Lawnequipment, powertools, andother hardware (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Housekeeping supplies ..................................................... Soaps anddetergents................................................. Other laundryandcleaning products (12/77 = 100) ................. Cleansingandtoilet tissue, papertowels andnapkins (12/77 = 100) . . Stationery, stationerysupplies, andgift wrap(12/77 = 100) ....... Miscellaneous householdproducts (12/77 = 100) ................... Lawnandgardensupplies (12/77 = 100)............................ Housekeepingservices ..................................................... Postage..................................................... Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and drycleaning services (12/77 = 100)................................ Applianceandfurniture repair (12/77 = 100)........................ APPAREL AND UPKEEP...................................................................................... Apparel com m odities............................................................................................ Apparel commodities less footwear.................................... Men's andboys’ ....................................................... Men's (12/77 = 100) ........................................... Suits, sport coats, andjackets (12/77 = 100)............. Coats andjackets........................................... Furnishings andspecial clothing (12/77 = 100)........... Shirts (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Dungarees, jeans, andtrousers (12/77 = 100) ........... Boys’ (12/77 = 100) ........................................... Coats, jackets, sweaters, andshirts (12/77 = 100)....... Furnishings (12/77 = 100) ................................ Suits, trousers, sport coats, andjackets (12/77 = 100) . . 76 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Nov. 482.6 626.9 633.0 194.9 444.7 350.9 584.9 234.4 191.1 166.9 116.2 125.4 382.8 Dec. 480.2 625.9 631.5 195.6 442.2 348.2 583.0 234.1 190.4 166.5 116.2 124.1 384.4 Jan. 481.2 621.6 626.5 195.6 444.1 351.0 582.9 235.3 190.8 167.1 116.2 124.0 389.6 Feb. 480.8 623.4 628.4 194.9 443.3 352.6 576.8 234.3 189.1 164.6 116.2 123.9 391.3 Mar. 482.2 620.8 626.3 194.2 445.5 354.2 580.1 236.3 191.3 167.7 116.2 124.3 391.4 Mar. 474.7 662.4 673.9 197.1 428.4 335.1 567.9 228.5 186.6 158.4 122.8 122.0 373.9 Oct. 491.4 629.4 636.9 194.3 454.7 360.8 592.1 233.9 190.5 166.1 116.6 124.6 384.8 Nov. 482.1 629.3 635.6 195.4 443.7 350.5 580.9 235.3 191.6 167.4 116.6 125.2 386.8 Dec. 479.7 628.4 634.0 196.2 441.0 347.3 579.7 235.0 190.9 167.0 116.5 124.0 388.3 Jan. Feb. Mar. 480.3 625.7 631.3 195.5 442.3 351.7 574.3 235.1 189.5 164.9 16.6 123.9 395.0 481.6 623.1 628.7 194.7 444.4 353.2 577.2 237.2 191.2 168.2 116.6 124.2 395.1 241.2 244.3 244.2 244.2 244.2 246.2 246.9 198.3 200.5 200.2 199.7 198.8 200.7 200.6 236.1 242.7 240.5 239.9 237.1 244.5 241.4 140.1 147.1 145.2 141.6 138.9 146.6 142.2 238.0 240.7 240.6 240.5 240.4 242.6 196.7 198.2 197.6 197.3 196.3 198.3 240.0 247.1 244.6 244.1 240.5 247.9 141.2 148.8 146.6 143.0 140.2 147.9 243.2 154.6 218.4 149.1 119.8 124.5 142.1 150.5 103.6 97.9 109.7 191.0 197.2 147.4 126.2 155.8 228.2 160.2 121.6 128.1 148.1 147.1 100.4 92.5 108.4 188.4 197.6 147.7 123.5 159.5 215.3 145.9 119.7 125.7 137.9 151.9 102.5 96.5 108.6 192.8 203.1 148.6 125.2 163.8 223.1 152.1 121.0 128.1 145.2 147.6 98.5 91.0 105.7 188.8 201.0 149.3 119.7 127.1 124.4 122.4 121.8 121.5 122.4 122.7 126.4 122.6 120.6 120.2 119.5 120.7 121.2 154.9 227.4 160.7 122.2 127.5 145.9 146.0 99.9 92.1 107.7 186.7 197.3 148.1 121.8 158.0 225.6 160.1 122.3 125.8 143.9 145.2 99.2 92.5 106.1 185.9 197.5 147.6 121.0 157.3 224.1 154.1 121.6 125.7 147.2 145.2 99.1 92.0 106.4 186.0 197.1 146.8 121.3 158.6 225.0 154.7 121.3 125.9 148.5 145.8 99.7 91.9 107.6 186.5 197.2 147.1 121.8 159.3 226.7 156.5 121.4 126.7 149.8 145.4 99.5 92.3 106.9 185.7 195.2 148.4 121.2 160.2 224.5 155.9 121.8 129.0 143.5 148.8 99.5 91.1 107.4 190.2 203.5 148.0 121.7 159.4 223.4 156.3 122.0 127.9 141.4 148.0 98.9 90.7 106.6 "189.2 203.2 149.1 119.9 162.9 222.5 156.4 121.9 126.4 140.4 147.3 98.2 91.3 105.0 188.6 203.8 148.9 118.9 161.3 220.4 150.5 121.2 126.2 142.9 147.1 98.1 90.7 105.2 188.5 203.5 147.8 119.1 162.3 221.5 151.2 120.7 126.9 144.6 147.9 98.6 90.5 106.4 189.2 203.3 147.9 119.8 198.2 245.2 143.5 125.8 122.9 121.5 120.5 121.4 121.4 120.0 123.8 122.3 119.0 117.4 118.4 118.7 117.9 141.6 141.2 142.8 143.9 143.6 145.1 144.9 139.2 138.5 139.8 140.7 141.0 142.6 142.1 145.4 147.9 148.4 152.0 150.9 153.0 152.2 137.0 138.2 137.8 141.9 140.5 142.4 132.8 135.6 137.4 137.2 135.2 137.3 135.8 128.5 130.8 132.6 132.5 131.0 133.2 142.4 131.6 148.2 143.5 147.6 145.5 146.0 147.0 148.3 144.2 139.8 143.4 140.9 142.8 142.4 144.8 135.3 300.6 296.1 153.7 149.3 141.7 159.5 146.6 326.1 337.5 144.9 308.9 303.9 157.6 159.7 149.8 158.6 142.4 338.5 372.7 135.5 305.4 299.9 156.6 156.5 144.8 161.7 143.5 330.2 337.5 134.8 306.2 302.3 157.1 156.1 145.5 162.1 143.4 330.3 337.5 139.1 307.5 305.7 157.1 155.8 145.2 161.5 146.3 330.6 337.5 140.0 309.9 308.0 158.4 156.6 145.4 163.5 147.9 331.3 337.5 141.2 311.5 309.1 158.8 158.7 145.3 163.9 149.8 333.9 349.4 140.4 311.8 308.6 159.1 160.0 146.0 163.9 148.6 337.4 371.9 140.1 297.1 291.7 152.4 149.4 144.7 154.0 138.9 326.0 337.5 141.1 302.5 295.4 155.1 156.4 148.4 156.2 137.1 330.8 337.5 140.2 303.5 297.6 155.7 155.8 149.1 156.7 137.5 330.9 337.5 144.3 304.6 301.1 155.7 155.6 148.8 156.0 140.3 331.1 337.5 144.6 306.9 303.3 156.9 156.4 149.1 158.0 141.6 331.8 337.5 146.0 308.5 304.3 157.2 158.4 149.0 158.4 143.9 334.9 349.8 171.7 176.3 176.0 176.6 177.9 180.2 181.4 172.0 176.8 176.4 176.9 178.2 180.9 182.0 148.8 154.7 155.4 155.3 155.0 155.8 156.4 146.9 152.2 152.9 152.8 152.6 153.4 154.0 198.8 205.7 205.2 203.2 199.8 201.8 205.3 198.0 204.8 204.2 202.1 198.5 200.7 204.2 185.9 192.6 191.9 189.6 185.7 187.5 191.3 185.8 192.3 191.6 189.2 185.1 187.2 190.9 182.3 189.9 119.4 110.6 98.1 146.1 127.0 112.4 124.1 119.7 137.9 122.1 189.2 197.6 124.3 116.4 107.9 151.8 129.5 115.5 128.6 126.8 136.8 126.7 188.3 197.8 124.5 115.7 106.6 152.0 129.4 117.6 128.5 125.9 138.9 126.4 185.9 196.0 123.2 113.3 105.6 151.7 128.3 116.6 128.1 123.9 139.2 126.9 181.9 193.2 121.7 112.3 101.5 149.1 127.4 116.0 125.0 117.1 138.1 126.0 183.7 192.8 121.6 112.2 100.9 149.0 128.0 115.4 124.4 116.2 138.9 125.1 187.6 195.2 123.2 113.5 100.7 150.6 130.6 117.3 125.9 120.0 138.2 125.6 181.9 190.5 120.1 104.1 101.4 142.1 130.0 118.3 122.8 122.0 133.4 119.6 188.7 198.1 125.0 109.7 111.1 147.7 132.1 122.0 127.2 129.2 132.7 123.8 187.8 198.6 125.4 109.2 109.9 147.8 132.2 124.3 127.1 128.3 134.4 123.7 185.3 196.8 124.1 106.8 108.8 147.6 130.7 123.1 126.5 125.6 134.7 124.2 180.9 193.6 122.5 105.6 104.4 145.2 129.9 122.4 123.2 118.0 133.9 123.4 183.1 193.1 122.2 105.5 103.3 144.8 130.5 121.6 122.8 117.3 134.5 122.8 187.0 195.7 123.8 106.5 103.0 146.0 133.7 123.8 124.5 122.0 133.8 123.2 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers All Urban Consumers 1984 General summary 1985 1984 1985 Mar. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Mar. Oct. Nov. Dm . Jan. Feb. Mar. Women's andgirls' ................................................... Women's (12/77 - 100) ........................................ Coats andjackets . ........................................ Dresses ..................................................... Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ................. Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100) ....... Suits (12/77 - 100)........................................ Girls’ (12/77 - 100)............................................. Coats, jackets, dresses, andsuits (12/77 = 100)......... Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ................. Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and accessories (12/77 - 100).............................. Infants’andtoddlers' ................................................. Otherapparel commodities ............................................ Sewing materials andnotions (12/77 = 100) ................... Jewelryandluggage (12/77 - 100) ............................ 163.3 108.7 167.2 175.9 92.5 136.8 85.0 108.0 100.6 103.9 172.2 115.0 181.7 179.9 104.3 138.5 94.1 112.3 106.2 108.2 170.4 113.4 181.9 175.8 103.6 138.5 87.6 112.7 106.8 107.7 167.2 111.3 175.0 174.3 100.8 138.8 81.6 110.9 104.0 106.2 161.3 107.3 161.7 168.1 96.1 137.9 76.8 106.9 96.2 104.1 164.1 109.3 161.0 172.3 98.6 139.0 80.9 108.3 100.3 103.4 169.9 113.4 164.8 182.5 102.4 140.4 88.7 110.7 105.1 105.0 165.3 110.5 172.8 162.9 93.0 136.3 106.4 107.4 98.3 104.6 173.8 116.4 186.3 165.8 104.7 138.0 114.0 112.0 105.0 108.9 171.9 114.9 186.0 162.4 104.1 138.1 106.6 111.8 105.8 106.9 168.6 112.6 178.2 160.7 101.5 138.3 99.9 109.9 101.8 106.3 162.1 108.3 164.6 154.8 96.5 137.3 93.0 105.9 94.8 103.1 165.8 110.9 166.3 159.7 98.7 138.5 100.2 107.7 100.1 102.3 171.5 114.9 169.8 168.7 102.7 139.8 109.8 110.6 104.9 104.9 128.0 288.0 217.2 120.8 148.8 130.0 291.6 216.0 120.6 147.7 131.6 290.2 215.4 120.1 147.4 130.9 291.9 213.3 121.9 144.7 129.8 290.3 212.2 120.9 144.1 130.5 298.8 215.5 122.0 146.6 130.7 302.1 216.9 122.9 147.6 126.9 298.6 205.3 119.7 138.7 128.7 302.5 204.0 119.0 137.8 130.2 302.1 203.1 118.4 137.2 129.6 302.9 201.0 120.5 134.3 128.6 299.7 199.9 119.1 133.9 129.5 310.1 203.0 119.5 136.7 129.7 314.5 204.2 120.5 137.4 Footwear.................................................................... Men's (12/77 - 100)................................................. Boys' andgirls’ (12/77 - 100)........................................ Women's (12/77 - 100)............................................. 207.7 135.2 131.2 125.5 212.9 138.3 136.0 128.0 212.9 138.4 136.3 127.6 211.4 137.1 135.3 127.0 208.6 136.5 135.3 123.2 210.1 136.5 136.9 124.6 213.1 139.1 137.1 127.0 208.3 137.1 133.8 122.3 213.2 140.1 138.7 124.1 213.1 140.2 139.0 123.6 211.7 138.9 138.3 122.9 209.5 138.5 138.4 119.5 210.8 138.5 139.7 120.8 213.4 140.9 139.5 123.1 Apparel services 300.8 309.5 310.8 311.5 312.5 316.0 317.1 ................................................................................................... 298.8 307.4 308.8 309.3 310.2 313.6 314.7 TRANSPORTATION 180.7 185.5 186.3 186.9 187.2 189.3 190.2 179.1 183.8 184.4 184.9 185.3 187.3 188.2 155.3 160.4 161.1 161.2 162.3 163.9 164.3 156.5 161.7 162.5 162.6 163.5 165.2 165.5 306.9 315.5 316.1 315.8 314.7 314.3 316.7 308.9 317.8 318.3 317.9 316.7 316.3 318.7 P riv a te ...................................................................................................................... 301.9 310.2 310.8 310.4 309.1 Laundryanddrycleaning otherthancoin operated(12/77 = 100) ....... Otherapparel services (12/77 - 100)...................................... Newcars.................................................................... Usedcars .................................................................. Gasoline .................................................................... Automobile maintenance and repair ........................................ Bodywork(12/77 - 100) ........................................... Automobile drivetrain, brake, andmiscellaneous mechanical repair(12/77 - 100) .................................. Maintenance andservicing (12/77 = 100)............................ Power plant repair(12/77 - 100) .................................... Other privatetransportation................................................. Otherprivatetransportationcommodities ............................ Motoroil, coolant, andother products (12/77 = 100) ......... Automobile parts andequipment (12/77 = 100) ............... Tires......................................................... Otherparts andequipment (12/77 = 100)................. Otherprivatetransportation services.................................. Automobile insurance ........................................... Automobilefinance charges (12/77 - 100) ..................... Automobile rental, registration, andotherfees (12/77 = 100). . . . State registration ........................................... Drivers’ licenses (12/77 = 100)............................ Vehicle inspection (12/77 - 100).......................... Othervehicle-relatedfees (12/77 = 100)................... Public ...................................................................................................................... 308.7 311.0 305.2 313.9 314.4 313.9 312.6 312.2 314.6 207.2 362.2 368.6 338.3 170.7 209.6 384.6 370.3 345.3 175.6 211.4 383.6 369.2 345.8 175.8 212.0 382.7 365.7 346.2 176.1 213.1 382.8 356.8 346.9 176.9 213.9 384.6 351.6 348.2 178.4 214.1 386.1 351.6 348.5 178.3 206.7 362.2 370.5 339.0 169.3 209.0 384.6 371.7 346.2 174.1 210.8 383.6 370.5 346.7 174.3 211.3 382.6 367.1 347.1 174.7 212.0 382.8 358.2 347.9 175.5 213.1 384.6 353.2 349.2 177.0 213.4 386.2 353.2 349.6 177.1 165.1 153.9 162.1 268.3 201.3 152.5 126.9 171.8 133.2 288.7 322.3 159.2 149.1 197.8 158.0 139.2 163.5 169.2 156.5 164.9 278.7 199.0 153.2 125.1 168.3 133.2 302.5 332.3 172.0 157.6 213.5 163.7 140.0 168.3 169.6 156.8 164.9 280.7 201.0 155.3 126.4 170.2 134.1 304.6 335.9 172.2 158.0 213.5 163.7 142.2 169.1 169.7 157.0 165.1 282.3 202.2 156.2 127.1 171.4 134.5 306.2 340.0 170.9 158.4 213.5 163.7 142.2 170.1 170.0 157.1 165.7 283.9 202.0 155.7 127.0 171.4 134.2 308.3 345.1 169.6 158.5 213.6 164.6 142.2 170.3 170.2 157.4 166.6 284.4 203.8 156.0 128.3 174.0 133.9 308.5 346.3 168.1 159.1 213.6 164.6 142.2 171.8 170.6 157.2 167.0 284.5 201.9 156.4 126.8 171.4 133.5 309.1 348.3 166.6 159.6 214.6 164.6 142.4 172.2 169.1 153.1 161.6 269.1 203.5 152.3 128.5 175.1 132.7 289.0 321.5 158.7 150.1 198.0 158.3 139.9 170.7 173.4 155.8 164.6 279.8 201.0 152.6 126.5 171.5 132.5 303.3 331.3 171.7 158.9 212.9 164.1 140.5 176.0 173.8 156.1 164.6 281.9 203.5 154.4 128.1 174.0 133.5 305.3 334.9 171.9 159.2 212.9 164.1 142.3 176.7 174.0 156.3 164.8 283.3 204.7 155.2 128.9 175.1 134.0 306.7 338.9 170.5 159.6 212.9 164.1 142.3 177.8 174.2 156.6 165.4 284.7 204.2 154.5 128.6 174.9 133.6 308.6 343.9 169.2 159.8 213.1 164.9 142.3 178.0 174.5 156.8 166.4 285.2 206.1 155.2 129.9 177.7 133.2 308.7 345.2 167.7 160.4 213.1 164.9 142.3 180.0 175.1 156.5 166.8 285.1 204.2 155.4 128.5 175.0 132.8 309.2 347.2 166.2 161.0 214.1 164.9 142.5 180.5 377.4 391.1 391.8 392.8 394.5 394.4 397.3 370.2 381.6 382.4 382.8 384.2 384.2 386.7 Airlinefare.................................................................. Intercitybus fare ........................................................... Intracitymass transit....................................................... Taxi fare .................................................................... Intercitytrainfare........................................................... 429.0 427.6 342.0 308.5 373.4 453.5 445.3 346.6 311.1 382.0 455.4 447.0 345.9 311.3 383.5 456.2 455.4 346.7 311.3 388.2 458.9 459.6 347.0 313.4 390.2 468.7 456.5 347.0 315.0 390.3 464.3 454.4 347.7 317.4 390.3 424.9 426.8 341.8 317.7 373.7 448.8 445.4 346.6 320.0 382.2 374.5 385.5 387.5 388.5 391.1 235.0 244.1 245.6 247.3 248.2 249.8 251.9 235.3 244.1 Prescriptiondrugs........................................................... Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 100).................................... Tranquilizers andsedatives (12/77 - 100) .......................... Circulatories anddiuretics (12/77 - 100)............................ Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and prescriptionmedical supplies (12/77 = 100)....................... Painandsymptomcontrol drugs (12/77 = 100)..................... Supplements, coughandcoldpreparations, and respiratoryagents (12/77 - 100).................................. 228.2 163.9 195.5 164.7 242.2 171.0 216.2 174.4 Nonprescriptiondrugs andmedical supplies (12/77 = 100)............... Eyeglasses (12/77 - 100) ........................................... Internal and respiratoryover-the-counter drugs....................... Nonprescription medical equipment andsupplies (12/77 = 100) . . . 161.2 138.4 263.1 155.8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 244.4 171.8 218.8 174.9 245.4 171.5 220.1 176.0 451.1 455.4 346.5 320.3 388.7 454.1 459.3 346.7 322.4 390.7 453.8 455.2 346.8 324.1 390.7 459.9 452.2 347.5 326.7 390.7 393.8 396.5 372.6 383.7 385.6 386.7 389.3 392.0 394.6 MEDICAL CARE ...................................................................................................... Medical care com m odities................................................................................... 240.2 170.5 212.7 172.8 450.6 447.8 345.9 320.1 383.8 247.6 171.9 223.2 178.5 250.9 174.0 227.9 180.9 229.7 166.3 195.4 164.3 241.7 173.3 212.7 172.1 245.6 247.2 248.0 249.6 251.5 243.8 173.8 216.3 173.7 245.9 174.6 218.9 174.2 247.0 174.3 220.2 175.3 249.2 174.7 223.1 177.8 252.4 176.7 227.8 180.1 209.7 222.3 223.8 228.3 228.9 229.6 230.8 211.9 224.7 226.1 230.7 231.2 232.2 233.2 185.5 192.7 194.4 198.2 196.6 198.1 200.9 187.7 194.7 196.3 197.2 198.7 200.3 203.0 171.4 176.9 178.3 179.1 180.6 183.2 185.7 172.0 177.7 179.0 179.7 181.2 184.0 186.4 165.4 141.9 271.3 157.7 166.0 142.2 271.5 159.8 166.8 141.9 273.7 160.3 167.3 142.5 274.7 160.2 168.0 144.0 275.1 161.2 168.6 144.5 276.6 161.1 162.1 137.3 264.4 157.5 166.3 140.8 272.4 159.1 166.9 141.2 272.7 161.5 167.8 140.9 275.0 161.9 168.2 141.4 275.8 161.6 168.9 143.0 276.2 162.8 169.5 143.4 277.6 162.6 77 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 20. Consumer Prices Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary 1984 Mar. Oct. Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Wurkers 1985 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. 1984 Mar. Mar. Oct. 1985 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Medical care s e rv ic e s ......................................................................................... 405.3 416.5 418.5 419.3 422.4 425.3 428.1 402.7 414.1 416.1 417.0 420.1 423.1 425.7 Professional services....................................................... Physicians' services................................................... Dental services......................................................... Other professional services (12/77 = 100).......................... 341.1 372.2 321.1 158.8 351.8 382.2 334.8 160.8 353.1 383.0 336.6 161.5 354.0 383.8 337.7 166.1 356.8 386.1 339.7 165.9 359.3 389.6 340.4 168.0 361.9 392.6 343.3 168.4 341.6 376.1 319.0 155.0 352.1 386.2 332.4 157.1 353.4 387.0 334.3 157.8 354.4 387.9 335.3 158.4 357.2 390.2 337.2 162.3 359.7 393.9 338.0 164.3 362.4 397.0 340.7 164.7 Othermedical care services ............................................... Hospital andother medical services (12/77 = 100) ................. Hospital room....................................................... Otherhospital and medical care services (12/77 = 100) ......... 482.8 207.0 659.4 203.3 494.7 215.0 687.1 210.7 497.7 217.2 691.3 213.6 498.2 217.6 690.8 214.4 501.7 219.4 697.7 216.0 505.2 220.6 700.7 217.3 508.0 221.6 703.6 218.4 479.3 204.9 651.7 201.5 491.7 212.9 677.3 209.3 494.6 214.7 680.8 211.7 495.3 215.1 680.9 212.5 498.8 216.9 687.0 214.2 502.3 218.1 690.3 215.5 505.0 215.8 692.2 216.3 ENTERTAINMENT................................................................................................... 251.7 258.3 259.0 260.1 256.9 257.3 Entertainment com m o d ities................................................................................ 250.6 255.9 256.0 256.8 257.1 257.9 258.7 245.3 249.6 250.2 250.9 251.1 251.9 252.2 Reading materials (12/77 = 100).......................................... Newspapers ........................................................... Magazines, periodicals, andbooks (12/77 = 100)................... 162.4 167.7 167.8 168.8 169.6 171.5 173.3 161.9 167.0 167.2 168.2 168.8 311.8 317.5 319.2 320.1 320.7 323.2 324.3 312.0 317.7 319.4 320.4 321.0 166.6 174.7 174.1 175.6 176.9 179.6 182.8 166.5 174.6 173.7 175.4 176.6 170.7 323.5 179.4 172.4 324.5 182.2 Sporting goods andequipment (12/77 = 100)............................ Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) ........................................ Indoorandwarmweather sport equipment (12/77 = 100) ......... Bicycles ............................................................... Othersporting goods andequipment (12/77 = 100)................. 136.1 139.9 117.1 201.5 134.0 138.8 144.5 117.2 198.8 135.6 140.0 146.0 118.2 198.1 137.3 139.6 145.9 118.0 198.4 134.4 140.2 146.9 117.3 198.4 135.1 139.9 146.7 117.6 199.5 133.2 140.2 147.0 118.1 200.0 132.6 130.0 130.4 115.1 202.5 133.8 132.2 133.9 115.3 200.0 135.1 133.6 135.8 116.4 199.1 136.5 133.0 135.4 116.1 199.5 134.0 133.9 136.8 115.5 199.8 134.3 133.7 136.6 115.8 200.9 132.9 133.4 136.0 116.3 201.6 132.3 Toys, hobbies, andotherentertainment (12/77 = 100)................... Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 100) ............... Photographic supplies andequipment (12/77 = 100) ............... Pet supplies andexpenses (12/77 = 100) .......................... 140.5 138.6 132.6 149.7 141.9 138.2 135.1 153.5 141.8 138.1 134.9 153.4 142.5 139.1 135.1 154.0 142.1 137.7 134.9 155.2 142.2 137.8 135.1 155.2 142.0 137.3 136.0 154.9 139.5 135.2 133.8 150.8 263.4 165.0 156.1 154.7 140.9 134.8 136.2 154.5 141.5 135.6 136.4 155.3 141.0 134.1 136.1 156.3 141.1 134.3 136.3 156.3 141.0 133.8 137.2 156.0 261.0 266.3 262.2 248.0 254.2 254.8 255.8 256.6 Entertainment services......................................................................................... 253.8 262.8 263.8 265.5 267.0 266.7 267.6 253.9 263.4 264.0 265.6 267.4 266.8 267.4 Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 100) ................................ Admissions (12/77 = 100) ............................................... Otherentertainment services (12/77 = 100).............................. 158.5 163.6 165.1 165.9 166.5 166.5 166.9 159.2 165.0 166.2 166.8 167.6 148.9 157.2 156.8 158.2 160.3 159.4 159.4 147.8 156.1 155.6 156.9 159.1 134.5 137.0 136.7 138.0 137.9 138.2 139.8 135.7 137.6 137.0 138.5 138.4 167.5 158.1 138.6 167.4 158.4 140.3 OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES 302.1 315.8 316.5 316.7 319.1 299.7 311.9 312.6 312.8 315.6 317.1 317.6 Tobacco products................................................................................................... 305.6 314.6 314.7 314.6 321.0 323.2 323.7 305.2 314.2 314.3 314.2 320.8 323.0 323.4 Cigarettes .................................................................. Othertobacco products andsmoking accessories (12/77 = 100) ....... 313.8 323.3 323.4 323.2 330.3 332.5 332.8 312.8 322.2 322.2 322.1 329.2 157.0 160.0 160.6 161.0 161.6 163.1 164.7 157.0 160.1 160.6 161.0 161.5 331.4 163.0 331.7 164.8 320.5 321.1 Personal c a r e ......................................................................................................... 267.8 274.7 276.3 276.6 277.2 278.2 278.7 265.7 272.4 274.0 274.4 274.9 275.9 276.3 Toilet goods and personal care appliances ................................ Products forthe hair, hairpieces, andwigs (12/77 = 100) ......... Dental andshaving products (12/77 = 100) ........................ Cosmetics, bathandnail preparations, manicureand eye makeup implements (12/77 = 100) .......................... Othertoilet goods andsmall personal careappliances (12/77 = 100) ... 265.9 272.0 273.4 273.5 274.0 275.4 276.0 266.6 272.6 274.0 274.2 274.6 154.1 155.9 156.9 156.5 156.4 152.0 157.2 153.3 155.0 156.2 155.8 155.6 164.6 168.2 170.9 172.1 173.5 175.8 174.5 162.9 166.0 168.9 170.0 171.4 275.9 156.1 173.5 276.5 156.3 172.3 150.0 154.9 154.9 155.3 155.3 155.6 155.8 150.8 155.9 155.8 156.3 156.3 151.8 155.4 155.5 154.7 154.8 155.3 157.5 155.4 159.0 159.1 158.3 158.5 156.8 158.9 156.8 161.1 Personal care services ..................................................... Beautyparlor services forwomen .................................... Haircuts andother barber shopservices for men (12/77 = 100) ... 270.4 278.0 279.9 280.4 281.1 281.7 282.0 265.3 272.6 274.4 275.0 275.7 273.4 281.2 283.1 283.8 283.9 284.3 285.1 266.6 274.0 275.8 276.6 276.7 149.9 154.0 155.0 155.1 156.2 156.8 156.3 148.6 152.8 153.8 153.8 154.9 276.3 277.1 155.5 276.5 277.8 155.1 Personal and educational expenses 356.4 384.0 384.1 384.3 385.6 386.9 387.6 359.2 386.0 366.2 386.4 387.9 389.3 390.1 317.1 365.7 184.3 184.5 183.9 201.2 ................................................................ Schoolbooks andsupplies ................................................. Personal andeducational services......................................... Tuitionandotherschool fees.......................................... College tuition (12/77 = 100) .................................. Elementaryand highschool tuition(12/77 = 100)............. Personal expenses (12/77 = 100).................................... 333.7 295.2 201.3 201.4 201.3 208.5 333.8 395.4 201.3 201.4 201.3 208.9 334.0 395.5 201.3 201.3 201.4 209.5 340.7 395.9 201.2 201.3 201.4 210.7 343.8 396.9 201.4 201.5 206.4 212.6 343.9 397.9 201.4 201.5 201.4 214.9 321.6 368.6 185.2 185.4 184.9 202.1 338.6 397.4 202.3 202.3 202.8 208.8 338.7 397.6 202.3 202.3 202.8 209.2 338.9 397.8 202.3 202.2 202.9 209.7 345.5 398.3 202.3 202.2 202.9 211.0 348.7 399.4 202.5 202.5 202.9 212.7 348.8 400.3 202.5 202.5 202.9 214.8 364.7 366.6 365.6 362.3 353.8 348.7 356.7 366.5 412.6 346.5 362.8 358.5 357.5 359.1 358.3 360.6 345.5 368.7 373.7 373.7 374.1 374.9 377.6 381.8 376.1 367.9 440.3 361.5 382.7 366.8 440.4 357.1 381.9 363.6 355.0 442.8 355.9 357.6 382.7 383.3 350.2 358.1 356.7 386.6 358.9 390.9 Special indexes: Gasoline, motoroil, coolant, andother products.......................... Insurance andfinance ..................................................... Utilities andpublictransportation ......................................... Housekeeping andhome maintenance services............................ 78 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 21. Consumer Price Index for Ail 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) Category and group Size class B (385,000-1,250 million) 1984 Oct. Dec. 1984 Feb. Oct. Dec. Size class D (75,000 or less) Size class C (75,000-385,800) 1984 1984 Feb. Oct. Dec. Feb. Oct. Dec. Feb. Northeast EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All Items .................................................................................... Foodandbeverages .................................................................. Housing................................................................................ Apparel and upkeep .................................................................. Transportation ........................................................................ Medical care .......................................................................... Entertainment.......................................................................... Othergoods andservices ............................................................. COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities................................................................................ Commodities less foodandbeverages ............................................... Services..................................................................................... 163.5 153.7 168.2 128.2 172.0 178.3 150.9 178.1 164.3 154.1 169.7 125.5 173.0 181.4 151.3 178.9 165.5 157.0 170.5 124.9 173.0 184.5 151.8 180.7 170.0 152.6 180.9 129.0 176.9 182.7 149.9 177.4 169.9 152.3 181.2 126.7 176.8 183.5 149.8 177.4 171.5 156.0 184.3 121.3 176.4 185.2 146.8 179.8 175.3 156.1 190.1 139.0 176.3 182.7 155.3 180.7 174.4 155.8 187.5 138.2 176.3 184.1 155.4 181.5 175.8 158.3 189.9 134.2 176.3 185.5 157.1 184.5 169.8 152.0 177.4 141.4 176.2 188.7 154.8 181.1 169.7 151.4 176.9 138.7 176.9 192.8 156.5 180.9 170.3 153.6 177.4 137.7 175.5 194.0 158.2 182.7 155.3 156.1 173.4 155.1 155.4 175.3 156.7 156.0 176.2 161.0 164.7 183.3 161.0 164.9 183.1 161.7 163.6 186.1 160.9 162.8 198.0 160.6 162.7 196.1 161.3 162.2 198.7 159.1 162.2 185.2 159.0 162.3 185.3 159.6 161.9 185.8 North Central Region EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ................................................................................... Foodand beverages .................................................................. Housing................................................................................ Apparel and upkeep .................................................................. Transportation ........................................................................ Medical care .......................................................................... Entertainment.......................................................................... Othergoods andservices ............................................................ COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities............................................................................... Commodities less foodandbeverages ............................................... Services..................................................................................... 173.4 150.0 192.2 122.9 174.0 181.5 148.3 172.9 173.2 150.4 191.8 120.8 173.7 182.1 148.4 173.0 174.3 152.5 193.6 120.1 172.8 184.6 150.2 175.7 168.9 149.2 178.1 134.4 173.9 183.0 140.3 184.7 169.2 149.6 178.3 132.5 174.3 184.6 139.9 186.1 169.7 151.3 178.5 132.9 172.7 188.2 142.2 188.7 167.2 150.2 175.8 132.0 176.7 175.6 153.4 169.4 166.4 149.9 174.0 129.3 176.7 176.3 154.2 169.6 166.7 151.7 173.3 131.3 175.6 178.3 155.6 170.8 167.5 157.8 171.3 128.7 175.1 185.6 143.3 181.4 167.6 158.5 171.0 128.0 174.9 186.2 146.4 181.8 168.2 158.9 172.1 126.5 173.7 189.4 147.3 184.9 159.4 164.0 193.7 159.0 163.1 193.7 159.7 162.8 195.5 157.7 161.1 186.7 157.8 161.0 187.2 158.1 160.6 188.0 156.4 159.1 184.3 155.9 158.5 183.1 156.1 157.9 183.4 156.4 155.7 184.7 156.7 155.8 184.8 156.2 154.8 186.8 South EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ................................................................................... Foodand beverages .................................................................. Housing................................................................................ Apparel and upkeep .................................................................. Transportation ........................................................................ Medical care .......................................................................... Entertainment.......................................................................... Othergoods andservices ............................................................ COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities................................................................................ Commodities less foodandbeverages ............................................... Services..................................................................................... 170.2 157.2 176.9 137.6 176.7 182.2 148.7 176.7 170.3 157.8 176.1 137.0 176.8 184.2 151.8 177.2 171.0 160.0 177.2 135.3 175.5 185.6 153.1 178.4 171.9 157.5 177.0 132.8 180.2 184.9 162.7 179.9 172.0 157.4 177.2 132.0 180.7 185.3 162.6 180.6 173.0 159.5 178.2 130.8 180.2 187.9 163.8 182.5 169.5 153.9 174.2 131.5 179.0 191.0 154.1 177.6 170.2 153.8 175.6 130.7 179.0 193.1 156.2 178.7 171.2 156.3 177.1 129.5 178.2 195.8 154.9 181.1 170.1 158.3 177.1 117.4 174.8 197.7 152.8 174.5 170.4 158.1 178.2 117.8 174.1 199.0 152.7 173.9 170.1 160.0 176.7 114.9 173.1 199.9 153.4 176 0 160.7 162.2 183.1 160.8 162.0 183.1 160.9 160.8 184.5 162.6 164.5 185.5 162.3 164.1 186.2 163.0 163.8 187.5 160.0 162.9 184.2 160.0 162.8 185.9 160.6 162.3 187.5 159.8 160.2 185.6 159.3 159.5 186.9 159.6 158.9 185.7 West EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ................................................................................... Foodandbeveraqes .................................................................. Housing............................................................................... Apparel andupkeep .................................................................. Transportation ........................................................................ Medical care .......................................................................... Entertainment.......................................................................... Othergoods andservices ............................................................ COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities............................................................................... Commodities less foodandbeverages ............................................... Services..................................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 172.2 156.8 180.5 129.3 181.0 188.0 145.7 182.7 172.1 157.6 179.8 126.7 181.2 187.9 146.9 183.0 173.5 158.9 182.2 127.8 180.1 191.8 147.9 185.7 170.6 159.7 175.0 131.2 181.2 183.6 152.6 179.3 170.9 161.5 174.1 131.8 181.8 184.5 154.6 179.8 172.0 163.1 176.2 131.0 180.3 186.8 155.5 181.7 162.7 155.8 161.1 127.7 176.3 190.5 154.0 174.4 162.9 155.2 160.9 125.6 177.0 193.5 158.0 175.0 164.2 158.2 161.9 126.8 176.0 196.0 162.6 176.9 170.1 164.2 172.2 147.1 172.7 188.7 165.9 179.3 170.1 164.3 171.2 146.1 173.4 189.9 169.3 180.3 170.0 166.2 171.6 146.6 172.5 192.5 157.1 182.0 158.0 158.7 190.1 157.8 157.9 190.0 158.3 157.8 192.4 160.3 160.4 184.2 161.4 161.0 183.7 161.8 160.7 185.4 158.2 158.6 168.0 157.9 158.6 168.7 158.5 157.8 170.8 158.7 155.8 186.7 159.0 156.3 186.3 158.6 154.5 186.5 79 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 22. Consumer Prices Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average, and selected areas [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers Area1 1984 Mar. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. U.S. cityaverage2........................................................... 307.3 315.3 315.3 315.5 316.1 Anchorage, Alaska (10/67 = 100).......................................... Atlanta, Ga................................................................... Baltimore, Md......................................................... Boston, Mass................................................................. Buffalo, N.Y........................................................... 274.4 Chicago, III.-Northwestern Ind............................................... Cincinnati, Ohio—Ky.—Ind.................................................. Cleveland, Ohio ............................................................ Dallas— Ft. Worth, Tex...................................................... Denver-Boulder, Colo........................................................ Detroit, Mich............................................................ Honolulu, Hawaii ................................................. Houston, Tex.............................................. Kansas City, Mo.—Kansas........................................... Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif.................................... Miami, Fla. (11/77 = 100)................................................. Milwaukee, Wis............................................................... Minneapolis— St. Paul, Minn.—Wis.......................................... NewYork, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J........................................... Northeast, Pa. (Scranton)................................................... 310.4 302.0 317.8 296.1 Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers 1985 303.2 315.3 307.8 318.2 303.4 278.3 315.2 309.4 Feb. 1984 Mar. Mar. Oct. 1985 Nov. Jan. Feb. Mar. 317.4 318.8 303.3 312.2 311.9 312.2 312.6 313.9 315.3 322.6 301.3 280.0 265.9 320.7 307.2 314.4 298.2 318.2 292.0 270.9 315.1 306.5 316.0 289.8 271.7 315.1 307.8 320.3 288.1 273.1 320.2 312.3 305.7 314.1 313.9 314.0 315.1 316.7 317.4 296.3 301.8 302.6 301.7 302.5 304.0 304.7 320.0 325.4 325.1 328.4 313.8 319.3 318.9 322.2 340.1 339.7 340.4 324.4 318.6 319.8 333.7 330.7 333.2 328.2 325.0 329.9 345.1 349.4 350.6 355.1 342.0 345.1 346.2 350.7 304.1 311.9 308.7 309.1 310.9 313.7 315.5 302.9 302.9 299.8 300.0 301.2 304.0 306.0 287.4 289.8 292.6 294.5 297.6 300.3 334.4 333.4 333.6 334.4 330.9 331.1 314.1 313.7 314.6 307.7 304.0 304.4 300.7 311.9 311.8 311.1 313.0 314.1 314.7 297.9 302.6 304.3 306.5 308.1 309.1 309.8 165.6 316.8 Philadelphia, Pa.—N.J....................................................... Pittsburgh, Pa.......................................................... Portland, Oreg.—Wash...................................................... St. Louis, Mo—III................................................................................................... San Diego, Calif..................................................... 168.3 168.6 170.1 166.3 169.6 324.3 324.6 327.8 335.3 342.7 328.0 327.9 330.4 327.0 299.9 306.6 308.0 308.0 308.4 310.2 310.9 289.9 300.4 301.2 293.0 301.1 301.5 304.9 294.0 300.6 296.7 303.7 306.0 305.1 306.3 309.2 310.4 298.8 308.7 309.2 321.1 322.1 323.8 304.2 298.0 304.8 306.8 309.0 292.2 295.7 302.7 309.1 313.3 314.3 297.3 307.1 363.7 349.3 364.1 369.2 326.2 328.8 San Francisco-Oakland, Calif................................................ Seattle— Everett, Wash........................................................ Washington, D.C.—Md.—Va............................................ 310.2 305.1 327.5 318.1 315.8 1The areas listed include not onlythe central city but the entire portionof the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as definedforthe 1970Census of Population, except that theStandardConsolidatedArea 80 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Dec. 325.8 319.5 314.6 328.7 321.4 299.9 319.2 308.2 is usedfor NewYorkandChicago. , ‘Average of 85cities. 319.3 305.5 319.8 169.8 343.4 171.3 346.9 307.9 309.4 312.4 304.6 306.0 297.4 310.4 329.1 313.5 323.8 306.0 301.6 302.0 303.6 304.2 301.0 304.2 321.5 306.7 317.7 324.2 299.8 311.0 333.7 309.0 322.3 23. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing [1967 = 100] Commodity grouping Annual average 1984 1985 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 292.3 r292.0 292.7 292.5 292.4 293.1 290.3 271.1 269.5 269.1 337.8 238.3 240.6 295.9 291.2 272.0 257.6 271.0 338.9 239.0 241.1 296.5 r290.9 r273.6 r263.0 r272.3 r336.7 r239.2 r240.7 r295.6 291.1 279.2 263.1 273.0 335.6 240.5 243.3 298.1 290.7 275.5 287.1 272.2 332.8 241.1 243.7 299.1 290.4 274.2 283.9 271.1 333.4 240.8 244.1 299.5 291.2 272.4 286.9 268.9 336.9 241.1 244.6 300.0 320.1 320.4 r319.9 319.6 318.6 318.6 319.4 300.7 Apr. May June July Aug. Sapt. Oct. Nov. 291.2 291.2 291.1 290 9 292.3 291.3 289.5 291.5 290.4 273.5 283 9 270.3 337.4 236.6 239.1 294.1 290.3 274.3 299.0 269.9 336.4 236.7 237.9 294.5 290.3 271.7 270.7 269.6 338.9 236.6 238.7 293.9 290.1 270.8 258.9 269.7 339.2 236.4 238.7 293.9 291.6 275.3 270.8 273.4 339.2 236.6 240.1 294 6 290.4 274.0 274.6 271.7 336.9 236.7 240.1 294.6 288.7 273.0 270.3 271.1 336.2 233.0 240.8 292.5 320.0 320.3 320.9 321.6 321.7 321.1 320.3 Dee.1 FINISHED GOODS Finishedgoods................................................. Finishedconsumer goods ................................ Finishedconsumerfoods .............................. Crude ................................................. Processed ............................................ Nondurable goods less foods.......................... Durable goods .......................................... Consumer nondurable goods less foodandenergy . . . Capital equipment.......................................... INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS Intermediate materials, supplies, andcomponents............. Materials andcomponents formanufacturing............. 301.8 302.9 303.3 303.4 303.2 302.5 301.9 301.4 301.7 301.1 300.7 300.5 300.1 Materials forfood manufacturing....................... Materials for nondurable manufacturing ............... Materials fordurable manufacturing ................... Components for manufacturing........................ 271.7 290.5 325.1 287.5 271.4 291.8 329.1 286.2 276.0 292.8 327.2 287.0 275.2 292.8 326.9 287.5 276.4 292.7 325.4 287.9 272.4 291.3 325.1 288.4 270.0 290.9 323.5 288.9 267.6 290.4 322.3 289.4 269.5 289.8 323.1 289.7 r268.2 r289.2 r321.9 r289.9 264.9 289.2 320.5 290.5 264.1 288.2 320.9 290.6 263.5 287.3 320.2 291.0 263.3 287.2 322.5 291.1 Materials andcomponents forconstruction............... 310.3 310.5 309.8 310.3 310.9 312.0 311.7 311.8 311.8 r312.4 313.2 313.0 313.1 313.8 575.2 490.4 649.1 576.6 491.4 650.9 569.2 484.7 643.0 565.3 481.8 638.1 564.1 483.4 634.3 566.6 r561.3 486.1 r483.0 636.5 r629 2 556.9 479.7 623.8 546.5 470.2 612.6 548.2 472.3 614.0 552.5 474.8 619.8 Processedfuels andlubricants............................ Manufacturing industries................................ Nonmanufacturing industries .......................... 566.3 483.8 638.2 562.9 480.6 634.5 567.2 485.5 638.2 Containers................................................. 302.1 299.4 300.9 301.8 303.0 304.1 305.2 308.8 310.1 r310.4 309.9 311.9 312.4 312.1 Supplies................................................... Manufacturing industries................................ Nonmanufacturing industries .......................... Feeds ................................................. Othersupplies........................................ 283.3 279.0 285.9 215.8 300.6 284.2 277.8 287.8 233.5 299.5 284.3 278.4 287.6 229.2 300.0 283.9 279.0 286.7 221.6 300.5 283.2 279.2 285.6 211.7 301.0 284.1 280.9 286.0 208.3 302.2 283.6 280.7 285.3 203.0 302.3 283.2 281.5 284.4 195.4 302.7 282.9 281.7 283.8 192.4 302.6 283.1 282.2 283.8 191.1 302.8 284.0 283.3 284.6 189.9 304.0 283.8 283.8 284.1 185.6 304.2 283.8 284.2 283.8 180.4 304.8 283.9 285.0 283.6 176.3 305.4 331.0 339.4 338.0 333.0 334.1 328.9 326.2 319.6 323.2 r322.4 319.4 318.3 312.9 311.3 252.7 244.9 252.8 r253.0 251.3 250.7 243.6 240.5 CRUDE MATERIALS Crude materials forfurther processing ........................ Foodstuffs andfeedstuffs.................................. 259.7 269.7 266.4 260.3 263.6 256.5 Nonfoodmaterials.......................................... 484.7 490.1 492.3 489.6 486.4 485.0 484.6 480.3 475.2 r472.0 466.1 464.2 462.2 464.0 380.9 390.1 282.0 376.8 386.1 277.6 379.3 388.5 279 9 374.7 383.9 276.3 369.2 r366.4 377.6 r374.4 276.3 r276.4 361.7 368.8 278.6 356.9 362.7 283.6 358.3 364.1 284.4 360.5 366.3 287.0 Nonfood materials except fuel.......................... Manufacturingindustries ............................ Construction.......................................... 380.6 390.2 278.7 388.8 399.5 279.2 389.9 400.2 282.7 386.1 395.7 283.5 931.4 920.8 928.4 932.6 940.2 953.1 937.6 935.9 934.0 r929.8 918.6 931.7 913.0 911.8 Crudefuel............................................... Manufacturingindustries ............................ 1,092.4 1,079.6 1,088.1 1,094.5 1,103.5 1,120.1 1,100.0 1,097.6 r1,095.1 r1,089.7 1,074.2 1,091.8 1,067.3 1,065.8 818.1 809.1 816.1 818.4 825.1 835.1 823.3 822.1 820.7 r817.3 809.6 819.2 804.9 804.1 Nonmanufacturing industries......................... SPECIAL GROUPINGS Finishedgoods excludingfoods................................ Finishedconsumer goods excludingfoods ............... Finishedconsumer goods less energy..................... 294.8 294.1 257.9 294.6 293.5 257.8 295.3 294.9 257.1 295.4 294.9 256.7 295.7 295.0 258.9 294.8 293.8 258.5 292.7 291.7 257.2 296.1 295.0 258.2 296.9 r295.8 295.9 r294.8 258.9 r259.3 296.6 294.8 261.0 295.9 293.6 261.7 296.2 293.7 261.3 297.8 295.8 261.0 Intermediate materials less foods andfeeds ................... Intermediate materials less energy........................ 325.0 303.7 325.0 304.4 325.4 304.6 326.4 304.7 326.7 304.7 326.3 304.7 325.7 304.2 325.8 304.1 326.1 r325.6 304.3 r304 1 325.4 304.2 324.6 304.1 324.7 303.9 325.6 304.4 Intermediate foods andfeeds .................................. 253.1 259.1 260.8 257.8 255.3 251.4 248.1 244.0 244.3 r243.0 240.4 238.4 236.3 234.8 552.5 257.6 549.8 258.5 548.8 251.9 546.6 249.9 542.4 242.6 535.9 r532.3 248.0 r247.8 525.6 246.6 525.8 245.9 521.6 240.9 523.0 239.1 Crude materials less agricultural products ..................... Crude materials less energy .............................. 547.2 255.6 553.0 265.4 554.0 263.3 'Data for December 1984 have been revisedto reflect the availabilityof late reports andcorrections byrespondents. All dataare subject to revision4 months afteroriginal publication. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised. 81 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 24. Producer Prices Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Code Commodity group and subgroup Annual average 1984 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. 1985 Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.1 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. All commodities ................................................................................... All commodities (1957-59 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................... 310.3 329.3 311.3 311.5 330.3 330.5 311.3 311.9 310.7 309.3 309.4 310.3 r309.8 r309.8 309.2 308.7 309.3 330.3 330.9 329.7 328.2 328.3 329.2 r328.7 r328.7 328.1 327.5 328.2 Farm products and processed foods and feeds ............................. Industrial comm odities......................................................................... 262.6 322.6 267.3 265.8 322.6 323.2 262.8 264.9 261.4 259.4 255.3 258.1 r258.6 258.0 257.8 255.0 253.3 323.8 323.9 323.3 322.3 323.4 323.8 323.0 323.2 322.5 322.6 323.8 FARM PRODUCTS AND PROCESSED FOODS AND FEEDS 01 01-1 01-2 01-3 01-4 01-5 01-6 01-7 01-8 01-9 Farmproducts..................................................... Freshanddriedfruits andvegetables.......................... Grains........................................................... Livestock....................................................... Livepoultry..................................................... Plant andanimal fibers ........................................ Fluidmilk....................................................... Eggs............................................................. Hay, hayseeds, andoilseeds .................................. Otherfarmproducts........................................... 255.7 278.0 239.7 251.8 240.6 228.4 278.3 210.8 256.3 285.4 265.4 263.8 262.1 260.8 240.8 252.3 272.7 264.4 282.1 279.7 260.8 251.9 256.2 254.8 240.6 259.1 271.7 201.0 297.0 288.2 257.1 273.7 257.8 250.0 227.7 252.7 271.8 177.9 272.4 279.1 258.7 281.9 248.9 260.1 259.2 235.8 273.9 184.9 245.8 277.4 253.3 293.7 236.9 253.7 218.6 211.3 276.8 181.2 242.6 284.3 249.8 290.1 231.4 244.9 239.7 210.3 282.1 177.6 228.4 296.5 240.2 267.3 219.0 233.9 219.2 202.8 286.7 179.9 219.1 294.0 245.7 251.2 219.7 247.7 247.1 201.4 287.6 176.0 227.3 297.9 245.7 r252.0 212.5 252.3 231.7 203.0 287.5 187.5 227.4 293.8 243.2 258.6 217.5 247.4 232.7 204.5 284.6 141.9 226.2 289.4 244.6 289.2 217.2 249.7 222.4 200.6 281.0 161.5 214.6 275.0 238.7 277.7 216.1 236.6 215.5 200.4 278.4 167.6 212.0 285.8 236.9 277.8 220.6 231.3 202.3 211.3 271.1 175.1 213.8 285.3 02 02-1 02-2 02-3 02-4 02-5 02-6 02-7 02-8 02-9 Processedfoods andfeeds........................................ Cereal andbakeryproducts.................................... Meats, poultry, andfish........................................ Dairyproducts ................................................. Processedfruits andvegetables................................ Sugarandconfectionery........................................ Beverages and beverage materials ............................ Fats andoils ................................................. Miscellaneous processedfoods................................ Preparedanimal feeds.......................................... 265.3 270.4 255.1 251.7 294.2 301.4 273.2 301.2 278.2 220.5 267.2 268.3 261.7 248.9 295.1 301.9 271.4 293.4 276.3 236.3 267.5 268.7 257.1 248.9 297.7 303.8 273.5 328.5 276.2 232.3 264.8 271.4 247.4 249.6 298.2 304.1 272.8 328.1 279.9 225.5 267.3 272.3 258.7 251.4 296.2 305.0 273.9 312.7 281.3 216.7 264.8 271.7 252.2 251.2 295.7 303.7 274.6 305.9 280.4 213.9 263.6 271.9 249.5 255.0 291.8 302.4 274.6 298.5 281.1 209.2 262.6 272.7 245.5 256.4 295.8 299.8 276.1 301.6 281.2 202.4 263.8 273.7 250.4 257.3 292.3 297.0 276.0 311.9 280.9 199.7 r264.5 r273.6 r255.9 r255.8 r293.5 r295.7 r275.6 297.6 r281.0 198.8 265.1 276.1 259.1 255.4 296.7 293.1 276.2 280.4 281.9 197.8 263.9 278.2 255.9 254.1 295.4 290.4 277.6 286.0 280.7 193.7 262.9 277.8 252.1 253.4 300.2 291.6 277.6 290.7 281.0 189.3 261.2 278.2 246.3 251.4 298.7 292.8 277.2 303.2 281.7 185.7 03 Textile products andapparel...................................... 03-1 Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 100)................................ 03-2 Processedyarns andthreads (12/75 = 100) ................. 03-3 Grayfabrics (12/75 = 100).................................... 03-4 Finishedfabrics (12/75 = 100)................................ 03-81 Apparel ......................................................... 03-82 Textile housefurnishings........................................ 209.9 159.6 142.7 153.7 126.5 201.1 239.2 209.9 160.7 143.6 153.0 126.9 200.7 238.1 210.5 160.6 144.3 153.7 127.3 201.3 238.8 210.2 160.5 143.8 154.3 127.1 200.8 239.0 210.5 160.1 143.7 154.5 126.9 201.6 239.1 210.1 159.9 142.1 154.4 127.1 201.0 240.0 210.7 159.2 142.2 154.6 127.3 202.2 240.5 210.4 158.2 141.4 154.8 126 9 201.9 241.3 210.2 157.5 140.8 153.7 126.6 202.2 241.4 ‘ r210.0 r157.7 r140.8 r154.0 r126.6 r202.1 r238.3 210.4 157.6 141.2 153.2 126.5 202.6 242.2 210.6 157.7 141.9 153.1 126.9 202.8 243.1 210.4 156.6 141.4 152.5 127.1 203.2 240.6 210.5 156.8 141.1 151.8 127.0 203.6 241.0 04 04-2 04-3 04-4 Hides, skins, leather, and relatedproducts....................... Leather ........................................... Footwear ....................................................... Otherleatherand relatedproducts ............................ 286.5 372.3 251.2 265.0 286.8 386.7 251.6 258.1 288.5 390.7 251.5 259.8 290.1 387.8 250.5 267.9 288.9 383.2 250.1 267.2 298.7 378.1 250.9 267.7 288.7 371.4 252.0 267.6 287.7 369.3 252.1 268.1 283.8 359.8 252.4 267.9 r283.6 r354.5 r252.6 r266.9 284.3 357.7 252.4 273.3 284.8 351.9 256.6 273.5 283.1 348.5 255.5 274.5 285.5 351.6 255.3 275.2 05 05-1 05-2 05-3 05-4 05-61 05-7 Fuels and relatedproducts andpower............................ Coal............................................................ Coke............................................................ Gas fuels3 ..................................................... Electric power ................................................. Crude petroleum4 ............................................. Petroleumproducts, refined5 .................................. 657.0 654.7 660.6 665.9 665.0 657.9 652.3 546.0 542.0 547.4 544.3 548.1 550.0 549.1 436.4 442.8 441.6 442.9 441.9 437.3 435.7 1,109.9 1,102.1 1,104.1 1,109.1 1,110.8 1,116.9 1,104.6 440.0 431.5 433.1 446.7 453.5 456.7 456.4 670.5 673.9 673.9 673.3 672.6 671.1 670.6 665.3 667.0 677.6 679.7 673.3 654.8 646.5 654.4 548.9 432.4 1,112.5 445.4 669.8 655.5 655.3 r648.5 548.6 r547.7 432.8 r435.1 1,113.4 r1,103.1 443.0 r440.8 655.8 r649.4 661.5 r652.3 637.6 550.5 439.7 1,075.5 446.4 631.1 636.2 625.9 550.1 439.8 1,068.7 446.4 616.0 615.9 625.8 549.3 433.6 1,046.8 448.0 615.4 620.7 633.6 548.2 430.1 1,045.0 449.4 618.3 636.5 INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES 06 Chemicals andallied products.................................... 06-1 Industrial chemicals6...................................... 06-21 Prepared paint 06-22 Paint materials................................................. 06-3 Drugs andpharmaceuticals .................................... 06-4 Fats andoils, inedible.................................. 06-5 Agricultural chemicals andchemical products................. 06-6 Plastic resins andmaterials.................................... 06-7 Otherchemicals andalliedproducts .......................... 300.9 341.4 272.5 329.7 240.4 371.3 284.7 308.6 277.3 302.0 345.4 268.7 328.7 239.8 383.2 288.4 307.8 277.0 302.7 345.3 270.0 337.6 240.1 399.2 286.8 310.6 277.2 302.2 345.4 270.9 337.4 237.3 414.3 286.5 311.1 275.9 302.6 345.6 274.0 334.8 240.5 378.8 285.0 310.6 277.3 301.1 340.9 276.4 334.3 240.7 350.1 283.0 310.3 278.3 300.9 337.7 277.0 333.0 239.7 359.4 285.0 311.8 279.6 301.3 335.9 277.8 332.5 244.7 365.1 285.5 309.4 279.7 301.6 334.7 277.1 334.3 246.9 380.1 282.5 309.0 281.3 r300.7 r334.8 r277.8 r334.7 r245.0 r376.7 r282.5 r306.2 r280.1 301.7 337.7 278.2 332.0 248.0 356.6 282.3 302.9 281.7 302.2 336.4 279.0 332.9 251.5 342.5 281.6 306.8 282.0 302.8 336.8 279.7 334.2 253.2 343.1 282.6 305.5 282.4 303.6 335.8 280.4 336.0 254.7 348.9 283.0 308.1 283.4 07 Rubber plastic products ......................................... 07-1 Rubberandrubber products.................................... 07-11 Crude rubber ................................................. 07-12 Tires andtubes................................................. 07-13 Miscellaneous rubberproducts ................................ 07-2 Plastic products (6/78 = 100) ................................ 247.2 266.9 276.8 243.7 290.5 139.5 247.3 267.2 282.3 243.5 289.8 139.4 247.5 266.3 277.7 243.2 289.3 140.2 247.6 266.5 277.2 243.0 290.5 140.2 247.5 266.5 275.6 243.5 290.0 140.2 247.7 267.6 273.0 243.7 293.7 139.7 248.3 268.1 273.9 244.2 294.0 140.1 246.6 264.8 271.2 239.2 292.9 140.1 246.1 263.9 270.4 238.3 291.8 140.0 r245.9 r263.7 r272.1 r237.1 r292.5 139.8 248.4 268.0 275.5 245.1 292.1 140.4 246.7 265.7 273.4 240.8 292.3 139.6 246.6 265.7 270.7 241.2 292.6 139.5 246.8 265.1 270.4 239.1 294.1 140.1 08 08-1 08-2 08-3 08-4 307.5 349.8 307.8 241.6 234.6 315.1 369.4 307.2 243.6 233.3 308.5 355.6 304.2 235.4 234.7 307.1 350.5 305.3 236.3 235.0 304.4 342.6 306.8 237.2 235.2 304.7 342.3 307.2 245.9 236.5 303.3 338.2 307.4 243.4 235.9 300.3 334.3 307.0 240.1 236.6 301.0 336.6 309.5 234.9 236.5 r303.0 r339.5 r311.6 235.8 r238.0 304.3 343.2 312.4 234.0 238.2 303.3 342.9 311.5 226.6 236.6 303.4 345.0 309.9 223.7 238.8 301.7 340.5 309.5 222.7 239.1 Lumberandwood products ...................................... Lumber........................................... Millwork..................................................... Plywood......................................................... Otherwoodproducts........................................... See footnotes at endof table. 82 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 24. Continued— Producer Price indexes, by commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Commodity group and subgroup Code Annual average 1984 1985 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dee.1 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES— Continued Pulp, paper, andalliedproducts.................................. 09 Pulp, paper,and products,excluding buildingpaperandboard 09-1 Woodpulp....................................................... 09-11 Wastepaper..................................................... 09-12 09-13 09-14 Paperboard..................................................... Converted paperandpaperboard products..................... 09-15 Buildingpaperand board ...................................... 09-2 318.3 293.1 396.6 240.1 303.2 281.1 280.9 258.9 316.3 291.5 401.1 258.8 300.4 277.1 279.1 263.8 317.7 292.7 407.9 259.3 301.3 277.8 280.1 265.2 318.4 293.3 410.3 257.3 301.6 279.1 280.6 265.1 319.8 295.7 410.6 254.7 307.7 279.1 282.1 262.9 321.3 296.3 410.2 254.5 307.0 285.1 282.4 259.8 322.0 297.5 409.1 249.6 306.7 288.6 284.4 259.4 323.1 299.3 408.2 235.6 306.7 293.7 286.9 257.7 324.1 299.7 397.3 221.4 306.9 294.3 289.0 253.7 r324.1 r298.9 r392.1 206.0 r305.7 r293.4 r289.3 r253.4 326.6 297.8 383.5 190.8 307.0 288.9 289.0 255.2 326.9 297.4 368.4 192.6 304.7 287.8 291.0 256.2 327.0 295.4 353.9 170.2 303.7 285.7 290.4 256.3 327.3 294.3 347.9 154.4 303.6 284.0 290.0 257.6 Metals and metal products........................................ 10 10-1 Steel mill products............................................. 10-17 Nonferrous metals............................................. 10-2 Metal containers ............................................... 10-3 10-4 Plumbingfixtures andbrass fittings .......................... 10-5 Heatingequipment............................................. 10-6 Fabricatedstructural metal products .......................... 10-7 Miscellaneous metal products.................................. 10-8 316.0 357.0 366.0 277.0 350.1 296.5 300.6 253.2 310.8 295.0 317.9 356.5 364.2 289.1 345.3 294.6 301.5 250.3 309.3 293.1 317.4 357.3 364.7 284.1 348.0 295.3 301.6 252.4 310.6 293.4 317.3 357.0 365.4 282.8 348.0 296.2 302.4 252.7 311.2 294.3 316.1 357.4 367.6 277.0 348.0 297.1 302.8 255.2 311.7 294.1 316.2 357.4 368.1 275.3 352.0 298.0 304.6 255.5 312.3 295.0 315.6 357.9 368.1 271.8 352.3 299.0 304.4 255.7 312.1 295.8 316.0 358.4 368.6 266.8 357.4 299.9 306.2 256.1 313.8 301.5 316.4 357.7 368.0 269.4 357.4 299.9 309.2 256.0 312.7 301.6 r315.5 r357.1 r367.9 r266.0 r357.2 r300.9 r309.3 256.4 313.2 r301.8 314.8 357.4 367.4 262.8 357.6 301.9 306.4 256.6 312.8 301.8 315.6 357.7 367.2 265.2 358.3 302.5 307.1 257.4 313.3 301.9 315.4 358.2 367.1 262.9 357.5 304.0 307.9 257.3 314.3 301.9 316.9 357.8 367.5 268.6 358.0 305.0 311.3 257.8 314.3 302.1 11 11-1 11-2 11-3 11-4 11-6 11-7 11-9 Machineryandequipment ........................................ Agricultural machineryandequipment ........................ Construction machineryandequipment........................ Metalworking machineryandequipment ...................... General purpose machineryandequipment ................... Special industrymachineryandequipment..................... Electrical machineryandequipment............................ Miscellaneous machinery ...................................... 293.1 336.2 357.5 333.8 314.1 348.5 248.6 275.0 292.2 335.5 357.5 332.6 313.1 346.8 247.7 274.6 292.6 338.2 357.8 333.5 313.2 348.2 248.1 273.7 293.1 337.8 358.1 333.4 314.0 348.6 249.1 273.9 294.0 338.6 358.3 334.2 315.2 351.9 249.4 274.2 294.1 338.8 356.9 334.7 315.5 352.8 249.4 274.1 294.3 337.2 357.2 335.6 315.9 351.1 249.8 274.5 294.8 337.3 357.5 337.1 316.0 351.5 250.8 274.4 295.3 337.0 357.6 338.1 316.5 351.8 251.5 274.8 295.6 337.6 r357.8 r338.7 r316.9 r352.4 r251.7 r274.5 296.7 338.5 360.4 338.0 318.0 355.6 252.2 276.2 297.4 338.3 361.7 339.4 318.5 356.9 253.0 276.7 298.0 339.0 361.8 340.6 319.9 357.2 253.3 277.0 298.3 339.0 361.2 340.8 320.5 358.4 253.2 278.0 12 12-1 12-2 12-3 12-4 12-5 12-6 Furnitureandhousehold durables................................ Householdfurniture ........................................... Commercial furniture........................................... Floorcoverings................................................. Householdappliances .......................................... Home electronic equipment.................................... Otherhouseholddurable goods................................ 218.6 242.0 297.3 190.5 211.3 83.7 318.3 218.2 240.8 296.1 188.2 210.9 84.9 319.1 219.1 241.5 297.4 191.7 210.8 84.5 321.6 219.1 242.3 297.0 192.7 211.1 83.9 319.9 219.2 242.2 298.1 192.7 211.5 84.2 318.6 219.2 242.7 298.4 192.6 211.9 83.8 316.8 219.0 243.4 297.5 192.5 211.6 83.1 316.8 219.2 244.3 297.3 193.0 211.1 83.1 317.7 220.0 245.1 300.7 192.9 210.9 83.1 320.5 r220.1 r245.5 r299.6 r193.2 r211.3 82.7 r320.7 220.3 247.1 300.1 192.7 211.3 80.9 323.1 220.7 247.4 302.3 191.1 211.2 81.8 323.6 221.1 247.7 303.5 192.1 211.1 81.9 324.5 221.4 248.2 305.0 192.4 212.3 80.9 323.6 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 ............... 337.3 224.0 325.8 309.5 286.6 361.5 399.5 346.5 360.7 500.0 335.8 230.2 324.3 308.8 285.0 361.8 396.2 353.0 358.0 491.3 337.6 226.1 328.0 309.4 285.6 361.8 398.7 360.9 361.9 494.9 338.3 226.3 326.7 310.0 286.2 361.8 394.2 360.3 365.0 499.2 339.8 226.3 327.1 310.6 286.4 361.8 394.5 359.7 366.3 507.1 340.8 219.6 328.4 311.3 288.2 361.6 408.4 359.5 366.1 511.4 340.5 219.7 328.2 311.7 289.4 361.6 408.0 355.4 364.6 509.8 340.0 219.9 327.6 312.0 289.5 361.6 409.1 339.0 364.9 508.9 339.6 218.5 328.5 311.8 289.6 365.6 410.1 334.4 364.2 505.8 r340.1 r218.6 r329.6 r312.2 r289.7 r365.6 r412.1 r330.6 r364.2 r507.3 342.3 221.0 331.4 314.8 290.7 367.0 409.9 328.5 363.7 513.3 342.7 220.9 334.1 314.3 291.0 367.0 408.3 330.2 364.2 513.3 343.6 221.2 335.8 315.0 291.8 368.0 404.6 320.9 370.7 513.9 344.8 220.5 336.7 316.9 291.7 370.0 414.3 317.8 371.4 518.3 14 14-1 14-4 Transportation equipment (12/68 = 100)........................ Motorvehicles andequipment.................................. Railroadequipment............................................. 15 15-1 15-2 15-3 15-4 15-5 15-9 Miscellaneous products........................................... Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition............... Tobacco products ............................................. Asphalt roofing................................................. Gypsumproducts ............................................. Othernonmetallic minerals .................................... Photographic equipment andsupplies ........................ Mobile homes (12/74 = 100).................................. Othermiscellaneous products.................................. 262.6 263.4 262.5 262.2 262.5 262.3 257.8 265.0 265.7 r265.0 261.3 261.9 261.5 261.1 261.4 261.1 255.2 263.8 264.3 r263.5 356.6 380.8 354.4 354.4 356.5 357.7 357.6 358.8 358.9 r358.9 296.0 294.6 294.3 295.7 297.3 298.2 296.7 296.5 296.5 r296.7 227.1 226.5 226.8 226.5 226.5 226.5 227.0 227.4 227.6 r227.7 399.5 390.4 390.6 400.2 408.7 406.7 406.7 402.3 402.7 r402.9 283.2 283.0 283.9 283.9 283.9 283.9 283.9 283.5 283.5 283.6 214.5 213.6 213.6 213.6 213.8 215.5 215.5 215.6 212.9 r213.2 163.3 163.8 163.7 162.7 162.9 163.2 163.6 163.6 164.4 r164.3 350.4 351.9 350.4 350.0 350.1 353.2 346.9 348.5 349.6 r350.1 1Datafor December 1984 have been revisedto reflect the availabilityof late reports and corrections byrespondents. All dataare subject to revision4 months afteroriginal publication. 2Not available. 3Prices for natural gas arelagged 1month. 4Includes onlydomestic production. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 267.9 268.1 268.0 268.5 266.6 266.7 266.6 266.6 358.9 361.7 362.7 364.0 299.9 228.8 423.8 283.6 213.8 164.7 346.5 300.7 231.8 420.4 284.1 213.9 164.4 350.0 300.5 231.3 420.6 284.1 215.9 164.4 347.7 301.7 231.2 420.7 285.6 215.8 164.5 352.2 5Most prices for refinedpetroleumproducts are lagged 1month, ®Some prices forindustrial chemicals are lagged 1month. r= revlS8<>- 83 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 25. Producer Prices Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Commodity grouping Ail commodities— less farm products......................................... All foods ................................................................................ Processed foods ............................................. Industrial commodities less fuels........................... Selectedtextile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 100)........... Hosiery ........................................ Underwearandnightwear ...................................... Chemicals andallied products, including synthetic rubber andfibers andyarns........................................ Annua! average 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. 313.8 269.4 270.0 314.2 270.6 270.9 314.7 268.9 271.4 314.8 267.5 269.0 315.3 271.7 272.8 314.4 269.6 270.0 313.3 268.6 269.1 314.2 266.6 268.3 287.6 142.0 147.6 229.9 287.8 141.7 147.4 229.8 287.8 142.7 147.4 230.9 288.0 142.7 147.4 228.8 288.2 142.7 147.9 230.2 288.3 142.9 148.0 230.3 287.6 143.0 148.0 230.6 1984 1985 Dec.1 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 314.7 r314.1 267.3 r268.5 270.3 r271.2 314.4 268.5 272.0 313.6 269.6 270.7 313.5 268.4 269.9 314.3 267.1 268.4 288.7 142.9 148.1 230.6 289.1 288.9 142.8 r142.3 148.1 r148.0 230.5 '230.3 290.2 142.7 148.4 232.6 290.6 143.0 148.6 231.9 290.7 142.6 148.6 232.3 291.3 142.5 148.7 234.7 289.7 290.6 291.1 290.5 291.3 290.2 289.9 290.0 290.0 r289.4 290.6 291.2 291.5 292.2 Pharmaceutical preparations............................ Lumberandwood products, excluding millwork............... Steel mill products, includingfabricatedwire products ....... Finishedsteel mill products, excludingfabricatedwire products .......................................... Finishedsteel mill products, includingfabricatedwire products .......................................... 243.3 318.5 363.7 241.5 332.5 361.8 241.9 320.4 362.4 240.6 317.2 363.1 244.6 312.2 365.2 245.1 315.0 365.8 243.9 311.4 365.9 249.7 307.6 366.5 251.9 r250.0 307.4 r309.6 365.9 365.8 254.0 311.5 365.3 257.3 308.8 365.1 259.5 309.2 365.1 260.6 305.8 365.5 365.5 363.6 364.1 364.8 367.0 367.5 367.5 368.1 367.5 367.4 366.9 366.7 366.6 367.0 363.0 361.0 361.6 362.4 364.4 365.0 365.1 365.7 365.2 365.1 364.6 364.4 364.3 364.8 Special metals and metal products ................. Fabricatedmetal products.................................... Copper andcopper products.................................... Machineryandmotive products................................ Machineryandequipment, except electrical ................... 299.9 303.9 185.8 286.3 319.4 301.2 301.9 199.4 286.2 318.5 300.8 302.9 191.8 285.9 318.8 300.6 303.6 189.5 286.1 319.2 300.0 303.9 184.4 286.8 320.3 299.9 305.0 183.3 286.8 320.6 297.2 305.4 182.5 284.8 320.6 301.0 308.7 178.1 288.4 320.9 301.3 308.5 183.0 289.0 321.3 '300.5 '308.9 '180.1 '288.8 '321.6 301.4 308.8 178.4 290.8 323.0 301.9 309.2 184.9 291.3 323.8 301.8 309.6 182.2 291.6 324.5 302.7 310.0 189.0 292.0 325.0 Agricultural machinery, includingtractors ..................... Metalworking machinery.................................... Total tractors................................ Agricultural machineryandequipment less parts............... 353.8 364.9 382.4 341.1 352.9 363.0 384.1 340.4 357.0 363.2 386.8 343.6 356.5 363.3 386.7 343.0 357.2 364.6 386.9 344.0 357.5 365.1 385.7 344.3 355.2 366.6 382.6 342.3 354.8 368.8 381.0 342.0 354.0 '354.8 370.4 371.4 379.5 379.7 341.5 '342.3 356.1 370.1 384.7 343.4 355.5 371.9 383.8 343.1 356.5 374.9 384.2 343.9 356.6 374.6 384.4 343.9 Farmandgardentractors less parts .......................... Agricultural machinery, excluding tractors less parts ......... Constructionmaterials...................................... 361.0 348.2 306.3 362.1 345.7 307.1 365.8 350.1 306.2 365.7 349.2 306.3 366.0 350.4 306.7 367.0 350.1 307.6 362.3 349.8 307.2 359.9 350.8 307.2 357.6 358.0 351.3 '352.5 307.0 '307.7 360.5 352.8 308.5 359.0 353.0 308.1 359.6 354.2 308.1 360.0 354.0 308.6 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 1Datafor December 1984 have been revisedto reflect the availabilityof late reports and corrections byrespondents. All dataare subject to revision4 months afteroriginal publication. 26. r = revised. Producer Price indexes, by durability of product [1967 = 100] Annual average 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Total durable goods ...................... Total nondurable goods ............................ 293.5 323.3 294.2 324.7 293.8 325.3 293.8 324.9 293.8 326.0 293.9 323.7 292.7 322.3 294.4 320.9 294.9 294.8 322.1 '321.3 295.7 320.5 296.3 318.9 296.4 317.9 297.1 318.4 Total manufactures........................ Durable ...................... Nondurable ........................................ 302.9 293.9 312.3 303.2 294.3 312.5 303.8 293.9 314.1 303.9 294.0 314.2 304.3 294.2 314.8 303.3 294.5 312.6 302.2 293.2 311.7 303.2 295.1 311.6 303.9 303.5 295.6 295.5 312.5 '311.7 303.9 296.4 311.6 303.2 296.9 309.6 303.3 297.0 309.8 304.1 297.7 310.7 Total rawor slightlyprocessed goods ................... Durable ................................ Nondurable ........................................ 347.0 266.7 351.7 352.4 280.6 356.5 350.1 277.9 354.3 348.0 273.3 352.3 349.6 264.5 354.7 346.9 259.6 352.2 344.4 260.6 349.4 339.1 255.9 344.2 341.0 '339.8 254.2 '252.2 346.3 '345.1 337.7 255.8 342.6 337.4 259.6 342.0 333.3 261.1 337.5 332.7 262.2 336.8 Commodity grouping 1984 1Datafor December 1984 have been revisedto reflect the availabilityof late reports andcorrections byrespondents. All dataaresubject to revision4 months afteroriginal publication. 84 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r= revised. 1985 Dec.1 27. Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC Industries [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] 1972 Industry description SIC code 1985 1984 Annual average 1984 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. 264.3 914.3 267.9 909.2 273.7 914.1 271.6 918.4 264.6 921.6 249.1 928.3 257.1 918.2 271.6 916.2 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. 276.6 267.9 906.2 r901.6 264.1 880.8 262.1 879.2 262.1 866.8 260.0 868.6 Dee.1 MINING 1092 1311 Mercuryores (12/75 = 100) ....................... Crude petroleumand natural gas ................... 2074 2083 2098 Cottonseedoil mills.................................. Malt ................................................. Macaroni andspaghetti.............................. 209.2 240.4 261.6 222.6 241.6 261.9 245.3 241.6 261.9 243.1 241.6 261.9 223.2 241.6 261.9 210.2 241.6 261.9 205.0 241.6 261.9 172.9 241.6 261.9 166.9 234.5 261.9 177.7 234.5 258.6 166.4 226.5 258.6 169.1 226.5 258.6 163.2 226.5 261.9 164.8 226.5 258.6 2298 2381 2394 2448 Cordage andtwine (12/77 = 100) ................. Fabricdress andworkgloves ....................... Canvas andrelated products (12/77 = 100)....... Woodpallets andskids (12/75 = 100)............. 138.7 310.5 151.4 163.9 139.3 304.8 150.6 161.6 139.4 315.6 150.6 165.1 139.4 315.6 150.6 165.4 138.6 315.6 150.6 168.6 138.5 315.6 150.6 168.6 138.5 315.6 152.1 168.7 138.5 315.6 152.1 168.3 138.5 r138.5 315.6 315.6 152.1 r152.1 168.2 168.5 138.5 313.5 152.9 169.0 138.5 314.9 152.9 169.3 138.5 314.9 152.9 169.4 138.5 314.9 152.5 170.1 2521 2654 2655 2911 Woodofficefurniture................................ Sanitaryfoodcontainers ............................ Fibercans, drums, andsimilar products (12/75= 100) Petroleumrefining (6/76 = 100) ................... 290.8 279.7 193.7 244.2 289.2 280.6 193.1 244.9 289.2 280.6 193.1 248.1 289.2 280.7 193.1 248.8 289.1 280.6 194.7 246.5 289.2 280.7 194.7 240.1 291.1 281.3 194.7 237.5 291.2 281.4 194.8 240.9 295.1 r298.6 281.5 r281.4 197.8 r197.8 242.7 239.4 301.0 285.6 199.1 233.4 301.0 288.3 200.0 225.4 301.0 289.7 200.0 226.7 303.1 289.8 200.0 232.7 3253 3255 3259 3261 3263 Ceramicwall andfloortile (12/75 = 100) ......... Clayrefractories...................................... Structural clay products, n.e.c........................ Vitreous plumbingfixtures.......................... Fineearthenwarefood utensils....................... 150.2 372.5 232.8 292.7 377.1 149.6 371.5 232.4 290.4 382.6 149.6 371.5 232.4 290.8 376.5 149.6 371.7 232.4 292.5 372.1 149.6 371.6 232.4 293.1 373.3 153.4 371.4 232.3 293.9 374.0 153.4 371.4 232.4 295.6 374.8 153.4 371.4 232.4 297.7 375.9 153.4 378.8 232.4 297.6 378.2 r153.4 r378.8 r232.5 r298.1 r379.4 150.5 381.4 237.7 297.9 391.7 150.5 381.5 237.6 298.8 395.2 150.5 383.3 237.5 298.1 385.5 150.5 387.3 237.6 299.3 369.5 3269 3274 3297 3482 Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ........... Lime (12/75 = 100) ................................ Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 100)................. Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100)............. 191.4 183.0 219.2 192.4 192.2 184.1 220.1 190.3 192.2 184.2 220.1 190.3 186.3 183.3 220.1 190.3 187.6 180.3 219.9 190.3 187.6 179.6 219.9 190.3 197.7 187.2 220.3 190.3 195.2 180.5 219.9 190.3 195.3 182.1 220.2 190.3 r195.3 r183.0 r220.2 r190.3 199.2 187.5 220.5 202.5 199.4 185.2 220.4 205.5 199.4 185.2 220.4 205.5 198.9 182.3 220.4 205.5 3648 3671 3942 3944 3955 Lightingequipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100)......... Electrontubes, receiving type ....................... Dolls (12/75 = 100)................................ Games, toys, andchildren’s vehicles............... Carbonpaper andinkedribbons (12/75 = 100) . . . 186.6 497.2 134.3 238.0 145.7 185.0 490.9 131.6 239.7 149.1 185.6 490.9 133.4 239.1 149.1 185.7 491.3 133.6 239.2 149.1 186.3 491.6 133.6 239.2 146.7 188.1 491.6 133.6 239.1 146.7 188.2 491.8 133.6 239.3 146.7 194.4 492.0 133.6 239.4 139.7 196.9 196.9 527.2 527.2 133.6 r133.6 239.4 f239.4 139.7 139.7 196.9 546.7 134.3 236.7 139.7 197.4 547.0 134.4 241.6 139.4 196.1 547.0 134.5 243.1 129.5 195.5 547.0 134.5 242.9 128.6 3996 Hardsurfacefloor coverings (12/75 = 100)....... 167.5 166.3 166.4 166.4 168.7 168.8 168.8 169.7 169.7 171.4 171.4 172.1 172.1 MANUFACTURING 1Datafor December 1984 have been revisedto reflect the availabilityof late reports andcorrections byrespondents. All dataare subject to revision4 months afteroriginal publication. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 169.7 r = revised. 85 PRODUCTIVITY DATA Productivity data are compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from establishment data and from measures of compensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board. Definitions Output is the constant dollar gross product produced by the particular sector. Output per hour of all persons (labor productivity) measures the value of goods and services in constant prices produced per hour of labor. Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) measures the value of goods and services in constant dollars per unit of capital services input. Multifactor productivity measures the output per unit of combined labor and capital input. The traditional measure of output per hour reflects changes in capital per hour and a combination of other factors— such as, changes in technology, shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in capacity utilization, research and development, skill and efforts of the work force, management, and so forth. The multifactor productivity meas ure differs from the familiar b ls measure of output per hour of all persons in that it excludes the effects of the substitution of capital for labor. Compensation per hour includes wages and salaries of employees 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 compensation per hour is com pensation per hour adjusted by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. Unit labor costs measure the labor compensation costs required to produce a unit of output and is derived by dividing compensation by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, interest, and in direct taxes per unit of output. They are computed by subtracting com pensation of all persons from current dollar gross product and dividing by output. Unit nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments except unit profits. Unit profits include corporate profits and the value of inventory adjustments per unit of output. The implicit price deflator is the price index for the gross product of the sector reported. It is derived by dividing the current dollar gross product by the constant dollar figures. Hours of all persons measures the labor input of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers. Output per all employee 86 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis hour describes labor productivity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed. The capital services input index used in the mul tifactor productivity computation is developed by bls from measures of the net stock of physical assets— equipment, structures, land, and inven tories— weighted by rental prices for each type of asset. Combined units of labor and capital input are computed by combining changes in labor and capital inputs with weights which represent each component’s share of total output. The indexes for capital services and combined units of labor and capital are based on changing weights which are averages of the shares in the current and preceding year (the Tomquist index-number formula). Notes on the data In the business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the output meas ure employed in the computation of output per hour is constructed from Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National Product. Multifactor productivity measures (table 28) for the p riv a te business and p riv a te non farm business sectors differ from the business and nonfarm business sector measures used in the traditional labor productivity indexes (tables 29-32) in that they exclude the activities of government enterprises. There is no difference in the sector definition for manufacturing. Output measures for the business sectors are derived from data 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. Com pensation and hours data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The productivity and associated cost measures in the tables describe the relationship between output in real terms and the labor time and capital services involved in its production. They show the changes from period to period in the amount of goods and services produced per unit of input. Although these measures relate output to hours and capital services, they do not measure the contributions of labor, capital, or any other specific factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of many influences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level of output; uti lization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization of production; managerial skill; and the characteristics and efforts of the work force. For a more complete description of the methodology underlying the multifactor productivity measures, see Bulletin 2178, “ Trends in Multifactor Produc tivity, 1948-81” (September 1983). 28. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years, 1950-83 [1977 = 100] Item 1950 1960 1970 1973 1974 1975 1976 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 49.7 98.6 63.6 39.5 64.8 98.5 75.4 53.3 86.1 98.5 90.2 78.3 94.8 103.0 97.5 91.8 92.5 96.5 93.8 89.9 94.5 92.0 93.6 88.0 97.6 96.1 97.1 93.7 100.5 101.8 101.0 105.5 99.3 100.3 99.7 107.9 98.7 95.6 97.6 106.4 100.6 94.1 98.3 109.2 100.8 89.6 96.8 106.3 103.7 92.3 99.6 111.1 79.4 40.1 62.1 50.4 82.2 54.1 70.7 65.8 90.8 79.4 86.7 87.4 96.8 89.1 94.1 92.0 97.2 93.1 95.8 95.9 93.1 95.7 94.0 102.8 95.9 97.5 96.5 101.6 105.0 103.6 104.5 98.7 108.6 107.5 108.2 98.9 107.8 111.4 109.0 103.3 108.5 116.0 111.0 106.9 105.4 118.7 109.8 112.6 107.2 120.3 111.5 112.3 55.6 98.2 68.1 38.3 68.0 98.4 77.6 52.3 86.8 98.6 90.7 77.8 95.3 103.2 97.9 91.7 92.9 96.5 94.1 89.7 94.8 91.7 93.6 87.6 97.8 96.1 97.2 93.6 100.6 101.9 101.0 105.7 99.0 100.1 99.4 108.0 98.2 95.2 97.2 106.4 99.6 93.2 97.4 108.7 99.9 88.7 95.9 105.9 103.5 91.9 99.3 111.3 69.0 39.0 56.2 56.6 77.0 53.2 67.4 69.1 89.7 78.9 85.9 88.0 96.2 88.8 93.6 92.4 96.5 93.0 95.3 96.3 92.4 95.6 93.5 103.4 95.7 97.4 96.3 101.8 105.1 103.7 104.6 98.7 109.1 107.9 108.7 98.9 108.4 111.7 109.5 103.1 109.1 116.6 111.6 106.8 106.0 119.4 110.4 112.6 107.6 121.2 112.0 112.6 49.4 94.5 59.9 38.6 60.0 88.0 67.0 50.7 79.2 91.8 82.3 77.0 93.0 108.2 96.8 95.9 90.8 99.6 93.1 91.9 93.4 89.4 92.2 85.4 97.6 96.1 97.1 93.6 100.9 101.5 101.1 105.3 101.6 99.5 101.0 108.2 101.7 90.7 98.8 103.5 104.9 89.9 100.8 106.1 107.1 82.9 100.3 99.3 111.6 87.6 104.9 104.4 78.2 40.9 64.5 52.3 84.4 57.5 75.6 68.2 97.3 83.9 93.5 86.2 103.1 88.6 99.0 85.9 101.2 92.2 98.7 91.1 91.4 95.5 92.6 104.5 95.9 97.4 96.3 101.6 104.4 103.8 104.2 99.4 106.5 108.8 107.1 102.1 101.7 114.1 104.8 112.2 101.1 118.0 105.2 116.7 92.7 119.8 99.0 129.2 93.5 119.2 99.5 127.5 PRIVATE BUSINESS SECTOR Productivity: Output perhour of all persons................. Output per unit of capital services............. Multifactor productivity......................... Output.............................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons............................ Capital services ................................ Combined units of laborandcapital input . . . . Capital per hour of all persons ................... PRIVATE NONFARM BUSINESS SECTOR Productivity: Output per hour of all persons................. Output per unit of capital services............. Multifactor productivity......................... Output.............................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons............................ Capital services ................................ Combined units of laborandcapital input . . . . Capital per hourof all persons ................... MANUFACTURING Productivity: Output per hour of all persons................. Output per unit of capital services............. Multifactor productivity......................... Output.............................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons............................ Capital services ................................ Combined units of laborandcapital input . . . . Capital per hour of all persons ................... 29. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1950-84 [1977 = 100] Item Business sector: Output perhourof all persons................. Compensationper hour......................... Real compensation per hour ................... Unit laborcosts................................ Unit nonlaborpayments......................... Implicit price deflator........................... Nonfarmbusiness sector: Output per hourof all persons................. Compensationper hour......................... Real compensation per hour................... Unit laborcosts................................ Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator.......................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output perhour of all persons................. Compensationper hour......................... Real compensation per hour ................... Unit laborcosts................................ Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator.......................... Manufacturing: Output perhour of all persons................. Compensationper 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 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 50.4 20.0 50.5 39.8 43.4 41.0 58.3 26.4 59.7 45.2 47.6 46.0 65.2 33.9 69.5 52.1 50.6 51.6 78.3 41.7 80.1 53.3 57.6 54.7 86.2 58.2 90.8 67.5 63.2 66.0 94.6 85.6 96.4 90.5 90.4 90.4 100.5 108.5 100.8 108.0 106.7 107.5 99.3 118.7 99.1 119.5 112.8 117.2 98.8 131.1 96.4 132.6 119.3 128.1 100.7 143.4 95.5 142.4 136.7 140.4 100.9 155.0 97.3 153.6 136.8 147.9 103.7 161.7 98.4 156.0 145.5 152.4 107.0 168.6 98.4 r157.6 r157.0 157.4 56.3 21.9 55.1 38.8 42.7 40.1 62.8 28.3 64.0 45.1 47.8 46.0 68.3 35.7 73.1 52.3 50.4 51.6 80.5 42.8 82.3 53.2 58.0 54.8 86.8 58.7 91.5 67.6 63.8 66.3 94.8 86.1 96.9 90.8 88.5 90.0 100.6 108.6 100.8 108.0 105.3 107.1 99.0 118.4 98.8 119.5 110.4 116.5 98.3 130.6 96.0 132.8 118.6 128.1 99.8 143.1 95.3 143.5 135.0 140.6 100.0 154.5 97.0 154.5 136.9 148.6 103.4 162.0 98.6 156.6 147.0 153.4 r106.2 168.7 98.4 158.8 r156.9 158.2 <1> (1) (1) <1) <1) (1) 49.4 21.5 54.0 43.4 54.3 46.6 <1) <1) (1) (1) (1) (1) 56.4 28.8 65.1 51.0 58.6 53.2 68.0 37.0 75.8 54.4 54.6 54.5 82.0 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 97.0 90.2 90.8 90.4 100.8 108.4 100.7 107.5 104.2 106.4 100.6 118.6 99.0 117.8 106.9 114.1 99.7 130.8 96 2 131.2 117.4 126.4 101.6 143.1 95.3 140.9 135.1 138.9 102.6 154.6 97.0 150.6 138.1 146.3 106.1 161.0 97.9 151.8 149.1 150.9 108.5 166.6 97.2 153.6 r158.8 155.4 60.0 36.7 75.1 61.1 61.1 61.1 74.6 42.8 82.3 57.5 69.4 61.0 79.2 57.6 89.8 72.7 65.1 70.5 93.4 85.5 96.2 91.5 87.3 90.3 100.9 108.3 100.6 107.3 102.7 106.0 101.6 118.8 99.2 117.0 99.9 112.0 101.7 132.7 97.6 130.5 97.9 120.9 104.9 145.2 96.8 138.4 111.6 130.6 107.1 158.0 99.2 147.6 110.5 136.7 111.6 163.4 99.4 146.4 128.8 141.2 r115.6 169.4 98.8 r146.5 <1) <1) r = revised. 87 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 30. Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1974-84 1974 Business sector: Output per hourof all persons ......... Compensationper hour................. Real compensation per hour ........... Unit laborcosts ......................... Unit nonlabor payments................. Implicit price deflator ................... Nonfarmbusiness sector: Output per hourof all persons ......... Compensationper hour................. Real compensation per hour ........... Unit laborcosts ......................... Unit nonlabor payments................. Implicit price deflator ................... Nonflnancial 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 perhour of all persons ......... Compensation per hour................. Real compensation per hour ........... Unit laborcosts ......................... Unit nonlabor payments................. Implicit price deflator ................... Annual rate of change Year Item 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 -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 8.5 2.6 5.1 4.0 4.7 2.4 7.7 1.2 5.1 6.4 5.6 0.5 8.5 0.8 8.0 6.7 7.5 -1.2 9.4 -1.7 10.7 5.8 90 -0.5 10.4 -2.7 11.0 5.7 9.3 1.9 9.4 -0.9 7.3 14.6 9.6 0.2 8.1 1.9 7.9 0.1 5.3 2.7 4.3 1.1 1.6 6.3 3.0 -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 5.1 2.2 7.5 1.0 5.2 6.9 5.7 0.6 8.6 0.8 8.0 5.3 7.1 -1.5 9.0 -2.0 10.7 4.8 8.8 -0.7 10.3 -2.8 11.1 7.4 10.0 1.5 9.6 -0.7 8.0 13.8 9.8 0.2 8.0 1.7 7.7 1.4 5.7 -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 0.8 8.4 0.7 7.5 4.2 6.4 -0.2 9.4 -1.7 9.6 2.6 7.2 -0.9 10.3 -2.8 11.3 9.8 10.8 1.9 9.4 -0.9 7.4 15.1 9.8 -2.4 10.6 -03 13.3 -1.8 9.0 2.9 11.9 2.5 8.8 25.9 13.1 4.5 8.0 2.1 3.4 7.5 4.6 2.5 8.3 1.8 5.7 6.5 6.0 0.9 8.3 0.6 7.3 2.7 6.0 0.7 9.7 -1.4 9.0 -2.6 5.7 0.2 11.7 -1.6 11.5 -2.1 7.9 3.1 9.4 -0.9 6.1 14.1 8.0 1Not available. 31. Productivity 1974-84 1950-34 3.2 4.2 1.0 r7.2 3.2 2.2 6.5 2.0 4.1 3.9 4.0 1.5 r8.0 0.3 6.4 7.2 6.7 3.5 4.9 1.6 1.4 7.4 3.2 2.7 4.1 -0.1 1.4 r6.7 3.1 1.9 6.2 1.7 4.2 3.9 4.1 r1.3 8.0 0.2 6.5 r7.5 6.8 1.0 8.0 1.8 6.9 2.3 5.3 3.3 4.2 0.9 0.8 7.9 3.1 2.3 r3.5 -0.8 1.1 r6.5 3.0 <1) <1) (1) (1) <1) (1) 1.5 r8.3 0.2 6.7 7.8 7.1 2.1 8.8 2.5 6.6 -1.0 4.7 4.3 3.4 0.2 -0.8 16.5 3.3 r3.5 3.6 -0.6 r-0.1 P8.9 P2.5 r2.5 6.3 1.8 3.6 r2.8 3.4 r2.4 8.3 r0.3 r5.7 7.3 r6.1 0.0 p = preliminary. r = revised. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted [1977 = 100] Business sector: Output perhour of all persons ............... Compensationper hour ....................... Real compensation per hour................... Unit laborcosts................................ Unit nonlabor payments ...................... Implicit price deflator.......................... Nonfarmbusiness sector: Output per hourof all persons ............... Compensationper hour ...................... Real compensation per hour................... Unit labor costs................................ Unit nonlabor payments ....................... Implicit price deflator.......................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output perhour of all employees............. Compensation per hour ....................... Real compensation per hour................... Total unit costs................................ Unit labor costs.......................... Unit nonlaborcosts....................... Unit profits .................................... Implicit price deflator.......................... Manufacturing: Output perhour of all persons ............... Compensationper hour ....................... Real compensation per hour................... Unit labor costs................................ 1Not available. 88 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Quarterly indexes Annual average Item 1982 III 1983 1984 1983 1984 103.7 161.7 98.4 156.0 145.5 152.4 107.0 168.6 98.4 r157.6 r157.0 157.4 100.9 156.7 97.3 155.3 135.8 148.7 101.6 158.4 98.0 155.9 136.5 149.3 102.2 160.2 99.0 156.8 139.8 151.0 103.6 161.0 98.5 155.4 144.6 151.7 104.3 161.8 r97.9 155.1 147.9 152.7 104.7 164.2 98.4 156.8 149.1 154.2 105.7 166.7 98.6 157.7 151.6 155.6 107.0 167.5 98.2 156.5 157.2 156.7 103.4 162.0 98.6 156.6 147.0 153.4 r106.2 168.7 98.4 158.8 r156.9 158.2 100.3 156.0 r96.8 155.6 136.8 149.3 100.5 157.9 97.7 157.1 136.4 150.2 101.6 160.1 99.0 157.6 140.6 151.9 103.6 161.5 98.8 155.9 146.4 152.7 104.1 162.4 98.3 155.9 149.4 153.8 104.4 164.0 98.3 157.1 151.4 155.2 105.2 166.5 r98.4 158.3 152.2 156.3 106.1 161.0 97.9 155.2 151.8 164.9 117.2 150.9 108.5 166.6 97.2 156.4 153.6 164.3 147.6 155.4 103.3 156.2 97.0 154.7 151.3 164.4 86.6 146.9 103.2 157.7 97.5 157.0 152.9 168.8 75.6 147.7 104.0 159.2 98.4 156.7 153.1 167.0 92.5 149.4 105.8 160.6 98.2 155.2 151.7 165.1 111.8 150.2 107.2 161.8 97.9 154.4 150.9 164.4 126.6 151.2 107.2 162.6 97.4 154.7 151.7 163.3 135.9 152.6 111.6 163.4 99.4 146.4 115.6 169.4 98.8 146.5 108.8 159.8 99.2 146.9 r107.9 161.0 99.6 149.3 r109.2 162.7 100.6 r149.0 r110.9 163.0 99.6 147.0 113.4 163.5 98.9 144.1 r113.0 164.6 98.6 r145.7 IV 1 II p = preliminary. r = revised. III IV 1 II 1985 III IV I 107.2 169.3 98.3 158.0 158.5 158.1 r108.0 171.1 98.5 r158.4 r160.2 159.0 P107.5 P173.5 P99.1 P161.4 P159.9 P160.9 106.6 168.0 98.4 157.6 156.8 157.3 106.3 169.5 98.4 159.5 158.0 159.0 r106.9 171.0 98.5 r160.0 r160.3 160.1 P106.5 P173.5 P99.1 P162.9 P161.0 P162.3 108.1 164.8 97.5 155.0 152.5 162.0 143.2 153.6 108.9 165.8 97.2 155.0 152.3 162.8 151.1 154.6 108.2 167.1 97.1 157.5 154.5 165.9 145.3 156.1 P108.8 P168.7 P97.1 P158.0 P155.0 P166.4 P147.6 P157.1 r114.0 167.1 98.8 r146.6 r115.0 168.3 98.6 r146.4 r117.0 169.9 r98.7 r145.2 r116.3 172.1 99.1 M47.9 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) P116.8 P174.9 P99.9 P149.8 32. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted at annual rate Quarterly percent change at annual rate Item Business sector: Output perhourof all persons....... Compensationper hour............... Real compensation per hour......... Unit laborcosts....................... Unit nonlabor payments ............. Implicit price deflator................. Nonfarmbusiness sector: Output perhourof all persons....... Compensation per hour............... Real compensation per hour......... Unit laborcosts....................... Unit nonlabor payments ............. Implicit price deflator................. Nonfinanclal corporations: Output per hour of all employees . . . Compensationper hour............... Real compensation per hour......... Total units costs ..................... Unit laborcosts ................... Unit nonlaborcosts ............... Unit profits .......................... Implicit price deflator................. Manufacturing: Output per hourof all persons....... Compensation per hour............... Real compensation per hour......... Unit laborcosts....................... 1Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Percent change from came quarter a year ago III 1983 to IV 1983 IV 1983 to 1 1984 11984 to II 1984 I1 1984 to III 1984 III 1984 to IV 1984 IV 1984 to 11985 IV 1982 to IV 1983 1 1983 to 11984 II 1983 la II 1984 III 1983 to III 1984 IV 1983 to IV 1984 11984 to 11985 1.4 6.1 1.9 4.6 3.1 4.1 4.0 6.2 0.8 2.1 7.0 3.7 4.9 1.9 -1.8 -2.9 15.4 2.9 0.6 4.4 0.7 3.7 3.4 3.6 r3.1 4.4 0.8 r1.2 r4.3 2.2 P-1.9 P5.7 P2.3 P7.8 P-0.7 P4.8 3.1 3.7 0.4 0.6 9.2 3.3 3.5 4.1 -0.4 0.6 8.4 3.0 3.3 4.0 -0.3 0.7 8.7 3.3 2.7 4.6 0.4 1.9 7.1 3.6 r3.2 4.2 0.1 r1.0 r7.4 3.1 P1.6 P4.1 P0.5 P2.4 P5.4 P3.4 1.0 4.1 -0.0 3.0 5.3 3.7 2.9 6.1 0.7 3.1 2.3 2.8 5.5 3.7 0.0 -1.7 12.5 2.8 -1.1 3.6 0.1 4.7 3.1 4.2 r2.2 3.7 r0.1 r1.4 r5.9 2.9 P-1.2 P6.0 P2.6 P7.3 P1.9 P5.5 3.9 3.9 0.6 0.0 10.9 3.3 3.5 4.0 -0.5 0.4 8.3 2.9 2.9 4.0 -0.3 1.1 7.1 3.0 2.1 4.4 0.2 2.3 5.7 3.4 r2.4 4.3 0.2 r1.9 r5.9 3.2 Pi.3 P4.2 P0.7 P2.9 P5.8 P3.8 -0.2 2.0 -2.1 0.8 2.1 -2.6 32.6 3.6 3.6 5.7 0.4 0.6 2.0 -3.2 23.4 2.7 2.8 2.4 -1.3 0.2 -0.4 2.0 23.8 2.6 -2.5 3.2 -0.4 6.5 5.9 8.0 -14.5 3.9 P2.5 P3.7 P0.2 P1.2 PI.2 P1.1 P16.0 P2.7 (1) (1) (1) <1) (1) (1) (1) <1) 3.9 3.1 -0.1 -1.5 -0.8 -3.2 79.8 3.3 4.0 3.6 -0.9 -1.1 -0.4 -3.0 54.8 2.8 2.9 3.3 -1.0 -0.1 0.4 -1.4 35.2 2.9 0.9 3.3 -0.9 2.0 2.4 0.9 14.7 3.2 P1.6 P3.8 P-0.3 P2.1 P2.2 Pi.9 P10.9 P3.0 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) r-1.4 2.9 -1.2 r4.3 r3.5 6.2 0.8 r2.6 r3.6 r6.2 -0.8 r-0.6 r7.1 3.7 0.1 r-3.1 r-2.2 5.2 1.6 r7.6 P1.6 P6.8 P3.4 P5.1 r4.8 2.2 -1.0 r-2.4 r4.4 2.7 -1.7 r-1.6 r3.7 3.3 -1.0 r-0.4 r3.1 3.9 -0.3 r0.8 r2.9 4.5 0.4 r1.5 P2.5 P4.7 P1.1 P2.1 r = revised. p = preliminary. 89 WAGE AND COMPENSATION DATA are reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics by a sample of 2,000 private nonfarm estab lishments and 750 State and local government units selected to represent total employment in those sectors. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensation information on five well-specified occupations. D a t a f o r t h e e m p l o y m e n t c o s t in d e x Data on negotiated wage and benefit changes are obtained from contracts on file at the Bureau, direct contact with the parties, and secondary sources. Definitions The Employment Cost Index (eci) is a quarterly measure of the average change in the cost of employing labor. The rate of total compensation, which comprises wages, salaries, and employer costs for employee ben efits, is collected for workers performing specified tasks. Employment in each occupation is held constant over time for all series produced in the eci, except those by region, bargaining status, and area. As a consequence, only changes in compensation are measured. Industry and occupational employment data from the 1970 Census of Population are used in deriving constant weights for the eci. While holding total industry and occupational employment fixed, in the estimation of indexes by region, bargaining status, and area, the employment in those measures is allowed to vary over time in accord with changes in the sample. The rate of change (in percent) is available for wages and salaries, as well as for total compensation. Data are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey months of March, June, September, and December. The statistics are neither an nualized nor adjusted for seasonal influence. Wages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions, ex cluding premium pay for overtime, work on weekends and holidays, and shift differentials. Production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-of-living adjustments are included; nonproduction bonuses are included with other supplemental pay items in the benefits category; and payments-in-kind, free room and board, and tips are excluded. Benefits include supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and savings plans, and hours-related and legally required benefits. Data on negotiated wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry collective bargaining agreements covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on compensation changes apply only to those agreements covering 5,000 workers or more. First-year wage or compensation changes refer to average negotiated changes for workers covered by settlements reached in the period 90 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and implemented within the first 12 months after the effective date of the agreement. Changes over the life of the agreement refer to all adjustments specified in the contract, expressed as an average annual rate. These meas ures exclude wage changes that may occur under cost-of-living adjustment clauses, that are triggered by movements in the Consumer Price Index. Wage-rate changes are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earn ings; compensation changes are expressed as a percent of total wages and benefits. Effective wage adjustments reflect all negotiated changes implemented in the reference period, regardless of the settlement date. They include changes from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from contracts negotiated in an earlier period, and cost-of-living adjustments. The data also reflect contracts providing for no wage adjustment in the period. Effective adjustments and each of their components are prorated over all workers in bargaining units with at least 1,000 workers. Notes on the data The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quarter of 1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in the private nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee benefits were in cluded in 1980, to produce a measure of the percent change in employers’ cost for 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 nonfarm economy. Data for the broad white-collar, blue-collar, and service worker groups, and the manufacturing, nonmanufacturing, and service industry groups are presented in the eci. Additional occupation and industry detail are 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 changes presented in the eci are also available. For a more detailed discussion of the eci, see chapter 11, “ The Em ployment Cost Index,” of the b l s Handbook of Methods (Bulletin 2134— 1), and the Monthly Labor Review articles: “ Employment Cost Index: a measure of change in the ‘price of labor,’ ” July 1975; “ How benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost index,” January 1978; and “ The Employment Cost Index: recent trends and expansion,” May 1982. Additional data for the eci and other measures of wage and compensation changes appear in Current Wage Developments, a monthly publication of the Bureau. 33. Employment Cost Index, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] Percent change 1983 Series Civilian workers1 ............................................................................................. Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers............................................... Blue-collarworkers ............................................... Service workers ................................................... Workers, byindustrydivision Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. Servces ......................................................... Publicadministration2 .......................................... Private industry w o rkers............................................................................. Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers ............................................ Blue-collarworkers ............................................. Service workers................................................. Workers, byindustrydivision Manufacturing................................................... Nonmanufacturing............................................... State and local government w o rk e rs ...................................................... Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers ............................................ Blue-collarworkers ............................................. Workers, byIndustrydivision Services ......................................................... Schools....................................................... Elementaryandsecondary ................................ Hospitals andother services3 ................................ Publicadministration2 .......................................... 'Excludes farm, household, andFederal workers. ^Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, andregulatoryactivities. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1984 1985 3 months ended 12 months ended March June Sept. Dec. March June Sept. Dec. 113.2 114.5 116.5 117.8 119.8 120.8 122.4 123.9 125.5 1.3 4.8 113.7 112.3 114.3 114.9 113.6 115.1 117.6 114.8 116.7 118.9 115.8 119.1 120.9 117.7 122.0 122.1 118.6 122.1 124.0 119.6 124.6 125.5 120.9 126.8 127.3 122.2 127.8 1.4 1.1 0.8 5.3 3.8 4.8 112.5 113.5 116.6 116.2 113.5 114.9 117.1 117.0 115.0 117.2 121.1 119.8 116.0 118.6 122.6 121.4 117.9 120.7 125.0 122.9 119.1 121.6 125.5 123.7 120.4 123.3 128.8 126.9 122.0 124.8 130.9 128.6 123.9 126.2 131.9 130.1 1.6 1.1 .8 1.2 5.1 4.6 5.5 5.9 March March 1985 112.6 113.9 115.6 117.0 119.0 120.1 121.1 122.7 124.2 1.2 4.4 112.8 112.1 113.8 114.2 113.5 114.6 116.5 114.6 115.1 117.9 115.7 117.9 119.9 117.5 121.5 121.4 118.4 121.2 122.4 119.3 123.2 123.9 120.6 125.7 125.8 121.9 126.3 1.5 1.1 .5 4.9 3.7 4.0 112.5 112.6 113.5 114.2 115.0 116.0 116.0 117.5 117.9 119.6 119.1 120.7 120.4 121.6 122.0 123.1 123.9 124.4 1.6 1.1 5.1 4.0 116.5 117.1 120.8 122.0 123.9 124.4 128.8 130.1 131.7 1.2 6.3 117.0 114.9 117.5 115.8 121.5 118.0 122.6 119.2 124.5 121.9 125.0 122.3 129.7 125.0 131.1 125.9 132.5 128.1 1.1 1.7 6.4 5.1 116.8 116.6 117.2 117.5 116.2 117.4 116.9 117.4 118.8 117.0 121.7 121.9 123.3 121.1 119.8 122.6 122.6 123.9 122.6 121.4 124.5 124.5 125.4 124.4 122.9 125.0 124.7 125.7 125.7 123.7 129.9 130.6 132.1 127.9 126.9 131.3 132.0 133.5 129.2 128.6 132.8 133.4 134.4 131.1 130.1 1.1 1.1 .7 1.5 1.2 6.7 7.1 7.2 5.4 5.9 includes, forexample, library, social, andhealthservices. 91 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 34. Wage and Compensation Data Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] Percent change 1984 1983 Series 1985 3 months ended 12 months ended March 1985 March June Sept. Dec. March June Sept. Dec. March 112.2 113.4 115.3 116.5 117.9 118.8 120.3 121.7 123.1 1.2 4.4 113.0 110.8 113.2 114.2 112.0 113.9 116.7 113.1 115.1 117.9 114.0 117.4 119.3 115.3 120.0 120.4 116.1 119.8 122.2 117.0 122.3 123.5 118.2 124.3 125.2 119.3 124.8 1.4 0.9 .4 4.9 3.5 4.0 Workers, byindustrydivision Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. Services ......................................................... Publicadministration2 .......................................... 111.0 112.7 115.8 114.6 112.0 114.0 116.3 115.4 113.3 116.1 120.1 118.2 114.5 117.4 121.3 119.4 115.7 118.9 123.3 120.4 116.8 119.7 123.8 121.3 118.0 121.3 127.2 124.4 119.5 122.6 128.9 125.7 121.0 123.9 129.7 127.0 1.3 1.1 .6 1.0 4.6 4.2 5.2 5.5 Private Industry w ork ers............................................................................. 111.6 112.9 114.5 115.8 117.2 118.2 119.2 120.6 122.0 1.2 4.1 112.2 114.8 112.0 105.7 113.4 110.7 112.2 110.0 108.0 109.0 112.9 113.6 115.9 114.0 107.1 114.6 111.9 113.4 111.1 110.3 109.8 113.5 115.9 119.9 114.8 108.4 116.7 112.9 114.3 112.3 110.7 110.8 113.7 117.2 120.4 115.7 111.2 118.3 113.9 115.4 113.6 110.2 112.1 116.5 118.5 122.2 118.0 110.2 119.8 115.1 116.5 114.9 111.7 112.9 119.8 119.9 123.8 119.2 111.9 120.7 115.9 117.3 115.8 112.7 114.1 119.3 120.9 125.2 121.0 110.5 122.0 116.7 118.0 116.6 113.4 114.7 121.2 122.3 127.3 122.2 111.6 122.9 118.0 119.4 117.9 114.0 115.9 123.7 124.0 127.7 123.8 116.3 124.7 119.1 120.8 118.9 114.5 116.7 123.8 1.4 .3 1.3 4.2 1.5 .9 1.2 .8 .4 .7 .1 4.6 4.5 4.9 5.5 4.1 3.5 3.7 3.5 2.5 3.4 3.3 111.0 111.1 110.9 112.0 110.4 112.9 108.5 111.8 107.2 110.6 116.0 112.0 111.8 112.3 113.4 112.1 114.7 110.8 114.1 109.4 111.1 116.6 113.3 112.9 113.9 115.2 112.2 115.7 111.5 115.7 109.9 113.5 120.4 114.5 114.4 114.6 116.5 112.9 116.8 112.3 116.5 110.6 116.9 121.9 115.7 115.7 115.8 118.0 113.3 118.5 114.3 118.2 112.8 116.1 124.2 116.8 116.6 117.1 119.0 114.0 119.3 116.0 120.0 114.4 116.9 124.7 118.0 117.7 118.6 119.9 114.3 119.9 116.5 120.7 114.9 115.3 127.1 119.5 119.1 120.2 121.2 114.4 120.7 118.1 122.9 116.2 115.8 129.5 121.0 120.6 121.6 122.6 115.5 121.7 118.8 123.7 116.9 122.0 129.9 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 .8 .6 .7 .6 5.4 .3 4.6 4.2 5.0 3.9 1.9 2.7 3.9 4.7 3.6 5.1 4.6 115.1 115.7 119.2 120.0 121.6 122.0 126.1 127.1 128.4 1.0 5.6 128.0 122.5 129.3 124.2 1.0 1.4 5.8 4.3 128.1 128.7 130.2 125.9 125.7 129.4 129.9 130.8 127.7 127.0 1.0 .9 .5 1.4 1.0 5.9 6.3 6.4 4.8 5.5 Civilian workers1 ............................................................................................. Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers............................................... Blue-collarworkers ............................................... Service workers ................................................... Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers ............................................ Professional andtechnical workers.......................... Managers andadministrators ................................ Salesworkers ................................................. Clerical workers............................................... Blue-collarworkers ............................................. Craft andkindredworkers.................................... Operatives, except transport.................................. Transport equipment operatives.............................. Nonfarmlaborers............................................. Service workers................................................. Workers, byindustrydivision Manufacturing................................................... Durables....................................................... Nondurables ................................................. Nonmanufacturing............................................... Construction ................................................. Transportationandpublic utilities............................ Wholesale and retail trade.................................... Wholesale trade ........................................... Retail trade................................................. Finance, insurance, and real estate.......................... Services....................................................... State and local government w o rk e rs ...................................................... Workers, byoccupational group White-collarworkers ........................................... Blue-collarworkers ............................................. Workers, byindustrydivision Services ......................................................... Schools....................................................... Elementaryand secondary ................................ Hospitals andother services3 ................................ Publicadministration2 .......................................... Excludes farm, household, andFederal workers. Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, andregulatoryactivities. 92 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 115.6 113.3 116.1 114.3 119.8 116.4 120.6 116.9 122.2 119.1 122.5 119.6 127.1 121.9 115.5 115.2 115.6 116.5 114.6 115.9 115.4 115.8 117.7 115.4 119.8 119.9 121.1 119.7 118.2 120.6 120.6 121.7 120.6 119.4 122.2 122.2 122.9 121.9 120.4 122.5 122.3 123.0 123.1 121.3 127.2 127.8 129.3 125.1 124.4 includes, forexample, library, social, andhealthservices. 35. Employment Cost Index, private industry workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size [June 1981 = 100] Percent change 1983 Series 1984 1985 3 months ended 12 months ended March June Sept. Dec. March June Sept. Dec. March Workers, bybargaining status1 Union ................................................................ Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. 114.5 114.0 114.9 116.0 114.8 117.1 117.8 116.3 119.2 118.8 117.2 120.4 120.6 119.3 121.9 121.7 120.5 122.8 122.6 121.6 123.6 123.9 123.2 124.5 124.8 124.2 125.3 0.7 .8 .6 3.5 4.1 2.8 Nonunion ............................................................. Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. 111.5 111.2 111.6 112.8 112.3 113.0 114.4 113.8 114.7 115.9 114.9 116.4 118.0 116.6 118.6 119.2 117.9 119.8 120.3 119.3 120.7 121.9 120.8 122.4 123.8 123.6 123.9 1.6 2.3 1.2 4.9 6.0 4.5 Workers, byregion1 Northeast ............................................................. South ................................................................ NorthCentral ......................................................... West.................................................................. 112.6 112.5 110.9 115.4 114.3 113.5 112.5 116.6 116.0 115.6 113.9 118.0 117.5 117.1 114.7 120.0 118.9 119.7 117.2 121.0 120.7 120.7 117.9 122.2 122.4 120.7 119.7 122.5 123.8 122.2 120.8 124.9 125.1 124.2 122.0 126.8 1.1 1.6 1.0 1.5 5.2 3.8 4.1 4.8 Workers, byareasize1 Metropolitanareas ................................................... Otherareas ........................................................... 112.9 110.8 114.2 112.3 116.0 113.4 117.4 114.5 119.4 116.7 120.6 117.4 121.5 119.0 123.2 119.8 124.7 121.4 1.2 1.3 4.4 4.0 Workers, bybargaining status1 Union ................................................................ Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. 112.9 111.4 114.3 114.2 112.3 116.0 116.0 113.7 118.3 116.9 114.8 118.9 118.1 116.1 120.1 119.0 117.1 120.7 119.8 118.1 121.3 120.9 119.5 122.1 121.7 120.4 122.8 .7 .8 .6 3.0 3.7 2.2 Nonunion ............................................................. Manufacturing ..................................................... Nonmanufacturing................................................. 110.9 110.7 111.0 112.2 111.8 112.4 113.7 113.0 114.0 115.2 114.2 115.6 116.7 115.4 117.2 117.8 116.5 118.3 118.8 117.9 119.2 120.4 119.5 120.7 122.1 121.5 122.3 1.4 1.7 1.3 4.6 5.3 4.4 Workers, byregion1 Northeast ............................................................. South ................................................................ Midwest (formerly NorthCentral) .................................... West.................................................................. 112.0 111.4 110.1 114.1 113.6 112.5 111.5 114.9 115.3 114.3 112.8 116.5 116.6 115.7 113.6 118.5 117.4 117.9 115.5 118.8 118.9 119.0 116.0 119.6 120.5 119.0 117.8 120.0 121.9 120.2 118.7 122.5 123.0 122.3 119.6 124.0 .9 1.7 .8 1.2 4.8 3.7 3.5 4.4 Workers, byareasize1 Metropolitanareas ................................................... Otherareas ........................................................... 111.9 110.1 113.2 111.4 114.9 112.3 116.2 113.4 117.6 115.1 118.6 116.0 119.5 117.5 121.0 118.3 122.4 119.6 1.2 1.1 4.1 3.9 March 1985 COMPENSATION WAGES AND SALARIES 1The indexes are calculateddifferentlyfromthose forthe occupationandIndustrygroups. Fora detaileddescriptionof the Indexcalculation, see BLS Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 1910. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 93 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW June 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: 36. Wage and Compensation Data Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1980 to date [In percent] Quarterly average 1980 1981 1984 1983 1982 1 1985 1984 1983 Measure II III IV 1 II III IV IP Total compensationchanges, covering 5,000 workers or more, all industries: First year of contract ............. Annual rate over lifeof contract. . . 10.4 7.1 10.2 8.3 3.2 2.8 3.4 3.0 3.6 2.8 -1.6 1.4 4.4 3.6 5.0 4.3 4.9 3.1 5.1 4.7 3.5 3.2 2.7 3.1 3.7 2.0 3.6 3.1 Wage ratechanges covering at least 1,000 workers, all industries: First year of contract ............. Annual rate over lifeof contract. . . 9.5 7.1 9.8 7.9 3.8 3.6 2.6 2.8 2.4 2.4 -1.2 2.2 2.7 2.8 3.7 3.6 4.2 2.8 2.8 3.3 2.6 2.7 2.1 2.6 2.3 1.5 2.8 3.0 Manufacturing: First yearof contract ............. Annual rate over life of contract. . . 7.4 5.4 7.2 6.1 2.8 2.6 0.4 2.1 2.3 1.5 -3.4 4.5 1.3 .9 3.4 3.5 2.9 3.1 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.8 2.3 2.5 2.2 1.0 0.1 1.0 Nonmanufacturing (excluding construction): First year of contract ............. Annual rate over life of contract. . . 9.5 6.6 9.8 7.3 4.3 4.1 5.0 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.3 5.3 5.9 5.2 5.8 4.3 4.8 2.7 4.2 4.8 4.3 4.2 2.0 2.8 3.9 3.8 5.1 4.6 Construction: First year of contract ............. Annual rateover life of contract. . . 13.6 11.5 13.5 11.3 6.5 6.3 1.5 2.4 .5 1.0 .7 2.4 1.7 2.1 1.5 2.9 1.1 2.6 -3.6 -2.8 1.1 1.4 2.0 2.1 -2.8 -.8 -1.6 .3 p = preliminary. 37. Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1980 to date Year and quarter Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 I 1985 1984 1983 Measure II III IV I II III IV IP 1.1 .9 1.2 0.9 1.2 .7 0.9 1.0 .9 1.2 1.0 1.3 0.7 1.1 .4 0.7 .9 .6 Average percent adjustment (including nochange): All industries............................................. Manufacturing ....................................... Nonmanufacturing .................................... 9.9 10.2 9.7 9.5 9.4 9.5 6.8 5.2 7.9 4.0 2.7 4.8 3.7 4.3 3.3 0.3 -.5 .9 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 Fromsettlements reached inperiod..................... Deferredfromsettlements reachedinearlier period. . . . Fromcost-of-living clauses.............................. 3.6 3.5 2.8 2.5 3.8 3.2 1.7 3.6 1.4 .8 2.5 .6 .8 2.0 .9 -.2 .4 .1 .3 1.0 .1 .2 .8 .2 .6 .3 .2 .1 .4 .3 .1 .7 .2 .2 .7 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 .6 .1 — 8,648 7,852 6,530 6,195 2,875 3,061 3,025 2,887 2,694 2,482 2,386 1,850 2,047 599 1,317 1,218 996 669 1,290 295 984 1,459 355 1,148 1,151 406 1,581 1,215 911 443 1,070 122 1,001 1,051 4,693 4,830 4,624 4,835 4,932 5,467 5,269 Total number of workers receivingwage change (inthousands)1 ....................................... Fromsettlements reached inperiod ..................... Deferredfromsettlements reachedinearlier period . . . Fromcost-of-living clauses.............................. Numberof workers receiving noadjustments (inthousands) ....................................... _ — 2,270 6,267 4,593 1,907 4,846 3,830 2,327 3,260 2,327 1,851 3,668 2,518 448 812 1,938 561 1,405 1,299 — 145 483 1,187 1,123 4,842 4,656 — 1Thetotal numberofworkerswhoreceivedadjustmentsdoesnotequal thesumofworkersthat received eachtype of adjustment, because some workers received more than one type of adjustment duringthe period. 94 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis P= preliminary. WORK STOPPAGE DATA o r k s t o p p a g e s include all known strikes or lockouts involving 1,000 workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data are based largely on newspaper accounts and cover all workers idle one shift or more in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or secondary effect on other establishments whose employees are idle owing to material or service shortages. W 38. Estimates of days idle as a percent of estimated working time measure only the impact of larger strikes (1,000 workers or more). Formerly, these estimates measured the impact of strikes involving 6 workers or more; that is, the impact of virtually a ll strikes. Due to budget stringencies, collection of data on strikes involving fewer than 1,000 workers was discontinued with the December 1981 data. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date Number of stoppages Month and year Beginning In month or year In eflect during month Workers Involved Beginning In month or year (in thousands) In eflect during month (in thousands) Days Idle Number (in thousands) Percent of estimated working time 1947 ..................................................... 1948 ............................................................. 1949 .................................. 1950 ............................................................. 270 245 262 424 1435 2537 1698 25,720 26,127 43,420 30,390 .22 .38 .26 1951................................................. 1952 .............................................. 1953 ............................................................... 1954 ............................................. 1955 ............................................................. 1956 ............................................................. 1957 ............................................................. 1958 ......................................................... 1959 ............................................... 1960 ..................................................... 415 470 437 265 363 287 279 332 245 222 1462 2746 1623 1075 2055 1370 887 1587 1381 896 15,070 48,820 18,130 16,630 21,180 26,840 10,340 17,900 60,850 13,260 .12 .38 .14 .13 .16 .20 .07 .13 .43 .09 1961............................................................... 1962 ......................................................... 1963 ......................................................... 1964 ............................................. 1965 ......................................................... 1966 ................................................. 1967 .............................................................. 1968 ............................................................... 1969 ............................................ 1970 ......................................................... 195 211 181 246 268 321 381 392 412 381 1031 793 512 10,140 11,760 10,020 16,220 15,140 16,000 31,320 35,567 29,397 52,761 .07 .08 .07 .11 .10 .10 .18 .20 .16 .29 1971............................................................... 1972 ................................................. 1973 ........................................................... 1974 .......................................... 1975 ..................................................... 1976 ......................................................... 1977 ............................................ 1978 ............................................................... 1979 ..................................................... 1980 ............................................................. 298 250 317 424 235 231 298 219 235 187 1006 1021 795 35,538 16,764 16,260 31,809 17,563 23,962 21,258 23,774 20,409 20,844 .19 .09 .08 .16 .09 .12 .10 .11 .09 .09 1981............................................................... 1982 ............................................. 1983 ........................................................... 1984 ............................................. 145 96 81 62 376 16,908 9,061 17,461 8,499 .07 .04 .08 .04 1984 6 3 2 7 5 5 8 5 10 4 4 3 2 4 4 1 505.3 379.5 296.3 657.3 587.6 761.1 1,228.0 1,634.5 731.0 562.1 500.1 655.8 278.3 259.3 698.5 215.6 .03 .02 .01 .03 .03 .04 .06 .07 .04 .03 .03 .04 .01 .01 .03 .01 January ....................................................................................... February ....................................................................................... M a r c h ........................................................................................... A p r i l .............................................................................................. M ay .............................................................................................. J u n e .............................................................................................. ................................................. ............................................... ........................................... October ............................................. J u ly August S e p te m b e r N o v e m b e r ................................................................................... D e c e m b e r ................................................................................... 1985P January ....................................................................................... February ....................................................................................... M a r c h ........................................................................................... A p r i l .............................................................................................. 1300 2 192 1855 1576 2468 2516 975 1796 12 13 10 13 15 14 20 19 18 16 15 13 9 13 12 6 28.0 9.4 3.0 28.5 8.1 23.7 70.8 24.2 107.9 18.0 12.0 42.5 4.7 29.3 15.2 1.2 42.9 42.4 16.5 38.4 39.2 45.9 106.4 103.9 122.9 39.6 32.3 59.0 16.0 43.9 48.2 9.8 p= preliminary. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 95 New from BLS Publications for Sale BLS Bulletins Employment, Hours, and Earnings, United States, 1909-84, Volume I and II. Bulletin 1312-12, 943 pp., $17 (G P O Stock No. 029-001-02836-9). Presents detailed in dustry statistics on the Nation’s nonagricultural workers. Included are monthly and annual averages on employ ment for all employees and female employees; produc tion workers in construction; and nonsupervisory workers in the remaining private nonagricultural in dustries. Also shown are average weekly hours, average hourly and weekly earnings, indexes of aggregate weekly hours and payrolls, and constant-dollar earnings related to 1977 as a base year. Replaces Employment and Earn ings, United States, 1909-78 ( b l s Bulletin 1312-11), issued in 1979. Area Wage Surveys These bulletins cover office, professional, technical, maintenance, custodial, and material movement jobs in major metropolitan areas. The annual series of 70 is available by subscription for $102 per year. Individual area bulletins are also available separately. Published in April were: Jackson, Mississippi, Metropolitan Area, January 1985. Bulletin 3030-4, 41 pp., $2.25 ( g p o Stock No. 829-001-0004-7). Current Wage Developments. The April issue includes major collective bargaining settlements in private in dustry in 1984, selected wage and benefit changes, work stoppages in March, major agreements expiring in May, major work stoppages March 1985, and statistics on compensation changes. 64 pp., $2 ($21 per year). Employment and Earnings. The April issue covers employ ment and unemployment developments in March, plus regular statistical tables on national, State, and area employment, unemployment, hours, and earnings. 179 pp., $4.50 ($31 per year). Occupational Outlook Quarterly. The Spring issue features articles on technology and jobs, general maintenance repairers, prosthetists, and employment trends in the legal services industry. 32 pp., $3 ($11 per year). Producer Price Indexes. The February issue includes a com prehensive report on price movements for the month, a note on future changes in Producer Price Indexes for refined petroleum products, plus regular tables and technical notes. 167 pp., $4.25 ($29 per year). Other Publications (Single copies available upon request while supplies last.) Area Wage Summaries Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN-KY. March 1985. 6 pp. Nashville-Davidson, TN. February 1985. 3 pp. Savannah, GA. March 1985. 3 pp. Wilmington, DE-NJ-MD. January 1985. 3 pp. BLS Reports Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota-Wisconsin, Metropolitan Area, January 1985. Bulletin 3030-1, 43 pp., $2.25 ( g p o Stock No. 829-001-0001-2). Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Metropolitan Area, January 1985. Bulletin 3030-3, 55 pp., $2.25 ( g p o Stock No. 829-001-0003-9). Employment in Perspective: Minority Workers, Fourth Quarter 1984. Report 717. 3 pp. Focuses on 1984 developments among blacks and persons of Hispanic ethnicity. To Order: Order by title and g p o stock number from a b l s regional office (see inside front cover), or from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Print ing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Subscriptions, are available only from the Superintendent of Documents. All checks—including those that go to the regional of fices—should be made payable to the Superintendent of Documents. S a le s P u b lic a tio n s : York, Pennsylvania, Metropolitan Area, January 1985. Bulletin 3030-5, 29 pp., $1.75 ( g p o Stock No. 829-001-0005-5). Periodicals CPI Detailed Report. The February issue provides a com prehensive report on price movements for the month, and includes statistical tables, charts, and technical notes. 171 pp., $4 ($25 per year). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis O th e r P u b lic a tio n s : Request national publications from Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212, or from any regional office. Re quest regional office publications from the issuing office. Do you sometimes feel like Stanley hunting for Livingstone, when confronted with the maze of economic and social statistics? and international prices; econom ic growth; and related topics. Each month, the R e v ie w also contains articles and inform ative reports. Some recent titles are: • Job Training and Partnership Act • Older workers in the labor market • Japan’s low unemployment • Employee-owned firm s • The labor force in 1995 • M ultifactor productivity • Im port prices for petroleum • The em ployment cost index • Work injuries from falls • Youth joblessness If so, your search for a single source of reliable and comprehensive statistics and analysis is over. Subscribe to the M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v ie w , the oldest government journal providing up-to-date inform ation in econom ic and social statistics. Published continuously since 1915, the R e v ie w provides a 40-page section of current statistics covering em ploym ent and unemployment; wages, and strike activity; w orker and capital productivity; unit labor costs and output; consumer, industrial, Order form: Credit card orders: (Send to Superintendent of Documents only.) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis • • • • • • • • M en’s and w om en’s earnings Occupational w inners and losers Black w o rke rs’ gains Shortage of machinists? Price inflation remains low Employment in energy industries Collective bargaining Fatal injuries To subscribe to the Review, please fill out the following coupon and send to: Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402. Please send the M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v ie w for 1 year at $24 (Foreign subscribers add $6). □ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents. □ Charge to GPO Deposit Account No. □ VISA □ MasterCard Account No. Expiration Date Account No. Expiration Date Total charges $ Name Organization (if appropriate) Address City, State, Zip Code U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Washington, D.C. 20212 Official Business Penalty for Private Use, $300 Second-Class Mail Postage and Fees Paid U.S. Department of Labor ISSN 0098-1818 RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis MLR LI BRA442 L 1SSDUE0IOR , LIBRARY FED RESERVE BANK OF ST LOUIS PO BOX 442 SAINT LOUIS HO 63166
@FedFRASER