Full text of Monthly Labor Review : June 1988, Volume 111, Number 6

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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
June 1988


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

In this issue:

Domestic and international prices in 1987
Problems of today’s high school dropouts

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Ann McLaughlin, Secretary

Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I— Boston:

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner

The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, DC 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year—$16 domestic; $20 foreign.
Single copy $4.75 domestic; $5.94 foreign.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-1818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Second-class postage
paid at Washington, DC, and at additional mailing addresses.

Anthony J. Ferrara

Kennedy Federal Building, Suite 1603
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 565-2327
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II—New York:

Samuel M. Ehrenhalt

Room 808, 201 Varick Street, New York, NY 10014
Phone: (212) 337-2400
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
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
W e st V irg in ia

Region IV—Atlanta:

Donald M. Cruse

1371 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, GA 30367
Phone: (404) 347-4416
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V—Chicago:

Lois L. Orr

9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI— Dallas:

Bryan Richey

Federal Building, Room 221
525 Griffin Street, Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6970
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII— Kansas City:

Gunnar Engen

911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, MO. 64106
Phone: (816) 426-2481
VII

Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII

Ju n e cover:
Detail from “ Railroad Sleeping”
a 1925 woodcut by Howard Norton Cook (1901-1980),
a drawing in the exhibition, “ Recent Acquisitions:
Prints, Drawings, and Watercolors” on display
from May 17 through December 6, 1988,
at the National Museum of American Art,
Washington, DC
Cover design by Richard L. Mathews


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

Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Regions IX and X—San Francisco:

71 Stevenson Street
P.O. Box 3766
San Francisco, CA 94119
Phone: (415) 995-5602
IX

American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X

Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington

Sam M. Hirabayashi

ynl

RESEARCH LIBRARY
Fed .3 <.if Reserve Bank

/

of St. Louis

1

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

JUNE 1988
VOLUME 111, NUMBER 6

JUL

28

7988

R. Blanchfield, W. Marsteller

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

3

Rising export and import prices in 1987 reversed recent trend
The falling value of the dollar played a large role In International price increases;
exports were also affected by rising commodity prices, imports by rising fuel prices

C. Howell, A. Clem,
R.A. Kuemmerling

20

Susan G. Powers

27

Domestic price rise in 1987 reflects swing of energy prices
Impact of volatile energy components is again evident in both Consumer Price Index
and Producer Price Index, with Increase In cpi returning to the 4-percent range

The role of capital discards in productivity measurement
Discarding of plant and equipment varies over the business cycle, but new measures
of capital input in 20 industries suggest the effect on multifactor productivity is minor

James P. Markey

36

The labor market problems of today's high school dropouts
Of the 4 million young high school dropouts In 1986, one-fourth were unemployed;
many were not In the labor force at all, and others faced strong competition

C. Huffstutler, B. Bingham

44

Productivity growth slows in the organic chemicals industry
Productivity growth was highest from 1963 to 1974; however, overall decline
in output, hours, and employment characterized the 1974-85 period

REPORTS
Tadd Linsenmayer

52

U.S. ends ilo moratorium by ratifying two conventions

Joseph P. Goldberg

53

The landmark provisions of ratified ilo conventions


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

DEPARTMENTS
2
52
56
59
60
63

Labor month in review
Foreign labor developments
Research summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Current labor statistics

Labor Month
In Review
COMPETITION AND COMPE­
TENCE. Commissioner of Labor
Statistics Janet L. Norwood discussed
changes needed to help the United
States regain its competitive edge in the
world economy. Here are excerpts from
her remarks, May 15, in St. Louis, to
the American Forum on Education and
International Competence.

Productivity growth. In many ways,
today’s American work force is the best
and most productive in history. More
than 1 in 4 of our adult workers (25 to
64 years old) has a college degree. A
decade ago, it was 1 in 5. In 1987, there
was more than $33,000 of gross domestic
product for every worker; in 1960 the
figure—measured in dollars of com­
parable value—was $24,000. And out­
put per hour of all persons has
improved in recent years.
If these numbers are so good, why do
we express so much concern with our
competitiveness and competence? How
do we compare with the other nations
of a dynamic and increasingly inter­
dependent world? How do we go about
preparing our workers to be competi­
tive in such an international economy?
There have been at least three distinct
stages of international productivity
competition in manufacturing since
1960. First, from 1960 to 1973, there
was a tremendous increase in produc­
tivity as the major European and
Japanese economies, by then fully reco­
vered from the devastation of the
Second World War, posted annual rates
of productivity growth averaging 6.6
percent and ranging as high as the 10.3percent yearly pace in Japan. In that


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

era, the 2.9-percent annual rate of
increase in U.S. factory productivity
looked rather puny.
Second, all of these industrial econ­
omies began to record a dramatic slow­
down in productivity growth. The
relative position of the United States
continued to slip, however, and the
competitiveness issue was promoted
from a problem to a crisis. Third, after
the recessions of the 1980’s ran their
course, our stronger recovery was
reflected in a significant improvement
in productivity performance. During
this third phase, U.S. productivity gains
have been near the average of our over­
seas competitors. In fact, in 1985, only
Japan posted a larger gain in manufac­
turing efficiency, and in 1986, the United
States was at the top of the heap.
The competitive position of the United
States has been further boosted by restraint
in wage gains and the depreciation of the
dollar. Relatively slow wage growth has
been reflected in lower unit labor costs for
manufactured goods. The relatively cheap
dollar has made our exports less expen­
sive to foreign buyers and, conversely,
raised the dollar price of our imports from
them.
Over the course of the past 27 years,
then, the comparative productivity of
our factories has careened from
problem to crisis to, possibly, a
renewed position of leadership. It is
plain that, for better or worse, the
international economy is a dynamic fo­
rum of competition; no lead seems to
last forever.

Educational needs. How can we con­
tinue to improve our competitive posi­

tion? Our analysis of the work force
demand and supply projections stresses
that education will, as always, be a key
to job market success, but probably
more so in the future than in the past.
As growth rates in professional and
managerial occupations continue to be
strong, and the number of youth enter­
ing the labor market declines, those
workers with college degrees should be
in a stronger competitive position. At
the other extreme, however, opportu­
nities for those without a high school
education will be quite limited in both
quality and quantity. Far fewer poorly
educated youth will have the opportu­
nity to obtain factory jobs. Many lower
paying service and retail trade jobs will
still be created, but opportunities for
advancement will be quite limited, par­
ticularly for those without competence
in language and math skills. This
rising skill requirement will pose a par­
ticular challenge to our society—that is,
to find ways for those who have had
relatively poor records of academic suc­
cess to raise their educational levels and
compete for the better jobs.
If our new jobs are performed com­
petently, we will create a healthy U.S.
economy. If they are done in a slipshod
manner, by persons with second rate
education and training, some of the
worst-case scenarios of lost competi­
tiveness will be more likely to come
true. We have found out the hard way
that American leadership in the world
economy is no longer a foregone con­
clusion. From this point on, our busi­
nesses and our workers, together, will
have to earn our position in the inter­
national marketplace.
□

Rising export and import prices in 1987
reversed the trend of recent years
The falling value o f the dollar played
a large role in export and import price increases;
exports were also affected by rising commodity prices
and imports, by rising fuel prices
R o b e r t B l a n c h f i e l d a n d W il l ia m M a r s t e l l e r

In 1987, both U.S. export and import prices broke the
downward trend of recent years. Export prices rose 6.9
percent, the first increase recorded in the all-export price
index which was begun in 1983. (See table 1.) Import
prices turned sharply upward, rising 14.8 percent after
falling every previous year since the all-import index was
initiated in 1982.1 (See table 2.)
The rise in export prices reflected the strong upward
trend in commodity prices. Food and crude materials
prices rose substantially in 1987 compared to previous
years. (See chart 1.) For example, exported food prices
were up 9 percent last year after falling 13.2 percent in
1986. Similarly, those for crude materials rose 20.7
percent in 1987 following a 2.5-percent increase in 1986.
On the other hand, 1987 price increases for manufactured
goods were only marginally changed from those posted in
1986. Price changes for intermediate goods were mixed.
Last year’s 14.8-percent increase in the all-import index
was a significant upturn from the 8.7-percent drop in
1986; however, when fuels and related products are
excluded, the price changes for the last 2 years were very
similar, 9.6 and 8.4 percent, respectively. This is indica­
tive of the large influence that fuels exert on the all-import

Robert Blanchfield and William Marsteller are economists in the
Division of International Prices, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Susan Chen,
an economist in the same division, prepared the charts.

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

index. Imported fuel prices rose 43.8 percent in 1987 after
declining 51.5 percent in 1986.

Falling dollar and the trade balance
The falling value of the dollar continued to play a large
role in the upward price movements for both exports and
imports. For a better measure of the effect of the dollar’s
movement on the prices of imports and exports in foreign
currency terms, the Bureau of Labor Statistics developed
new indexes. They indicate that, while prices of nonfuel
imports have risen 22.4 percent in dollar terms, the tradeweighted value of the dollar has fallen 32.8 percent since
March 1985. (See chart 2.) Nonfuel import prices in
foreign currency terms declined 17.7 percent during the
same period. These offsetting price movements suggest
that foreign exporters have been willing to absorb a
substantial portion of the drop in the trading value of the
dollar. In addition, the moderate increase in export dollar
prices since the first quarter of 1985 suggests that U.S.
exporters are using currency changes to improve their
competitive position. As a result of a modest export price
increase in dollar terms of 5.4 percent, and a 27.2-percent
drop in the dollar’s trade-weighted value, foreign cur­
rency prices of U.S. exports have fallen 23.2 percent since
the first quarter of 1985.
The dollar began its fall in February of 1985. In
September of that year, the decline was accelerated when
3

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

the Group of Five countries—the United States, Japan,
West Germany, Great Britain, and France—agreed to
intervene in foreign exchange markets to bring the dollar
down further. However, by February of 1987, the dollar
had fallen 37.2 percent from its peak,2 leading to a
meeting of the Group of Five countries and Canada and a
consensus (the Louvre Accord) to stabilize exchange rates
at approximately the levels existing at that time. It was
further agreed that, in order to alleviate the large trade
imbalances, the United States would strive to reduce its
budget deficit, and West Germany and Japan would
stimulate their economies.
This program of exchange rate stabilization experi­
enced initial success, but some economic analysts were
concerned that the high interest rates necessary to
maintain the value of the dollar would lead to an
economic slowdown. Although both short-term and long­
term interest rates were relatively stable through April
1987, both began an upward trend in subsequent months
which continued until the dramatic fall of the stock
market on October 19. For example, the rate on 3-month
U.S. Treasury bills increased from approximately 5.5
percent in January 1987 to 7 percent in mid-October
1987. The 30-year U.S. constant-maturity rate rose over
the period from 7.3 to 10 percent.3
Fear of an economic downturn led to an easing of
monetary policy and, hence, to lower interest rates. In the
9 weeks following the fall of the stock market, the dollar
dropped another 7.6 percent,4 setting postwar lows in

world money markets numerous times.5 Finally, on
December 22, 1987, the Group of Seven (the Group of
Five countries plus Canada and Italy), determining that
the dollar had fallen far enough, “agreed that either
excessive fluctuations of exchange rates, a further decline
of the dollar, or a rise in the dollar to an extent that
becomes destabilizing . . . could be counterproductive
by damaging growth prospects in the world economy.”6
In addition to the falling dollar, the Nation’s persistent
trade deficit was once again a major story in U.S.
international economic relations in 1987. Although the
deficit decreased by 5 percent in constant dollars,7 in
nominal terms it set a new high in 1987 for the fifth
consecutive year at $171.2 billion, up from $156.2 billion
in 1986. Significant deficits were registered against Japan,
$59.8 billion; the so-called Four Tigers (Singapore, Hong
Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan), $37.7 billion; Western
Europe, $30.2 billion; the Latin American Free Trade
Association countries,8 $14.9 billion; and Canada, $11.7
billion.9 West Germany ($16.3 billion) accounted for over
half of the U.S. deficit with Western Europe, while
Mexico and Brazil accounted for $10.3 billion of the
deficit with the Latin American Free Trade Association
countries. The deficits recorded with the Four Tigers
individually were: Singapore, $2.3 billion; Hong Kong,
$6.5 billion; South Korea, $9.9 billion; and Taiwan, $19
billion.10 Chart 3 shows the relative shares of the U.S.
trade deficit by region.

Table 1. Changes in Export Price Indexes for selected categories of goods, 1986-87
Quarterly percent change

Annual percent change
SITC

Commodity

Percentage
of 1980
trade value

December
1985 to
December
1986

December
1986 to
December
1987

December
1986 to
March
1987

March
1987
to June
1987

June
1987 to
September
1987

September
1987 to
December
1987

All commodities1 ........................................................

100.000

-0 .5

6.9

1.0

2.8

0.3

2.6

0
04

Food..............................................................................
Grain and grain preparations.................................

12.786
8.341

-1 3 .2
-25.6

9.0
11.6

-1 .7
-2 .9

4.5
5.7

-4 .6
-6 .6

11.2
16.4

2
22
24
25
26
28

Crude m a te ria ls...........................................................
Oilseeds ................................................................
W o o d ......................................................................
Pulp and wastepaper............................................
Textile fibers ..........................................................
Metal ores and metal scrap .................................

10.948
3.024
1.417
.954
1.813
2.062

2.5
-1 .6
5.8
30.7
-5 .6
2.5

20.7
17.0
32.8
21.0
24.1
28.6

2.4
-4 .0
2.6
9.7
8.1
1.9

9.5
13.6
5.2
4.3
15.3
10.3

2.6
-6 .3
19.0
2.8
3.7
9.9

4.9
14.5
3.4
2.8
-4 .0
4.1

5
51
56
58

Chemicals and related products.................................
Organic chem icals................................................
Fertilizers, manufactured .....................................
Artificial resins, plastics, and cellulose ...............

9.578
2.289
1.036
1.767

-4 .5
- 6 .0
-2 3 .7
.0

17.8
29.5
36.7
27.6

4.8
11.3
9.8
5.2

6.7
14.9
6.6
7.5

1.0
-2 .0
9.5
5.4

4.3
4.2
6.7
7.0

6

Intermediate manufactured products.........................

10.544

3.6

6.7

1.7

2.3

1.6

1.0

35.261
4.939

1.3
2.1

1.6
2.6

.5
1.5

.1
.1

.3
.1

.7
.9

3.990
4.738

-1 .3
1.1

-2 .8
3.7

- 2 .0
1.4

-.1
.3

- .5
.2

-.1
1.3

Machinery and transport equipment,
excluding military and commercial a ircra ft..............
General industrial machines, parts, n.e .s..............
Office machines and automatic data
processing equipment...........................................
Electric machines and e qu ip m en t.........................

7
74
75
77

1This category includes indexes in addition to those shown here. For all of the indexes available in each category, see "U.S. Import and Export Indexes," Release 86-36
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Jan. 28,1988).
n.e.s.

=

not elsewhere specified.


4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Table 2.

Changes in Import Price Indexes for selected categories of goods, 1986-37
Quarterly percent change

Annual percent change
SITC

Commodity

Percentage
of 1980
trade value

December
1985 to
December
1986

December
1986 to
December
1987

December
1986 to
March
1987

March
1987 to
June
1987

June
1987 to
September
1987

September
1987 to
December
1987

All commodities1 ....................................................

100.000

-8 .7

14.8

6.5

4.0

1.6

2.0

All commodities, excluding fuels and
related products1 ...........................................................

67.223

8.4

9.6

2.5

2.6

1.3

3.0

3
33

Fuels and related products.........................................
Crude petroleum and petroleum products............

32.776
30.653

-5 1 .5
-5 2 .7

43.8
48.3

29.4
31.7

10.3
10.6

2.9
3.8

-2.1
-1 .9

6
67
68

Intermediate manufactured products.........................
Iron and s te e l...........................................................
Nonferrous m etals...................................................

13.520
3.127
3.123

4.5
0.2
1.5

13.3
17.2
24.9

2.0
3.2
1.0

3.7
3.9
10.3

3.7
3.9
7.3

3.3
5.1
4.5

7
72
74
78

Machinery and transport equipm ent..........................
Machinery specialized for particular industries ....
General industrial machinery and parts, n .e .s .....
Road vehicles and p arts.........................................

25.442
1.998
1.645
10.887

12.0
15.3
16.2
13.1

7.7
13.1
13.0
6.4

3.1
5.4
5.8
2.9

1.8
2.0
2.3
1.6

.2
.0
- .7
.3

2.4
5.3
5.1
1.5

1 This category includes indexes in addition to those shown here. For all of the indexes available in each category, see "U.S. Import and Export Indexes," Release 86-36
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Jan. 28,1988).
n.e.s.

=

not elsewhere specified.

A number of explanations have been put forward in
recent years for the seemingly contradictory trends of a
rising U.S. trade deficit and the falling dollar. They
include the /-curve effect, the international debt crisis, a
larger relative share of trade with the newly industrialized
countries whose currencies are pegged to the dollar, and
the willingness and ability of foreign exporters to cut
profits, costs, or both to limit dollar-denominated price
increases.
Most estimates indicate that the y-curve effect—that is,
lagged improvements in the trade balance after a currency
depreciation—should be seen within 12 to 18 months
after the depreciation. The y-curve effect further assumes
that, after the initial depreciation, the value of the
currency in question is stable. However, since early 1985,
the dollar has not been sufficiently stabilized to determine
the y-curve effect. The effect of each successive fall in the
dollar has spilled over into previous depreciations, blur­
ring the effect of any one particular decline. Thus, the
magnitude of the y-curve effect, if any, has been difficult to
determine.
The international debt crisis has contributed to the
Nation’s inability to reverse its trade imbalance, especially
with Latin American countries. External debt has forced
these countries to tighten their belts domestically and
promote substantial export growth in order to accumulate
U.S. dollars to service their debts. This practice restricts
the ability of U.S. firms to export to these countries.
A clear trend in recent years toward increased trade
with the newly industrialized countries also is a source of
the deficit. However, the contention that their currencies
have not appreciated relative to the dollar did not hold
true in every case last year. The currencies of three of the

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

Nation’s major trading partners—Singapore, South K o­
rea, and Taiwan—rose 8.8, 8.8, and 24.1 percent, respec­
tively.11 It is interesting to note that Taiwan had both the
largest trade surplus and the largest currency apprecia­
tion vis-a-vis the United States of any of the newly
industrialized countries.
Lastly, although it is apparent that import prices have
not risen as much as might have been expected in the face
of sharply appreciating foreign currencies, the reasons for
this are less clear. When the dollar initially began falling,
the standard assumption was that foreign exporters were
narrowing profit margins significantly to maintain market
shares. However, recent evidence suggests that, as foreign
currencies have appreciated, the focus among U.S. trade
partners has been on reducing costs rather than profit
margins as a method of holding the line on import prices.
Taking Japan as a prime example of a country whose
currency has appreciated against the dollar, yet which has
been able to maintain a high level of exports to the United
States, one can examine the reasons for this occurrence.
When the value of the dollar falls against the currencies
of surplus countries, the costs of the raw materials also
fall, because many world markets for these products
transact business exclusively in dollars. For example, the
drop in the yen-denominated price of oil allowed the
Japanese chemical industry to limit price increases to
about 9 percent during 1987.12 Lower interest rates in
Japan also enabled the Japanese to enjoy relatively
cheaper capital costs. In addition, some Japanese interme­
diate manufacturing has been relocated to countries
whose currencies and wages are relatively low, such as
Malaysia. Many Japanese firms also have taken steps to
increase labor and capital productivity.
5

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

Recently, structural considerations have also been
advanced to explain the inability of the falling dollar to
induce a more favorable trade balance. The dollar’s
appreciation during 1980-85 allowed many foreign ex­
porters to undercut the prices of their U.S. competitors.
Thus, many U.S. producers were forced out of selected
markets, causing domestic capacity in these industries to
fall or be completely eliminated. For example, if there are
no longer any U.S. manufacturers of a particular product,
such as videodisk players, then no domestic substitute
exists at any price. In such a scenario, a cheaper dollar
alone may not be enough to return nominal trade flows to
their previous levels. If the price elasticity of demand is
less than 1, price increases of imported videodisks will
actually worsen the deficit. Domestic manufacturers’
ability and willingness to reenter the market depends on
industry startup costs and forecasts of the future level of
the dollar, as well as other factors particular to the
industry.
On a macroeconomic level, another explanation for the
persistent trade deficit is differential rates of growth in
gross national product between the United States and
some of the surplus countries. For example, since the last
year of balanced trade, 1980, the cumulative g n p growth
in the United States exceeded that of Western Europe and
Japan by 12 percent.13 A higher growth rate implies a

greater absorption of imports. In order to regain a trade
balance, this trend must be reversed.

Export price developments
Food.
The index for exported food products, which
represents approximately 13 percent of the all-export
index, rose 9 percent during 1987. This increase was due
primarily to an 11.6-percent advance in the grain sub­
category. Overall, 1987 was an unusually successful year
for U.S. farmers, as their incomes hit record highs.14
Farm debt declined, land values stabilized, and export
volumes rose in both real and nominal terms. In fact, 1987
was the first year since 1980 in which agricultural exports
increased, with grains playing a major role in the
turnaround. Japan continued to be the largest consumer
of U.S. farm exports, as it had been since 1964.15
The combination of a weaker dollar and changing
domestic agricultural policy contributed to the popularity
of U.S. grain on world markets. The U.S. Department of
Agriculture lowered the loan rates for selected agricul­
tural products, including grains. This policy adjustment
reduced many loan rates to near world-market prices and
allowed U.S. agricultural products to be more competitive
on international markets. The Agriculture Department’s
Export Enhancement Program also promoted exports by
allowing farmers to sell their goods overseas at below

Chart 1. Annual percent price changes for selected export product groups, 1984-87
Percent

Percent

25

25
□

20

20

M Crude materials

15
10

Food

■

Fuels

0

Machinery

-

5 -

-

15

-

10

HU Miscellaneous
manufactures

0

-5
-10

-

-5

H -10

-

-15

-15
1984

1985

1986

1987

NOTE: Sold bars denote categories of unfinished goods; patterned bars denote categories of finished goods.


6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Chart 2. Quarterly indexes of U.S. dollar prices, foreign currency prices, and dollar
exchange rate values for all imports, excluding fuel, and all exports, 1985-87
[March 1985
- 1001

market rates and receive a government subsidy equal to
the difference between the sale price and market price.
This program was particularly effective in promoting
sales of wheat and barley.
In the major grain subcategories, the index for wheat,
which represents 3 percent of the all-export index,
advanced 6.8 percent during 1987 because of reduced
plantings and stronger worldwide demand. However,
index movements during the year were inconsistent as
prices rose during the first quarter, fell significantly
during midyear, and climbed again at yearend.
The initial price rise was primarily due to large wheat
purchases by the Soviet Union, North Africa, Latin
America, Japan, and China. Normal seasonal price
declines and a large U.S. winter wheat harvest helped
dampen midyear prices. (Winter wheat is planted in the
fall and harvested in the spring.) Record yields caused the
harvest to increase 1 percent from 1986, despite govern­
ment programs that idled more than one-fifth of the
Nation’s cropland.16 These programs were designed to
reduce excess stocks of selected crops in order to bolster
prices.17 Midyear demand from selected countries, includ­
ing China and the Soviet Union, remained strong.
Export wheat prices advanced 8.9 percent during the
fourth quarter owing to a smaller world crop and

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

[March 1985
- 1001

heightened world demand for wheat. Demand was espe­
cially strong from countries that experienced crop short­
falls because of inclement weather, such as China, India,
and the Soviet Union. Reduced plantings in Canada and
Australia, both net exporters of wheat, caused harvests in
those countries to fall and allowed U.S. exporters to pick
up much of the shortfall. An increased willingness on the
part of some countries to rely on imports to satisfy
domestic needs also contributed to the wheat industry’s
success during 1987. Ultimately, world demand for U.S.
wheat exceeded the 1987 supply at the prices prevailing at
the beginning of the year. This imbalance resulted in
higher yearend prices, and reduced domestic stocks by 30
percent.
Rice export prices soared 81.3 percent during 1987.
Early in the year, however, prices were flat due to sagging
demand which reflected increased self-sufficiency in Asia,
lack of economic growth in Africa, and declining reve­
nues in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries.18 Increased supplies, especially from Thailand,
contributed to the already depressed rice market. Devel­
opments in the first half of the year were also strongly
affected by U.S. Department of Agriculture policy
changes of 1986. In April of that year, regular Govern­
ment-loan rates, which set a floor for the U.S. price for
7

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

rice, were changed to those of marketing loans, which
more accurately reflect world prices. This change sent
U.S. prices tumbling to the world-market level and was
still affecting prices during the first half of 1987.
Tightened world supplies, however, characterized the
remainder of the year. In response, prices rose 6.7 percent
during the third quarter and 77.4 percent during the
fourth quarter. Production in many of the leading riceproducing nations, including Thailand, India, Bangla­
desh, China, Nepal, and Burma, was reduced significantly
because of inclement weather. Particularly hard hit was
the harvest in Thailand, the world’s leading rice exporter.
Because world stocks of rice are traditionally not as high
as those of other crops, rice prices rose quickly, as did the
quantity of U.S. exports.
Like the indexes for wheat and rice, the index for
exported corn, which represents approximately 4 percent
of the all-export index, rose during 1987 by 10.3 percent.
Export prices were volatile during the year, falling in the
first and third quarters and rising significantly in the
second and fourth quarters. The fall of prices early in the
year can be attributed to burgeoning supplies of feed grain
and a 5-billion-bushel carryover from 1986.19 However,
the combination of unusually large second-quarter pur­
chases by the Soviet Union and tight supplies bolstered
midyear prices. Restricted supplies in the United States

were largely due to the Agriculture Department’s “Acre­
age Reduction Program,” in which 88 percent of Ameri­
can corn growers participated.20 A seasonal drop in prices
took place in the third quarter. Record yields of summer
harvest also had a dampening effect on prices. Prices
rebounded strongly in the fourth quarter due to height­
ened demand and reduced harvests by two major produc­
ers, Argentina and Thailand. Thailand’s exports were
reduced by attempts to substitute corn for rice in domestic
consumption. U.S. farmers also contributed to higher
prices as they withheld crops from the market in
anticipation of increasing prices. Market speculation was
based on the fact that the crop in 1987 was 1 billion
bushels lower than in 1986.
The U.S. grain industry experienced strong advances in
both exports and prices for the first time in several
years.21 Farmers appeared to be better positioned to
weather economic fluctuations than they were during the
early 1980’s, because of reductions in debt, lower interest
rates, and the 1987 farm bill which shored up the ailing
farm credit system and created a number of debt
restructuring opportunities.22
Crude materials.
After a moderate 2.5-percent rise in
1986, prices of exported crude materials advanced 20.7
percent during 1987. Although all product categories,

Chart 3. Percent distribution of U.S. trade deficit by region, 1987


8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

except crude minerals, showed price increases, the prod­
uct groups contributing most to this large increase were
wood, metalliferous ores and scrap, textile fibers, pulp
and wastepaper, and oilseeds.
A lower dollar and strong overseas housing markets
enabled wood export prices to increase 32.8 percent in
1987—the largest annual increase since 1978. The in­
crease was propelled chiefly by the strength of a large
third-quarter price rise— 19 percent, the largest quarterly
increase ever recorded in this index.
Indexes for the main categories of wood exports,
softwood logs and lumber, rose 52.5 and 20.4 percent,
respectively, largely due to the strength of very large
third-quarter price increases (32.9 and 10.4 percent).
These increases were facilitated by the highest quarterly
level of log and lumber exports in at least 15 years.23
Because Japan currently is the largest purchaser of U.S.
softwood logs and lumber, its influence on the U.S. export
market is significant. In 1987, the Japanese housing
market was the main impetus for the large price increases
in U.S. softwood log and lumber exports. Housing was
one of the sectors successfully targeted in the Japanese
Government’s attempt to stimulate domestic consump­
tion, and this development is an example of what the U.S.
Government had hoped for from the Japanese and West
German economies—stimulative growth leading to larger
volumes of imports from the United States. Moreover,
wood-based construction was specifically targeted in
Japan.
U.S. log and lumber exporters were in an advantageous
position to satisfy much of the additional Japanese
demand for logs and lumber because of Japanese dissatis­
faction with supplies from the Soviet Union, the banning
by the Canadian Government of exports of high-grade
hemlock logs, the raising of export taxes on other grades
and species by the Canadians,24 and, most importantly,
the lower value of the U.S. dollar. In fact, log exports to
Japan were 15 percent higher, and lumber exports 33
percent higher, than in 1986.25
The year 1987 was an excellent one for producers of
metal scrap. Large price increases for metal scrap
outweighed a 7.1-percent decline in metal ores to raise the
export price index for metalliferous ores and scrap by 28.6
percent. High rates of capacity utilization in primary
steel, aluminum, and copper plants resulted in high U.S.
scrap consumption.
Ferrous scrap export prices posted a 29.6-percent gain.
Although exports fell to 10 million tons in 1987 from their
level of 11.7 million in 19 86,26 this reflected a strong
domestic demand that absorbed a greater share of total
production rather than weak export markets (domestic
ferrous scrap purchases rose 9.9 percent in real terms last
year27). Some traders claimed that high prices in the
domestic market resulted in domestic sales of approxi­

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

mately 1 million tons of top-grade scrap that otherwise
would have been exported.28
Nonferrous base metal scrap prices rose 55.8 percent
during 1987. A stronger aluminum market allowed
consistently strong aluminum-scrap price increases
throughout the year. Also, copper scrap prices, while less
consistent, were a pleasant surprise for dealers. Prices for
alloyed copper scrap were up 44.8 percent during the
year, and those for unalloyed copper scrap soared 74
percent.
U.S. brass mills, which account for approximately 40
percent of domestic copper scrap consumption, stepped
up production in 19 87.29 This increase reflected strong
domestic demand and fewer imports resulting from a
weaker dollar and the success of the anti-dumping efforts
of the Copper & Brass Fabricators Council. Meanwhile,
copper scrap exports through the first 11 months of 1987
were essentially the same as 1986 levels in real terms.30
Also contributing to the tight market were declines of
copper scrap supplies in recent years. Many manufactur­
ers whose operations produce scrap as a byproduct have
moved offshore, while the remaining firms produce less
scrap as a result of more efficient production processes.31
In 1987, U.S. textile fiber manufacturers experienced
the highest capacity utilization rates in 20 years.32 Textile
fiber export prices rose 24.1 percent during 1987 on the
strength of a 34.4-percent increase in exported raw cotton
prices.
Strong production of finished cotton goods in Japan,
the newly industrialized countries, and the European
Community led to a healthy demand for raw cotton.
World consumption of raw cotton was at a record-setting
pace of 81.9 million bales in 1987. Moreover, 1987 world
production levels were at 77.4 million bales, lower than in
1986 due to the expectation that the low prices of 1986
would continue and to poor weather in 1987.33
U.S. pulp and wastepaper export prices rose 21 percent
in 1987. Tight market conditions were reflected in the
fifth consecutive record year of world shipments of
chemical paper-grade market pulp, 7.3 million metric
tons, and the lowest inventories of North American and
Scandinavian producers in 8 years, 641,000 metric tons.34
Sulphate woodpulp export prices were up 24.9 percent
and accounted for over half the value of the pulp and
wastepaper index. Sulphate woodpulp is used in the
manufacturing of kraft linerboard, used primarily in
making corrugated containers. A strong world economy
requires the use of containers for shipping and, therefore,
keeps demand for sulphate woodpulp healthy. U.S.
corrugated box shipments were up 4.8 percent in real
terms in 1987, breaking the record high set in the previous
year. 35
Markets were so strong that U.S. exporters were able to
raise prices substantially in dollar terms and, because of
9

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

Chart 4. Quarterly indexes of U.S. dollar prices, foreign currency prices, and dollar
exchange rate values for selected categories of exports, 1986-87
[December 1986

[December 1986
- 1001

Dec.
1986

-

March
1987

June
1987

Sept.
1987

Dec.
1987

1986

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

1987

[December 1986
- 1001
140

[December 1986
-

100]

100]

120

135

115

130

110

125

105

120
115

100
110
95

105

90

100
95

85

90

80

85
Dec.
1986

March
1987

June
1987

Sept.
1987

Dec.
1987

the low level of the dollar, increase sales by undercutting
other major producers, such as the Scandinavians. At the
same time that pulp and wastepaper export prices rose
21.0 percent, the trade-weighted value of the dollar fell
14.6 percent. The result was that the price of exported
pulp and wastepaper in foreign currency terms rose
slightly in 1987— 3.3 percent. (See chart 4.) This indicates
that a tight world market for crude paper products has
not made it necessary for U.S. exporters to take advantage
of the sharp changes in relative prices that currency
adjustments would have accomplished to increase sales.

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

1986

Prices of exported oilseeds were up 17 percent in 1987,
the first increase since 1983. This rise was driven by an
18.4-percent rise in soybean prices, also the first increase
in 4 years. The index was volatile, falling 4 and 6.3
percent in the first and third quarters, while rising 13.6
and 14.5 percent in the second and fourth.
Soybean prices began 1987 at the depressed levels
characteristic of the 2 previous years, largely a result of a
high level of world supplies. However, when the price
descended toward the U.S. loan rate (a Government-set
rate which effectively acts as a minimum price), the price

strengthening mechanism took effect. A price level at or
below the loan rate encourages U.S. farmers to forfeit
their crops to the Department of Agriculture’s Commod­
ity Credit Corporation stocks in lieu of repaying their
Government loans. Because these crops do not reach the
market, supplies are tightened. In addition, Brazil, a
m ajor competitor, underestimated its own domestic
demand and, therefore, had fewer soybeans available for
export. Lastly, in the fourth quarter, the Soviet Union
reentered the U.S. market with major purchases of
soybeans and soybean meal. This surge in demand pushed
prices up 14.1 percent during a time of year when they
usually fall, resulting in the first annual price increase
since 1983.
Chemicals.
The index for exported chemicals and
chemical products rose 18 percent in 1987 following years
of relatively stability. Capacity constraints and higher raw
materials costs in the form of surging oil prices contrib­
uted to the advance in the chemical index. After years of
depressed prices and sales, the U.S. chemical industry was
revitalized during 1987 because of the fall in the dollar’s
value and heightened worldwide consumer and industrial
demand.36 In response to these factors, export prices rose
in all major subcategories, including organic chemicals
(29.5 percent), inorganic chemicals (42.4 percent), fertil­
izers (36.7 percent), and resins and plastics (27.6 percent).
Chemicals, which represent approximately 10 percent
of the all-export index, trail only oil and automobiles as
America’s largest smokestack industry.37 Products manu­
factured by the chemical industry provide materials to
many sectors of the industrial economy, ranging from
industrial process chemicals to high-technology products.
The industry also provides many consumer goods, includ­
ing drugs, cosmetics, and paints.
The success of the chemical industry in 1987 occurred
as a result of that industry’s vast transformation during
the previous decade. Rising demand, increasing prices,
and greater profit opportunities characterized the late
1970’s. In response, chemical manufacturers worldwide
expanded capacity. However, higher oil prices and the
economic downturns of the early 1980’s resulted in
overcapacity and caused profits to fall precipitously.38
The industry responded by cutting capacity and investing
heavily in research and development to develop specialty
chemicals such as drugs, engineering plastics, and agri­
chemicals.39 These products typically enjoy higher profit
margins and less cyclical demand than do bulk chemi­
cals.40
The combination of lower production and increased
demand for both bulk and specialty chemicals helped
make 1987 the most successful year in the domestic
industry since 1980. As chart 5 illustrates, the dollar value
of chemical exports increased 10 percent in 1987 to reach
$24.8 billion. While imports also rose marginally during

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

Chart 5. Dollar volume of U.S. imports
and exports of chemicals, 1980-87
Billions
oí dollars

BHHons
of dollars
30

30

25 -

Exports

S

20 ■

25

20

15

Imports

♦

10

_

-■

/

15

10

■ ■/
5

0

5

1981

1983

1985

1987

0

the year, the trade surplus in chemicals was the largest
since 1980 at $10.2 billion, up $1.6 billion from 1986.41
The declining value of the dollar clearly had a positive
effect on the trade balance in chemicals. The combination
of the 18-percent advance in the price of exported
chemicals and the increase in real exports reflected U.S.
producers’ ability to raise prices without sacrificing
market share.
Surging crude petroleum prices were an obvious con­
tributor to higher chemical prices during 1987. Petroleum
feedstocks, prices of which skyrocketed due to the rising
cost of crude oil, account for approximately 70 percent of
total production costs of organic chemicals.42
Heightened demand for products manufactured from
chemicals such as synthetic rubber, plastics, paints,
fertilizers, and drugs also helped bring about the advance
in chemical prices. This demand placed a strain on many
chemical producers, which already were operating at
85-95 percent of capacity. Rather than invest heavily to
open new plants, many firms chose to install more
efficient equipment to increase an existing plant’s produc­
tivity. In addition to being influenced by high costs,
domestic chemical producers have been reluctant to open
new plants because they feared an appreciation of the
dollar or an increase in petroleum feedstock prices.43
11

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

Similar to that for bulk chemicals, the index for
exported fertilizers surged 36.7 percent during 1987 and
was also up 27.1 percent in foreign currency terms, as
chart 4 illustrates. The dramatic rise in foreign currency
prices indicates that factors other than exchange rates
affected the decision of U.S. exporters to raise prices.
These factors included capacity limitations, higher raw
materials costs, and moderately increased foreign de­
mand.
Capacity limitations were caused by the combination of
low fertilizer prices in recent years and technical problems
which caused plant shutdowns during 1987. In addition
to U.S. capacity constraints, a labor strike in Turkey
rendered that country incapable of exporting its usual
large quantities of fertilizer.
Higher raw materials costs, in the form of increased
urea and diammonium phosphate prices, also contributed
to the 36.7-percent jump in exported fertilizer prices.
Urea and diammonium phosphate are produced from
natural gas and phosphate rock, respectively, which both
were more expensive in 1987.
Finally, two atypical occurrences during 1987 caused
demand for U.S. fertilizer to surge: First, the European
Community eliminated specific duties on diammonium
phosphate, which led to easier market access for U.S.

exporters. Second, China and India both entered the
market as buyers after depleting their own inventories.
After nearly a decade of decline, the U.S. plastics
industry rebounded strongly in 1987. Like producers of
its chemical feedstocks, the plastics industry during the
early 1980’s was characterized by increasing raw mate­
rials costs, falling profits, and excess capacity. In re­
sponse, many firms closed mills and laid off workers
during the mid-1980’s in order to lower production
capabilities.44
Lower oil prices in 1986, the continued decline of the
dollar, and the expansion of the packaging industry led to
increased U.S. plastics exports during 19 87.45 The greater
use of plastic motor oil containers, disposable diapers,
plastic grocery sacks, and other plastic consumer goods
helped bring about the renewed health of the domestic
plastics industry.
The combination of capacity constraints, soaring petroluem prices in m id-1987, and heightened consumer
demand generated a 27.6-percent advance in the index for
exported plastics. This price climb allowed many plastics
producers to increase profit margins lost during the
recessions of the early 1980’s.46 The continued substitu­
tion of plastics for metal, glass, paper, and wood in
various industrial and consumer applications should
ensure industry vitality.47

Chart 6. Quarterly indexes of U.S. dollar prices, foreign currency prices, and dollar
exchange rate values for selected categories of imports, 1986-87
[March 1985
- 100]


12
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

[March 1985
- 100 ]

Intermediate products.
The export price index for
intermediate manufactured products rose 6.7 percent
during 1987. Although all major categories in this area
experienced significantly higher export prices during the
year, the major increases were for paper and paperboard
products and nonferrous metals. One significant aberra­
tion was a small (0.9-percent) advance in the index for
exports of miscellaneous metal manufactures. This rela­
tively small increase was due to the strong competition
the United States faces in world markets from many
Pacific Rim nations. Competition is especially fierce in
cutlery, handtools, fasteners, and wire products markets.
Export prices of paper and paperboard products
advanced 9.9 percent during 1987, but actually fell 1.1
percent in foreign currency terms. (See chart 4.) The 9.9percent increase was primarily the result of a 21.3-percent
jump in export prices in the kraft paper and paperboard
subcategory. This increase was largely the result of strong
demand in the European and Asian markets which was
augmented by a weaker dollar. U.S. producers continued
to penetrate foreign markets, achieving a 9-percent
increase in export shipments to approximately 5 million
tons.48 Although paper and paperboard production was
up during the year, utilization rates were actually slightly
lower than in 1986 because productive capacity increased
during 1987.49
Foreign demand was especially strong for unbleached
and bleached grades of paperboard packaging. These
materials are used in the manufacture of corrugated boxes
and account for approximately 70 percent of all export
shipments in the paperboard area.50 Mill strikes and
startup problems also affected prices during the year by
causing supply shortfalls. U.S. paper manufacturers’
adoption of new technologies, such as multi-ply forming,
high-pressure presses, and preprinted linerboards, en­
abled them to reduce costs while improving product
quality during 1987.
The export index for nonferrous metals rose 20.7
percent during 1987 as a result of tightened supplies and
stronger world demand for most base metals. Strong
foreign demand also allowed U.S. producers to increase
the real dollar value of exports by 18 percent.51
Specifically, export copper prices increased 24.4 per­
cent during 1987. Surging domestic demand for copper
was the biggest reason for higher copper export prices and
also contributed to the 82-million-ton decline in real
exports.52
The combination of strong demand from Japan and
Europe, the stock market drop in October, and inflation
fears led to a 23.5-percent advance in the export price of
silver.
The expansion of heavy industry contributed to
higher export prices for both nickel and aluminum during
1987. Very little nickel was available for export during the
year because of greater domestic demand for stainless

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

steel.53 Domestic capacity limitations forced many U.S.
producers to ignore export opportunities and added to the
6.6-percent rise in exported nickel prices. Aluminum
prices also climbed (24.3 percent) in response to the
strengthening of the durable goods industries and a
weaker dollar. The dollar’s decline against the yen made
U.S. exporters more competitive against Japan—their
biggest rival in world aluminum markets. U.S. exports
rose 18 percent during 1987, owing to the lower dollar
and lower import tariffs on aluminum shipped to Japan
and the European Community.
Machinery and transport equipment.
The machinery
and transport equipment index, which accounts for over
one-third of the all-export index, continued its gradual
upward climb, rising 1.7 percent in 1987. This was the
third consecutive year in which it increased between just 1
and 2 percent. In only one category—office machines and
automatic data processing ( a d p ) equipment—did prices
fall, by 2.8 percent. The increases for the remainder of the
indexes were limited to a relatively narrow range, from
0.9 to 4.3 percent.
The fall in prices for office machines and a d p equip­
ment was predominantly driven by a 3.7-percent decline
in a d p machine prices. Most significantly, central proc­
essing unit prices fell 7.2 percent. The trend toward mini
and micro systems and personal computer networks has
led manufacturers of central processing units to make
significant price reductions. Declining demand amidst a
very competitive market induced many companies to take
advantage of the lower dollar to either maintain or
increase their market share, rather than raise prices. In
fact, for office machines and a d p equipment as a whole,
the 2.8-percent dip in export prices, combined with the
13.7-percent decline in the trade-weighted value of the
dollar in 1987, resulted in a 16-percent drop in export
prices for these products in foreign currency terms. (See
chart 4.) General industrial machines prices were up in all
categories, leading to a 2.6-percent overall increase. The
largest rise occurred for heating and cooling equipment
and parts— 4.9 percent. The trade balance for general
industrial machines was in deficit for the first time in
1987. The forecast for 1988 is that the dollar volume of
exports will be 27 percent lower than in 1982.54
For many years, U.S. manufacturers of industrial
machines have been moving production offshore in order
to penetrate particular markets. Because these firms
export to both the United States and other countries, this
effectively raises U.S. imports and lowers exports. Unless
production returns to the United States, the fall in the
dollar may do little to reverse the deteriorating trade
deficit in this product area.
Electrical machinery and equipment prices rose 3.7
percent in 1987. Prices in all product categories were up.
13

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

Electrical component prices rose 6.2 percent, the largest
increase since 1984.
Increases in export prices of electrical components were
driven by a strong domestic market. Dollar-volume
shipments increased by an estimated 8.2 percent; ship­
ment quantities were up 12.5 percent. Much of this
growth was due to increased demand from the personal
computer and defense industries.55
Propelled by the strength of the personal computer
market, shipments of U.S. semiconductors rose 13 percent
in dollar terms in 19 87.56 A large portion of this growth
occurred near the end of the year when unit shipments
were running at a nearly 30-percent annual growth rate.57
This increase helped to push semiconductor export prices
up 4.4 percent—the largest annual increase since 1979.
Higher raw materials costs also exerted upward pressure
on prices.
The strength of the global semiconductor market was
apparent in increased revenues for the domestic industry,
the largest backlogs in 2 years,58 and a healthy ratio of
new orders to actual shipments—known as the book-tobill ratio. Market growth occurs when this ratio is greater
than 1, as it was during 1987. U.S. exports of semiconduc­
tors, which have the largest trade weight in the electrical
components category, were pushed up 20 percent in
19 87.59 Increased exports led to an 11-percent decline in
the trade deficit for semiconductors, reducing it to $1.01
billion.
The production of metal oxide silicon memory devices
is characterized by significant economies of scale. This
factor, in combination with an extremely competitive
world market and technological improvements in the
production process, has led to depressed world prices for
these products in recent years. This has been particularly
true of dynam ic random access m em ory devices
( d r a m ’s ) . Poor markets, particularly in 1985 when
companies endured large losses, resulted in the suspension
of production by many U.S. companies. A trade agree­
ment enacted in September 1986 between the United
States and Japan has contributed to more stable prices,
but now there are few U.S. producers of market dynamic
random access memory devices. Nevertheless, one of the
objectives of the trade agreement was to ensure greater
access to the Japanese market, which is especially
important to U.S. exporters because Japan’s electronics
and automotive industries now consume half of the
world’s production of semiconductors.60

Import price developments
Energy.
The index for imported energy, which repre­
sents one-third of the trade value of the all-import index,
soared 43.8 percent during 1987. This increase, in large
part, reflected surging prices of petroleum, which consti­
tutes 94 percent of the energy index. Higher petroleum

14
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

prices were related to the renewed commitment of o p e c
to oil production quotas and a fixed-price system. Higher
import prices were also a result of heightened U.S.
demand for petroleum.61
Faced with rapidly decreasing world oil prices, the
o p e c ministers met in December 1986 in an attempt to
curb production and shore up prices. Prior to that
meeting, the absence of quotas allowed many o p e c
members, including Saudi Arabia, to discount prices in
order sell a large volume of crude petroleum. This
practice sent prices falling during 1986. Faced with lower
world oil prices, and therefore more limited profit
opportunities, U.S. firms curtailed many exploration
projects and U.S. drilling dropped significantly in the first
quarter of 1987. Consequently, U.S. petroleum produc­
tion fell from approximately 9.2 million barrels per day
(m b/d) early in 1986 to about 8.3 m b/d during early
1987.62
In response to declining prices, o p e c ministers agreed
in December 1986 to lower production through countryspecific quotas and to return to a fixed-price system that
allowed crude petroleum prices to range from $16.27
to $18.92 per barrel.63 First-quarter 1987 production
responded, dropping 2.1 m b/d from the volume at the end
of 1986.64 Supplies tightened immediately, and the price
of imported crude petroleum rose 31.7 percent during the
first quarter. To avoid expensive purchases, petroleum
firms worldwide immediately began drawing heavily on
their petroleum stocks. In the United States, stocks of
petroleum products were drawn down at a rate of 0.5
m b/d during the first quarter of 1987, the fastest pace
since 1979.65 However, this trend did not curb the import
flow of crude petroleum, which rose approximately 1.1
m b/d during early 1987.66
o p e c ’ s continued adherence to production quotas was
manifested in the 9.4-percent increase in import crude
petroleum prices during the second quarter. In June 1987,
the o p e c ministers agreed to keep the official benchmark
price at approximately $18 per barrel and to raise
production 5 percent over second-quarter levels.67 o p e c
production levels, however, rose drastically during the
third quarter, ending approximately 3.1 m b/d above
quota levels, causing import prices to moderate.68 Iran,
Iraq, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates all produced
well above established quota levels in order to export large
volumes of crude petroleum. Fearing interruptions of
petroleum shipments through the Persian Gulf, many
importer nations, including the United States, purchased
significantly higher volumes of o p e c petroleum during
the third quarter. The United States, in fact, spent $12.6
billion on crude oil and petroleum products during the
third quarter, a 27-percent increase over the amount spent
during the second quarter.69
In an attempt to stem the excess flow of crude
petroleum, o p e c called a stop-gap meeting of its monitor-

ing committee in September 1987. Little progress
was realized from this meeting, however, and “overpro­
duction” continued through the end of the quarter.
Consequently, oil companies in the United States in­
creased stocks of crude petroleum and petroleum prod­
ucts in land storage to 1.6 billion barrels by the end of
third-quarter 1987.70
Despite increased supplies, prices moved moderately
higher (0.4 percent) during the fourth quarter owing to
the increased demand for o p e c petroleum, o p e c ’s pro­
duction fell, but was still approximately 2 mb/d above its
quota of 16.6 mb/d. Demand fordPEC oil waned in the
fourth quarter due to earlier stockpiling of petroleum by
purchasers worldwide who feared an interruption in
petroleum shipments.
Dissension among o p e c members at their December
1987 meeting led to an agreement that failed to address
the problems of “overproduction” or discounted prices.
o p e c ministers did agree to keep the production level at
16.6 m b/d and the benchmark price at approximately $18
per barrel. However, production at yearend continued at
approximately 18.6 m b/d (2 m b/d above quota level) and
contributed to already burgeoning inventories.71 Some
o p e c members chartered tankers to store crude petro­
leum in order to maintain relatively stable production
levels as export sales fell during the winter months.72
Despite higher prices during 1987, imports continued
unabated, averaging 4.52 m b/d, or 12.3 percent higher
than 1986 levels. U.S. dependence on o p e c oil increased
during the year while domestic production declined 5
percent.73
Ultimately, the combination of increased domestic
consumption and lower U.S. production resulted in the
second consecutive annual increase in petroleum imports,
and made 1987 the most costly year for imported energy
since 1980. The Nation’s total bill for imported petroleum
for the year was approximately $45 billion, or one-fourth
of the total trade deficit.74
In sharp contrast to developments for petroleum,
import prices of natural gas fell 11 percent during 1987.
The index for imported natural gas rose moderately
during the first half of the year and fell precipitously near
yearend. Initial increases can be attributed, in part, to
soaring crude petroleum prices, because natural gas
competes with distillate fuel oil in the home heating
market and with residual fuel oil in the power generating
market. The large drop in prices during the second half of
the year can be attributed to continued excess supplies.
U.S. supplies of natural gas increased 3.4 percent during
the year, largely due to an increase of 1.7 percent in U.S.
production and a 32-percent rise in imports from Can­
ada.75 A fall in demand also helped bring about the price
decline during the second half of the year. The drop in
consumption in the industrial and commercial sector was
partially explained by the fact that many U.S. firms were

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

still depleting their stocks of relatively inexpensive resid­
ual fuel purchased during 1986. The single bright spot for
natural gas producers was the utility sector where U.S.
demand rose from 1.777 trillion cubic feet in 1986 to
1.923 trillion cubic feet in 1987. The increased demand by
this sector reflected a switch back to natural gas caused by
the sharp increases in heavy oil prices.76
Intermediate products.
Although prices increased in all
major subcategories of imported intermediate manufac­
tured products, including leather, rubber, cork, and
textiles, the overall rise of 13.3 percent was primarily
caused by large advances in the indexes for nonferrous
metals and iron and steel.
The index for imported nonferrous metals (except gold)
jumped 24.9 percent during 1987, due largely to the fall in
the dollar, tight supplies, and surging demand in U.S.
manufacturing industries. It seems clear that factors other
than exchange rates played a significant role in the
increase as foreign exporters raised prices 10.7 percent in
their own currencies, “passing through” the entire depre­
ciation of the dollar. (See chart 6.)
Tight supplies had a significant impact on the index for
imported nickel, which rose 39.3 percent during 1987.
The closing of the primary American nickel smelter in
1986 made the United States almost totally dependent on
foreign supplies. The combination of scarce domestic
production and booming U.S. demand for stainless steel
induced an 11-percent increase in the quantity of nickel
imports during 1987. Increased production of stainless
and other specialty steels did, in fact, raise U.S. primary
nickel consumption to the highest level since 1974. Tight
foreign supplies caused by mine closures and extended
summer shutdown contributed to higher nickel prices
during the year.
Tight supplies also contributed to a 50.1-percent surge
in copper import prices during the year. Domestically,
higher consumption of refined copper left U.S. inventories
at a 13-year low.77
After years of sluggishness, the U.S. aluminum indus­
try rebounded sharply in 1987 due to a resurgence of
demand from customers in heavy industries. Driven by
exceptionally strong world demand, U.S. primary produc­
tion rose 4 percent, to an estimated 3.2 million tons,
during 19 87.78 Domestic demand was especially strong
for packaging materials, particularly aluminum cans and
foils.79 Import prices responded, rising 37.8 percent
during the year.
Despite lower domestic consumption, prices for im­
ported zinc advanced 3.6 percent during the year due to
lower U.S. production and the fall of the dollar. The
galvanization of steel is zinc’s largest application in the
United States, and the auto industry is the largest
domestic market for this product. The average weight of
galvanized steel used per car has increased 34 percent
15

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

over the last 3 years. In addition, orders for galvanized
steel during 1987 frequently exceeded capacity, fueling
higher import prices.
After falling precipitously in 1986, imported tin prices
rose 15.3 percent during 1987. Lower 1986 prices had
forced the closure of many less efficient world producers,
which resulted in reduced capacity. Lower production
and the renewed health of the U.S. steel industry were the
primary reasons for higher prices of imported tin during
the year.
After years of relative stability, the index for iron and
steel, which represents 3 percent of U.S. imports, rose
steadily throughout 1987. The 17.2-percent advance in
prices was largely a reflection of the weaker dollar.
Foreign exporters lowered prices only 0.7 percent in
foreign currency terms during the year, allowing nearly
all of the dollar’s fall to be passed through in the form of
sharply higher U.S. import prices. (See chart 6.) Stronger
demand, continued enforcement of the voluntary restraint
agreements negotiated with foreign governments, and
higher raw materials costs also contributed to the rise in
imported steel prices during 1987. These factors led to a
fourth-quarter price rise of 5.1 percent, the largest single
quarterly increase since 1984. All major subcategories
experienced price gains including: pig iron (19.3 per­
cent); bars, rods, and angles (12.4 percent); plates and
sheets (16.9 percent); hoop and strip (14.5 per­
cent); wire (5.3 percent); and tubes, pipes, and fittings
(19.7 percent). As a result of higher costs for imports,
domestic prices of many steel products were actually
lower than the prices of imports for the first time in
several years.
Higher import prices during 1987 also reflected the
continued decline of the dollar vis-a-vis the currencies of
major steel-exporting countries, including Japan and
West Germany. Higher import prices for products such as
steel plates and sheets, which tend to originate in these
countries, can be directly related to the fall in the dollar.
Japan was especially hard hit by the dollar’s decline as
approximately 30 percent of Japanese steel output is
directed toward the export market, and 25 percent is
indirectly exported in the form of automobiles and
machinery.80 Because the dollar’s fall made foreign steel
less competitive on domestic markets, U.S. producers
were able to regain some of the market share lost since
1980.
Demand also played a role in the advance of the index
for iron and steel. During a typical year, steel orders
slacken and backlogs are low by summer; however,
during mid-1987, new orders were 24 percent higher and
unfilled orders were 35 percent higher than 1986 levels. In
response, delivery dates were stretched to the fourth
quarter, and, in some instances, duplicate orders were
placed with more than one steelmaker in order to ensure
supply.81 Fearing the market strength was temporary,

16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

domestic steelmakers were reluctant to reopen marginal
plants because of the substantial cost. The temporary
shutdown of some facilities for repair, and the slow return
to the market of the largest U.S. steelmaker after a 6month strike, also hampered domestic steel production
during the year.
Along with the domestic supply shortfalls, import
volumes also were lower due to the impact of voluntary
restraint agreements. These arrangements are negotiated
bilaterally and allow imports based on a percentage of
forecast consumption. Because consumption was ex­
pected to decrease during 1987, allowable imports were
reduced as well.82 The goal for 1987 was to reduce
imports of finished steel from 26 percent to 20 percent of
the U.S. market.83 Voluntary restraint agreements were
especially effective in reducing import quantity of steel
wire, which fell 7 percent during the year. The decrease in
shipments, combined with the lower dollar, led to a 12percent rise in the index for imported wire.
Although import volumes fell during the year, import
penetration remained high at approximately 22.5 percent,
or 2 percent above the target of the administration’s
import restraint program. This was primarily due to
surging imports from countries not covered by a volun­
tary restraint agreement, including Canada, Turkey,
Argentina, and Sweden.84
Rising raw materials costs also helped bring about the
advance in the index during 1987. This was especially true
for imported hoop and strip, for which prices increased
14.5 percent during the year as a result of rising
worldwide scrap costs.
The dollar’s large appreciation between 1980 and 1985
also indirectly affected the price and market share of
imported steel during 1987. During those 5 years, the
dollar’s appreciation allowed foreign sellers to undercut
the prices of rival U.S. firms in domestic markets. Many
U.S. producers were driven out of the market, and
domestic capacity fell 27 percent between 1982 and 1987.
During 1987, the dollar’s decline forced many foreign
exporters to raise prices; however, the ability of U.S.
manufacturers to exploit the market was hampered by
capacity limitations. Ultimately, this structural change
allowed foreign producers more freedom to raise export
prices because of insufficient U.S. competition.
Factors contributing to the rise in imported steel prices
during the year were numerous. In turn, these price
increases allowed many domestic producers to expand
sales to both American, and to a small extent, foreign
purchasers. However, export activity was limited in
some cases by capacity constraints and strong domestic
demand. A positive fourth-quarter sign was an announce­
ment by u sx Corp. that it was reopening its export
division, which has been largely dormant since 1984.85

Machinery and transport equipment.
The import price
index for machinery and transport equipment, which
accounts for approximately one-quarter of the all-import
index, advanced 7.7 percent in 1987. This was the third
consecutive year of higher prices. All eight product
categories were up, with the smallest increase at 3.6
percent and the largest at 16.7 percent. The main movers
of the index were specialized industrial machinery,
general industrial machinery, electrical machinery and
equipment, and road vehicles and parts.
Imported road vehicles and parts, which account for
42.8 percent of the machinery and transport index, rose
6.4 percent in 1987. This followed a 13.1-percent advance
in 1986. The smaller increase was largely attributable to a
slack automobile market in the United States. Automo­
biles account for approximately two-thirds of the product
category, and despite the continued decline of the dollar,
imported automobile prices rose only 4.3 percent—the
smallest increase in 3 years.
The relatively modest increase in imported car prices
was accomplished while maintaining profitability, albeit
at narrower margins, largely due to the apparent ability of
Japanese exporters to cut costs in order to maintain
market shares. For example, Toyota reduced costs by
close to 160 billion yen during the fiscal year ended June
30, 1987.86 Toyota’s cost-cutting measures included re­
ducing the number of manufacturing stations on assembly
lines, giving only modest annual wage increases to labor,
enforcing a Saturday-to-Wednesday workweek at some
factories to take advantage of cheaper weekend electricity
rates, and getting agreements on price reductions from
subcontractors who supply components.
Oversupply characterized the domestic automobile
market in 1987, as both domestic and import inventories
were at their highest levels in years.87 Unit sales in the
United States were below 1986 levels by 10.7 percent.
Both domestic and import car sales fell, the former by
13.8 percent and the latter by 2.8 percent.88 Market
shrinkage allowed the share for imports to increase from
28.3 percent in 1986 to an unprecedented 31.1 percent last
year. Japan’s market share edged up to 21.3 percent from

20.7 percent in 1986 despite a drop in sales of 190,819
units.89
Falling unit sales were not a uniform occurrence among
importers. For example, Hyundai’s sales rose 56.1 percent
(moving the company from the sixth to the fourth largest
im porter); Yugo, 35.7 percent; and Acura, 107.1
percent.90
The Japanese may have found that building plants in
the United States dampens pressure on them to limit auto
exports to this country. However, the current high value
of the yen has also proven it to be an efficient cost-cutting
measure. In fact, Japanese auto producers located in the
United States will be exporting autos to Japan later in
1988. Sales from this transplanted production were
543,884 units in 1987, up 57.2 percent from 1986, while
the market share rose from 3.0 to 5.3 percent. Japanese
companies accounted for 88.8 percent of this type of
production in 1987. In addition, for the first time,
American Honda Motor Co.’s U.S. sales in 1987 actually
exceeded exports to the United States by Honda Motor
Co. Ltd. (the manufacturer located in Japan).91
Specialized industrial machinery prices advanced 13.1
percent. They were led by prices for textile machinery and
parts, which rose 19.3 percent. European and Japanese
exporters have acquired significant power in the U.S.
market due to their superior development and commer­
cialization of technological advances in most types of
textile machinery.92 This has enabled them to pass along a
large part of the exchange rate adjustment to U.S.
importers, as evidenced by the sharply higher dollar
prices.
Textile machinery imports increased 22 percent in
1987, to over $1.1 billion. The leading importers were all
countries with strong currencies: West Germany (41
percent), Switzerland (16 percent), Japan (15 percent),
Italy (8 percent), and France (4 percent). Imports
accounted for 59 percent of new supplies in the United
States in 1987, up 50 percent from 1986 levels.93
General industrial machinery import prices increased
13.0 percent on the strength of first- and fourth-quarter
price increases of over 5 percent.
□

A c kn o w le d g m e n t:
The following economists in the Bureau’s
Division of International Prices assisted in the analysis of the various
indexes discussed in this article: Francis Boyce, Susan Chen, Thomas
Connor, Joshua Girelber, Gerald Gribbons, Daniel McCarthy,
Elizabeth McGregor, David Marshall, James Piedmont, Jeanne Schillaci, Thomas Sherman, and Paul Washburn. We gratefully acknowledge
the help of Brian Costello in the preparation of this article.

seasonally adjusted. Price indexes are weighted by the value of trade in
1980. Beginning with the first-quarter 1988 release in April, the i p p
indexes will shift to 1985 weights. In addition, the indexes will be
recalculated from 1985 forward using the new weights. B L S also
publishes these series by Standard Industrial Classification and end-use
classifications.

'Price developments discussed in this article are based on data from
the b l s International Price Program ( i p p ) . That program produces
import and export price indexes based on the Standard Industrial Trade
Classification scheme. Both indexes use a modified Laspeyres formula.
Price data are collected for more than 22,000 products, and are not

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

2See “Foreign Exchange Rates,” F e d e r a l R e s e r v e S ta t is tic a l R e le a s e ,
G.5(405), Feb. 27, 1985, and Feb. 28, 1985. Figures are based on
monthly averages for February 1987 and February 1985.
3J. A. Cacy and Richard Roberts, “The U.S. Economy in 1987 and
1988,” E c o n o m ic R e v ie w (Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City),
December 1987, p. 6.

17

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

4See “Foreign Exchange Rates,” F e d e r a l R e s e r v e
H .10(512), Oct. 23, 1987, and Dec. 28, 1987.

•

1987 Export and Import Prices

S ta t is tic a l R e le a s e ,

5Robert Solomon, “Don’t Stabilize the Dollar Yet,”
Dec. 21, 1987, p. 8A.

The Jou rn a l o f

34“World pulp demand expected to push against limits of supply in
1988,” P u lp & P a p e r W eek , Feb. 15, 1988, pp. 4-5.
35C o r r u g a te d & S o li d F ib re P r o d u c ts S ta tis tic s ,

Fibre Box Association,

C o m m e rc e ,

December 1987.

6Walter S. Mossberg, “Group of Seven Declares the Dollar Dropped
Enough, May Intervene,” T h e W a ll S tr e e t J o u r n a l, Dec. 23, 1987, p. 3.

361 9 8 8 U n ite d S ta t e s I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k (U.S. Department of Com­
merce, International Trade Administration, January 1988), p. 12-1.

7Tom Raum, “Increase in Exports Helps Narrow Fourth-Quarter
U.S. Trade Deficit,” T h e W a sh in g to n P ost, Feb. 25, 1988, p. 81.

37“Chemicals: A Changing Alchemy,”
p. 76.

8This association includes Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador,
Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Argentina.
’“Highlights of U.S. Export and Import Trade,” FT-990 (U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, forthcoming).
10Robert Kuttner, “The Theory Gap on the Trade Gap,”
Y o r k T im es, Jan. 17, 1988, p. 28.

12Kuttner, “The Theory Gap,” p. 28.
13Rudiger W. Dornbusch, “The Dollar: How Much Further Depreci­
ation Do We Need?” E c o n o m ic R e v ie w (Federal Reserve Bank of
Atlanta), September-October 1987, p. 6.
14Mark Drabenstott and Alan Barkema, “U.S. Agriculture on the
Mend,” E c o n o m ic R e v ie w , December 1987, p. 28.
The Jou rn al o f

C om m erce,

17Larry Van Meir, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service, Crops Branch, Washington DC, interview, Feb. 29,
1988.
18Sarah Schwartz, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Re­
search Service, interview, Feb. 12, 1988.
1’Larry Van Meir.
20Larry Van Meir.

39Amal Kumar Naj, “Chemical Firms Resist Lures to Expand,”
Jan. 12, 1988, p. 6.

The

W a ll S tr e e t J o u r n a l,

40“Chemicals: A Changing Alchemy,” p. 76.
41I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k , pp. 12-1 and 12-2; data from U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, and International Trade Adminis­
tration.

42Charles Thurston, “Chemicals To See Some Gain From Decrease In
Oil Prices,” T h e J o u r n a l o f C o m m e r c e , Dec. 28, 1987, p. 5a.
43Naj, “Chemical Firms,” p. 6.
44Karen Blumenthal, “Plastics Field Rebound on New Demand,
Lower Oil Prices and The Weaker Dollar,” T h e W a ll S tr e e t J o u r n a l,
July 7, 1987, p. 6.
43I b id .
46I b id .

4iI b id ,

p. 6-4.

49I b id ,

p. 6-4.

50I b id ,

p. 6-4.

51M in e r a l

p. 15-4.

C o m m o d itie s S u m m a r y 1 9 8 8 ,

52I b id ,

p. 44.

53I b id ,

p. 109.

p. 44.

54I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k (U.S. Department of Commerce, International
Trade Administration, January 1988), p. 24-1.

2'Drabenstott, “U.S. Agriculture,” p. 28.
T h e J o u r n a l O f C o m m e rc e ,

23“U.S. Exports Strong in Third Quarter,”
Dec. 10, 1987, insert.

R a n d o m L e n g th s E x p o rt,

24“Ponderosa Pine Exports to Japan Grow,” R a n d o m L e n g th s E x p o rt,
Sept. 3. 1987, p. 1; and “B.C. Raises Stumpage Fees, Taxes Log
Exports,” R a n d o m L e n g th s E x p o r t, Sept. 17, 1987, p. 1.
25“U.S., Canadian Exports Set Records in 1987,”
Mar. 17, 1988, p. 1.

R a n d o m L e n g th s

26Hi Howard, “Demand challenges ferrous scrap industry,” A m e r ic a n
Jan. 13, 1988, p. 12A.

M e t a l M a r k e t,

27Bureau of the Mines, M in e r a l C o m m o d ity
Department of the Interior, 1988), p. 82.

S u m m a r ie s 1 9 8 8

(U.S.

28Howard, “Demand challenges,” p. 13A.
29John Tunney, “Copper scrap’s heady pace,”
M a r k e t, Jan. 13, 1988, p. 18A.
30“Copper scrap exports reported,” A m e r ic a n
1988, p. 9.

33I b id ,

p. 34-1.

36I b id ,

p. 34-2.

57Matthew Cain, “ p c Industry Seen Growing 20% in ’88,” E le c tr o n ic
N e w s, Jan. 4, 1988, p. 14.
58I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k , p. 34-2; and Brian Santo, “Gear Makers’ ShortTerm Hopes High But 2d Half Is Uncertain,” E le c tr o n ic N e w s, Jan. 4,
1988, p. 22.
59I n d u s tr i a l

E x p o rt,

A m e r ic a n

M e t a l M a r k e t,

M e ta l

32“Dollar Drop Strains U.S. Output Capacity,” J o u r n a l o f C o m m e rc e ,
Dec. 22, 1987, p. 5A.
33W o r ld C o tto n S itu a tio n , FC1-88 (U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Foreign Agricultural Service, January 1988), p. 6.

O u tlo o k ,

p. 34-6.

60Stuart Auerbach, “Japan Believed Acting to Block Chips,”
Jan. 30, 1988, p. D12.

The

W a sh in g to n P o st,

61Richard Lawerence, “U.S. Stands To Cut Trade Deficit Faster If Oil
Prices Fall,” T h e J o u r n a l o f C o m m e r c e , Dec. 29, 1987, p. 5A.
62M o n th ly E n e r g y R e v ie w , d o e / e i a -0 0 3 5 (U.S. Department of
Energy, Energy Information Agency, November 1987), p. 38.
63I n d u s tr i a l

Jan., 15,

31Tunney, “Copper scrap’s,” p. 19A.


18
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

38“Chemicals: A Changing Alchemy,” p. 76.

47I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

16Drabenstott, “U.S. Agriculture,” p. 28.

22“U.S. Farmers Move Into Black in ’87,”
Dec. 12, 1987, p. 3a.

May 16, 1987,

The N ew

n See “Foreign Exchange Rates,” F e d e r a l R e s e r v e S ta t is tic a l R e le a s e ,
G.5(405), Dec. 31, 1987. Figures are based on monthly averages for
December 1986 and December 1987.

15“Japan is Top Market for U.S. Farm Exports,”
Jan. 14, 1988, p. 5a.

T h e E c o n o m is t,

O u tlo o k ,

p. 10-2.

64M o n th ly E n e r g y R e v ie w ,
63I b id ,

November 1987, p. 113.

p. 38.

66P e tr o le u m S u p p ly M o n th ly , d o e - e i a -0 1 0 9 (U.S. Department of
Energy, Energy Information Agency, July 1987), p. 3.
67P e tr o le u m I n te llig e n c e W e e k ly
68M o n th ly E n e r g y R e v ie w ,

(New York, forthcoming).

November 1987, p. 38.

69“Oil Dependency to be Investigated,”
Dec. 28, 1987, p. 6b.
70M o n th ly E n e r g y R ev ie w ,

T h e J o u r n a l O f C o m m e rc e ,

n I b id ,

p. 20-3.

83Ernest Beasley, “Big Steel’s Push to Extend Quotas Draws Debate,”
T h e W a ll S tr e e t J o u r n a l, Dec. 30, 1988, p. 2.

November 1987, p. 38.

71William Power and James Tanner, “Oil Prices Soar on Word of
Cuts; Analysts Say Reports are Premature,” T h e W a ll S tr e e t
J o u r n a l, Jan. 3, 1988, p. 3.
o pec

84I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

p. 20-3.

85Cindy Skrzycki, “usx Firing Up Export Division As Dollar Falls,”
Dec. 15, 1987, Sec. B, p. 3.

T h e W a sh in g to n P o st,

72James Tanner,

“

Output Falls as Members Show Discipline,”
Jan. 20, 1988, p. 4.

o pec

T h e W a ll S tr e e t J o u r n a l,
73I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

p. 10-3.

87“Car Supply Still a Problem Dec. 31,” W a r d 's A u to m o tiv e R e p o r ts ,
Jan. 11, 1988, p. 9; and Roger Rowand, “Imports report record
inventories,” A u to m o tiv e N e w s, Jan. 18, 1988, p. 50.

74Lawerence, “U.S. Stands,” p. 5a.
75N a tu r a l G a s M o n th ly ,
76I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,
11I b id ,

December 1987.

88Joseph Bohn and Philly Murtha, “87 sales off 7% at 15.2 million;
trucks set record, cars decline”, A u to m o tiv e N ew s, Jan. 11, 1988, p. 50.

p. 10-3.

p. 21-11.

78M in e r a l C o m m o d ity S u m m a r ie s 1 9 8 8 ,
79I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

80“Japan’s Steelmakers Recast Themselves,”
1987, p. 59.


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

89“Imports Post Second-Best Sales in 1987, But Grab Record 31.1%
Share, W a r d 's A u to m o tiv e R e p o r ts , Jan. 11, 1988, p. 9.

p. 10.

90Bohn, “87 sales off,” p. 50.

p. 21-10.

81I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k , p. 20-2.

86John Burgess and Fred Hiatt, “Toyota Finds Ways to Hold Down
Prices,” T h e W a sh in g to n P o st, Feb. 16, 1988, p. A4.

T h e E c o n o m is t,

Aug. 29,

91I b id .
92I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

p. 25-8.

93I b id , p. 25-10.

19

Domestic price rise during 1987
reflects swing of energy prices
Impact o f volatile energy components
again evident in Consumer Price Index
and Producer Price Index, with increase
in c p i returning to the 4-percent range,
compared with a 1.1-percent rise in 1986
C r a ig H o w e l l , A n d r e w C l e m ,
a n d

R o b e r t A . K u e m m e r l in g

U.S. inflation in 1987 accelerated from its lowest level in
more than 20 years, largely reflecting the partial rebound
in energy prices. The Consumer Price Index ( c p i ) rose 4.4
percent during the 12-month period ended in December.
This compared with an energy-restrained 1.1-percent rise
in 1986 and increases of about 4 percent in each of the
preceding 4 years. The turnaround in energy prices—
particularly in the first half of the year—was almost
entirely responsible for the acceleration in the overall
index in 1987. Excluding energy, the c p i increased 4.1
percent during the year, after advancing 3.8 percent in
1986.
In 1987, the food component rose somewhat less than
in 1986, despite the sharp increase in fruit and vegetable
prices. The indexes for shelter and all items excluding
food, shelter, and energy each rose slightly more than in
1986. Within the latter group, however, price movements
for commodities and services differed substantially from
1986. The other commodities component, in part reflect­
ing the declining value of the dollar in international
markets, accelerated in 1987. Prices for clothing, wine,
and entertainment commodities were sharply higher.
Charges for other services, however, slowed in 1987,
particularly those for medical care and transportation
services. (See table 1.)
Producer prices turned up across a broad front during
1987. The Finished Goods Price Index increased 2.1
percent from December 1986 to December 1987, follow­
ing a 2.3-percent decline in 1986 and a 1.8-percent
increase in 1985. The index level in December 1987 was

Craig Howell, Andrew Clem, and Robert A. Kuemmerling are
economists in the Office of Prices and Living Conditions, Bureau of
Labor Statistics. They were assisted by Roger Burns, an economist in the
same office.

20
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

almost the same as it had been in December 1985. Prices
for intermediate goods moved up 5.5 percent over the
year, in the wake of a 4.4-percent drop in 1986 and a
nominal decline in 1985. In contrast to substantial
decreases in 1986 (8.9 percent) and 1985 (5.6 percent), the
Crude Goods Price Index climbed 8.8 percent in 1987.
Energy prices, which had spearheaded the 1986 de­
clines, rebounded somewhat in 1987, contributing to the
upturn at each stage of processing. Food price index
movements were generally moderate. The behavior of
price indexes for goods except food and energy was
mixed. At the crude material level, prices for sensitive
industrial materials surged 22.4 percent. Prices for inter­
mediate industrial materials advanced 5.3 percent after 2
years of virtually no change. Yet prices of finished goods
other than foods and energy rose only 2.1 percent, even
less than in either 1985 or 1986, in large part because of a
downturn in the motor vehicles price index.

Consumer spending slows
The general economic expansion that had begun when
the most recent recession ended in late 1982 completed its
fifth year in 1987, but with some signs of faltering.
Consumer expenditures, which had fueled the recovery
for some time, weakened as the year progressed, resulting
in some excessive inventory accumulation by retailers.
Business expenditures on capital goods generally enjoyed
another good year in the wake of some broad 1986
changes in tax laws affecting investment spending, but
also exhibited some weakness. The pace of residentialhousing construction was somewhat slower than in other
recent years, in part because of a moderate climb in
mortgage interest rates. The October stock market crash,
while further heightening concerns about the durability of

Table 1. Percentage changes for major categories of the
Consumer Price Index and Producer Price Index, 1983-871
Index

1983

1984

1986

1987

All ite m s ......................................................
E n e rg y......................................................
Energy com m odities.............................
Energy services.....................................

3.8
- .5
-3 .2
4.1

3.9
.2
-1 .8
3.5

3.8
1.1
1.8 -1 9 .7
3.4 -3 0 .5
-.6
-3 .3

4.4
8.2
17.8
.2

All items less ene rg y.................................
Food..........................................................
S h e lte r.....................................................

4.5
2.7
4.7

4.4
3.8
5.2

4.0
2.6
6.0

3.8
3.8
4.6

4.1
3.5
4.8

All items less food, shelter, and energy...
Other com m odities.................................
Other services.........................................

5.0
5.0
4.9

4.3
3.1
6.0

3.7
2.2
5.4

3.3
1.4
5.6

3.8
3.5
4.9

.6
2.3
-9 .2
1.9

1.7
3.5
-4 .2
2.0

1.8
-2 .3
.6
2.8
- .2 -38.1
2.7
2.7

2.1
- .3
10.3
2.1

1.8
9.3
-5 .5

1.4
-5 .4
-.1

-.3
-4 .2
-.8

-4 .4
-.5
-2 9 .0

5.5
5.4
9.4

2.9

2.1

-.1

.1

5.3

4.7
7.9
-4 .7
15.5

-1 .6
-1 .2
-1 .2
-3 .4

-5 .6
-6 .4
-4 .9
-4 .3

-8 .9
-1 .5
-2 7 .6
1.8

8.8
1.7
10.5
22.4

1985

C o n s u m e r P r ic e I n d e x

P r o d u c e r P r ic e In d e x

Finished goods...........................................
Finished consumer foods.......................
Finished energy goods...........................
Finished goods less food and energy ...
Intermediate materials, supplies,
and com ponents..................................
Intermediate foods and fe e d s ...............
Intermediate energy goods.....................
Intermediate materials less food
and e n e rg y............................................
Crude materials for further processing....
Foodstuffs and fee d stu ffs......................
Crude energy m aterials..........................
Crude nonfood materials less energy ...

'Calculated on a December-to-December basis.

the expansion, did not seem to curtail either consumer or
capital goods demand at yearend.
As in other recent years, developments in international
currency and trade markets had a complex effect on the
American economy and the behavior of domestic pro­
ducer prices. The value of the U.S. dollar fell rapidly
through most of the year, tending to lower prices of
American goods sold in other countries and to raise prices
of imported goods. Significantly improved export demand
for many kinds of U.S.-made products was a major factor
in boosting the capacity utilization rate in manufacturing
to its highest level since the early 1980’s and in pushing
the unemployment rate even lower. At the same time,
higher prices for foreign-made goods generally failed to
dampen consumer demand for imported products with a
reputation for value and quality.
But despite rising exports and advances in prices of
competitive imported goods, domestic producers of many
finished goods did not appear to raise their own output
prices very much, in part because they hoped to keep or
recapture a greater market share. For similar reasons,
some output prices did not seem to reflect the full pass­
through of higher costs for materials, whether domestic
or imported.

CONSUM ER PRICES
Food.
Retail food prices rose 3.5 percent in 1987, after
increasing 3.8 percent in 1986. Price advances in the
second half were considerably less than in the prior 12

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

months. In 1986, a severe spring drought in the Southeast
led to higher prices for fresh fruits and vegetables, pork,
poultry, and eggs. By the end of 1987, prices for the latter
three groups were below their levels of a year earlier. The
index for fruits and vegetables, however, rose 12.8
percent. Heavy demand from food processors led to
higher prices for citrus fruits. Fresh vegetable prices
surged, typically because of the vagaries of the weather. In
addition, lettuce prices more than doubled late in the year
after a virus spread by the sweet potato white fly seriously
damaged the winter lettuce crop.
The index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs increased
1.1 percent in 1987, as advances in prices for beef and veal
and for fish and seafood—6.7 percent and 10 percent—
were partly offset by the declines in pork, poultry, and egg
prices. These declines largely reflected the return to pre­
drought supply levels.
Other grocery food groups contributing to deceleration
in the food index were dairy products and nonalcoholic
beverages, especially coffee—the largest U.S. agricultural
import—which continued to be affected by the release of
stocks built up earlier in the decade. The index for cereal
and bakery products rose 4.1 percent, while other
prepared foods rose 4.2 percent. Prices for food away
from home increased 3.7 percent.
Shelter.
Shelter costs rose 4.8 percent in 1987, com­
pared with a 4.6-percent increase in 1986. Despite the
apparent similarity, the composition of the change was
different. A 4.0-percent increase in house and apartment
rents followed a 5.0-percent rise in 1986 and was the
smallest annual increase since 1972. Conversely, the index
for owners’ equivalent rent advanced 5.3 percent in 1987,
up from 4.6 percent in 1986. The homeowner and renter
index for maintenance and repair costs increased 3.3
percent in 1987, compared with 1.8 percent in 1986. The
acceleration was largely the result of increased charges for
services as prices for maintenance and repair commodities
rose at about the same rate as in 1986.
Energy.
The energy component of the c p i , which had
declined 19.7 percent in 1986, partially rebounded in
1987, advancing 8.2 percent. In 1986, a glut of crude oil
resulted when production quotas were formally aban­
doned by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries ( o p e c ) . However, during the winter of 1986,
o p e c tentatively managed to restore control, and, with
the backdrop of hostilities in the Persian Gulf, oil prices
rose sharply in the first quarter of 1987.
The 8.2-percent rise in the energy index in 1987 was its
largest advance since 1981. Leading the way were items
whose price fluctuations closely paralleled those of crude
oil. Fuel oil prices surged 17.9 percent during 1987, while
gasoline prices were up 18.6 percent. However, by
yearend the indexes for both fuel oil and gasoline
21

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Producer and Consumer Prices in 1987

remained considerably below their peak levels in early
1981. Energy services (gas and electricity) also turned
upward, but only modestly, advancing 0.2 percent in 1987
after declining 3.3 percent last year. Charges for electric­
ity rose 1.8 percent, but were nearly offset by a 2.9percent decline in charges for natural gas.
Services excluding shelter and energy.
For each of the 5
years prior to 1987, prices for services excluding shelter
and energy rose substantially more than the average for
all items. (See table 2.) During 1987, the 4.3-percent
increase in this category was about the same as the
advance in the overall c p i . The only significant decline in
the services less shelter and energy component was
registered by long distance telephone rates. Charges for
interstate toll calls fell 12.4 percent in 1987 and were 26.9
percent below their level of December 1983, the last
month preceding deregulation of the industry. This drop,
coupled with a 3.0-percent decline in intrastate toll calls,
was sharp enough to pull the yearend telephone services
index down 1.3 percent, despite a 3.3-percent increase for
local telephone charges.
Charges for several services components, although
outpacing the overall c p i , slowed significantly in 1987.
Automobile insurance charges increased 5.8 percent after
double-digit increases in each of the previous 2 years. A
Table 2.

5.6-percent advance in the cost of medical care services
followed a 7.9-percent rise in 1986 and was the smallest
increase in 15 years.
A few service categories experienced price acceleration
in 1987. Auto finance charges were up 5.9 percent as a
result of the expiration of several manufacturer incentive
plans. Refuse collection charges increased at double-digit
rates because of the apparent scarcity of landfill sites
around major metropolitan areas. And the cable TV
index rose 9.5 percent reflecting deregulation of the cable
industry, which allowed for increases in both periodic and
installation charges.
Commodities less food and energy.
Price movements
accelerated in 1987 for several groups of commodities
with above-average representation of imports in market
sales, reflecting the declining value of the dollar. (See
table 3.) For example, wine at home and entertainment
commodities such as toys, sport vehicles, and photo­
graphic supplies all rose substantially more in 1987 than
in 1986. In addition, prices for apparel commodities
moved up 4.9 percent in 1987, the largest increase since
1980. Significantly, however, a relatively high proportion
of clothing imports were from the Newly Industrializing
Countries of the Pacific Rim. The currencies of these
countries traditionally have been pegged to the U.S.

Price changes for consumer services other than shelter and energy, December 1982-December 1987
Percent change
December
1982 to
December
1983

December
1983 to
December
1984

December
1984 to
December
1985

December
1985 to
December
1986

December
1986 to
December
1987

Services excluding shelter and e n e rg y .........................................................................

4.9

6.0

5.4

5.6

4.3

Telephone:
Local c h a rg e s ...........................................................................................................
Interstate toll c a lls ....................................................................................................
Intrastate toll c a lls ....................................................................................................
Water and sewerage maintenance............................................................................
Cable television...........................................................................................................
Refuse collection.........................................................................................................
P o sta g e ........................................................................................................................
Appliance and furniture repair....................................................................................
Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and drycleaning ..............................
Gardening and other household services.................................................................

3.2
1.4
7.4
8.5
(1)
0)
.0
4.9
6.2
0)

17.1
-4 .3
3.7
5.5
6.1
3.2
.0
5.6
4.9
(1)

8.9
-3 .8
.5
5.5
6.0
6.4
10.2
3.1
7.2
0)

7.1
-9 .5
.4
5.4
3.8
9.4
.0
2.6
3.2
(D

3.3
-1 2 .4
-3 .0
5.2
9.5
10.2
.0
3.1
0)
4.9

Consumer service category

Apparel services..........................................................................................................

5.0

4.9

4.9

3.9

3.9

Automobile maintenance and re p a ir.........................................................................
Automobile insurance ................................................................................................
Automobile finance charges.......................................................................................
Automobile registration, licensing, and inspection fe e s .........................................
Other automobile related fe e s ...................................................................................
Airline fa re s..................................................................................................................
Other intercity public transportation..........................................................................
Intracity public transportation ....................................................................................

3.8
9.1
-7 .9
7.8
3.5
4.8
7.0
2.1

3.2
7.9
6.8
8.5
5.8
6.5
10.7
5.9

3.3
12.0
-8 .3
2.1
4.2
6.3
6.4
3.6

3.7
11.8
-7 .3
3.4
10.0
5.3
4.9
6.8

3.8
5.8
5.9
1.7
5.2
1.6
2.0
2.4

Professional medical services ...................................................................................
Hospital and related services ....................................................................................

7.6
10.4

6.3
7.6

6.5
5.0

6.3
7.2

6.3
7.0

Entertainment services...............................................................................................

5.4

5.7

4.4

5.4

4.3

Personal care se rvice s...............................................................................................
Tuition and other school fees ....................................................................................
Personal expenses (legal, financial, and funeral)....................................................

3.6
9.4
12.2

4.9
10.1
6.5

3.6
8.4
6.1

2.6
7.9
9.0

3.8
7.6
4.4

’ Data not available.


22
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

dollar, and, unlike the currencies of Japan and the nations
of Western Europe, have only recently been allowed to
appreciate. Another import-sensitive commodity—new
cars—experienced a smaller increase in prices in 1987,
rising only 1.8 percent after climbing 5.9 percent in 1986.
The price behavior of automobiles is an example of
market conditions vitiating the effects of exchange rate
movements. New car sales consistently trailed the prior
year’s levels and, combined with high inventories of
unsold vehicles, led to widespread use of manufacturer
and dealer incentives.
Although prices of imported cars increased more than
those of their domestic counterparts, the rise was below
expectations based on the appreciation of the exporters’
currencies. There are several possible explanations. First,
foreign car manufacturers might be willing in the short
run to sacrifice profit margins rather than reduce their
market share. Second, there was evidence that dealers,
who in the past added substantial surcharges to the
sticker price of imports in short supply, were cutting or
eliminating entirely these “dealer markups.” Finally, the
determination of exactly what is or is not an imported
vehicle was becoming blurred as an increasingly large
num ber of “ foreign” m odels were m anufactured
domestically.
Prices also accelerated for two additional commodity
groups that are not directly sensitive to imports. Used car
prices rose a brisk 8.9 percent because the weakness in
new car sales reduced the supply of trade-ins. And the
index for medical care commodities rose 7.1 percent in
1987, compared with a 6.8-percent increase in 1986.

PRODUCER PRICES
Finished goods
Energy.
After slumping 38.0 percent in 1986, the index
for finished energy goods rose 10.2 percent in 1987. This
reflected a similar upturn in crude petroleum prices in
both domestic and world markets. Price indexes for
gasoline and home heating oil each climbed more than 20
percent, after plunging almost 50 percent the year before.
Natural gas did not share in the 1987 price resurgence,
however, falling about 4 percent in the wake of a 16.7percent decrease in 1986 and a 7.8-percent drop in 1985.
Other consumer goods.
Prices received by domestic
producers of consumer goods other than foods and energy
moved up 2.6 percent, following a 3.0-percent increase
during 1986. This index would have accelerated some­
what had it not been for a downturn in the passenger cars
index. Prices for a number of goods tended to rise more
rapidly in the second half than in the first half.
The new car price index dropped 3.1 percent in 1987, in
contrast to its 6.5-percent climb a year before. Imports
commanded more than 30 percent of the new car market,

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

but sales of domestic automobiles retreated somewhat
after several strong years. Car sales had been unusually
brisk in the second half of 1986, because of both attractive
factory-subsidized finance programs and changes in
Federal income tax laws scheduled to take effect in 1987.
As a result, demand for cars was sluggish in early 1987,
and incentive programs later in the year had to be
generous to hold down dealer inventories. Even with
higher prices of many foreign-made models because of the
reduced value of the dollar and with escalating costs of
some materials such as copper and plastics, American car
manufacturers minimized their own price increases to
improve their competitive stand.
Prices for prescription and over-the-counter pharma­
ceutical preparations continued to advance rapidly in
1987 (9.3 and 4.8 percent); these increases were partly
attributed by manufacturers to the continued substantial
rise in research and development costs associated with
bringing new drugs onto the market. Increases in gold and
silver prices were reflected in higher prices for precious
metal jewelry. The index for tobacco products also moved
up sharply, partly to respond to stronger export demand
but also to boost profit margins in the face of several years
of falling domestic sales. Increased costs for stainless steel
and silver contributed to the substantial advance in
household flatware prices. Producer prices for many
kinds of apparel rose more than in 1986, although most of
the 1987 advances were still modest.
Capital equipment.
The Producer Price Index for
capital equipment edged up 1.3 percent for the 12 months
ended in December 1987, following a 2.1-percent rise in
1986 and a 2.7-percent increase in 1985. As with
consumer goods, indexes for motor vehicles played a key
role in restraining inflation in the capital goods sector in
1987. Prices received by manufacturers of heavy trucks
dropped 2.7 percent after a 3.4-percent advance a year
before, while the light trucks index retreated from a 3.6percent advance in 1986 to a 0.5-percent decline a year
later. Prices for most other kinds of capital equipment
rose less than 4 percent in 1987; however, some of these
prices tended to accelerate at the end of the year in
reaction to much-improved export demand.
Capital spending in 1987, as in most other recent years,
was concentrated on equipment that would cut costs and
enhance productivity rather than on large-scale capacity
expansion projects. While this strategy limited the vulner­
ability of companies to cyclical downturns, it also limited
the ability of producers to respond to increased domestic
or foreign demand without encountering capacity re­
straints and having to boost prices as a result.
Foods. The Producer Price Index for finished consumer
foods inched down 0.3 percent in 1987, following a 2.8percent advance for 1986. As often happens, there was a
23

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Producer and Consumer Prices in 1987

Table 3. Seasonally adjusted annual rates of change for Consumer Price Indexes for certain commodities with higher-thanaverage import proportions, selected periods, December 1982-December 1987
December
1982 to
December
1983

December
1983 to
March
1985

March
1985 to
June
1986

June
1986 to
December
1986

December
1986 to
December
1987

Commodities less food and energy................................................................................

5.0

3.5

0.7

2.0

3.5

Wine at h om e ...........................................................................................................
Whiskey at hom e......................................................................................................
Alcoholic spirits, excluding whiskey ......................................................................

-1 .5
1.5
1.0

.7
1.3
2.0

2.6
7.8
9.7

-1 .3
.2
- .3

3.8
1.3
.9

TV and sound equipm ent........................................................................................
Clocks, lamps, and decor ite m s .............................................................................
Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric kitchenware....................................
Lawn equipment, power tools, other hardw are....................................................

-2 .2
2.4
1.6
2.3

-4.1
1.0
.5
1.9

-5.1
1.6
2.2
-1 .9

-3 .0
-5 .8
.9
1.8

-3 .7
1.7
1.3
1.3

Men's and boys’ a p p a re l........................................................................................
Women's and girls' apparel....................................................................................
Infants' and toddlers' apparel ................................................................................
Jewelry and luggage................................................................................................
F o o tw e ar..................................................................................................................

2.3
3.3
3.5
3.4
1.0

2.3
2.5
5.5
.3
2.0

1.3
-2 .3
4.6
-1.1
-1 .4

.9
5.0
-4 .3
5.1
3.9

3.1
5.9
2.4

New v e h ic le s ...........................................................................................................

3.3

3.0

4.1

5.8

Category

111.5

3.8
1.8

1 Jewelry only.

wide variation in price behavior among the items within
this category. Substantial decreases for pork, processed
poultry, roasted coffee, and eggs offset increases for fish,
fresh and dried vegetables, shortening and cooking oils,
and milled rice. Indexes for most other major foods rose
less than 5 percent.
Pork and processed poultry prices fell during most
months of 1987, principally because of significant in­
creases in supplies. Beef and veal index movements were
more mixed, as strong advances in the first half were
negated by later declines, resulting in a modest increase
for the year as a whole. Fish prices, however, were 18.1
percent higher at the end of 1987 than they had been a
year earlier, in part because of the continuing shift
towards fish as an alternative to red meats. Seafood
consumption reached a new high.
Extensive damage to California crops from the white
fly virus late in the year was the primary reason prices of
lettuce doubled. Bad weather contributed to price in­
creases for tomatoes, citrus fruits, and milled rice. Higher
costs for ingredients such as grains, soybeans, and sugar
were passed through in increases for such foods as
shortening and cooking oils, bakery products, confection­
ery products, and soft drinks. In contrast, excess supplies
and sluggish retail demand resulted in considerably lower
prices for roasted coffee and eggs.

Intermediate goods
The Producer Price Index for intermediate materials,
supplies, and components advanced 5.5 percent during
1987, more than recovering the 4.4-percent decline of
1986. Although the upturn was most pronounced within
the intermediate energy category, the same pattern was

24
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

observed for a number of other industrial goods, particu­
larly metals and petroleum-derived products.
Manufacturing materials.
After showing virtually no
net change over the two preceding years, the index for
intermediate goods other than food and energy advanced
5.3 percent in 1987. The strongest surge was centered in
the materials for durable manufacturing category, which
climbed 11.6 percent, after 3 consecutive years of small
declines. Unusually large increases occurred for certain
nonferrous metals, and steel prices turned up moderately.
According to Federal Reserve Board data, the rate of
capacity utilization in the primary metals sector jumped
from 72 percent to 88 percent between December 1986
and December 1987.
Primary copper prices soared 86 percent, more than in
any other year since p p i records for this commodity began
in 1947. Because of a long-term decline in demand for
copper (owing in part to fiber optics replacing copper
wire, and plastics replacing copper pipes) and excess
production by certain Third World countries, copper
prices had fallen in 6 of the 7 preceding years. This led to
a severe contraction and restructuring of the copper
industry in the United States and overseas. Smaller
output, in turn, set the stage for an upturn in prices.
Demand for copper was stronger than expected through­
out 1987; by the end of the year, tight supplies resulted in
sharp price increases. Copper and brass mill shape prices
rose 55 percent in 1987.
Similarly, aluminum prices advanced sharply during
the year; unalloyed primary aluminum advanced 33
percent, while aluminum mill shape prices rose 14
percent. As with copper, price decreases in recent years
had led producers to cut back their output. Heightened

speculative interest in aluminum contributed to the
volatility experienced during 1987.
Lead prices rose 49 percent, even more than in the year
before. The jump resulted from strong non-automotive
demand, a strike in a Canadian lead-zinc smelter, and
production problems elsewhere. Gold and silver prices
both registered increases of about 30 percent, reflecting
renewed speculative and precautionary demand respond­
ing to the drop in the exchange value of the U.S. dollar.
After a 4.2-percent decline in 1986 and a small dip in
1985, the p p i for steel mill products moved up 6.4 percent.
Sizable increases were noted for all major categories of
steel except wire and cold finished bars. Having under­
gone extensive plant modernization and closings of
obsolescent furnaces and mills in recent years, the
American steel industry emerged in a stronger competi­
tive position vis-a-vis producers in other countries. For
example, most of the steel produced in this country is now
made in mills with continuous casters, compared to less
than 30 percent 5 years earlier. Such productivity­
enhancing measures, plus the decline in the value of the
dollar, helped to regain part of the market share from
foreign producers and restored profitability to the indus­
try. Among other durable materials, hardwood lumber
prices advanced 9.0 percent, reflecting the strong demand
from Europe and Japan.
After moving down about 2 percent in both 1985 and
1986, the index for materials for nondurable manufactur­
ing advanced 7.7 percent. A major portion of the increase
resulted from petrochemicals and derivative products. In
the wake of the sharp oil price increases early in the year,
prices for benzene and toluene advanced sharply until
June, and propylene continued to rise throughout the
year. The p p i for basic organic chemicals ended the year
11.7 percent higher than in December 1986, reflecting
increases in oil costs, while inorganic chemical prices
showed little change.
Petrochemical-derived products likewise began to
move up, particularly during the second quarter. Plastic
resins prices climbed 14.4 percent over the year, and
synthetic rubber advanced 24 percent; both had declined
during the two previous years. Comparatively little effect
on synthetic fibers took place, however; prices turned up
1.9 percent after 5 consecutive years of decrease. The
continued trend in consumer preferences for clothing
made from natural fibers contributed to price increases in
cotton and wool yarns and fabrics. Aided by restrictions
on textile imports, the American textile industry was
operating at about 93 percent of capacity at the end of the
year, versus 90 percent in December 1986.
Much like textiles, the pulp and paper products
industry operated at more than 90 percent of capacity for
the entire year, resulting in significant price increases for
the second consecutive year. Paper manufacturers in this
country and abroad have been reluctant to boost capacity

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

in recent years, leading to higher prices in reaction to
improved demand as production limits are reached.
Woodpulp prices rose 16.1 percent, almost as much as in
1986. Newsprint and paperboard prices also advanced
more than 10 percent, while other grades of paper
continued to move up modestly.
Domestic and export demand for leather was strong
during 1987, and supplies of hides became tight. As a
result, prices for leather advanced 20 percent. Double­
digit increases also occurred for both phosphates and
inedible fats and oils, following declines in recent years.
Construction materials.
Although new residential con­
struction activity continued to recede gradually during
the year, prices for several types of materials showed
substantial increases. During the spring, mortgage inter­
est rates began to jump because of Federal policy moves
to bolster the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar. The rate of
private housing starts declined from about 1.8 million at
the beginning of the year to about 1.4 million at the end.
However, most of this reduction came from the multi-unit
segment of the market (which was adversely affected by
the new tax law), while single-family housing starts were
only slightly below year-earlier levels. However, nonresidential construction spending turned up slightly after a
sharp drop in the previous year.
The p p i for materials and components for construction
rose 4.3 percent, following 3 years of smaller increases.
Softwood lumber prices advanced 6.8 percent, slightly
more than in the year before, led by large increases for
southern pine. Because the slowdown in new housing
starts was centered in multi-unit structures in which less
lumber is used per unit, lumber markets were rather
stable through most of the year. Strength in the home
repair sector, construction of larger homes, and the
popularity of such amenities as wood sundecks boosted
lumber prices. Prices for both plywood and millwork
advanced moderately.
Tight supplies of copper and aluminum contributed to
the 21.7-percent jump in the index for nonferrous wire
and cable, the biggest annual increase since 1979. Higher
costs for the component resins caused the plastic con­
struction products index to climb 8.4 percent, after
declining the two previous years.
In contrast, price movements for nonmetallic minerals
were modest. Gypsum product prices fell 10.6 percent,
after a small decline in the previous year. Prices for
concrete products and insulation materials continued to
be very stable. Small upturns occurred for refractories,
asphalt roofing, and asphalt paving mixtures.
Energy.
In the wake of the record 29-percent drop of
1986, the index for intermediate energy goods rose 9.4
percent; this index was still more than one-quarter below
its peak level in 1981. Most refined petroleum fuels had
25

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Producer and Consumer Prices in 1987

fallen nearly 50 percent during the prior year; the
magnitude of the increases in 1987 was varied.
Prices for jet fuel soared more than any other interme­
diate energy product (over 40 percent), contrary to their
usual pattern of relative stability among energy products.
Number 2 diesel fuel and residual fuel prices climbed
nearly 30 percent, while liquefied petroleum gas prices
rose about 25 percent. Prices for electric power declined
slightly (as in 1986), reflecting lower costs for coal and
natural gas used for power generation.
Foods. The intermediate foods and feeds index rose 5.4
percent, the first over-the-year increase since 1983. Prices
for crude vegetable oils jumped 21.1 percent, because of
strong export demand. Similarly, demand from foreign
and domestic sources led to a 13.3-percent increase in the
prepared animal feeds index. Prices for most materials
used in food manufacturing were generally stable.

Crude goods
Following decreases in each year from 1984 through
1986, the Producer Price Index for crude materials for
further processing rose 8.8 percent during 1987. The
category for basic industrial materials showed a record
advance for 1987. Crude oil prices turned up substantially
after falling in recent years, and scrap metals and other
items surged at double-digit rates.
Basic industrial materials. The index for crude nonfood
materials other than energy advanced 22.4 percent, much
more than 1.8-percent increase of 1986, and the largest
annual advance recorded since this grouping was first
compiled in 1973. Prices for all varieties of scrap metal
soared at double-digit rates. Production cutbacks in
recent years for steel, aluminum, and copper had led to
low inventories for scrap metal (scrap in part is generated
as a by-product of metal production); increased demand
for metals during 1987 then drew up demand for scrap.
Iron and steel scrap soared 41.1 percent after a modest
increase in 1986; in addition, the falling U.S. dollar
boosted exports for ferrous scrap. Aluminum base scrap
surged 53.0 percent, and copper base scrap jumped 60.1
percent, each following a much smaller increase in 1986.
Lead scrap prices soared 61.5 percent.
Prices for logs and timber and for raw cotton turned up
sharply following declines in 1986. Logging operations
were hindered by inclement weather, thus tightening
supplies, and lumber demand associated with residential


26
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

housing rose. The rising popularity of pure cotton
clothing and higher export sales because of the low U.S.
dollar, together with falling world cotton harvests, drove
up raw cotton prices. Leaf tobacco prices also moved up
after falling in the previous year; smaller carry-in stocks
made for tighter supplies despite slightly higher produc­
tion. Cattle hide prices showed stronger advances than in
the previous year; domestic demand for leather goods was
up, demand from the Far East for cattle hides increased,
and world supplies decreased in accord with lowered
cattle slaughter rates. Prices also rose for phosphates and
domestic apparel wool. Price advances slowed for wastepaper, nonferrous metal ores, and construction sand and
gravel, however, compared to the previous year.
Energy. The crude energy materials index moved up 10.5
percent following a 27.6-percent drop in 1986. Crude
petroleum prices jumped 29.3 percent after plummeting
50.6 percent in 1986. U.S. production continued to decline
in 1987, and imports won an increased share of domestic
consumption. Prices surged in the early part of the year
after the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
set a new policy of lower production and higher prices at its
December 1986 meeting. The aggregate output quota was
cut from 17 million barrels per day to 15.8 million, and the
U.S. Producer Price Index for crude oil jumped 20 percent
in January. The effectiveness of the o p e c agreement was
short-lived, however. The December 1987 meeting of o p e c
members achieved little substantive success.
The index for natural gas dropped 4.1 percent, following
more sizable declines in 1985 and 1986. Gas consumers
continued to switch to refined petroleum products. Prices for
coal moved down nearly 5 percent, considerably more than
in either of the 2 preceding years.
Foodstuffs.
The index for crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs moved up 1.7 percent, after decreasing 1.5 percent
in 1986. Cattle prices advanced 11.3 percent, prompted by
tight supplies. A smaller world crop, together with greater
exports, pushed soybean prices up. Grain prices rose with
higher export demand, particularly from the Soviet
Union. Supply problems, owing in part to weather,
boosted prices for hay, fresh vegetables, and citrus fruits.
Prices for unprocessed fish were up substantially, while
raw cane sugar showed a small increase. In contrast,
expanded production brought price declines of 24.7
percent for hogs and 30.3 percent for chickens. Fluid milk
prices also declined.
□

The role of capital discards
in multifactor productivity measurement
Discarding o f plant and equipment
varies over the business cycle,
but new measures o f capital input
in 20 industries suggest the effect
on multifactor productivity is minor
S u s a n G. P o w e r s

Since the early 1970’s, the United States has experienced a
marked slowdown in productivity growth, in comparison
with the experience of the early postwar years.1 The
slowdown focused increased attention on long-term pro­
ductivity trends. This article examines a second pattern in
productivity growth, prevalent since World War II.
Productivity growth increased during business cycle
expansions, and decreased during downturns. The cycli­
cal pattern is illustrated in chart 1, using the Bureau of
Labor Statistics multifactor productivity measure for the
private business sector from 1948 to 1986. The multifac­
tor productivity measure is the ratio of output to
combined capital and labor inputs.2
The cyclical pattern in the multifactor productivity
measure has not been satisfactorily explained, although
various factors that may contribute to such movements
have been identified. Change in multifactor productivity
is measured as the difference between the growth rate of
output and the growth rate of labor and capital inputs.3
Growth in this measure reflects increase in output due to
factors other than growth in capital and labor inputs. One
of these factors is technical change—the increased effi­
ciency of production resulting from better management or

Susan G. Powers is an economist in the Division of Productivity
Research, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

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

organization of resources and improved technology.
However, the multifactor productivity measure also
reflects the impact on output of changes in capacity
utilization, in the composition of labor, and in economies
of scale. In addition, the measure can be affected by errors
in the measurement of output and of capital and labor
inputs.
One possible explanation for the cyclical pattern of
multifactor productivity focuses on the measurement of
capital input, specifically, the measurement of capital
discards. Capital input in production is defined as the
flow of services from the available stock of capital, which
is composed of capital assets of various vintages. The
stock of capital changes over time as a result of new
investment in capital assets, discarding of capital assets,
and decay or loss in economic value of existing capital
assets. In the b l s framework, capital stock is measured
using gross investment data and some assumptions about
how capital assets decay and when they are discarded.4
The assumption used to estimate when capital assets are
discarded does not allow for increases and decreases in
discards over the business cycle.5 However, capital
discards generally increase when the economy is experi­
encing a slowdown, and decrease when economic activity
is at a peak.
Because this fluctuation in capital discards over the
business cycle is not reflected by the capital input
27

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Capital Discards in Productivity Measurement

Chart 1. Index of multifactor productivity in the private business sector, 1948-86
Index
[1977 - 1001
106

index
[1977 - 1001

102
98
94
90

86
82
78
74
70

66
62
58

NOTE Shaded areas Indicate recessionary periods, a s designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

measure, variation in capital input over the business cycle
may be understated. The capital input measure will reflect
only cyclical movements in the gross investment series
and changes in the distribution of the average age of assets
over time. When multifactor productivity is measured
using this smooth capital input series, cyclical movements
in the output series may be more extreme than the
understated cyclical movements in capital input. The
result will be exaggerated cyclical movements in the
multifactor productivity measure.
b l s has conducted research that develops direct meas­
ures of capital discards, in order to examine whether
capital discards increase and decrease over the business
cycle, and, if so, what implications this may have for
cyclical movements in the multifactor productivity meas­
ure.6 Direct capital discard measures are developed for
each 2-digit Standard Industrial Classification (sic) man­
ufacturing industry, and for durable, nondurable, and
total manufacturing, for the period 1963-81. The capital
discard measures are constructed using data on the gross
book value of depreciable capital assets.

Gross book value measures
For a firm in a particular year, the gross book value of
capital is defined as the sum of the original purchase cost

28
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

of all existing capital assets. When a company discards
capital assets, the gross book value is reduced by the
original cost of the asset. Data on the gross book value of
capital, then, directly reflect actual capital discards as
they occur. The method used to obtain the direct
measures of discards is described below.
This research provides a sensitivity test for the impact
that an assumed smooth pattern of capital discards may
have on business cycle movements in capital input and in
multifactor productivity.7 The direct capital discard
measures are compared to the smoothed measures to
assess the implications of increases and decreases in
discards over the business cycle. The gross book value
data, which are in historical dollars, are deflated to obtain
constant-dollar gross book value measures. These gross
book value capital stock measures reflect actual move­
ments in capital discards over time and are developed for
each 2-digit sic industry for the years 1962-81.
Next, the gross book value capital stock series, which
reflect increases and decreases in discards over the
business cycle, are used to construct multifactor produc­
tivity measures for each industry for 1962-81. Finally, for
each industry, the capital discard, gross book value
capital stock, and multifactor productivity measures that
reflect actual capital discards are compared to corre­
sponding measures that reflect a static capital discard
assumption.

Measurement of capital discards
Capital may be discarded for a variety of reasons.8 The
physical condition of capital assets deteriorates over time
and as the result of wear and tear from use. The benefit to
a firm of keeping an asset in use eventually may be
eclipsed by the cost of maintaining the asset. The asset
may become obsolete, or a company may discontinue the
production of a good or service for which the asset was
required. Capital also may be discarded as the result of
accidental destruction.
Discarding an asset involves removing the asset from
useful service. A discarded asset may be physically
removed from a plant or left in place but not used. An
asset no longer in use is considered to be discarded when
the firm’s account of the value of capital assets in service
is adjusted to remove the original cost of the asset.
Capital discards can be measured using data on the
gross book value of depreciable capital assets. The gross
book value of capital for a firm in a given year is the
historical dollar value of existing capital assets. These
data reflect capital discards as they occur, because the
original cost of an asset is removed from the gross book
value when the asset is retired.
This research developed a measure of actual capital
discards by deflating historical dollar gross book value
data to obtain gross book value capital stock measures.

The gross book value capital stock measure for a given
year may be expressed as:
GBVt

=

GBVt_!

+

G It -

D It

where:
GBVt is the gross book value of capital stock in period t;
GIt is gross investment in period t; and
DIt is discards in period t.
When the expression for gross book value capital stock is
rearranged, a measure of actual capital discards can be
defined in terms of gross investment and gross book value
capital stock:
D It

=

G It -

(GBVt - GBVt_0

For the period 1963-1981, capital discards for each
industry were measured using this expression and data on
gross investment and the gross book value of capital
stock.9 Census Bureau data on new capital expenditures
were used for the gross investment series. Gross book
value capital stock measures were developed by deflating
data on the gross book value of depreciable capital assets
from Annual Survey o f Manufactures and Census o f
Manufactures, published by the Census Bureau.
The capital discard measures derived using the gross
book value data reflect the actual cyclical pattern of

Chart 2. Discard measures by type of gross capital stock estimate, total
manufacturing, 1963-81
Millions of
1972 dollars


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

Millions of
1972 dollars
24.000

22.000
20,000
18,000
16,000
14.000

12.000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4.000

2.000
0

29

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Capital Discards in Productivity Measurement

capital discards. This contrasts with the smooth pattern of
capital discards that underlies the b l s capital stock
measures. The b l s uses the perpetual inventory method to
construct net capital stock measures, that is, measures of
capital stock net of the decay in the productive efficiency
of existing capital assets.10 The perpetual inventory
method measures net capital stock as the cumulated value
of investment minus cumulated discards and cumulated
decay of capital assets. Under the perpetual inventory
method, capital discards are determined by a static
assumption, and this results in a smooth pattern of capital
discards over the business cycle.
For each industry, gross capital stock measures are
constructed using the perpetual inventory method, and
are used to derive the capital discard series implied by the
method’s discard assumption for the years 1963 to 1981.
Gross, rather than net, capital stock measures are created,
to facilitate comparison with the gross book value capital
stock measures.11 Under the perpetual inventory method,
gross capital stock is defined as the cumulated value of
investment, minus the cumulated value of discards. This
measure can be expressed as:
G PIM t

=

G PIM t_!

+

G It -

DI*

where:
GPIMt is the gross perpetual inventory method capital
stock in period t;
GIt is gross investment in period t\ and
DI* is capital discards in period t.

Capital discards, implicit in the gross perpetual inven­
tory capital stock measure, can be defined in terms of
gross investment and the gross capital stock measure:
DI*

=

G It -

(G PIM t - G PIM t_!)

This measure of capital discards is computed for each
industry. The gross investment series is measured using
gross investment data from the Commerce Department’s
Bureau of Economic Analysis. The gross perpetual
inventory capital stock measures are developed using the
gross investment data, and the discard assumption used in
b l s methods.

Measurement of capital stock
Gross book value estimates.
Gross book value capital
stock is measured for each industry for the years 1962-81,
and used to compute the discard measures described
above. The gross book value capital stock measures are
also useful because movements in these measures over
time can be compared, by industry, to movements in the
gross perpetual inventory capital stock measures. This
comparison is made to determine whether the use of gross
book value data to reflect actual capital discards signifi­
cantly affects cyclical movements in capital stock. The

30
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

sensitivity of the multifactor productivity measure to
movements in discards is also studied using the book
value capital measures. Multifactor productivity is com­
puted for each industry using the gross book value capital
stock measures, and compared to multifactor productivity
measures computed using the gross perpetual inventory
method measures of capital stock.
As indicated earlier, the gross book value capital stock
measures are constructed by deflating historical-dollar
gross book value data for each industry for the years
1962-81. Gross book value data are obtained from the
Annual Survey o f Manufactures and the Census o f
Manufactures. Census gross book value is defined as the
gross book value of all fixed depreciable assets (buildings,
structures, machinery, and equipment) on the books of
establishments at the end of the year. Data are available
by detailed manufacturing industry12 for 1957, 1962-64,
and 1967-81.
Price deflators for the historical-dollar gross book value
data were constructed for each industry following a
methodology suggested by John Kendrick.13 For a given
year, the gross book value of capital is the value of the
existing capital assets, based on the original cost of the
assets. The existing capital assets include capital pur­
chased in different years, that is, of different vintages.
Development of a capital stock measure using the gross
book value data is possible if the value of the various
vintages of capital assets can be expressed in constant
dollars. This requires a price deflator that considers the
vintage distribution of assets in the gross book value for a
given year, and adjusts the valuation of capital assets
from historical dollar to constant dollar, based on this
vintage distribution. The price deflators developed re­
flected estimates of the vintages of capital included in a
specific year’s gross book value data, and the proportion
of investment in each vintage, in the form of Bureau of
Economic Analysis gross investment data and average
useful life estimates.14
Perpetual inventory method estimates.
Gross perpetual
inventory method capital stock measures were created for
each industry for the years 1962-81. As indicated above,
the perpetual inventory method measures net capital
stock as cumulated new capital investment adjusted for
decay and discarding of previously accumulated capital
stock. For a gross capital stock measure, cumulated new
investment is adjusted for the cumulated value of dis­
carded investment, but not for decay.
Constructing a gross perpetual inventory capital stock
measure requires a long historical series of new capital
investment data for each year in the capital series and an
assumption regarding capital discards. The capital invest­
ment data used were Bureau of Economic Analysis
constant-dollar gross investment data by asset type for
each industry, from 1880-1981.

Chart 3. Growth rates of alternative capital stock measures, total manufacturing,
1963-81
Annual
percent change

Annual
percent change

8.0
7.5
7.0
6.5

6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5

2.0
1.5

1.0
0.5

0.0

The discard assumption used was identical to the b l s
discard assumption. In using the perpetual inventory
method to measure capital, b l s assumes capital assets are
discarded as a function of the average useful life of an
asset.15 For each industry, capital assets of similar
characteristics are grouped into asset-type categories. An
average useful life for each type of asset is estimated by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Because each type
contains many different, although similar, assets, a
particular asset may have a slightly different average
useful life than that determined for its asset type. In
addition, capital assets of a given description may exhibit
variation in their useful lives as a result of random
variations in breakage, loss, or obsolesence. Because of
this, discards are assumed to be normally distributed
around the average service life.
Initially, gross perpetual inventory capital stock meas­
ures were constructed for each detailed asset type within
each 2-digit sic manufacturing industry. The detailed
asset-type measures in each industry were then summed
to obtain the 2-digit industry gross capital stock measure.
The durable, nondurable, and total manufacturing indus­
try gross capital stock measures were similarly obtained
by summing the appropriate 2-digit sic manufacturing
industry measures.16

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

Measurement of multifactor productivity
The impact on multifactor productivity of using a static
assumption to estimate capital discards was examined by
comparing alternative measures of multifactor productiv­
ity. The measures were constructed by methods similar to
those used in constructing the b l s published multifactor
productivity measures for m ajor sectors.17 The growth
rate of multifactor productivity for each industry is
defined as the growth rate of output minus the weighted
growth rates of labor and capital inputs, where the
weights are the cost shares of the respective inputs in total
cost.18 Multifactor productivity was measured using first
the gross book value capital stock measure and, alterna­
tively, the gross perpetual inventory capital stock measure
for each industry for the years 1962-81.

Results
As noted, actual capital discards, derived from the
gross book value data, increase and decrease substantially
with economic slowdowns and expansions, respectively,
in each industry studied.19 This is in contrast to the
smooth capital discard pattern assumed in the b l s capital
measures. For each industry, the growth rate of gross
book value capital stock showed substantially more
31

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Capital Discards in Productivity Measurement

movement over the business cycle than did the growth
rate of the perpetual inventory-based stock. In contrast,
multifactor productivity based on the gross book value
capital stock measure, which reflects actual capital
discards, displays virtually the same cyclical pattern as
multifactor productivity computed using the gross perpet­
ual inventory capital stock measure, which reflects a
smooth pattern of capital discards. Thus, even though
capital discards do vary over the business cycle, and
incorporating these variations into the capital stock
measure does increase the cyclical movement of that
measure, this pattern of capital discards is not an
im portant factor in explaining cyclical variation in the
multifactor productivity measures.
A measure summarizing cyclical movement in the book
value and perpetual inventory method series on capital
discards, capital stock, and multifactor productivity was
computed for each industry. This measure uses the
deviation of the actual series values from trend values as a
proxy for the cyclical movement in the series. The
summary measure of cyclicality is the absolute value of
the percentage difference between the actual and the trend
values of a series, summed over the years 1969 to 1981.20
Those years respectively contained the initial and the final
business cycle peaks occurring during the study period. A
higher value of the measure indicates that a series has
more extreme movements over the business cycle than a

series with a lower value. The summary measures of
cyclicality for each industry are presented in table 1.
Actual capital discards in each industry vary substan­
tially over the business cycle, compared to capital
discards implied by the gross perpetual inventory capital
stock measures. The summary measure of cyclicality for
capital discards based on the gross book value data, as
shown in table 1, is consistently of a much higher
magnitude than the same measure based on the static
perpetual inventory discard assumption.
The second set of columns in table 1 presents the
summary measures of cyclicality for gross book value and
gross perpetual inventory capital stock in each industry.
Although the perpetual inventory capital stocks do
exhibit some cyclical movements as a result of variation in
gross investment over the business cycle, the book value
measures in each industry consistently exhibit more
extreme cyclical movements. The book value capital stock
measures reflect variation in capital discards, as well as
gross investment, over the business cycle.
The third set of columns in table 1 presents the
summary measures of cyclicality for the alternative
measures of multifactor productivity. Multifactor produc­
tivity is first measured using gross book value capital
stock, and then using gross perpetual inventory capital
stock. The resulting multifactor productivity measures
demonstrate similar patterns of cyclical variation, as
evidenced by the small difference between the summary

Table 1. Summary measures of cyclicality in alternative measures of capital discards, growth rates of gross capital stock, and
multifactor productivity, by industry, 1969-81
Capital discards

Standard
Industrial

Industry

code

20
21
22
23
26
27
28
29
30
31
24
25
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

Book
value
basis

Perpetual
inventory
basis

Capital stock growth rates

Difference

Book
value
basis

Perpetual
inventory
basis

Difference

Multifactor productivity indexes
Book
value
basis

Perpetual
inventory
basis

Difference

Total manufacturing...............

3.56

.05

3.51

3.74

1.15

2.59

.17

.17

.00

Nondurable manufacturing.............
Food and kindred products............
Tobacco manufactures.................
Textile mill products.....................
Apparel and other textile products..
Paper and allied products.............
Printing and publishing..................
Chemicals and allied products.......
Petroleum and coal products........
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics
products.................................
Leather and leather products........

2.92
2.62
5.88
4.47
22.72
5.05
4.35
4.24
7.86

.04
.13
.01
.12
.01
.05
.04
.11
.06

2.88
2.49
5.85
4.35
22.71
5.00
4.31
4.13
7.80

3.56
4.86
10.17
18.58
51.66
4.24
7.50
5.21
7.48

1.12
1.19
5.20
5.31
2.16
2.74
1.88
2.49
2.89

2.44
3.67
4.97
13.27
49.50
1.50
5.62
2.72
4.59

.18
.28
.50
.52
.30
.39
.21
.31
.44

.18
.26
.39
.51
.33
.40
.21
.29
.45

.00
.02
.11
.01
-.03
-.01
.00
.02
-.01

17.86
2.62

.02
.02

17.84
2.60

10.36
26.46

2.83
4.22

7.53
22.24

.31
.33

.36
.34

-.05
-.01

Durable manufacturing...................
Lumber and wood products...........
Furniture and fixtures....................
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete
products.................................
Primary metal industries...............
Fabricated metal products............

4.40
14.75
5.58

.05
.02
.02

4.35
14.73
5.56

4.04
14.09
10.34

1.48
2.78
3.55

2.56
11.31
6.79

.15
.24
.36

.16
.17
.37

-.01
.07
-.01

6.60
2.09
15.49

.04
.02
.06

6.56
2.07
15.43

11.06
5.94
7.85

2.84
2.53
1.75

8.22
3.41
6.10

.27
.53
.31

.28
.54
.32

-.01
-.01
-.01

3.16
4.11
5.27
34.22

.13
.03
.04
.07

3.03
4.08
5.23
34.15

2.42
4.30
6.47
5.24

1.49
2.12
2.28
2.13

.93
2.18
4.19
3.11

.22
.37
.53
.34

.21
.39
.53
.35

.01
-.02
.00
-.01

4.75

.07

4.68

12.14

2.37

9.77

.33

.33

.00

Machinery, except electrical.........
Electric and electronic equipment ..
Transportation equipment.............
Instruments and related products...
Miscellaneous manufacturing,
industries................................

1The summary measure is the sum of the absolute values of the percentage differences between actual and trend values for the specified series, for the years 1969-81.


32
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Chart 4. Indexes of alternative multifactor productivity measures, total
manufacturing, 1962-81
Index
[1977 - 1001
108

Index
[1977 - 1001

104

100
96
92

88

76
72

measures of cyclical variation for the alternative multifac­
tor productivity measures in each industry.
These results are illustrated for total manufacturing in
charts 2, 3, and 4. Chart 2 shows actual capital discards
with implied capital discards derived from the gross
perpetual inventory capital stock measure. For total
manufacturing and for detailed manufacturing industries,
actual capital discards derived from gross book value data
increase and decrease over the business cycle, while
discards implied by the perpetual inventory discard
assumption have a smooth, upward-trending pattern.
Chart 3 shows that, while the perpetual inventory capital
stock measure does vary over the business cycle, the book
value measure exhibits more extreme cyclical variation.
Chart 4 compares two alternative multifactor productiv­
ity measures, one based on the gross book value capital
stock, and a second based on the gross perpetual
inventory capital stock. The two multifactor productivity

measures show similar patterns of cyclical movements.
Accounting for increases and decreases in capital
discards over the business cycle demonstrates that varia­
tion in capital discards is a minor factor in explaining the
cyclical pattern exhibited by multifactor productivity
measures. This finding supports the conclusion that the
b l s technique of measuring capital stock using the static
discard assumption in the perpetual inventory method
does not create a large cyclical bias in the multifactor
productivity measure. However, the issue of explaining
the relationship between multifactor productivity and the
business cycle remains open. Possible explanations in­
clude fluctuations over the business cycle in the rates of
capital and labor utilization, which are not accounted for
by the capital or labor input measures, b l s is conducting
further research investigating these and other factors that
may explain the cyclical fluctuations in multifactor
productivity measures.
□

-F O O T N O T E S
A c kn o w le d g m e n t:
Edwin Dean and Michael Harper of the
Division of Productivity Research provided valuable comments and
editorial assistance on this article. The author also thanks William
Waldorf of the State University of New York at Binghamton, who
provided guidance in the completion of this research.


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

‘in the private business sector, growth in labor productivity—output
per unit of labor input—decreased from a rate of 2.9 percent annually in
1948-73 to a rate of 1.0 percent in 1973-86. Growth in multifactor
productivity—output per unit of combined capital and labor input—
decreased from a rate of 2.0 percent in the earlier period to a rate of 0.3

33

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Capital Discards in Productivity Measurement

percent in 1973-86. For further information on trends in multifactor
productivity, see M u ltif a c to r P r o d u c tiv ity M e a s u r e s , 1 9 8 6 , u s d l 87-436
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Oct. 13, 1987).
2A detailed explanation of the multifactor productivity measure
published by b l s is available in T r e n d s in M u ltif a c to r P r o d u c tiv ity ,
1 9 4 8 - 8 1 , Bulletin 2178 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 1983).
3Output is defined as real gross product originating in a given
industry, which is net of its intermediate inputs. The multifactor
productivity measurement formula is derived from an assumed produc­
tion relationship: Q (t) = A ( t ) f ( K ( t ) ,L ( t ) ) , where Q (t) is real output, K ( t )
is real capital input, L ( t ) is real labor input, and A f t ) is an index of
neutral technological progress, or multifactor productivity. Taking the
logarithmic differential of this production function with respect to time,
and assuming perfect competition and constant returns to scale, a
measure of multifactor productivity growth can be derived from
observed input and output quantities and prices:
A _

Q

Pl L L

PkK

K

A

Q

PQ L

PQ

K

where P L is the price of labor services, P K is the rental price of
capital services, P is the price of output, and the “dot” notation refers to
the rate of change of the variable over time. The growth rate of
multifactor productivity is equal to the growth rate of output minus the
cost-share-weighted growth rates of labor and capital inputs. The cost
share of labor input is the expenditure on labor, calculated as the price of
labor services multiplied by the quantity of labor services, P l L , divided
by total input cost, calculated as the price of output multiplied by the
quantity of output, or P Q . Similarly, the cost share of capital input is
calculated as expenditure on capital input, P k K , divided by total input
cost, P Q . Under constant returns to scale and perfect competition, total
input cost is equal to the value of total output. That is,
PQ

=

( Pl L + PkK )

4The b l s measures capital stock using the perpetual inventory
method. This method is described below.
5b l s estimates capital discards using a constant discard pattern based
on the estimated average useful lives of capital assets. An assumption of
a constant discard pattern has generally been made when measuring
capital stock using the perpetual inventory method. For example, see L.
Christensen and D. Jorgenson, “The Measurement of U.S. Real Capital
Input, 1929-1967,” R e v ie w o f I n c o m e a n d W e a lth , 1969, pp.
293-97; E. Denison, A c c o u n tin g f o r U n ite d S ta te s E c o n o m ic G ro w th ,
1 9 2 9 - 1 9 6 9 (Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1974), pp.
156-57; D. Jorgenson and Z. Griliches, “The Explanation of Produc­
tivity Change,” S u r v e y o f C u r r e n t B u s in e ss , May 1969, pp. 31-38; F ix e d
R e p r o d u c ib le T a n g ib le W e a lth in th e U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 2 5 - 7 9 (U.S.
Department of Commerce, March 1982), pp. T - l—T—15; C a p ita l S to c k
E s ti m a te s f o r I n p u t- O u tp u t I n d u s tr ie s : M e th o d s a n d D a ta , Bulletin 2034
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1979), pp. 1-24; and T r e n d s in M u ltif a c to r
P r o d u c tiv ity , 1 9 4 8 - 8 1 , pp. 40-45.

Multifactor Productivity,” Ph. D. thesis (State University of New York
at Binghamton, 1985).
8For a discussion of capital discarding, see A. Marston, R. Winfrey,
and J. Hempstead, E n g in e e r in g V a lu a tio n a n d D e p r e c ia tio n (New York,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1953), pp. 139—42.
9Capital discards are measured for 1963-81, rather than 1962-81,
because of the lagged term in the discard definition.
10Net capital stock measures are constructed by b l s using the
perpetual inventory method. Capital in the current year is equal to
capital in the previous year, plus new investment, minus capital discards
and decay. Capital discards are determined based on the average useful
lives of capital assets. Decay in the productive efficiency of assets is
approximated using a hyperbolic functional form. The hyperbolic
function is concave, implying slower decay during the early life of an
asset and faster decay during the later years.
11Net capital stock measures are used more frequently than gross
measures. However, net book value data often reflect an accounting, rather
than an economic, concept of depreciation. Comparing gross book value
and gross perpetual inventory, capital stock measures avoid the bias that
might result from comparing net capital stock measures based on different
depreciation concepts. Note that capital discards measured using the gross
book value capital stock series reflect the original value of the capital
asset, rather than the remaining value of the asset after adjusting for
loss in productive efficiency of the asset over time. Similarly, discards
implied by the gross perpetual inventory capital stock measures are not
adjusted for loss in productive efficiency.
12These data are available for manufacturing industries at the 2- , 3- ,
and 4-digit levels of the Standard Industrial Classification of industries.
The first year of available data, 1957, is not used. Values for the missing
observations, years 1965 and 1966, were interpolated to complete the
data series for 1962-81. The Census Bureau gross book value data were
regressed on gross book value data series constructed using Bureau of
Economic Analysis gross investment data and a discard assumption. The
fitted values for the Census Bureau gross book value series in 1965 and
1966 from this regression were used as estimated values.
13This method is described in John Kendrick, I m p r o v in g C o m p a n y
H a n d b o o k w ith C a se S tu d ie s (Baltimore, The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1984), pp. 42-46.

P r o d u c tiv ity :

6This study, of course, does not attempt a complete analysis of the
business cycle movements of capital discards, capital stock, and
multifactor productivity. The focus of the empirical work performed is
annual variation in capital discards, using alternative measures of
discards, and the effects of the discard series on trends in multifactor
productivity. Additional study of the capital discard data, and related
data, within the context of the business cycle is contemplated. Some
exploratory work has examined movements in capital discards over the
business cycle by correlating the level of capital discards and the rate of
growth of output for each industry. These correlations, performed using
data for 1964-81, are negative for 18 of the 20 2-digit sic manufacturing
industries and for the durable, nondurable, and total manufacturing
sectors. These results indicate a decline in the level of discards as the rate
of growth of output increases during business cycle expansions and an
increase in the level of discards as the rate of output growth declines
during business cycle contractions.

14Gross book value price deflators were developed for each industry
from 1962-81. First, the deflators were constructed for each industry’s
individual asset types. Total gross book value price deflators for each
industry were then constructed as weighted sums of the individual
detailed-asset-type gross book value price deflators. The weights used to
construct the industry gross book value price deflators were the sum of
constant-dollar investment in asset / in years X - L to X , divided by the
sum of constant-dollar investment in total assets in years X - L to X . L is
the average service life of a capital asset. The weights constructed were
variable weights, changing each year.
The individual-asset-type deflators for each industry were constructed
using a method that considers the vintage composition of an industry’s
gross book value in any given year. The gross book value of capital for a
given year is defined as the original cost valuation of existing capital
assets, and so includes capital assets of different vintages. This method
estimates the vintage distribution of assets included in a given year’s
gross book value figure. Vintages from the previous L years were
assumed to remain in a given year’s gross book value. The proportion of
investment in each vintage within the gross book value figure was
determined by the original level of gross investment in the vintage.
The method used can be summarized as follows. The gross book value
price deflator value in year X is the sum of historical-dollar gross
investment in years X - L to X , divided by the sum of constant-dollar gross
investment in years X - L to X . This general formulation was constructed
using data on each asset type for each industry. The historical- and
constant-dollar gross investment data for each asset type in each
industry were obtained from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, as were
the average useful life values for each asset type by industry.

7For further analysis and discussion of this issue, see Susan G. Powers,
“Cyclical Variation in Capital Stock Measures: Implications for

15The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates of the average useful
lives of assets, and a truncated normal distribution ranging from 2

34

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

percent to 198 percent of the average useful life of an asset L , are used by
B LS in determining discards. Capital assets are discarded as a function of
their average useful life. Variation in the discarding of capital assets
around the average useful life is described by the truncated normal
distribution. The value of discards in a given year, X , is calculated by
summing the product of the constant-dollar value of a capital asset times
the probability of the asset’s retirement at that age, for capital assets
ranging in age from 2 percent to 198 percent of the asset’s average life.
The truncated normal distribution includes two standard deviations or
95 percent of the area under the discard distribution. An expanded
discussion of the discard assumption used by b l s is contained in T r e n d s
in M u ltif a c to r P r o d u c tiv ity , 1 9 4 8 - 8 1 , appendix C.
16For each 2-digit sic manufacturing industry, the gross perpetual
inventory capital stock measure was obtained as an unweighted sum of
the industry’s detailed-asset-type gross perpetual inventory capital stock
measures. This is similar to the methodology underlying the gross bookvalue capital stock measures for each industry, because an industry’s
total gross book value is an unweighted sum of the gross book value of
existing capital assets. This approach also simplified the construction of
the gross perpetual inventory capital stock measures.
17For further discussion of the methodology underlying the published
multifactor productivity measures, see Jerome A. Mark and William

B LS


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

H. Waldorf, “Multifactor productivity: a new b l s measure,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1983, pp. 3-15; T r e n d s in M u ltif a c to r
P r o d u c tiv ity , 1 9 4 8 - 8 1 ; and M u ltif a c to r P r o d u c tiv ity M e a s u r e s , 1 9 8 6 .
18Bureau of Economic Analysis data on output quantity were used in
each industry, whereas labor services data were obtained from b l s
2-digit industry data sources. Labor income, capital income, and total
income estimates were obtained from Bureau of Economic Analysis
2-digit industry data.
19For example, capital discards in total manufacturing increase during
the peak-to-trough years, and decrease during the trough-to-peak years.
This is particularly noticeable during the 1973-75 and 1980 recession
periods. During the 1969-70 recession, discards increased slightly and
then jumped substantially in 1971. For a graphical presentation of
capital discards in total manufacturing for 1963-81, see chart 2.
20The summary measure of cyclicality for a given series was
constructed using trend values which were estimated by regressing the
actual series values on a constant, time, and time squared, and obtaining
the fitted values from this regression. The measure was constructed
using a sum over the years 1969 to 1981, in order to provide a peak-topeak comparison of the measures.

Excessive hours and productivity
Economists have tended to assume that 1 hour of labor supplied by a
worker is much like another. Karl Marx, who cited a variety of evidence
to show that long hours of work were detrimental to health and to
longevity, did not go on to deduce that those who worked long hours
must, because of their poor health, produce less. The most fundamental
connection between hours of work and production exists at this
physiological level. People are able to sustain work for remarkably long
continuous periods, and for remarkably high proportions of their total
daily hours. But long hours are accommodated by an adjustment of pace
or work intensity—by a slowing of movements and an interpolation of
more pauses between movements. In addition, long hours (which must
also be judged relative to the arduousness of the work) tend to give rise to
a high rate of absence and sickness, which has particularly serious effects
in production involving the interdependence of workers and complex
planning and scheduling.
— M ic h a e l W h it e
W o rk in g H ou rs: A ssessin g th e P o te n tia l f o r
R e d u c tio n (Washington, International

Labour Office, 1987), pp. 40-41.

35

The labor market problems
of today’s high school dropouts
O f the 4 million young high school dropouts
in 1986', 1 in 6 was unemployed;
many were not in the labor force at all,
and those who were, faced strong competition
from high school graduates for limited job opportunities
J a m e s P. M a r k e y

Among the Nation’s unemployed, about 3 of 8 are young
persons age 16 to 24. The high unemployment rates
among youth reflect the problems often encountered by
these new entrants to the job market. Without a doubt,
the youth facing the greatest difficulties are the 4 million
high school dropouts. Many dropouts do not participate
in the job market at all; of those who do, 1 of 4 are
unemployed.

The dropout problem
Education has long been recognized as vital in building
an able and skilled work force, and the 20th century has
seen a tremendous rise in the educational level of the U.S.
population. At the beginning of this century, only 10
percent of male students received a high school diploma.
During the 1950’s, more than half of all students
graduated from high school.1 By the late 1960’s, data
from the National Center for Education Statistics put
high school completion rates at about 75 percent, where
they have since remained.2 This apparent halt in the rising
trend of high school completions has resulted in height­
ened awareness of the dropout problem. Currently, there
is debate on the appropriateness of using high school

James P. Markey is an economist in the Division of Labor Force
Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

36
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

completion rates (and the derived dropout rate) as a
means of estimating the magnitude of the dropout
problem. The adequacy of estimates obtained from other
methods is also questioned given that the range of
reported dropout rates extends from 14 percent to 25
percent.3 However, regardless of the measure chosen,
there is little conclusive evidence to suggest that there has
been significant improvement in the dropout situation
over the last two decades.
Information on dropouts is obtained from several
sources, including the administrative records of local
school districts, longitudinal surveys of youth/student
cohorts, and the Current Population Survey ( c p s ) .4 This
article assesses the labor market behavior of young high
school dropouts, relying heavily on data from the c p s .
Each October, a supplement to the regular c p s asks
questions regarding the school enrollment status of
household members, including the year they last attended
school and the highest grade completed. Separate data are
tabulated for high school graduates and high school
dropouts5 and for two groups of special interest—recent
dropouts (those who dropped out of school between
October of the previous year and the current October) and
recent graduates (those who completed high school
during the current calendar year).
The number of recent dropouts has averaged about
700,000 a year for the last 20 years, although it was at its

lowest level, 562,000, in 1986.6 The 1978 high of 839,000
roughly mirrors the population peak of baby-boomers.
The following tabulation shows the number of recent
dropouts, 1967-86:

Table 1. Median family income by type of family in which
16- to 24-year-old recent high school dropouts and graduates
reside, October 1985
H ig h s c h o o l g r a d u a t e s
T y p e o f fa m ily a n d in c o m e 1

R e c e n t d r o p o u ts

R e c e n t d r o p o u ts

(th o u s a n d s )

(th o u s a n d s )

1967 .... ..........
1968 .... ..........
1969 .... ..........
1970.... .........
1971 .... ..........

614
610
661
712
657

1977 .... .........
1978 .... ..........
1979 .... .........
1980.... .........
1981 .... ..........

832
839
812
759
713

1972 .... .........
1973 .... ..........
1974 .... .........
1975 .... .........
1976.... ..........

734
790
813
737
749

1982.... .........
1983 .... .........
1984.... ..........
1985 .... .........
1986.... .........

668
597
601
612
562

The recent dropouts of 1986 were nearly equally
divided among young men (53 percent) and young women
(47 percent), which was typical of the last two decades.
Although the dropout problem is often represented as
primarily a problem among minority youth, only 16
percent of recent dropouts in 1986 were black, a propor­
tion representative of black high school enrollment, while
80 percent were white.7 Since 1973, when data were first
tabulated for Hispanics (most Hispanics are counted as
white), a disproportionate number of dropouts have been
of Hispanic origin. Most recently, 23 of 100 recent
dropouts were Hispanic, although Hispanics account for
only 9 percent of the enrolled high school population.
In October 1986, there were about 4 million young high
school dropouts, representing nearly 1 of 8 of the 16- to
24-year-olds.8 To better understand this sizable group,
this article first explores the phenomenon of dropping out
of school before analyzing the labor market behavior and
performance of young dropouts.

Dropping out: factors and reasons
Several factors have been theorized to explain what
influences a youth’s decision to drop out of high school.
Reliable indicators of who will complete high school
appear to be family background characteristics, such as
income and parental education, and an individual’s
performance on intelligence tests and demonstrated read­
ing skill.9 Studies have found that dropouts are more
likely to score lower on ability tests and to come from
families with relatively low income and education.
Data from the October 1985 supplement to the CPS
were used to look at two background variables for recent
graduates and dropouts: family income and parental
education. Because it lacks the necessary longitudinal
capacity, the c p s cannot identify the parental education
and family income of dropouts and graduates prior to
their leaving school, but a reasonable proxy for the two
variables is found by using data for recent graduates and

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

H ig h s c h o o l
E n r o l le d

N o t e n r o lle d

in c o l l e g e

in c o l l e g e

d ro p o u ts

All families (thousands)............
Percent with income less
than $10,000 ...................
Median family income...........

450
40.9
$12,064

1,457
5.7
$34,171

$22,659

Married-couple families
(thousands)...........................
Percent with income less
than $10,000 ...................
Median family income...........

231

1,190

699

23.4
$21,249

2.9

8.8

$37,593

$26,575

Families maintained by women
(thousands)...........................
Percent with income less
than $10,000 ...................
Median family income...........

183

206

226

68.0
$6,764

21.0
$17,966

33.8

968
14.7

$12,323

'Data refer only to those families reporting income.

dropouts who were still living with their parents when
surveyed.10 (Thus, the discussion in this section excludes
recent graduates and dropouts who were living on their
own.11)
As one might expect, family income differed signifi­
cantly for recent dropouts and high school graduates.
Median income was $12,100 for families of recent
dropouts, $22,700 for families of recent high school
graduates not enrolled in college, and $34,200 for families
of college-enrolled recent high school graduates.12 These
income differences are explained, in part, by the distribu­
tion of family types for each group. For example,
dropouts are more likely to come from families main­
tained by women, whose incomes, on average, are less
than half those of married-couple families. (See table 1.)
A second factor, parental education, has also been
suggested as influencing the dropout’s decision. More
than half of the recent dropouts were in families where the
householder13 had completed less than 12 years of school;
only 10 percent of college-enrolled recent graduates were
in such families. (See table 2.) Dropouts are also more
likely to live in families maintained by women, and these
women tend to have relatively low levels of both
educational attainment and income.
These findings support previous studies that show
parental education and family income as factors associ­
ated with dropping out of high school. While the findings
do not establish a causal relationship, they help identify
youths who are “at risk” of dropping out. The data also
suggest differences in the familial backgrounds of gradu­
ates and dropouts which will not be changed by obtaining
a high school diploma, and which must be recognized
when formulating programs dealing with the employment
problems facing young dropouts.
In addition to the familial background factors, re­
sponses obtained from dropouts on their reasons for
37

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Labor M arket Problems o f Dropouts

leaving school add vital information to their portrait.
Data on reasons for leaving school are available from the
Center for Education Statistics’ longitudinal survey of
high school sophomores and seniors, begun in the spring
of 1980.14 The survey categorized reasons for dropping
out as school-related, family-related, or other (the catego­
ries are not mutually exclusive; dropouts could give more
than one reason). Among the other reasons, “offered job
and chose to work” was listed separately and is of special
interest in this analysis. The following tabulation shows
the percent of dropouts, by reason, from the Center for
Education Statistics’ survey:
M a le

F e m a le

Had poor grades..............................
School not for me ...........................

35.9
34.8

29.7
31.1

Married or planned to get married ..
Was pregnant..................................

6.9
—

30.7
23.4

Had to support family.....................
Offered job and chose to work........

13.6
26.9

8.3
10.7

For young women, the decision to leave school is
primarily related to school or family matters. Many listed
marriage or pregnancy as the reason for dropping out;
only 11 percent listed “offered job and chose to work.” In
view of their low labor force participation after leaving
school, it appears that work-related factors play a minor
role in the decision of young women to drop out. Marital
status and childbearing appear to be important factors.
For many young men, the reasons given for dropping out

Table 2. Distribution of 16- to 24-year-old recent high
school dropouts and graduates by the educational
attainment of the householder in the family in which they
reside, October 1985
[In percent]
T y p e o f f a m ily a n d
e d u c a tio n a l a tta in m e n t
o f h o u s e h o ld e r

H ig h s c h o o l g r a d u a t e s
H ig h s c h o o l
d ro p o u ts

E n r o l le d

N o t e n r o ll e d

in c o ll e g e

in c o ll e g e

Table 3. Labor force participation rates of 16- to 24-yearold female high school dropouts and graduates by marital
status, presence of children, race, and Hispanic origin,
March 1987
D ro p o u ts
M a r ita l s ta tu s a n d
p r e s e n c e o f c h il d r e n

T o ta l................................
With no own children ..
With own children.......
Married, spouse
p rese n t......................
With no own
children.................
With own children...

H is p a n ic

G ra d u a te s 1

T o ta l

W h ite

B la c k

46.1
59.5
35.6

47.7
62.4
35.5

37.9
40.6
36.3

35.1
58.0
21.2

39.5

37.9

(2)

22.8

67.9

51.4
35.5

47.9
34.7

(2)
(2)

(2)
18.4

81.5
58.4

o r ig in

77.4
87.1
60.0

Other marital status3 ..
With no own
children.................
With own children...

50.0

55.4

35.7

45.4

82.9

61.6
35.8

66.9
36.8

36.5
35.1

65.3
25.1

88.8
62.4

Maintaining families
with own children .

32.8

35.1

28.2

(2)

61.3

’ Data refer to graduates who completed 4 years of high school only.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
3Refers to single, widowed, divorced, or separated women.

of school suggest an implicit choice of work over further
studies. For example, in addition to school-related rea­
sons, “offered job and chose to work” and “had to
support a family” figured prominently.
In analyzing data on the reasons for leaving school, it is
im portant to note that “post hoc explanations provided by
dropouts may be somewhat questionable because of the
complexity of the dropout phenomenon and the natural
tendency for persons to rationalize behavior which might
be regarded by others as evidence of failure.” 15 However,
data on the reasons for dropping out of school provide
insight into the post-school behavior of dropouts. And the
labor force behavior of dropouts, both female and male, is
inextricably linked to the reasons and causes of
dropping out.

Female dropouts
All families’ ....................................
Less than 4 years of
high sch oo l...........................
4 years of high s c h o o l..............
1 to 3 years of co lle g e ..............
4 years of college or m o re .......

100.0

100.0

100.0

55.1
26.7
13.6
4.7

10.3
35.5
22.9
31.4

32.0
46.3
12.7
9.0

Married-couple fam ilies...............
Less than 4 years of
high sch oo l...........................
4 years of high s c h o o l..............
1 to 3 years of co lle g e ..............
4 years of college or m o re .......

100.0

100.0

100.0

53.5
27.4
11.3
7.8

10.1
34.3
21.7
33.9

33.9
43.9
13.3
8.9

Families maintained by w om en...
Less than 4 years of
high sch oo l............................
4 years of high s c h o o l..............
1 to 3 years of co lle g e ..............
4 years of college or m o re .......

100.0

100.0

100.0

59.9
24.2
15.9

11.7
41.7
30.6
16.0

23.5
55.3
11.9
9.3

(2)

’ Includes a small number of families maintained by men.
2Less than 0.5 percent.


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

Between October of 1985 and 1986, more than a
quarter of a million young women dropped out of high
school. Only a little more than half of them were in the
labor force in October 1986, continuing the historical
pattern of comparatively low labor force participation
among young female dropouts. About 20 years earlier, the
participation rate for 16- to 24-year-old female dropouts
was just 38 percent. Their participation has steadily
increased over the last two decades, reaching 50 percent
in 1986. However, their rate was still dramatically below
the 77-percent rate for 16- to 24-year-old women who had
ended their studies with a high school diploma.
Children and marriage.
Childbearing and marriage
would seem to be two important factors in explaining the

low labor force participation of female dropouts. A
special tabulation of the March 1987 c p s data provided a
look at the relationship between marital status, presence
of children, and labor force participation of 16- to 24year-old female high school graduates who did not go to
college16 and dropouts. As expected, the presence of
children had a negative effect on the participation of both
groups. However, regardless of marital or maternal
status, dropouts have significantly lower rates of partici­
pation than do graduates. (See table 3.)
The presence of children has, by far, the greatest impact
on the labor force participation of young female dropouts.
Regardless of marital status, just over one-third of the
dropouts who were mothers were in the labor force.
Marital status, however, affects young women’s depen­
dence on family and government for financial support.
About 44 percent of unmarried mothers lived with
relatives, and many received government assistance.
Using data from the Center for Human Resource Re­
search’s longitudinal study of young women age 14 to 24
that was begun in 1979, Frank L. Mott and Nan L.
Maxwell found that about 32 percent of white dropouts
with children and 74 percent of black dropouts with
children received government assistance from at least one
of the following programs: Aid to Families with Depend­
ent Children, food stamps, and Supplemental Social
Security.17
Among female dropouts with children, labor force
participation rates vary substantially by race and ethnic­
ity. For example, Hispanic dropouts have significantly
lower rates than do their white or black counterparts. (See
table 3.) Cultural attitudes regarding marriage, childrear­
ing, and paid employment may help explain the variations
in participation. Although both white and black dropout
mothers have similar participation rates, they exhibit
distinctly different marital patterns—only 1 of 10 black
mothers was married, compared with about 6 of 10 white
mothers and Hispanic mothers. (See table 4.) The high
proportion of unmarried black dropouts explains, to some
extent, the large percentage of black mothers receiving
government assistance, compared with white mothers.
This marital pattern also results in nearly half of all black
dropout mothers living with relatives, and about 40
percent maintaining their own families.
Even when they do not have children, black female
dropouts seem to have a very tenuous attachment to the
labor force. Fewer than half of them were in the labor
force in March 1987, in contrast to about 60 percent of
their white or Hispanic counterparts.
Unemployment. The poor labor market performance of
female dropouts is also exemplified by their high unem­
ployment rates. In October 1986, the jobless rate for
female dropouts age 16 to 24 was 30.4 percent, about 2\

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

Table 4. Distribution of 16- to 24-year-old female dropouts,
by marital status, presence of children, race, and Hispanic
origin, March 1987
M a r ita l s ta tu s a n d p r e s e n c e o f
c h il d r e n

T o ta l

W h it e

B la c k

H is p a n ic
o rig in

Total female dropouts:
Number (thousands).................
P e rc e n t.....................................
Married, spouse p rese n t.....
Other marital s ta tu s '............

2,024
100.0
37.2
62.8

1,577
100.0
44.1
55.9

391
100.0
10.2
89.8

454
100.0
45.8
54.2

With no own children:
Number (thousands)............
Percent..................................
Married, spouse p re s e n t..
Other marital s ta tu s '........

887
100.0
21.1
78.9

714
100.0
23.7
76.3

144
100.0
9.7
90.3

171
100.0
26.9
72.5

With own children:
Number (thousands)............
Percent..................................
Married, spouse p re s e n t..
Other marital s ta tu s '........
Maintaining own family .
Living with re la tiv e s.....

1,137
100.0
49.8
50.2
28.1
22.2

863
100.0
61.1
39.0
23.8
15.3

247
100.0
10.5
89.5
42.9
46.6

283
100.0
56.9
43.1
24.4
18.7

'Refers to single, widowed, divorced, or separated women.

times the rate for women this age who had ended their
education with a high school degree.
From data collected in the October 1986 c p s supple­
ment, a special tabulation was constructed to compare
female dropouts and graduates as they go through the
transition period during the 4 years after leaving high
school. Using cross-sectional data, the following tabula­
tion shows the effect of time out of school and age on the
unemployment rates of dropouts and graduates:
Unemployment rates
D ro p o u ts

G r a d u a te s

Last attended high school:
Current year (1986)........ ...
1 year ago ....................... ...
2 years ago ...................... ...
3 years ago ...................... ...
4 years ago, or longer ..... ...

33.7
40.3
31.8
36.5
26.4

20.3
14.3
16.6
8.2
10.8

Age in 1986:
16-17............................... ...
18-19............................... ...
20-21............................... ...
22-24............................... ...

37.1
35.9
27.8
28.2

—
15.9
12.7
11.2

Unemployment rates for both groups show some decline
with age and time out of school, although for dropouts the
jobless rate remains exceptionally high. The unemploy­
ment rate was 34 percent for current-year dropouts,
compared with 20 percent for 1986 high school graduates
not enrolled in college. The gap between graduates’ and
dropouts’ unemployment rates was smallest immediately
after leaving school.

Male dropouts
Because of their strong labor force attachment, the
labor market problems of male dropouts have often
39

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Labor M arket Problems o f Dropouts

received more analytical attention than those of female
dropouts. Numerous studies of the “youth employment
problem” identify young male dropouts as the group most
adversely affected by a slack youth labor m arket.18 Job
competition for full-time employment is keen, with
dropouts competing not only among themselves, but also
with high school graduates who did not go to college. The
employment problems of black youth dropouts are often
viewed as approaching crisis proportions.
The occupational distribution of young male dropouts
suggests that they compete with male high school
graduates who did not attend college. Among both
groups, about two-fifths of the employed 16- to 21-yearolds were machine operators, fabricators, or laborers;
about one-fourth were employed in precision production,
craft, and repair jobs; and 1 of 7 was in service
occupations. Such competition between graduates and
dropouts often puts the dropout at a distinct disadvan­
tage. In the extreme, the use of the high school diploma as
an employment screening device could prevent the quali­
fied dropout from even being considered by the employer.
The occupational distribution of high school dropouts
is also noteworthy because of the small proportion (14
percent) employed in service occupations. A popular
stereotype portrays employed youth as low-paid, often
part-time workers in service occupations. However, male

dropouts are more likely to work full time in the goodsproducing sector as operators, fabricators, or laborers,
and as precision production, craft, or repair workers. The
sector’s lagging performance does not promise very strong
employment prospects for the recent dropouts who, in the
past, have found jobs in mining, manufacturing, and
construction.19
The jobless rates for high school dropouts and gradu­
ates provide some indication of the labor market perform­
ance of these competing groups. In October 1986, more
than 1 of 5 male dropouts were unemployed, compared
with 1 of 10 high school graduates. Among dropouts, the
jobless rate for blacks (44 percent) was much higher than
that for whites (18 percent) and Hispanics (15 percent).
However, the most useful measure of the labor market
success of male dropouts and high school graduates may
be the employment-population ratio—that is, the em­
ployed as a proportion of the civilian noninstitutional
population. This measure focuses on the more clear-cut
and analytically important distinction between employ­
ment and “nonemployment” (this category includes those
unemployed and those not in the labor force), particularly
for out-of-school young men, for whom it is sometimes
difficult to distinguish between being outside the labor
force and being unemployed.20 In October 1986, the
employment-population ratio was 56 percent for recent

Chart 1. Employment-population ratios of 16- to 24-year-old male high school
graduates and dropouts, October 1972-86
Percent


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

Percent
90
85
80

75

70
65
H 60
55

male dropouts, and 70 percent for recent high school
graduates. Although the employment-population ratios
for dropouts generally increase with age and time out of
school, the gap between graduates and dropouts remains
fairly constant. Using cross-sectional data for October
1986, the following tabulation illustrates the impact of the
age and time out of school variables on employmentpopulation ratios:
E m p lo y m en t-p o p u la tio n ra tio s
G r a d u a te s

D ro p o u ts

Last attended school:
Current year (1986) .... ...
1 year ago ................... ...
2 years ag o .................. ...
3 years a g o .................. ...
4 years ago, or longer .. ...

69.4
81.1
80.9
87.0
87.7

47.6
58.5
61.0
64.8
73.6

Age in 1986:
16-17 ........................
18-19 ......................... ...
20-21 ........................ ...
22-24 ......................... ...

73.7
83.1
88.3

44.2
63.0
68.2
74.1

Both aging and time out of school give young men a
chance to mature and gain valuable work experience as
they pass through a “moratorium period,” where employ­
ment is often of secondary importance.21 However, over
the last two decades there has been an alarming down­
trend in employment-population ratios of out-of-school
youth, particularly for young black dropouts. It is no
longer clear whether the normal increase in such ratios
that is typically associated with aging will be enough to
integrate these black dropouts into the labor force during
their prime working years.22
Nonemployment o f out-of-school youth.
While quite
sensitive to cyclical changes over the last 15 years, the
employment-population ratio of male dropouts and high
school graduates has trended downward—although more
moderately for high school graduates. (See chart 1.) From
October 1973 (1 month prior to a business cycle peak) to
October 1986 (4 years into an expansion), the employ­
ment-population ratio of black dropouts fell 25 percent­
age points, while the white and the Hispanic ratios
declined only 7 and 8 percentage points, respectively.
Similarly, the decline in the employment-population ratio
for black graduates was more severe than that for their
white or Hispanic counterparts. (See chart 2.)
While low em ploym ent-population ratios among
dropouts demonstrate that a large proportion are not
working, that measure alone does not capture the
underlying dynamics of the labor force activity of
dropouts. It is important to know whether low employ­
ment-population ratios are a result of frequent, short
spells of nonemployment or a product of extended periods

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

Table 5. Distribution of 20- to 24-year-old male high school
dropouts with work experience by number of weeks
worked, race, and Hispanic origin, 1979 and 1986
[In percent]
Total

White

Weeks worked
1979

Total with work
experience............
5 0 -5 2 w eeks....
4 0 -4 9 w eeks....
2 7 -3 9 w eeks....
1 - 2 6 w e e k s .....
1 4 -2 6 weeks.
1 -1 3 w ee ks.

1986

1979

1986

Black
1979

1986

Hispanic
origin
1979

1986

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
45.6
16.7
14.4
23.8
13.7
10.2

49.6
12.4
9.3
28.8
16.0
12.7

47.2
17.5
13.8
21.2
12.7
8.5

53.3
12.2
9.8
24.6
13.9
10.7

37.7
13.4
17.7
31.2
13.9
17.3

28.1
10.8
6.6
54.5
27.5
26.9

47.2
13.4
17.7
22.1
15.6
6.5

58.9
9.1
9.9
21.9
11.3
10.6

of nonemployment. A study sponsored by the National
Bureau of Economic Research identified long spells of
nonemployment as the primary cause of low employmentpopulation ratios of out-of-school black youth.23 Analysis
of CPS work experience data confirm the existence of long
periods of nonemployment among a sizable proportion of
dropouts. During 1986, 17 percent of men age 20 to 24
with less than 4 years of high school had no work
experience at all; 25 percent had worked 26 weeks or less.
By comparison, about 40 percent of the black dropouts
reported no employment whatsoever for the year. Since
1974 (when data were first available), the proportion of
black dropouts with no work experience during the year
has increased dramatically. This is also true among high
school graduates, where blacks clearly had the highest
incidence of and greatest rise in nonemployment. The
following tabulation shows the proportion of 20- to 24year-old male graduates and dropouts with no work
experience during selected calendar years:

Graduates:
1974 ............
1979 ............
1982 ............
1986 ............
Dropouts:
1974 ............
1979 ............
1982 ............
1986 ............

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

T o ta l

W h ite

B la c k

H isp a n ic
origin

5.3
5.4
9.6
6.7

4.6
3.7
7.2
4.8

9.0
15.2
22.9
15.7

9.2
8.7
9.5
8.9

10.4
12.4
19.6
16.8

9.1
9.3
14.9
11.8

15.1
23.9
40.1
39.7

8.8
9.4
14.3
9.6

There has also been a slight polarization in the distribu­
tion of weeks of work for the dropouts who do work. The
proportion working 50-52 weeks rose from 46 percent in
1979 to 50 percent in 1986, while the percentage working
26 weeks or less also increased slightly. (See table 5.) Black
dropouts, however, have shown a decrease in the propor­
tion working full year, as well as a large increase in the
number working half a year or less.
41

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Labor Market Problems o f Dropouts

Chart 2. Employment-population ratios of 16- to 24-year-old male high school
graduates and dropouts, by race and Hispanic origin, October 1972-86
Percent

Percent

100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50

Y o u n g h ig h s c h o o l d r o p o u t s face a difficult time

in today’s labor market. Unemployment rates are high,
especially among black dropouts. Only half of all female
dropouts are in the labor force at any time, and many
of these young women have the additional responsibility
of motherhood, often without a spouse. A surprisingly
small proportion of male dropouts are employed, with
many experiencing long periods of nonemployment.
In a labor market demanding increasingly higher
skill levels, school dropouts face declining employment
opportunities. Further, they must compete with high

42
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

school graduates for these limited jobs. The data suggest
that dropouts are less likely to achieve success in the
labor market than are high school graduates. However,
it would be misleading to infer that the employment
problems of dropouts would be solved solely by obtain­
ing a high school diploma. While the importance of
education cannot be overstated, there are differences in
the family background and personal characteristics of
dropouts and graduates that affect labor market success.
These differences cannot be overcome simply by obtaining
a diploma.
□

■FOOTNOTES
A c k n o w le d g m e n t:
The author thanks Robert J. Mclntire and
Bernard R. Altschuler, Office of Employment and Unemployment
Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for constructing the computer
programs used in this study.

'Jerald G. Bachman, Swayzer Green, and Ilona D. Wirtanen, Y o u th
Vol. Ill (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Institute for
Social Research, 1971), p. 4.

in T r a n sitio n ,

‘Unpublished data from the U.S. Department of Education, Center
for Education Statistics, Washington, D C .
For a discussion of the different dropout measures and the debate
surrounding the dropout problem, see Chester E. Finn, Jr., “The high
school dropout puzzle,” T h e P u b lic I n te r e s t, Spring 1987, pp. 3-22; and
“School Dropouts: The Extent and Nature of the Problem,” Briefing
Report to Congressional Requesters, g a o / h r d - 8 6 - 1 0 6 B r (U.S. Gen­
eral Accounting Office, June 1986).
4Data in this article were derived primarily from the October Current
Population Survey ( c p s ) . The c p s is a monthly survey of approximately
60,000 households conducted and tabulated for the Bureau of Labor
Statistics by the Bureau of the Census. Most analysis in this article
relates to persons 16 to 24 years of age in the civilian noninstitutional
population. Because it is a sample survey, estimates derived from the c p s
may differ from actual counts that could be obtained from a complete
census. Therefore, estimates based on a small sample should be
interpreted with caution. For further information on sampling reliabil­
ity, see S tu d e n ts , G r a d u a te s , a n d D ro p o u ts, O c to b e r 1 9 8 0 - 8 2 , Bulletin
2192 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1983).
5In this article, the term “high school dropouts” refers to individuals
who are not enrolled in school and have not completed 4 years of high
school. The term is somewhat of a misnomer, as this group contains a
small proportion of persons who never attended high school. In October
1986, 14 percent of the “high school dropouts” had left school before
ever attending high school. No attempt is made to analyze this small
group separately.
6Data refer to recent graduates and dropouts age 16 to 24. In addition,
an average of 86,000 persons 14 and 15 years of age dropped out of
school annually over the same period. While the data presented on
dropouts refer to persons who had not completed high school when
surveyed, a number of dropouts do return to school or obtain high
school equivalency certificates at a later date. Estimates of returnees are
as high as half of all dropouts. For further information, see Andrew J.
Kolstad and Jeffrey A. Owings, H ig h S c h o o l D r o p o u ts W h o C h a n g e d
T h e ir M in d s A b o u t S c h o o l (U.S. Department of Education, Center for
Education Statistics, April 1986).
7This was the first year in which blacks did not make up a
disproportionate share of recent dropouts. Because of the relatively
small size of the black youth population, the 1986 anomaly may be a
result of sampling error, and not indicative of a change in the past trend.
8These figures are not intended as a dropout rate, but only as an
indication of the prevalence of dropouts in the 16- to 24-year-old
population. See footnote 3 for references on the distinction among these
and other measures of the dropout problem.
9Bachman and others,


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

Y o u th ,

ch. 3.

10This group is identified as recent graduates and dropouts who are
relatives of the householder. Included may be a very small number of
individuals who are not sons or daughters of the householder, but are
otherwise related (such as a sister or a cousin). The householder, a proxy
for the dropout’s or graduate’s parent, is the person (or one of the
persons) in whose name the housing unit is owned or rented. In marriedcouple families, the term householder is replaced by reference person,
but is defined identically. In cases of joint ownership or rental
partnership by husband and wife, the reference person is self-designated,
invariably the husband. Although several simplifying assumptions have
been made, the data are believed to accurately portray the characteristics
of the specified population.
"Only a small percentage of dropouts are on their own. For example,
in October 1985, 91 percent of recent high school graduates and 74
percent of recent high school dropouts were living with their parents.
"Median income figures are tabulated from data collected on the c p s
control card. This method yields estimates that lack a high degree of
precision, but allows for intergroup comparisons.
13A householder is the person (or one of the persons) in whose name
the housing unit is owned or rented. See footnote 10.
"Samuel S. Peng, H ig h S c h o o l D ro p o u ts: D e sc r ip tiv e I n f o r m a tio n f r o m
H ig h S c h o o l a n d B e y o n d , Bulletin n c e s 8 3 - 2 2 l b (Washington, U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
November 1983).
15Peng, H ig h

S c h o o l D ro p o u ts,

p. 4.

16All analyses regarding high school graduates refer to those
individuals with 4 years of high school education only, unless otherwise
specified.
"Frank L. Mott and Nan L. Maxwell, “School-Age Mothers: 1968
and 1979,” F a m ily P la n n in g P e r sp e c tiv e s , November/December 1981, p.
290.
18See Richard B. Freeman and David A. Wise, eds.,
M a r k e t P r o b le m : I ts N a tu r e ,

C a u ses,

and

T h e Y o u th L a b o r
C o n s e q u e n c e s (Chicago,

National Bureau of Economic Research, 1982); and Richard B. Freeman
and Harry J. Holzer, eds., T h e B la c k Y o u th E m p lo y m e n t C risis
(Chicago, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1986).
"Thomas Nardone, “Decline in youth population does not lead to
lower jobless rates,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1987, pp. 40 - 41.
‘°For a discussion of the distinction between unemployment and out
of the labor force, see Kim B. Clark and Lawrence H. Summers, “The
Dynamics of Youth Unemployment,” in Freeman and Wise, eds., T h e
Y o u th L a b o r M a r k e t P r o b le m : I ts N a tu r e , C a u s e s a n d C onsequ en ces-, and
Christopher J. Flinn and James J. Heckman, “Are Unemployment and
Out of the Labor Force Behaviorally Distinct Labor Force States?”
J o u r n a l o f L a b o r E c o n o m ic s, 1983, vol. 1, no. 1.
"Paul Osterman,
p. 27.

G e ttin g S t a r t e d

(Cambridge, The

m it

Press, 1980),

"Richard B. Freeman and Harry J. Holzer, “The Black Youth
Employment Crisis: Summary of Findings,” in Freeman and Holzer,
eds., T h e B la c k Y o u th E m p lo y m e n t C risis.
"John Ballen and Richard B. Freeman, “Transitions between
Employment and Nonemployment,” in Freeman and Holzer, eds., B la c k
Y o u th E m p lo y m e n t C risis.

43

Productivity growth slows
in the organic chemicals industry
Productivity growth was highest
from 1963 to 1974; however, overall declines
in hours and employment
have characterized the 1974-85period
C l y d e H u f f s t u t l e r a n d B a r b a r a B in g h a m

Output per employee hour in the manufacture of certain
industrial organic chemicals—such as ethylene, acetic
acid, and formaldehyde—rose at an average annual rate
of 4.1 percent between 1963 and 1985, compared with 2.3
percent for all manufacturing.1 (The industry accounts
for nearly four-fifths of total employment in organic
chemicals manufacturing.) Over the period, output in­
creased at a faster rate, 5.0 percent a year, than employee
hours, which rose by only 0.9 percent.
Productivity growth was greatest from 1963 to 1974,
when it increased at a rate of 6.6 percent a year. From
1974 to 1979, the rate dropped to 3.2 percent, reflecting a
slowdown in output growth and an increase in the
employee hour rate. During the years 1979 to 1985, the
productivity rate slowed further, to 1 percent, as both
output and hours declined. (See table 1.)
Year-to-year movements in output per hour were
volatile, ranging from a 21-percent increase in 1983 to a
17-percent decline in 1975. From 1963 through 1979, the
magnitude of change in productivity was generally about
the same as, or slightly less than, the corresponding
change in output. After 1979, productivity and output
still moved in the same direction, but the annual
productivity changes were sometimes greater than output

Clyde Huffstutler and Barbara Bingham are economists in the Division
of Industry Productivity and Technology Studies, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

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

changes, largely attributable to a sustained decline in
employee hours.
A period o f rapid gains. Labor productivity growth over
the 1963-74 span was driven by large increases in output
(8.4 percent a year), which were spurred, in part, by
product innovations.2 Employee hour growth for the
same period was m oderate— 1.7 percent a year. A major
portion of this capital intensive industry’s output is made
in plants with automated, continuous processes. Con­
struction of more efficient, high-volume plants during this
period made for greater economies of scale. In ethylene
production, for instance, a major effort to increase plant
capacity started in the mid-1950’s and continued until a
plateau was reached in the late 1960’s. Advanced com­
puter technology, especially in the area of process
controls, was also a major factor behind the productivity
gain.3 (Computerized controls are essential in highvolume, continuous processing characteristic of the
industry.)
Because the number of production workers in large
organic chemicals plants is fairly constant over a wide
range of output levels, labor productivity changes in the
short run largely reflect changes in capacity utilization
and the age composition of capital stock.4 During the
early part of the 1963-74 period, effective operating
capacity for organic chemicals was high. Some excess
capacity did develop after 1966, following rapid modern-

Table 1. Indexes of productivity, output, and employment
in the industrial organic chemicals industry,11963-85
Year

Output per hour

Output

Employee hours

Employees

1963.....................
1964.....................
1965.....................

46.7
50.1
55.3

35.5
39.2
45.3

76.0
78.3
81.9

76.1
77.6
81.6

1966.....................
1967.....................
1968.....................
1969.....................
1970.....................

58.0
56.3
58.1
61.9
65.5

49.2
47.5
51.6
56.9
60.7

84.9
84.3
88.8
91.9
92.7

85.2
84.7
87.8
90.5
92.8

1971.....................
1972.....................
1973.....................
1974.....................
1975.....................

72.6
81.5
90.4
102.8
85.3

64.2
73.3
83.1
94.6
78.6

88.4
89.9
91.9
92.0
92.1

89.2
91.2
91.5
91.3
93.4

1976.....................
1977....................
1978....................
1979.....................
1980.....................

93.4
100.0
102.8
113.4
98.9

90.3
100.0
104.3
116.7
102.4

96.7
100.0
101.5
102.9
103.5

97.3
100.0
101.4
102.6
104.4

1981.....................
1982.....................
1983.....................
1984....................
1985.....................

103.9
87.2
105.3
114.0
112.4

103.9
85.3
98.8
104.2
95.9

100.0
97.8
93.8
91.4
85.3

99.7
99.6
95.0
92.1
85.9

Average annual rates of change (in percent)
1 9 6 3 -1 9 8 5 ........
1 9 6 3 -7 4 ...........
197 4 -7 9
1 9 7 9 -8 5 ...........

4.1

6.6
3.2
1.0

5.0
8.4
5.9
-2.1

0.9
1.7
2.6

-3.1

0.9
1.7
2.5
-2 .9

' Not elsewhere classified.

ization efforts (including debottlenecking) and new plant
construction, but the mix of capital stock had become
more efficient. During extended periods of excess capac­
ity, it is common practice to mothball the older, smaller,
less efficient plants. Thus, the negative effects of overca­
pacity on industry productivity are somewhat offset by
having more efficient plants in operation.5
The slowdown. Plant replacement continued during the
1974-79 period. Further improvements in computer
hardware and software also were made. However, the
positive influence of these changes was offset by declining
capacity utilization and a slowdown in process innova­
tion.6 Moreover, although the rate of output growth
slowed, the growth rate of employee hours increased
faster than during the previous 11 years.
By this time, economies of scale had largely been
realized in many commodity chemicals plants.7 Thus, the
productivity benefits in building a new plant were less
than in the earlier period. Also, as demand slowed, the
utilization of many of the very large plants declined,
lessening their efficiency and lowering productivity.8 In
1975, for instance, when output dropped by 17 percent,
the industry operated at only 74 percent of capacity—and
productivity fell 17 percent. The situation was aggravated

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

by the continued construction of large plants even as
demand fell off. The lengthy period involved in plant
planning and construction, combined with the belief that
high sales growth would soon resume, contributed to the
overbuilding.9
A volatile period.
The 1979-85 period, during which
productivity increased moderately, was marked by an
overall decline in output accompanied by reductions in
employment. Annual changes in productivity were very
erratic—due largely to big swings in output.
There was some apparent progress in technical innova­
tion, particularly in improved automation in the produc­
tion of specialty chemicals.10 (Specialty chemicals are
usually batch-produced in low volume.) However, inas­
much as the commodity chemicals sector dominates the
industry and its productivity changes are largely deter­
mined by capacity utilization rates, overall industry
productivity improvements were dampened by several
years of excess capacity.11 For example, in 1980, when
productivity dropped 13 percent, capacity utilization for
plants producing ethylene, a major feedstock in the
manufacture of other products and the most important
industry product in terms of volume, was 71 percent.
Operating rates recovered briefly in 1981, but fell again by
the end of the year to 7 0 -7 5 percent. (Productivity
increased only 5 percent.) By 1982, when the utilization
rate was 60 - 65 percent and many plants were closed,
productivity again dropped sharply. Ethylene, formalde­
hyde, and propylene plants were running at less than 60
percent of capacity.
The upward climb in productivity in 1983 and 1984
mostly reflected increases in output. Producers of ethyl­
ene and other commodity chemicals kept their older, lessefficient plants mothballed because of the excess capacity
in the more-modern plants currently operating. Thus, the
surge in demand was met without having to initiate plant
startups, which are costly in both dollars and labor time.12
There was no significant change in productivity in 1985.

Products
Organic chemicals can be divided into two groups—
commodity and specialty. Commodity chemicals are
produced and sold in large quantities and usually are used
as feedstocks in the synthesis of other organic chemicals.
Some commodity chemicals also are sold to manufactur­
ers outside the industry, such as those in plastics
production. Specialty chemicals are made in much
smaller quantities—a whole year’s supply sometimes will
be produced in a few days. Some of these chemicals are
made to individual customers’ specifications; others are
simply low-volume stock chemicals.
Few organic chemicals are direct consumer products.
They are purchased by companies in many different indus45

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Productivity in Organic Chemicals

tries and have a vast array of end uses. (See exhibit 1.)
Synthetic acetic acid, for instance, is used by chemical
companies as an intermediate to produce other organic
chemicals such as vinyl acetate, and by industries outside
chemicals manufacturing, like textile processing. In addition,
some acetic acid production processes use other organic
chemicals as a feedstock (such as methanol and acetalde­
hyde), while ethylene is used only as a feedstock in further
chemical processing. Other industries that use organic
chemicals include pharmaceuticals, automobiles, synthetic
tires, cosmetics, building materials, household appliances,
and flavorings. The following tabulation shows the volume
rank of the industry’s top 13 chemicals:13
1. Ethylene
2. Propylene
3. Ethylene dichloride
4. Vinyl chloride
5. Terephthalic acid
(acid and ether)
6. Methanol

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

Ethylene oxide
Formaldehyde, 37 percent
Ethylene gylcol
Acetic acid
Propylene oxide
Acrylonitrile
Vinyl acetate

Output trends
Over the long term, output increased at a rate of 5
percent, compared with the 2.5-percent rate for all
manufacturing. This, however, reflected a high growth
rate (8.4 percent) for the first 11 years, followed by a rate
of only 0.8 percent over the remaining 10 years.
High growth period.
From 1963 to 1974, output grew at
an average annual rate of 8.4 percent, with 6 years of
double-digit increases. During this period, total manufac­
turing output rose at a rate of 3.3 percent. Low cost,

readily available petroleum-based feedstocks and rapidly
developing markets helped fuel the output growth.14
The increased demand came mainly from the expand­
ing plastics and synthetics industries. Synthetic fibers
output, for example, increased at an average annual rate
of 11.7 percent from 1970 to 1974, while the organic
chemicals industry’s output was rising 12.1 percent. (See
table 2.)
Energy shortages— the next 5 years. The period of high
output growth ended in 1975 when output dropped
sharply (16.9 percent). The 1975 output drop was largely
attributable to the general decline in industrial activity,
but materials shortages, specifically of petroleum-based
products, may also have been limiting factors. The oil
embargo of late 1973 and early 1974 and the imposition of
an oil import fee in early 1975 restricted the production of
petroleum-related feedstocks essential to the industry.15
In 1976, output increased 14.9 percent as demand rose
and the supplies of petroleum-related products improved,
although they generally were priced much higher. N atu­
ral gas supplies continued to be somewhat limited. Output
grew at an average annual rate of 8.5 percent for the next
3 years, which was slightly above the industry’s 1963-74
rate.
Even though the industry’s overall rate of output
increase slowed over the 1974-79 period, it ran higher
than that for all manufacturing— 5.9 percent versus 4.5
percent. M ajor end-use industries showed mixed output
trends.

Exhibit 1. Selected organic chemicals and their end uses
Chemical

End use

1,3 Butadiene, made in chemical plants................
Ethylene or ethene................................................
Propylene or propene............................................
Chloroform or trichloromethane..........................
DDT or dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane...........
Dichlorodifluoromethane.....................................
Ethyl chloride.......................................................

Synthetic rubber, fibers
Plastics, antifreeze, synthetic fibers, solvents, anesthetic, welding materials, gasoline additives
Plastics, synthetic fibers
Freon 22, refrigerant, propellants, resins, pencillin solvent
Insecticide, scabicide
Freon 12, refrigerant, aerosol propellant •
Local anesthetic, solvents, refrigerant, gasoline antiknock

Ethanol or ethyl alcohol........................................
Ethylene glycol or 1,2-Ethanediol........................
Methanol or methyl alcohol..................................
Ether or diethyl ether............................................
Ethylene oxide........................................................

Solvents, cosmetics, toiletries
Antifreeze, polyester, Mylar films
Plastics, fibers, adhesives, solvents, rubbing alcohol, antifreeze, octane booster
Solvents, anesthetic
Polyester fibers, films, antifreeze, surfacants, sterilizers, pharmaceuticals, synthetic rubber,
paint, adhesives, resin, cosmetics, brake fluid, solvents, pesticides
Chemical warfare agent
Plastics, adhesives, preservatives, dyes, disinfectants, fertilizers
Rayon, plastics, solvents, paints, electronic cleaners
Solvents, rubber manufacturing, photochemicals, plastics, pharmaceuticals, fibers
Rayon, pharmaceuticals, coatings, solvents, perfume, flavorings, paint, plastics
Perfume, flavorings, counterirritants
Vulcanizing accelerator, urinary tract antiseptic, gas mask absorbant, resins, explosives
Fibers, plastics, synthetic rubber, mustard gas

Mustard gas or dichlorodiethyl sulfide.................
Formaldehyde or methanal ..................................
Acetone or 2-propanone........................................
Acetic acid or ethanoic acid..................................
Ethyl acetate..........................................................
Methyl salicylate (wintergreen)............................
Hexamethylenetetramine or methenamine..........
Acrylonitrile or propenenitrile..............................

46
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Slowdown in the 1980’s.
In 1980, there was another
large output decline (12.3 percent) as petroleum-based
feedstock supplies were once again strained and the level
of industrial activity slowed. There was a small increase in
1981, but for the industry and the general business
economy, the rebound was short-lived. The following
year, the organic chemicals industry suffered its largest
single-year drop, 17.9 percent, largely attributable to a
falloff in final demand. Output rebounded strongly in
1983, increasing almost 16 percent, as feedstock supplies
were generally good and prices favorable. The growth in
demand for automobiles and housing, which helped
stimulate the 1983 increase, carried through to 1984,
though output grew at a much slower rate. The following
year, output once again declined, as industrial production
slowed. The one exceptional increase in 1983 could not
offset output declines in other years, resulting in an
annualized 6-year rate of change of -2.1 percent. (All
manufacturing output rose 2 percent.)
During this period, growth in two of the industry’s
m ajor markets, plastics and synthetic fibers, slowed.
There were no comparable major new product markets to
sustain high growth rates—rather, the organic chemicals
industry had to seek new uses for old products. The
increased cost of raw materials for petroleum-based
chemicals, which led to increased final chemical prices,
also depressed demand somewhat.16 Furthermore, the
industry faced increasing competition abroad (as the
dollar strengthened) and at home (from foreign produc­
ers), especially in commodity chemicals. While the ratio
of imports to new supplies (imports plus product ship­
ments) remained fairly low—it was 0.034 in 1981 and
0.063 in 1985—increased imports in major end-use
industries like automobiles and textiles dampened their
output growth, thus indirectly reducing demand for the
organic chemicals used by these industries.17

Employment
Employment numbered 96,500 persons by 1985, having
risen 13 percent since 1963, and having peaked at 117,200
in 1980. All of the long-term increase was among
nonproduction workers, whose numbers rose 38 percent.
The number of production workers was at its highest in
1979, that of nonproduction workers, in 1982.
From 1963 to 1969, moderate increases in employment
occurred as salesforces were expanded to open up new
m arkets.18 (See table 3.) The period was followed by a 5year lull, in spite of double-digit output increases in 1972,
1973, and 1974.
Nonproduction worker hours rose slightly faster from
1974 to 1979, as research and development efforts were
stepped up to meet growing competition and to take
advantage of new end-use markets—particularly in plas­
tics. According to industry sources, a larger salesforce

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

Table 2. Average annual rates of change in output for
selected industries, 1963-85
Industry

196 3-8 5

1963 - 74

1974 - 79

1979 - 85

All m anufacturing........

2.5

3.3

4.5

2.0

Industrial organic
ch em ica ls..........................

5.0

8.4

5.9

-2 .1

Selected industries:1
Synthetic fib e rs ...............
Pharmaceutical
preparations................
Soaps and detergents....
Cosmetics and other
toile trie s.......................
Paints and allied
products.......................
Tires and inner tu b e s .....
Miscellaneous plastics
products.......................
Major household
appliances...................
Motor ve h ic le s................

4.7

10.1

4.5

- 2 .7

5.1
22.9

8.4
4.6

4.2
2.5

0.4
- 1.1

24.7

7.6

3.7

2.5

1.7
1.4

3.0
5.1

2.7
1.6

0.4
0.5

—

—

10.3

6.2

2.1
2.8

3.6
4.2

5.9
8.3

0.3
5.2

1 Major end-use markets for organic chemicals.
2 1 9 6 3 -8 4 .
Note :

Dashes indicate data not available.

and clerical staff, many of whom had been hired in
anticipation of continued high sales growth, were part of
the nonproduction worker increase.19 The rate of increase
in production worker hours also rose.
Nonproduction worker hours declined from 1979 to
1985. Employment reductions, particularly in corporate
staff, were made in conjunction with industrywide cost
cuts.20 The use of management information systems, on­
line data base services that provide information on
changing regulations and safety and health matters, and
better training helped managers become more productive.
In addition, some marketing departments increased their
participation in industry marketing conferences at which
they can present new products to many potential custom­
ers at one time, in lieu of numerous separate sales trips.21
Both the number of production workers and their hours
fell every year over the 1979-85 span, as some of the
plants that had been closed on a temporary basis stayed
closed.22
Occupations. Chemical engineers, chemists, and techni­
cians account for a significant proportion of the profes­
sional workers employed. Two of the larger production
worker occupational groups are machine operatives and
mechanics, repairers, and installers.
The proportion of nonproduction workers is high in
this industry, and increased from 34 percent in 1963 to 42
percent in 1985. This is 9 percentage points higher than
the average for all manufacturing industries for 1963 and
12 points higher than that for 1985. As the use of
instruments (especially when computer-based) and the
complexity of equipment has grown, so has the need for
highly skilled professionals.23
47

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Productivity in Organic Chemicals

Technology, research, and capital
The technology employed to produce most organic
chemicals, whether on a large scale or small, is based on
chemical reactions: Feedstocks or intermediate chemicals
(elements or compounds) are mixed with a catalyst under
high pressure or high temperature, or both, in a tightly
controlled environment to produce the desired chemical
derivatives. Byproducts are separated and then recycled,
processed further, sold, or otherwise disposed of.
Large-scale processes.
Most commodity chemicals are
manufactured in large-scale operations that have low
labor requirements per unit of output. The plants that
produce them usually operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week. Such plants account for much of the industry’s
output volume. Computers control the complex chemical
processes through feedback mechanisms that are moni­
tored by engineers and other operators.
Although direct production unit labor requirements are
low, there are some operations that are more labor
intensive—repair and maintenance, and loading and
shipping. Many hours are expended on checking and
maintaining the miles of pipeline and other equipment,
particularly during a turnaround (such as a scheduled
maintenance shutdown), mothballing, or startup.24 Re­
pair and maintenance are crucial operations, because
reactions take place under high temperature or pressure,
or both, and often involve highly toxic or corrosive
materials.
Olefin plants, which produce two of the m ajor organic
chemicals, ethylene and propylene, are large-volume
producers. These plants are most economical when they
produce great quantities; their annual capacity ranges
upward of 1 billion pounds. In the early 1980’s, more than
75 percent of the industry’s ethylene capacity was from
plants that could produce more than 500,000 metric tons
annually. More than 20 percent was from plants with a
capacity greater than 1 million metric tons.25 Over the
past 25 years, changes and refinements in the plants’
processing technologies and increasing economies of scale
led to a doubling of their average yield.26
Older olefin plants relied on natural gas-based raw
materials (butane, ethane, and propane). These plants
Table 3. Employment trends in the industrial organic
chemicals industry, 1963-851
Average annual rates of change (in percent)
Period

Nonproduction worker
hours

All employee hours

Production worker
hours

1 9 6 3 -1 9 8 5 ........

0.9

0.3

1.9

1 9 6 3 - 7 4 . ...

1.7

1.3

2.5

1 9 7 4 - 7 9 . ...

2.6

2.5

2.6

1 9 7 9 - 8 5 . ...

- 3 .1

-4 .0

- 1 .5

'The difference in rates of change between employment and hours was
negligible over the long term, so only rates of change in hours are presented.


48
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

were succeeded by thermal or steam crackers which use
naphtha and gas oil (or heavier, oil-derived hydrocar­
bons) as a feedstock. Olefin plants make ethylene,
propylene (considered a coproduct), and other hydrocar­
bons, the proportions of which depend on the feedstock
used. Generally, the lighter feedstocks produce higher
percentages of ethylene.27 During the early 1970’s, many
producers who were either retrofitting or building new
plants switched from designs that used light hydrocarbon
feedstocks to those using heavy hydrocarbons.
In the eighties, companies began to build plants that
had more feedstock flexibility. Many new olefin plants
were designed to handle wide variations in feedstock type,
allowing for more rapid feedstock substitutions. However,
use of alternate raw materials (other than the one(s) for
which a plant is primarily designed) still result in lower
product yield, higher costs, and less output.28 But costly
shutdowns, which had been required when switching
feedstocks, can now generally be avoided.
These technological changes, though not primarily
designed to lower unit labor requirements, have helped
the industry improve productivity over the long run.
Significant additional labor is required when starting up a
plant or when greatly increasing output from a plant
operating at very low capacity. But stepping up from 70
percent to 90 percent of capacity, for example, requires
few additional production workers.29 Continual, highcapacity operations facilitated by feedstock flexibility
allow companies to use labor more efficiently.
One technological change that went hand in hand with
the construction of very large plants during the seventies
was the introduction of computers. (Although older
plants were ofttimes retrofitted with state-of-the-art
electronics, the new technology proved most effective in
new plants.) Since then, there have been continual
improvements in both computer hardware and software,
particularly for process control. One recent innovation in
this area has been the use of optimizing controls.30
(Optimizing software, when employed plantwide, in­
volves the use of extensive data bases, plant process
models including economic and engineering variables and
constraints, and reaction models, which all are then
integrated with the control system.)
Overall, these changes have helped the industry pro­
duce a given volume of chemicals faster. Moreover, some
processes are now so complex that they could not be run
without computers. The computer control systems con­
stantly monitor and collect data, and then calculate and
evaluate the results. These data, in conjunction with
process-specific software, enable the systems to perform
automatic startups and shutdowns of process units, and to
optimize on-line production under given conditions and
constraints. Process controls also are used to analyze
incoming raw materials and outgoing finished products.
Controls have become so important that, in large plant

construction, instrument expense can account for up to 15
percent of total cost.31
Because most of these newer, large plants have very low
labor requirements, only those technological innovations
that make dramatic improvements in the feedstock-tooutput ratio are likely to have a significant, if indirect,
effect on labor productivity—and such changes are
seldom felt industrywide, at least in the short term .32
These process innovations can entail changing any or all
of the factors in a chemical process—the required
temperature or pressure, catalysts, raw material mix,
reaction time, and so forth.
Specialty chemical plants.
Specialty chemicals, such as
synthetic perfumes, are often produced in small volume,
either on a batch basis or in a continuous process. While a
few stock specialty chemicals are made in quantity, most
are custom ordered and produced in short runs. An
average specialty plant produces 50 or so different
chemicals. In general, these processes tend to be labor
intensive, particularly the batch processes. H ow ­
ever, recent technological improvements, largely in
computerized process controls, have led to increased
automation. These advances are particularly applicable to
continuous operations, although it is possible to automate
some parts of batch processes.
Research and development.
Research is crucial to this
industry as it seeks to meet the changing user needs. The
research and development budgets for all chemicals
companies (as a percent of sales) run 15 percent to 20
percent above the all-industry average.33
Much of the research focuses on existing products and
processes, resulting in incremental improvements. Some
of the research is directed toward end-product develop­
ment, though in recent years it has seldom resulted in
revolutionary new products. Instead, research has led to
the development of new markets or new applications for
existing products.
There is also continual research on technology, though
it is focused on improving labor productivity to only a
limited degree. Through replacement or retrofitting, plant
equipment may be adapted to shifts in raw materials
markets (based on price and availability); to new chemical
processes that are more energy efficient, have higher
yields, and so forth; and to cope with new environmental
or safety hazards and regulations. The energy crisis of the
seventies made feedstock flexibility and energy efficiency
particularly important. New catalysts which are effective
at lower temperatures are examples of technological
change used to increase energy efficiency.
Capital investment.
For the industry as a whole, large
expenditures are needed each year to maintain equipment
and structures because of the huge amount of capital

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

stock in place. In 1982, capital assets per employee were
almost six times greater than for all manufacturing.34 In
addition, because technological changes in this industry
occur more or less continuously, obsolescence is rapid and
high rates of depreciation are common.35 In the past, the
industry’s plant and equipment had a comparatively short
lifespan owing to the pace of technological change, the
rapidly increasing economies of scale, and the corrosive,
high pressure, high temperature processing environment.
The average life span of plants lengthened somewhat after
1973 as the pace of technological change slowed and
fewer replacement plants were built. (By that time, near­
maximum economies of scale had been reached for some
commodities and the cost of new plants had risen
sharply.36)
Online industry capacity for a given chemical changes
periodically. Within the total available capacity for a
product, actual online capacity is adjusted to fluctuations
in supply and demand by closing and opening the small,
older plants. In addition, plants regularly shut down as
they undergo extended turnarounds during which equip­
ment and catalysts are checked and serviced, and, at
times, complete processes are replaced.
Industry structure.
In 1982, 74 percent of the establish­
ments in the industry had fewer than 100 employees—
only 3 percent had 1,000 workers or more. The group of
small plants accounted for 10 percent of industry value of
shipments and 11 percent of employees. In contrast, the
large establishments produced 44 percent of total ship­
ments and employed 45 percent of the industry work
force.37
Because of the interdependence in the industry (that is,
the end product of one plant may be the feedstock of
another), many plants intentionally are located near one
another. For example, plants making methanol may be
integrated with plants making ammonia because the
processes and ancillary equipment are similar and the
production of methanol requires carbon dioxide, which is
a byproduct of ammonia synthesis.

Outlook
The organic chemicals industry has undergone exten­
sive restructuring in recent years, as it undertook a major
upgrading of its plants (while restricting capacity expan­
sion), consolidated product lines, closed or sold off
inefficient plants, and trimmed its labor force.38 These
changes have possibly laid the foundation for long-term
productivity increases, if output grows steadily. The areas
of potential output growth appear to be changing,
however. Chemicals companies are focusing on opportu­
nities for growth in specialty chemicals because it is
unlikely that the commodity chemicals portion of the
industry will experience many large, long-term output
49

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Productivity in Organic Chemicals

increases. Octane enhancers and methanol fuels are two
of the few potential high-growth areas for commodities.
U.S. companies may find it increasingly less expensive to
import feedstock chemicals, rather than produce their own.
These imports will come largely from increased production
in the Middle East, Mexico, Canada, and other countries that
have ready access to cheap and plentiful supplies of oil and
natural gas.

Technological innovation for commodity chemical process­
ing will continue, but probably at the comparatively
slow rates of recent years. There is greater potential for
productivity improvement in specialty chemical production.
If research and development activities continue to intensify
and efforts to automate batch or semicontinuous processes
typical of specialty chemical production are sustained,
significant productivity improvements may result.

□
■FOOTNOTES

'The segment of the organic chemicals industry discussed in this
article, S IC 2869, is defined in the 1 9 7 2 S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr i a l C la ss ific a tio n
M a n u a l as including establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing
industrial organic chemicals not elsewhere classified. Important prod­
ucts of this industry include: noncyclic organic chemicals; solvents;
polyhydric alcohols; synthetic perfume and flavoring materials; rubber
processing chemicals; plasticizers; synthetic tanning agents; chemical
warfare gas; and esters, amines, etc. of polyhydric alcohols and fatty and
other acids.
Average annual rates of change presented in this article are based on
linear least squares of the logarithms of the index numbers. Extensions of
the indexes will appear in the annual b l s Bulletin, P r o d u c tiv ity M e a s u r e s
f o r S e le c te d I n d u s tr ie s a n d G o v e r n m e n t S ervices.

2Martin Neil Baily and Alok K. Chakrabarti, “Innovation and
Productivity, in U.S. Industry,” B r o o k in g s P a p e r s on E c o n o m ic A c tiv ity ,
2, 1985, pp. 611, 619. The average number of product innovations per
year in the chemical industry was as follows:
R a d ic a l o r
m a jo r d iffe r e n c e s

1967-73 ..............
2.4
1974-79 ......................... 2
1980-82 .........................0

S ig n ific a n t
im p r o v e m e n t

M in o r
im p o r ta n c e

96.9
9.0
5.7

232.6
29.7
59.0

industry sources; Harold A. Wittcoff and Bryan G. Reuben,

P r o d u c tiv ity -e n h a n c in g

A ll p r o c e s s

in n o v a tio n s

in n o v a tio n s

M a jo r

1967-73 .. . 0.6
1974-79 .. . .3
1980-82 .. . .7

S ig n if ic a n t

M in o r

M a jo r

S ig n if ic a n t

M in o r

4.1
2.8
5.7

2.6

3.1
2.7
2.3

22.7
15.8
23.7

13.1
13.8
8.7

1.0
1.0

7Richard C. Levin, “Technical Change and Optimal Scale; Some
Evidence and Implications,” S o u th e r n E c o n o m ic J o u r n a l (Southern
Economic Association and the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, October 1977), p. 214; and Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and
Productivity,” pp. 623, 630.
industry sources; and Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and
Productivity,” p. 624.
9Wittcoff and Reuben, I n d u s tr i a l O rg a n ic C h e m ic a ls in P e r sp e c tiv e, Pt.
O n e: R a w M a te r ia ls a n d M a n u fa c tu r e , p. 20; Jane H. Cutaia, “Rediscov­
ering the formula for profits,” B u s in e ss W e e k , Jan. 12, 1987, p. 72; and
Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and Productivity,” p. 624.
10Industry sources.
" “Productivity makes slim gain as capacity use remains low,”
June 14, 1982, p. 61.

C h e m ic a l & E n g in e e r in g N e w s,

12Ted Wett, “Capacity down, production up: Rx for ethylene’s ’84
outlook,” O il & G a s J o u r n a l, Sept. 3, 1984, p. 55; and U.S. Department
of Commerce, 1 9 8 3 U .S. I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k , pp. 9 -7 , 9 -9 .

I n d u s tr i a l O rg a n ic C h e m ic a ls in P e r sp e c tiv e, P t. O n e: R a w M a te r ia ls a n d

(New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1980), p. 20; and various
issues of U.S. Department of Commerce, U .S. I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k
(Washington, Government Printing Office), chapters on chemicals.

M a n u fa c tu r e

4Industry sources; Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and Productiv­
ity,” pp. 615, 624; and U.S. Department of Commerce, 1 9 8 2 U .S.
I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k , p. 98.
"Effective or preferred capacity is lower than full capacity due to cost
considerations or other reasons. Capacity rates quoted are from various
issues of the American Chemical Society’s C h e m ic a l & E n g in e e r in g
N e w s and the U .S. I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k .
Many of the references to energy usage and capacity utilization refer
to the “petrochemical” industry or the “organic chemical” industry
because data at the 4-digit level are not available. In 1984, sic 2869
accounted for 79 percent of total employment and 81 percent of the
overall value of shipments in sic 286, Industrial Organic Chemicals. The
petrochemicals group includes the following industries: 2821, 2822,
2824, 2843, 2865, 2869, 2873, and 2895. Of these, sic 2869 is the largest.
6Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and Productivity,” pp. 617-18,
623. Employees of two large commodity chemical producers, who were
interviewed in conjunction with this study, confirmed that a falloff in
innovation and the slowdown in product demand were two of the most
important causes of the productivity slowdown.
The following data on the average number of process innovations per
year were presented on this study of the total chemical industry:

50
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

13C h e m ic a l a n d E n g in e e r in g N ew s,

Apr. 13, 1987, p. 21.

14U.S. Department of Commerce, Industry and Trade Administra­
tion, 1 9 8 5 U .S. I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k (Government Printing Office,
January 1985), p. 11-2.
1"Chemical-grade olefins, particularly ethylene and propylene, are
among the most important feedstocks for organic chemicals. These
olefins are made from either natural gas or naptha fractions, which are
petroleum-based.
16Baily and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and Productivity,” p. 623.
"Bernard A. Gelb and Gary L. Guenther, U .S. P r im a r y P e tr o c h e m i­
c a ls: T h e S u p e r f u n d T a x e s a n d O th e r F a c to rs S h a p in g R e c e n t T r e n d s in
S u p p ly a n d D e m a n d (Washington, Congressional Research Services,
The Library of Congress, Aug. 30, 1984), pp. 12, 15-17, 21-23; and
Bailey and Chakrabarti, “Innovation and Productivity,” pp. 623-24.
"industry sources.
"industry sources; and Baily and Chakrabarti. “Innovation and
Productivity,” p. 624.
20Industry sources; and U.S. Department of Commerce,
p. 9 -7 .

1 9 8 3 U .S.

I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

2'Industry sources.
22Industry sources; and U.S. Department of Commerce,
pp. 9 -1 0 to 9-12.

I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k ,

1 9 8 3 U .S.

23R. Norris Shreve and Joseph A. Brink,
(New York, McGraw-Hill, 1977), p. 20.

C h e m ic a l P r o c e s s E c o n o m ic s

24Industry sources.

The following data on research and development expenditures for sic
28 are from the Bureau of the Census, S ta t is tic a l A b s tr a c t o f th e U n ite d
S ta t e s 1 9 8 6 (Government Printing Office, 1985), p. 580:
R & D d o lla r s (m illio n s)

25U.S. Department of Commerce,
26Wittcoff and Reuben,
p. 35.

1 9 8 3 U .S . In d u s tria l O u tlo o k ,

27Plants produce different grade feedstocks; chemical (95 percent C3)
or polymer grade (99.9 percent C3) determines whether they will be used
further within the industry (perhaps captively), or sold as a commodity
to other industries. (Refinery grade chemicals are made largely by those
olefin plants in the petroleum refining industry.)
28U.S. Department of Commerce,

1 9 8 3 U .S . In d u s tria l O u tlo o k ,

p. 9-8.

s ic 28

s ic 28

1975 ...............
1980 ...............
1983 ...............

$2,727
4,636
7,287

A l l in d u s tr i e s

3.7
3.6
4.4

3.1
3.0
3.8

According to 1981 data from the National Science Foundation, the
industrial chemical industry (sic 281,2,6) spends slightly less on
research and development than the total chemical industry (2.7 versus
3.0 percent of research and development to value of shipments).
34Bureau of the Census, 1 9 8 3 A n n u a l S u r v e y o f M a n u fa c tu r e s ,
M83(AS)4 (Government Printing Office, 1986), pp. 4 -7 , 4-31.

29Industry sources.
30Industry sources; G. L. Funk and C. C. Kania, “ Optimizing an entire
olefins plant pays off,” O il a n d G a s J o u r n a l, Sept. 3, 1984, p.75; and
Shreve and Brink, C h e m ic a l P r o c e s s E c o n o m ic s , pp. 12-16.
C h e m ic a l P r o c e s s E c o n o m ic s ,

p. 12.

32The average number of production workers per plant in 1982 was
only 94.
33John K. Stille, I n d u s tr ia l O r g a n ic C h e m is tr y (Englewood Cliffs, n j ,
Prentice-Hall, 1968), p. 1; and Wittcoff and Reuben, In d u s tria l O rg a n ic
C h e m ic a ls in P e r s p e c tiv e , P t. O n e , p. 20.

APPENDIX:

35Stille, I n d u s tr i a l O rg a n ic
36Wittcoff and Reuben,
Pt. O ne, pp. 1, 27.

C h e m is try ,

p. 1.

I n d u s tr i a l O rg a n ic C h e m ic a ls in P e rsp e c tiv e,

37Bureau of the Census, 1 9 8 2 C e n su s o f M a n u fa c tu r e s , M C 82-I-28F
(Government Printing Office, 1985), p. 28F-9.
38Blanca Riemer, “Are America’s manufacturers finally back on the
map?” B u s in e ss W eek , Nov. 17, 1986, pp. 92-93; Jane H. Cutaia,
B u s in e ss W eek , Jan. 2, 1987, p. 72; and “Chemical Recovery Follows
Restructuring,” C h e m ic a l M a r k e tin g R e p o r te r , Dec. 15, 1986, p. 3.

Measurement techniques and limitations

Indexes of output per employee hour measure changes
in the relation between the output of an industry and the
employee hours 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.
Real output was calculated in terms of the deflated
value of shipments (adjusted for inventory change) for
each product group. Changes in prices were removed
from the current-dollar values by means of appropriate
price indexes at various levels of subaggregation for a
variety of products in each group. In order to combine the
output segments into a total output index, employee hour
weights relating to the individual segments were applied.


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

Y ear

In d u s tria l O rg a n ic C h e m ic a ls in P e r s p e c tiv e , Pt.

O ne,

31Shreve and Brink,

R & D a s a p e r c e n t o f s a le s

p.9-9.

Complete output data are available only in years for
which the Commerce Department takes a Census of
Manufactures (such as 1972, 1977, and 1982). For the
intercensal years, the data are based on samples, and are
not quite so complete. Therefore, these data are benchmarked to census-year data.
The indexes of output per employee hour relate total
output to one input—labor. The indexes do not measure
the specific contribution of labor, capital, or any other
single factor. Rather, they reflect the joint effects of
factors such as changes in technology, capital investment,
capacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and
efforts of the work force, managerial ability, and other
factors.

51

Foreign Labor
Developments

U.S. ends ILO moratorium
by ratifying two conventions
T a d d L in s e n m a y e r

On May 12, 1988, President Ronald Reagan formally
ratified two conventions adopted by the International
Labor Organization ( i l o ) in 1976. The U.S. Senate had
given its nearly unanimous consent on February 1.
These two actions broke an undeclared but unyielding
moratorium on ratification of i l o standards that had
lasted 35 years—a moratorium which i l o advocates,
particularly a f l - c i o President Lane Kirkland, argued
was eroding American influence in the organization. In
Senate hearings, Kirkland, along with former Labor
Secretary William E. Brock and Secretary of State George
P. Shultz, noted that the United States was the target of
increasingly sharp criticism not only from Communist
countries, but from U.S. allies as well, for failing to ratify
i l o standards.
Ratification of the two new conventions still leaves the
U.S. ratification record—9 ratifications out of more than
160 i l o standards—far behind most other i l o members.
The U.S. action nevertheless is historic. (See exhibit 1.)
Not only is this the first American ratification of i l o
standards since 1953, but one of the conventions is the
first nonmaritime i l o standard ever ratified by the United
States.
Prior to the ratification of the new standards, all but
one of the U.S. ratifications involved i l o maritime
standards (the remaining ratification is a purely proce­
dural agreement transferring the i l o from the old League
of Nations to the United Nations). One of the two new
ratifications is similarly in the maritime field. Approved
by a Senate vote of 84 to 0, Convention No. 147
(Minimum Standards in Merchant Ships) requires ratify­
ing countries to ensure effective safety and health condi-

Tadd Linsenmayer is director, Office of Foreign Relations, Bureau of
International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor.

52
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

tions on board ships flying their flag or ships calling at
their ports.
Convention No. 144 (Tripartite Consultations), which
the Senate approved by an 81 to 2 margin, is the first
nonmaritime convention ever ratified. It requires govern­
ments to establish effective machinery to ensure tripartite
(government, worker, employer) consultation on i l o related issues, including reviewing the possible ratification
of other i l o standards.
This requirement became a matter of considerable
controversy, and led to a remarkable compromise be­
tween American worker and employer delegates to the
i l o . U.S. employers have long been concerned that
ratification of i l o standards might adversely affect
existing U.S. labor law because of the Constitution’s
supremacy clause making international treaties the su­
preme law of the land. For that reason, they were initially
opposed to the ratification of any nonmaritime standards.
What finally allowed ratification of Convention No.
144 to move ahead was an agreement on a statement of
principles concerning how the United States would review
other i l o standards for possible ratification. The Presi­
dent’s Committee on the i l o , a Federal advisory commit­
tee chaired by the Secretary of Labor and including
representatives of business and labor, established three
fundamental ratification principles:
• Each i l o convention will be examined on its merits on
a tripartite basis;
• If there are any differences between the convention and
Federal law and practice, these will be dealt with in the
normal legislative process; and
• There is no intention to change State law and practice
by Federal action through ratification of i l o conven­
tions, and the examination will include possible con­
flicts between Federal and State law that would be
caused by such ratification.
These principles will apply to all i l o standards being
considered for possible U.S. ratification, including several
key human rights and technical standards now before a
tripartite subcommittee of the President’s Committee on
the i l o .

Exhibit 1.
the

Chronology of American participation in

1 9 1 9 ......

Samuel Gompers chairs the commission
which drafts the ilo Constitution

1920 ......

U.S. Senate refuses to join the League of
Nations or the ilo

1934 ......

U.S. joins the ilo

1938 ......

U.S. ratifies five ilo conventions (only two
others are ratified 1 9 3 8 -8 8 )

1970 ......

U.S. withholds ilo funds, charging pro-Soviet
bias

1972 ......

U.S. restores ilo funds, citing progress on
reforms

1975 ......

After ilo recognizes Palestine Liberation Or­
ganization, U.S. files letter of intent to
withdraw

1977 ......

U.S. withdrawal takes effect

1980 ......

U.S. rejoins ilo

1988 ......

U.S. ratifies two ilo conventions, including
first nonmaritime convention

il o

American delegates to the forthcoming 1988 i l o
conference, which meets in Geneva, Switzerland, June
1-22, say ratification of these two conventions should
boost U.S. credibility in the organization. Edward J.
Hickey Jr., longtime a f l - c i o representative in the i l o
Conference Committee on the Application of Conven­
tions and Recommendations, claims these ratifications
will be particularly helpful during the 1988 conference in
dealing with worker rights violations in other countries.
Says Hickey, “Every time we point to problems in other
countries, they point right back at our poor ratification
record. Now we can show them we’re doing something
about it.”
In spite of this optimism on worker rights issues,
several other 1988 i l o conference issues may prove more
difficult than those in the 1987 conference. A number of
Americans who attended the 1987 conference described it
as being surprisingly calm, and fear the mood may not be
as “mellow” in 1988.
The 1987 conference agenda, for example, contained
few issues requiring decisions. Two of the technical
agenda items—those concerning employment promotion
and construction safety—were before the conference for
preliminary discussion. The 1988 conference, however,
will have to vote on new conventions and recommenda­
tions on these issues. A third technical item in 1987
concerning i l o technical cooperation programs resulted
in the adoption of noncontroversial general conclusions.
This will be replaced in 1988 by two new and potentially
contentious issues: proposed new standards on the rights

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

of indigenous and tribal populations, and principles for
rural employment promotion.
The 1987 il o conference also temporarily sidestepped a
challenge to the credentials of the Polish worker delegation,
an issue which delegates to the 1988 conference may have to
face squarely. The 1987 challenge, filed by Western worker
delegates, charged that the Polish government had neither
consulted Solidarnosc nor included any of its members in the
Polish worker delegation, in violation of the il o Constitu­
tion. The conference avoided a vote on this challenge by
adopting a compromise report calling on Poland to consult
Solidarnosc in the future. The Polish government, however,
emphatically rejected this report, and according to recent
press reports has shown no willingness to work with
Solidarnosc since then. That may spark a new challenge for
credentials in 1988 and a politically charged showdown vote.
The 1988 conference may also face other potentially
contentious issues involving apartheid, as well as an annual
survey on Israel and the occupied territories. But whatever
else happens during the conference, 1988 will surely go into
the record books as an important new milestone in the
history of American involvement in the i l o .
□

The landmark provisions
of ratified ILO conventions
J o s e p h P. G o l d b e r g

Past U.S. inaction concerning the ratification of Interna­
tional Labor Organization ( i l o ) conventions was the
result of concern over whether these conventions would
overshadow existing Federal and State labor laws. The
avenue to ratification was eased by the establishment of
the President’s Committee on the i l o . (The members of
the Committee are the Secretaries of Labor, State, and
Commerce; the President’s Assistant for National Secu­
rity Affairs; and the presidents of the a f l - c i o and the
U.S. Council for International Business.) Its subordinate,
the Tripartite Advisory Committee on International
Labor Standards, had found unanimously that both
conventions are consistent with U.S. law and practice.
Convention No. 144, (concerning tripartite consulta­
tion to promote the implementation of international labor
standards) had been adopted at the 1976 i l o Conference,
with the support of the U.S. Government, and employer
and worker delegates. It requires ratifying members to
establish and maintain machinery to ensure effective

Joseph P. Goldberg was the U.S. Government delegate to the
Maritime Conferences in 1975-76.

il o

53

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Foreign Labor Developments

consultations between governments and employers and work­
ers of “ the most representative organizations . . . enjoying
the right of freedom of association.” The United States has
had a long history on effective tripartite consultation on il o
matters, the present President’s Committee of the ILO was
institutionalized in 1980, when the United States reentered
the ILO, after withdrawing in 1977.
U.S. ratification of Convention No. 144 is innovative in
that it is of general application and does not deal with
seamen and international shipping m atters— the sole
areas of concern of the only six substantive conventions
previously ratified by the United States. These areas were
already basically covered by Federal law and practice.
Convention No. 144 sets procedures by which adherence
to effective tripartism, the foundation of the i l o , can be
evaluated. In testimony supporting ratification, Lane
Kirkland, president of the a f l - c i o , stressed the role of
the i l o in protecting the fundamental interests of
workers— including freedom of association; Abraham
Katz, president of the U.S. Council for International
Business, stressed the i l o role in protecting “free business
association as well as free labor unions.” In reaching
agreement to ratify, the President’s Committee also

agreed to principles to be used in the consideration of the
ratification of additional conventions.
Convention No. 147 (concerning minimum standards
in merchant ships) adopted by the i l o Maritime Confer­
ence in 1976, was born of long and arduous deliberation.
Originally, discussions were directed at dealing with
substandard conditions on ships operated under so-called
“flags of convenience.” To prevent maritime catastro­
phes, to set uniform international standards, and to avoid
ad hoc actions by unions and other private groups in
individual ports, the conference majority reached tripar­
tite agreement to set minimum standards on the ships of
all nations. The convention was supported by the U.S.
Government, and seamen’s union and employer represen­
tatives, including tanker operators.
Not only does the convention set the standards to be
met on the ships of the ratifying country, it also contains
“port control” provisions— a significant innovation in an
i l o convention, in that the standards apply beyond the
national limits of the ratifying country. In deciding that
the control provided by this article was essential to the
effectiveness of the convention in setting international
ship standards, the majority recognized the historic

Profile of two ilo conventions ratified by the United States
Tripartite Consultations to Promote
the Implementation of International Labor Standards, No.
144, was adopted by the International Labor Conference in
1976, with the active participation and support of the U.S.
tripartite delegation. It essentially relates to the administra­
tive machinery for participating in the i l o . The Convention
provides that i l o members which ratify it must establish and
maintain machinery to ensure effective tripartite consulta­
tions between the government, employers, and workers on
matters relating to the i l o —in particular, matters relating to
the adoption, ratification, and implementation of i l o
standards.
The United States effectively practiced tripartite consulta­
tion on such matters even before the Convention was
adopted. U.S. practice in this area has been strengthened in
recent years by the establishment of the tripartite President’s
Committee on the i l o , by regular meetings of its staff-level
Consultative Group, and by creation of the Tripartite
Advisory Panel on International Labor Standards.
The tripartite advisory panel has unanimously determined
that the United States is in full compliance with Convention
No. 144, and that no modification of U.S. legislation is
required to give effect to its provisions.
Convention No. 144.

The Minimum Standards in Merchant
Ships, No. 147, is one of 32 conventions adopted by the i l o
that deals with the working and living conditions of seafarers.
This particular Convention was adopted at a special maritime
session of the International Labor Conference in 1976 with
Convention No. 147.


54
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

the active support of the U.S. Government, employer, and
worker delegations.
It obligates ratifying i l o members to establish, by national
law and regulation, as well as by encouragement of appropri­
ate collective agreements, labor standards applicable to ships
registered in their territory covering:
— safety, including standards of competency, hours of
work, and manning;
— appropriate Social Security measures;
— shipboard living arrangements;
— hiring, training, and conditions of employment;
and
— investigation of complaints and casualties
The Convention also provides that, if a ratifying member
receives a complaint or obtains evidence that a foreign flag
ship in its port does not conform to the standards of the
Conventions, it may report the matter to both the country of
registry and to the i l o , and take measures necessary to
rectify conditions on board ships which are clearly hazardous
to safety and health.
Following an extensive review, the tripartite advisory
panel unanimously determined that there are no legal
obstacles to U.S. ratification of Convention No. 147, because
existing U.S. legislation, regulations, and industry practice
are in full compliance with the obligations of the instrument.
All members of the President’s Committee on the i l o fully
support ratification of Convention No. 147.

jurisdiction of the port state over the health and safety
conditions on all ships when in the port country.
Henceforward, the port control provisions will apply to
foreign flag ships when in the ports of ratifying states.
They also provide that if a ratifying state “receives a
complaint or obtains evidence that a foreign flag ship does
not conform to the standards of the convention, . . . it
may prepare a report to the government of the country in
which the ship is registered, with a copy to the Direc­
tor-G eneral of the i l o and may take measures necessary
to rectify any conditions on board which are clearly
hazardous to safety or health.”
The ratification of the convention, consistent with U.S.
standards and law and practice, included several clarify­
ing provisions. With ratification, the United States joins
19 other nations which together represent about 60
percent of the world’s merchant fleets. The Soviet Union
as a major merchant fleet operator has not ratified the


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

convention. At the 1976 Conference, the Soviet Union
pressed for limitation of the convention to “flags of
convenience,” and opposed the “port control” provision
when the Convention was extended to ships of all nations.
In 1982, 14 West European nations drew up a
Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control to
coordinate their implementation of the convention. From
July 1985 until June 1986, 11,740 inspections were carried
out on 8,720 ships of 116 nations. While the total
deficiencies on ships did not drop from previous years, the
number of ship delays and detentions decreased substan­
tially, suggesting a decline in the number of serious
deficiencies, but also the need for continuing inspection.
The minimum international standards of this convention
can save lives, cargo, and costs by reducing marine
casualties, particularly tanker spills. The standards also
reduce the unfair competitive advantage of substandard
ships over ships of nations that adhere to i l o standards. □

55

Research
Summaries

Occupational pay in shipbuilding
and repairing industry

Production and related workers in the private shipbuild­
ing and repairing industry averaged $10.67 an hour in
October 1986, according to a study by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics.1 Individual earnings for the middle 50
percent of the workers ranged from $9.82 to $11.75. The
industry’s relatively compressed wage structure is due
partly to the absence of incentive pay systems and the
prevalence of single-rate pay plans in this highly union­
ized industry.2
The October 1986 pay level was 19 percent above the
$8.97 hourly average recorded by a similar survey in
September 1981.3 This compares with a 24-percent rise in
the wage and salary component of the Bureau’s Employ­
ment Cost Index for durable goods manufacturing be­
tween the third quarters of 1981 and 1986.
In contrast to rising wages, employment in the industry
dropped sharply over the same period. The number of
production workers in the shipbuilding and repairing
industry, estimated at 65,309 by the October 1986 survey,
declined by more than two-fifths. This reduction in the
work force reflects a steady decline in orders for commer­
cial vessels during the past 10 years, and the loss of
commercial repair orders to foreign shipyards. Hence,
U.S. builders rely almost exclusively on military and
domestic ship procurement that under Federal law is
reserved to U.S. shipyards. For example, as of October 1,
1986, nine commercial vessels were under construction,
while orders for 77 vessels had been placed by the U.S.
Navy.4
Regionally, wages in October 1986 averaged $10.39 an
hour along the Atlantic Coast, where nearly three-fifths of
the production workers were employed. An additional
one-fifth of the work force were in Gulf Coast yards and

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

a

00 01

a
0

a

averaged $10.34. The Pacific Coast, accounting for onesixth of the workers, recorded the highest average—
$12.66; the Great Lakes yards recorded the lowest—
$9.87 an hour (table 1).
The 27 occupations selected to represent the range of
skills in the industry accounted for three-fifths of the
production workers. Nationwide, hourly earnings aver­
aged from $7.54 for marine trades helpers to $12.01 for
loft workers (table 1). Hand welders, the largest occupa­
tional group studied separately, averaged $11.43 an hour
for those working under conditions involving critical
safety and load requirements (class A) and $11.03 an hour
for those performing jobs requiring less skill (class B).
Occupational averages were highest on the Pacific
Coast. In seven jobs permitting comparison, workers in
Pacific yards averaged 12 percent to 27 percent more than
their counterparts in the next highest paying shipyard.
Among the three remaining yards— Atlantic Coast, Gulf
Coast, and Great Lakes— differences in occupational
averages were slight, with no consistent ranking pattern
among the few possible comparisons.
Individual earnings frequently were highly concen­
trated within the occupations studied separately, espe­
cially within a given region. For example, nearly half of
the 880 shipfitters and half of the 880 hand welders on the
Pacific Coast earned between $13.25 and $13.75 an hour.
On the Gulf Coast, three-fifths of the 882 shipfitters
earned between $10 and $10.50 an hour.
All shipyards studied provided paid vacations, typically
1 week after 1 year of service, 2 weeks after 5 years, 3
weeks after 12 years, and 4 weeks after 20 years. Vacation
periods varied among the regions, particularly after
longer periods of service. For example, all workers along
the Great Lakes and half of those along the Atlantic
Coast had provisions for 5 weeks or more after 25 years of
service.
Nearly all shipyards provided paid holidays, usually 11
to 13 days annually. Most workers on the Atlantic Coast
received 11 to 13 holidays; those on the Gulf Coast, 8 or

The remaining workers (about 3 percent) were engaged in
the construction or repair of off-shore drilling rigs and
platforms, nonself-propelled vessels such as barges, and
merchant vessels under 1,000 gross tons.

12 days; and those on the Great Lakes and the Pacific
Coast, 10 to 12 days.
All production workers covered by the survey were in
shipyards that provided at least part of the cost of life
insurance and a variety of basic health insurance plans.
Accidental death and dismemberment insurance was
offered to four-fifths of the workers, while short-term
protection against loss of income because of illness or
accident was available to three-fourths. About half of the
workers were provided dental and prescription drug
insurance, and one-tenth were covered by long-term
disability and vision care insurance.
Retirement pension plans, usually financed entirely by
the employers, were available to nine-tenths of the
production workers. Coverage under retirement plans
varied from all workers in Atlantic and Pacific Coast
shipyards to two-thirds on the Gulf Coast, and just over
two-fifths along the Great Lakes.
About four-fifths of the production workers covered by
the survey were in yards primarily building military
vessels, and nearly one-sixth were in yards building or
repairing merchant vessels of 1,000 gross tons or more.

Approximately four-fifths of the workers were in
establishments with collective bargaining agreements
covering a majority of their production workers. The
principal unions in the industry included the Interna­
tional Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders,
Blacksmiths, Forgers, and Helpers; the International
Association of Machinists; and the International Union of
Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America (all
a f l - c i o affiliates).
A comprehensive bulletin on the study, Industry Wage
Survey: Shipbuilding and Repairing, October 1986, Bulletin
2295, may be purchased from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Publications Sales Center, P.O. Box 2145, Chicago, il
60690, or the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern­
ment Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. The bulletin
provides additional information on occupational pay and
employee benefits.
EH

Table 1. Number of production workers and average straight-time hourly earnings1in selected occupations, private shipyards,
U.S. ports, October 1986
U n ite d S ta te s 2
Ite m

N u m b e r of
w o rk e rs

A v e ra g e
h o u rly
e a rn in g s

N um ber of
w o rk e rs

A v e ra g e
h o u rly
e a rn in g s

G re a t L a ke s

G u lf C o ast

A tla n tic C oast

N u m b e r of
w o rk e rs

A v e ra g e
h o u rly
e a rn in g s

N u m b e r of
w o rk e rs

A v e ra g e
h o u rly
e a rn in g s

P a c ific C o a s t

N u m b e r of
w o rk e rs

A v e ra g e
h o u rly
e a rn in g s

All production workers ..................................

65,309

$10.67

38,531

$10.39

13,959

$10.34

2,791

$9.87

9,241

$12.66

Size of establishment:
Under 2,500 workers..........................................
2,500 workers or more.......................................

20,578
44,731

10.18
10.90

9,749
—

9.23
—

2,354
—

9.58
—

2,791
—

9.87

4,897

12.63

Labor-management contract coverage:
Establishments with—
Majority of workers covered...........................
None or minority of workers covered.............

53,748
11,561

11.01
9.09

33,349
5,182

10.69
8.51

—
—

Crane operators....................................................
Electronics technicians..........................................
Insulators...............................................................
Loft workers...........................................................
Machine-tool operators........................................
Machinists, production ..........................................

709
816
608
116
804
792

11.54
11.89
11.16
12.01
11.34
11.16

3,576
2,851
3,661
1,397
1,978
3,363

11.31
11.36
11.41
11.14
7.54
11.14

11.59
—
11.19
10.49
11.19
—
10.80
11.06
10.99
10.69
—
—

196
—
—
—
—
112

Marine electricians................................................
Marine machinists.................................................
Marine pipefitters..................................................
Marine riggers ......................................................
Marine trades helpers..........................................
Painters.................................................................

345
—
460
50
730
—
1,911
1,875
1,632
962
—
—

Sheet-metal workers.............................................
Shipfitters..............................................................
Shipwrights...........................................................
Welders, hand......................................................

2,312
4,339
1,915
5,558
4,011
1,547
1,290

11.69
11.36
11.42
11.32
11.43
11.03
11.44

1,398
2,169
—
—

11.44
11.28
—
—

—

141

10.30
—

—
—

~

9,241
—

12.66

11.32
—
—
—
—
—
10.91
—
11.04
—
—
10.59

97
—
—
—
46
13b

12.97
—
—
—
13.09
13.16

690
509
748
249
—
433

13.39
12.69
12.93
12.99
—
13.25

—
—
—

—
—
—
—

—

—

459
880
—
880
—

12.95
12.76
—
12.86
—

—
—

—
—

S e le c te d o c c u p a tio n s

Welders, machine (arc or gas) .............................

1Excludes premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and
late shifts. Incentive payments, such as those resulting from piecework or
production bonus systems, and cost-of-living increases (but not bonuses) were
included as part of the workers’ regular pay. Excluded are performance bonuses
and lump-sum payments of the type negotiated in the auto and aerospace
industries, as well as profit-sharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or


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

_

—

—

415
—
—
—
893
882
—
1,030
584
446
—

10.96
—
—
—
—
11.05
—

11.14
—
—
—
10.78
—

10.52
—
9.99
10.81
8.92
—

55
—
—
—
—
—
199
—
257
—
—
125
—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

yearend bonuses, and other nonproduction bonuses.
in c lu d e s data for five shipyards located along major inland waterways,
principally the Mississippi and Ohio rivers.
Note : Dashes indicate no data were reported or that data did not meet
publication criteria.

57

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Research Summaries

-F O O T N O T E S

'Earnings data exclude premium pay for overtime and for work on
weekends, holidays, and late shifts. Cost-of-living pay increases (but not
bonuses) were included as part of the workers’ regular pay. Excluded
were performance bonuses and lump-sum payments of the type
negotiated in the auto and aerospace industries, as well as profit-sharing
payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or yearend bonuses, and other
nonproduction bonuses.
The survey covered establishments employing 100 workers or more
primarily engaged in building and repairing ships, barges, and lighters,
whether propelled by motor or towed. Shipyards that converted and
altered ships were also included. Establishments fabricating structural
assemblies, as well as subcontractors and U.S. Navy shipyards, were
excluded from the survey. A description of the pay system in seven naval
shipyards is included in an appendix to b l s Bulletin 2295.
2The index of dispersion, calculated by dividing the middle range of
earnings by the median, is 17. This value falls within the first quartile of


58
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

an array of dispersion indexes for 43 manufacturing industries discussed
in an article by Carl B. Barsky and Martin E. Personick, “Measuring
wage dispersion: pay ranges reflect industry traits,” M o n th ly L a b o r
R e v ie w , April 1981, pp. 35-41. Dispersion indexes for the middle half of
the industries fell between 24 and 36, according to the article.
3For an account of the earlier survey, see I n d u s tr y W a g e S u rv e y :
Bulletin 2161 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1983). Data are not strictly comparable because the
1986 survey had a lower minimum establishment size— 100 rather than
250 workers. However, shipyards with 100 to 249 workers accounted for
only 6 percent of the 1986 survey work force. Using a 250 minimum
cutoff for both years, we find the 1981-86 wage increase was 20 percent.

S h ip b u ild in g a n d R e p a irin g , S e p te m b e r 1 9 8 1 ,

4The estimated decline in employment takes into account the lower
minimum establishment size for the 1986 survey. For a detailed account
of trends in shipbuilding and repair, see 1 9 8 7 U .S. I n d u s tr i a l O u tlo o k
(U.S. Department of Commerce), ch. 38.

A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supple­
ment, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be
considered for publication, communications should be factual and
analytical, not polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed
to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 20212.

Major Agreements
Expiring Next Month
This list of selected collective bargaining agreements expiring in July is based on information collected
by the Bureau’s Office of Compensation and Working Conditions. The list includes agreements covering
1,000 workers or more. Private industry is arranged in order of Standard Industrial Classification
Industry or activity

Number of
workers

Employer and location

Labor organization1

Associated General Contractors and others (Southern California).......
Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors (Boston, ma) .............................
Air Conditioning Contractors of Arizona (Arizona).............................
Mechanical Contractors Association of Utah (Salt Lake City, ut) .......

Teamsters .......................................
Sheet Metal Workers......................
Sheet Metal Workers......................
Plumbers ........................................

2,650
1,250
1,000
1,300

Food products ...........................

Dried fruit industry (California).........................................................

1,000

Paper.........................................
Rubber.......................................
Fabricated metal products ..........
Machinery..................................
Electrical products.....................

Mead Corp. (Chillicothe, oh) .............................................................
Armstrong Rubber Co. (Interstate) ....................................................
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Interstate)......................................................
American Standard (La Crosse, wi)....................................................
Hughes Helicopter Corp. (Los Angeles, ca) ........................................

Longshoremen and Warehousemen
(Ind.)
Paperworkers..................................
Rubber Workers..............................
Boilermakers...................................
Machinists .....................................
Carpenters.......................................

1,900
2,600
2,550
1,600
1,550

Transportation equipment ..........

Rockwell International Corp., Automotive Operations (Interstate)......
Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. (Jacksonville, fl) ....................................
Fairchild Industries Inc., Fairchild Republic Division
(Farmingdale, ny)
Freightliner Corp. (Portland, or) ........................................................

Auto Workers..................................
Boilermakers...................................
Machinists .....................................

2,750
1,500
1,500

Various unions................................

1,500

National Association of Doll & Stuffed Toy Manufacturers
(New York, ny)
Eastern Airlines, pilots (Interstate) ....................................................
General Telephone Co. of Michigan (mi) ............................................
Pennsylvania Power and Light Co. (Pennsylvania) ..............................
Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric Co. (Ohio)...............................

Toy and Novelty Workers ...............

2,000

Air Line Pilots................................
Electrical Workers (ibew) ...............
Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) ...............
Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) ........................

4,200
2,350
5,500
1,400

Retail trade...............................

Bradlees Mercantile, Division of Stop and Shop Co. (New England) ...
Bradlees Mercantile (Connecticut)....................................................
Kroger Food Stores (Interstate) ........................................................
Jewel, Dominick’s, Eagle Discount, and others (Chicago, il) ..............

Food and Commercial Workers......
Food and Commercial Workers......
Food and Commercial Workers......
Food and Commercial Workers......

4,400
2,800
5,700
4,300

Restaurants ..............................

President’s Council of Food, Beverage and Lodging Industries of
Oregon (Portland, o r )
Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers
(Los Angeles, c a )
Affiliated Hospitals of San Francisco (California)...............................

Hotel Employees and Restaurant
Employees
Theatrical Stage Employees...........

2,600
30,000

California Nurses Association.........

2,000

Law enforcement......................
Education ................................

Florida:
Illinois:
Massachusetts:
Michigan:

General government..................
Transit.....................................

New Jersey:
Ohio:

Manatee County Board of Education, faculty ..........
Peoria Board of Education, teachers ........................
State Police............................................................
Wayne State University, clerical and technical.........
Wayne State University, faculty..............................
Essex County, clerical u nit.....................................
Cleveland Regional Transit, operators.....................

Teachers........................................
Teachers........................................
Police Associations (Ind.)...............
University Professors (Ind.)............
University Professors (Ind.)............
Electrical Workers ( i b e w ) ..............
Transit Union................................

1,400
1,000
1,000
1,400
1,400
1,100
2,000

General government..................
Hospitals ..................................
Transit......................................

Pennsylvania:

Allegheny County, clerical and technical.................
Allegheny County Hospital, blue collar....................
Houston Metro Transit Authority...........................

Service Employees.........................
........................................
Transport Workers.........................

1,000
1,150
1,900

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

Miscellaneous manufacturing .....
Air transportation......................
Communication .........................
Utilities.....................................

Amusements.............................
Hospitals ..................................
P u b lic

Education ................................

Texas:

A F L -C IO

‘Affiliated with AFL-CIO except where noted as Independent (Ind.).


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

59

Developments In
Industrial Relations

Brewery contract focuses on job security
After union members rejected two contract proposals
because of dissatisfaction with the job security provisions,
Anheuser-Busch and the Teamsters negotiated a new
approach that the workers approved by a 3-to-l margin.
Under the new approach, employees with at least 5 years
of service who lose their jobs due to the increasing use of
automation will be offered jobs in another of the 12 plants
covered by the settlement.
The 3-year contract, which runs to February 28, 1991,
calls for 25-cents-an-hour wage increases in March of
each year, and for an immediate $1,000 lump-sum pay­
ment to all nonprobationary employees. According to
the union, prior to the settlement, the 9,000 employees
earned an average of $17 an hour, the highest level in
the industry
The accord also provides for a 50-cent hourly increase
in the company’s financing of benefits in the first contract
year and 25-cent increases in the second and third years,
with each of the local unions given the right to decide how
to spend the money. The plants covered by the agreement
are in Los Angeles, CA; Fairfield, CT; Tampa and Jackson­
ville, FL; St. Louis, MO; Merrimack, NH; Newark, NJ;
Syracuse, NY; Columbus, OH; Houston, TX; Williamsburg,
VA; and Ft. Collins, CO.
In another development in the brewery industry,
a f l - c i o umpire Murray H. Finley ruled that the
Teamsters would have exclusive right to attempt to
organize 3,000 employees at Adolph Coors Co.’s brewery
in Golden, co . Finley also ruled that both the Teamsters
and the Machinists could attempt to organize 250
employees at Coors’ packaging and distribution center in
Elkton, v a , which is scheduled to add a brewery.
The events leading to the ruling began last year when
the a f l - c i o terminated its 10-year boycott of Coors’
products in return for a company pledge not to interfere
in organizing campaigns at its facilities. At the time, the

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

60
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Auto Workers, the Steelworkers, and the Machinists were
all planning organizing campaigns at Coors, but an
umpire ruled that only the Machinists should undertake a
campaign. (The decision was rendered under a f l - c i o
procedures intended to prevent wasteful overlapping of
organizing drives.) Later, when the Teamsters, who had
begun efforts to organize Coors’ operations, rejoined the
a f l - c i o , the Federation was forced to decide between
the Teamsters and the Machinists.
The Teamsters’ organizing campaign at Coors will be
directed by the union’s Brewery and Soft Drink Confer­
ence, which claims to represent 90 percent of the Nation’s
brewery workers.

Work stoppage at General Electric ends
A 7-week work stoppage at General Electric Co.’s
aircraft engine plant in Evendale, o h , ended when the
company and the Auto Workers and Machinists unions
agreed on contract provisions regarding job consolida­
tions and subcontracting. The stoppage began when
General Electric moved to implement a plan, announced
in 1987, under which the 5,300 employees represented by
the Auto Workers would have been assigned to 32 job
classifications, down from 84, to help improve the plant’s
competitive position. Although the reclassification of
duties was expected to result in wage increases for 36
percent of the workers, the Auto Workers contended that
it would also result in the loss of 10 percent of the jobs in
the bargaining unit. The settlement provided that the
number of classifications will only be reduced to 40 and
that there will be no resulting layoffs. Employees forced
into lower rated jobs will retain their current pay rate for
2 years. The settlement does not prohibit layoffs resulting
from declining sales.
The concurrent settlement for the 1,400 skilled trades
employees represented by the Machinists centered on the
union’s contention that General Electric was sending an
excessive amount of machining work to its nonunion
plants and to subcontractors. Under the settlement, the
parties established a joint committee to deal with the
issue.
The settlement on the two issues came shortly before the
start of national negotiations between General Electric and

a Coordinated Bargaining Committee comprising a dozen
unions. Announced union demands in the bargaining on
contracts to succeed those scheduled to expire in July
center on provisions to protect employees from layoffs,
plant closings, and automation of operations. The same
demands apply to Westinghouse Corp., where current
contracts expire in August. A union official said that the
unions represent 67,000 workers at the two companies,
compared with 100,000 workers in 1966.

New contract for Bloomingdale workers
In New York City, 4,000 employees of Bloomingdale’s
Manhattan store, two warehouses, and an office building
were covered by a settlement between the department store
chain and Local 3 of the Retail, Wholesale, and Depart­
ment Store Union. The 3-year accord included new
provisions intended to counter possible job losses resulting
from Canadian Campeau Corp.’s purchase of Bloomingdale’s parent, Federated Department Stores.
A new provision requires a new owner to honor the
terms of the union’s contract. Another provision calls for
new jobs or retraining for employees who lose jobs as a
result of automation in the finance and control depart­
ment or the closing of the warehouse. The affected
workers will retain their current pay rate for 1 year if the
new job has a lower rate.
Over the contract term, full-time noncommission em­
ployees will receive five wage increases totaling $45 a
week. Part-time employees will also receive five increases,
totaling $1.20 an hour. The parties agreed to consider
changing the pay system for commission employees, as
well as changing all hiring and progression rates.

Home health care workers get increase
Nearly 60,000 home health care workers in New York
City were covered by a settlement that provided for a 50percent increase in wages and benefits over the 3-year
term. One of the parties to the accord was the New York
Home Care Union Coalition—comprising units of the
Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, the State,
County and Municipal Employees, and the Office and
Professional Employees. A fourth union, the Service
Employees, bargained separately, but accepted the same
terms. On management’s side, bargaining was conducted
by the Home Care Council of New York, Inc., comprising
60 nonprofit service providers.
Labor and management joined in persuading govern­
ment agencies to accept the cost increase. The State pays
40 percent of the cost of the home care service, the city
pays 10 percent, and the Federal Medicaid program pays
the balance. Most of the workers covered by the settle­
ment are black and Hispanic women who care for the
elderly and chronically ill in the patients’ homes.

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

The settlement provided for an 85-cent-an-hour wage
increase retroactive to December 1, 1987, a 40-cent
increase in July 1988, and a 50-cent increase in July 1989.
The increases will bring pay rates to $5.90 for starting
employees and to $6.20 for those with 1 year of service.
Employees who live in patients’ homes will now receive
a weekend pay differential of 50 cents an hour, increasing
to $1.10 on April 1, 1989. Because live-in employees are
only paid for 12 hours a day, despite being on call for 24
hours, they will begin to receive a “sleeping differential’’
of $6.25 a day effective July 1, 1988, rising to $10 on April
1, 1989, and to $14.80 on July 1, 1989.

California nurses avert work stoppage
In California, a possible work stoppage involving 1,300
registered nurses employed by Stanford University Medi­
cal Center was averted when the parties agreed on a 2year contract. According to the president of the
Committee for Recognition of Nursing Achievement,
which represents the nurses, the chief issues were job
staffing and scheduling, even though these subjects were
not usually dealt with in past bargaining. Under the
settlement, the parties agreed to more frequent meetings
of existing joint committees that had been established to
deal with these and other issues.
The employees’ association was unable to regain “givebacks” it had accepted in 1986, but vowed to continue
pressing for restoration during the contract period. The
givebacks included a cut to one-quarter pay, from onehalf, for on-call assignments, and cuts in educational
reimbursements.
Salaries were raised by 5 percent in each year and a 4.5percent salary progression step was added after l \ years of
service. For a nurse on day shift, the starting rate is
$14.57 an hour in the first year, up from $13.88, and the
top rate is $23.75, up from $20.62. Top-rated nurses
working at night will earn $54,578 in the first contract
year and $57,304 in the second.

Employees get ‘paybacks’ from copper companies
An upswing in copper prices resulted in bonuses to
3,500 employees of Magma Copper Co. and Inspiration
Resources Inc. under automatic formulas adopted in
bargaining involving 14 unions in 1986. At that time, the
industry was in a recession and the employees took
compensation cuts of about 15 percent. In return, the
companies agreed to the provision for possible bonuses
based on the price of copper.
At Magma, the bonuses, which varied with the number
of hours worked by the employees, averaged $312 for the
third quarter of 1987 and $2,600 for the fourth quarter.
At Inspiration, bonuses for the respective quarters aver­
aged $426 and $2,342.
61

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Developments in Industrial Relations

The provision for paybacks differed at Asarco, where
employees received guaranteed wage increases instead of
bonuses. Workers at Kennecott Corp.’s Utah operations
agreed to a compensation cut of about 25 percent without
any provision for paybacks linked to the price of copper.
However, the company did agree to an immediate $1,000
payment to each worker and to reopen its Bingham
Canyon mine.

Employers required to offer parental, sick leave
Under a new law, companies in Maine with at least 25
employees are required to offer 8 consecutive weeks of
unpaid leave after the birth or adoption of a child, or
when a member of the immediate family becomes ill. The
benefit is available only to employees with at least 1 year
of service and the employee must submit a doctor’s
certification in cases of illness. Employees on leave will
continue to be covered by health insurance, but must pay
the entire premium cost. The law expires in 2 years, unless
it is renewed.
aids policy set for Federal workers

The Office of Personnel Management has established
official policy for dealing with a i d s (acquired immune
deficiency syndrome) for all 2.1 million Federal employ­
ees. The new policy, which supersedes varying policies
adopted by individual agencies, bars discrimination
against AIDS-afflicted employees and authorizes disciplin­
ary action against fellow workers who refuse to work with
such employees.
In announcing the new policy, Constance Horner,
Director of Federal personnel, said, “the Federal Govern­
ment, as an en-lightened and compassionate employer
concerned with the health and welfare of its employees,
has an obligation to show the way in addressing the
realities of the a i d s epidemic.” In the directive to agency
personnel directors, Horner stated:
• Afflicted employees “should be allowed to continue
working as long as they are able to maintain acceptable
performance and do not pose a safety or health threat
to themselves or others in the workplace.”
• “Agencies should treat infected employees in the same
manner as employees who suffer from other serious
illnesses.”
• “There is no medical basis for employees refusing to
work with such fellow employees or agency clients”
who are infected with the virus.


62
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

• The concerns of employees who fear working with
infected fellow workers “should be addressed with
appropriate information and counseling.”
• If counseling and information measures are unsuccess­
ful, resulting in disruption of work, supervisors “should
consider appropriate corrective or disciplinary action
against the threatening or disruptive employees.”
Horner emphasized the need to educate Federal em­
ployees regarding a i d s , and quoted a Center for Disease
Control conclusion that “the kind of nonsexual person-toperson contact that generally occurs among workers and
clients or consumers in the workplace does not pose a risk
for transmission of a i d s .”
In other aspects of the new policy:
• Infected employees may request leave and the agency
should decide whether to grant it in the same manner
as for workers with other medical conditions.
• Agencies should revise the work schedules or assign­
ments of infected employees in the same way they
would for employees with other medical conditions.
• Infected employees may continue their insurance cov­
erage, but may not raise their life insurance coverage
after they become seriously ill.
• Some workers may be eligible for disability retirement
if they have the required years of service.

Supreme Court rules on multiemployer benefit plans
The Supreme Court held that multiemployer benefit
plans can not file a court suit against a company for
failing to make payments to such plans while the
company is negotiating to replace an expired collective
bargaining agreement. In the 8 -0 opinion, written by
Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court said that the only
recourse for plan officials is to file a complaint with the
National Labor Relations Board. The Court held that the
intent of the Congress to leave such disputes to the Board
“is so plain” that the plans should appeal to the Congress
for remedial legislation, not to the courts.
The decision was a defeat for multiemployer benefit
plans because the Board could order plan officials to settle
for less than the contested amount, and the Board cannot
order employers to pay punitive damages or attorneys’
fees.
The case originated in 1983, when eight benefit plans in
Northern California sued Advanced Light Concrete Co.
after it withdrew from multiemployer benefit plans and
offered to negotiate separately with the unions.

Current
Labor Statistics

Schedule of release dates for major

statistical se rie s ..............................................................................................

64

Notes on Current Labor S ta tistics ............................................... .................. ............................. ................................................

65

bls

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

75
76
76

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

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

77
78
79
80
81
81
81
82
82
83
84
85
86
86
87
87
87
88

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

Employment Cost Index, compensation, by occupation and industry group ....................
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group .............
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size..........................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, situations
covering 1,000 workers or m ore..................... ......... ......................................................................................................................... .
Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more ....................
Average effective wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more............................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments, State and local government bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more.....................................................................................................................................................................................
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or m ore...............................................................................................................................

89
90
91
92
92
93
93
93

Price data
30. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity and service groups........................................
31. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and local data, all item s.....................................................................................................
32. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items and major groups......................................................................................................

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

94
95
96

63

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics

Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing....................................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing.............................................................................................................
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification ........................................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification........................................................................................
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category .........................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by end-use category....................................................................................................................................
U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification.........................................................................................................
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification ...................................................

97
98
98
100
101
101
101
102
102

Productivity data
42. Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted..................................................................
43. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity.........................................................................................................................................
44. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices ...................................................................................

102
103
104

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

104
105
106

Injury and illness data
48. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness incidence rates............................................................................................................

107

Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series
R e lea se
date

Period
covered

Nonfarm business and manufacturing .
Nonfinancial corporations.....................

June 6

1st quarter

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

June 3

May

July 8

Producer Price Indexes............................

June 10

May

Consumer Price In d e x ..............................

June 21

May

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

June 21

May

S e r ie s

R e lea se
date

Period
covered

R elea se
date

Period
covered

August 4

2nd quarter

2 42-44
2; 42-44

June

August 5

July

1; 4-21

July 15

June

August 12

July

2; 33-35

July 22

June

August 23

July

2; 30-32

August 23

July

MLR table
num ber

Productivity and Costs:

July 22

June

Major collective bargaining settlements. .

July 26

1st 6 months

3 ’ 25-28

Employment Cost Index .........................

July 26

2nd quarter

1-3' 22-24

U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes . .

July 28

2nd quarter

36-41


64
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

14-17

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: series on
labor force, employment, unemployment, collective bargaining settle­
ments, consumer, producer, and international prices, productivity,
international comparisons, and injury and illness statistics. In the notes
that follow, the data in each group of tables are briefly described, key
definitions are given, notes on the data are set forth, and sources of
additional information are cited.

General notes

Adjustments for price changes. Some data—such as the Hourly
Earnings Index in table 17—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 1977 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1977 dollars is $2 ($3/
150 X 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other resulting values) are described
as “real,” “constant,” or “ 1977” dollars.
Additional Information

The following notes apply to several tables in this section:
Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are
adjusted to eliminate the effect on the data of such factors as climatic
conditions, industry production schedules, opening and closing of
schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which might
prevent short-term evaluation of the statistical series. Tables containing
data that have been adjusted are identified as “seasonally adjusted.”
(All other data are not seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal effects are
estimated on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors
are computed each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data
for several preceding years. (Seasonally adjusted data appear in tables
1-3, 4-10, 13, 14, 17, and 18.) Beginning in January 1980, the b l s
introduced two major modifications in the seasonal adjustment meth­
odology for labor force data. First, the data are seasonally adjusted with
a procedure called x-11 a r i m a , which was developed at Statistics
Canada as an extension of the standard x-11 method previously used by
b ls .
A detailed description of the procedure appears in T h e
x - 1 1 a r i m a S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t M e th o d by Estela Bee Dagum (Statis­
tics Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E, February 1980). The second
change is that seasonal factors are calculated for use during the first 6
months of the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are
calculated at midyear for the July-December period. However, revisions
of historical data continue to be made only at the end of each calendar
year.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 1 and 4-10 were
revised in the February 1988 issue of the R e v ie w , to reflect experience
through 1987.
Annual revisions of the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in
tables 13, 14, and 18 were made in the July 1987 R e v ie w using the
x-11 a r i m a seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors
for productivity data in table 42 are usually introduced in the
September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent changes from
month to month and from quarter to quarter are published for
numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series. However,
seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U.S. average All
Items c p i . Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are available for
this series.

Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the
Bureau in a variety of sources. News releases provide the latest
statistical information published by the Bureau; the major recurring
releases are published according to the schedule preceding these general
notes. More information about labor force, employment, and unem­
ployment data and the household and establishment surveys underlying
the data are available in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, a monthly
publication of the Bureau. More data from the household survey are
published in the data books—R e v is e d S e a s o n a lly A d ju s te d L a b o r F o rce
S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2306, and L a b o r F o rc e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d F ro m th e
C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u rv e y , Bulletin 2307. More data from the establish­
ment survey appear in two data books—E m p lo y m e n t, H o u rs, a n d
E a rn in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , and E m p lo y m e n t, H o u r s , a n d E a rn in g s , S ta te s
a n d A re a s, and the supplements to these data books. More detailed
information on employee compensation and collective bargaining
settlements is published in the monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e
D e v e lo p m e n ts . More detailed data on consumer and producer prices are
published in the monthly periodicals, T h e c p i D e ta ile d R e p o r t, and
P r o d u c e r P r ic e I n d e x e s . Detailed data on all of the series in this section
are provided in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , which is published
biennally by the Bureau, b l s bulletins are issued covering productivity,
injury and illness, and other data in this section. Finally, the M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w carries analytical articles on annual and longer term
developments in labor force, employment, and unemployment; em­
ployee compensation and collective bargaining; prices; productivity;
international comparisons; and injury and illness data.

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

COMPARATIVE INDICATORS
(Tables 1 -3 )
Comparative indicators tables provide an overview and comparison
of major b l s statistical series. Consequently, although many of the
included series are available monthly, all measures in these comparative
tables are presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include employment measures from two
major surveys and information on rates of change in compensation
provided by the Employment Cost Index ( e c i ) program. The labor
force participation rate, the employment-to-population ratio, and
unemployment rates for major demographic groups based on the

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

Current Population (“household”) Survey are presented, while meas­
ures of employment and average weekly hours by major industry sector
are given using nonagricultural payroll data. The Employment Cost
Index (compensation), by major sector and by bargaining status, is
chosen from a variety of b l s compensation and wage measures because
it provides a comprehensive measure of employer costs for hiring labor,
not just outlays for wages, and it is not affected by employment shifts
among occupations and industries.

65

Data on changes in compensation, prices, and productivity are
presented in table 2. Measures of rates of change of compensation and
wages from the Employment Cost Index program are provided for all
civilian nonfarm workers (excluding Federal and household workers)
and for all private nonfarm workers. Measures of changes in: consumer
prices for all urban consumers; producer prices by stage of processing;
and the overall export and import price indexes are given. Measures of
productivity (output per hour of all persons) are provided for major
sectors.

Alternative measures of wage and compensation rates of change,
which reflect the overall trend in labor costs, are summarized in table 3.
Differences in concepts and scope, related to the specific purposes of the

series, contribute to the variation in changes among the individual
measures.

Notes on the data
Definitions of each series and notes on the data are contained in later
sections of these notes describing each set of data. For detailed
descriptions of each data series, see b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin
2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988), as well as the additional bulletins,
articles, and other publications noted in the separate sections of the R e v ie w ’s
“ Current Labor Statistics Notes.’’ Users may also wish to consult M a jo r
P r o g r a m s , B u rea u o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Report 718 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1985).

EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DATA
(Tables 1; 4 - 2 1 )

Household survey data
Description of the series
e m p l o y m e n t
d a t a
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 55,800 households selected to represent
the U.S. population 16 years of age and older. Households are
interviewed on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the sample is the
same for any 2 consecutive months.

Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjust­
ments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for
estimating errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect
the comparability of historical data. A description of these adjustments
and their effect on the various data series appear in the Explanatory
Notes of E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s.
Data in tables 4 -1 0 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1987.

Additional sources of information

Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any
time during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who
worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and
(2) those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because
of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. Members of
the Armed Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the
employed total. A person working at more than one job is counted only
in the job at which he or she worked the greatest number of hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey
week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had
looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look
for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within
the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The overall
unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of
the labor force, including the resident Armed Forces. The civilian
employment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the
civilian labor force.
The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus
members 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, sanitariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or
needy, and members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United
States. The labor force participation rate is the proportion of the
noninstitutional population that is in the labor force. The employmentpopulation ratio is total employment (including the resident Armed
Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional population.

66

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

For detailed explanations of the data, see b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s,
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988). Historical unadjusted
data from 1948 to 1987 are available in L a b o r F o rc e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d
f r o m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u rv e y, Bulletin 2307 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988). Historical seasonally adjusted data appear in L a b o r
F o rc e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d f r o m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u rv e y : A D a ta ­

Vol. II, Bulletin 2096 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), and
Bulletin
2306 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household
and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur­
veys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1969, pp. 9-20.
book,

R e v is e d S e a s o n a lly A d ju s te d L a b o r F o rc e S ta tis tic s , 1 9 7 8 - 8 7 ,

Establishment survey data
Description of the series
E m p lo ym en t, hours, a n d
e a r n in g s
d a t a
in this section are
compiled from payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to
the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by
more than 300,000 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.) Self-employed 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 surveys.

Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which produces goods or
services (such as a factory or store) at a single location and is engaged in
one type of economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including
holiday and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the
12th 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 working supervisors
and nonsupervisory workers closely associated with production opera­
tions. Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 include production
workers in manufacturing and mining; construction workers in con­
struction; and nonsupervisory workers in the following industries:
transportation and public utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance,
insurance, and real estate; and services. These groups account for about
four-fifths of the total employment on private nonagricultural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers
receive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime
or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special
payments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of
changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from
the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical
Workers ( c p i - 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 develop­
ments: fluctuations in overtime premiums in manufacturing (the only
sector for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes
and seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and lowwage industries.
Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsu­
pervisory workers for which pay was received and are different from
standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the portion of
average weekly hours which was in excess of regular hours and for
which overtime premiums were paid.
The Diffusion Index, introduced in the May 1983 R ev ie w , represents
the percent of 185 nonagricultural industries in which employment was
rising over the indicated period. One-half of the industries with
unchanged employment are counted as rising. In line with Bureau
practice, data for the 1-, 3-, and 6-month spans are seasonally adjusted,
while those for the 12-month span are unadjusted. The diffusion index
is useful for measuring the dispersion of economic gains or losses and is
also an economic indicator.

Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are
periodically adjusted to comprehensive counts of employment (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the
release of May 1987 data, published in the July 1987 issue of the
R e v ie w . Consequently, data published in the R e v ie w prior to that issue
are not necessarily comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have
been revised back to April 1985; seasonally adjusted data have been
revised back to January 1982. These revisions were published in the
S u p p le m e n t to E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1987). Unadjusted data from April 1986 forward, and seasonally
adjusted data from January 1983 forward are subject to revision in
future benchmarks.
In the establishment survey, estimates for the 2 most recent months
are based on incomplete returns and are published as preliminary in the


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

tables (13 to 18 in the R e v ie w ). When all returns have been received, the
estimates are revised and published as final in the third month of their
appearance. Thus, August data are published as preliminary in October
and November and as final in December. For the same reason,
quarterly establishment data (table 1) are preliminary for the first 2
months of publication and final in the third month. Thus, secondquarter data are published as preliminary in August and September and
as final in October.

Additional sources of information
Detailed national data from the establishment survey are published
monthly in the b l s periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s. Earlier
comparable unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in
E m p lo y m e n t, H o u rs, a n d E a rn in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 0 9 - 84, Bulletin
1312-12 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985) and its annual supplement.
For a detailed discussion of the methodology of the survey, see b l s
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household
and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur­
veys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1969, pp. 9-20.

Unemployment data by State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained from two major sources—
the Current Population Survey ( c p s ) and the Local Area Unemploy­
ment Statistics ( l a u s ) program, which is conducted in cooperation
with State employment security agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force, employment, and unemploy­
ment for States and sub-State areas are a key indicator of local
economic conditions and form the basis for determining the eligibility
of an area for benefits under Federal economic assistance programs
such as the Job Training Partnership Act and the Public Works and
Economic Development Act. Insofar as possible, the concepts and
definitions underlying these data are those used in the national
estimates obtained from the c p s .

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

Additional sources of information
Information on the concepts, definitions, and technical procedures
used to develop labor force data for States and sub-State areas as well as
additional data on sub-States are provided in the monthly Bureau of
Labor Statistics periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, and the annual
report, G e o g ra p h ic P r o file o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d U n e m p lo y m e n t (Bureau
of Labor Statistics). See also b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).

67

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics

COMPENSATION AND WAGE DATA
(Tables 1-3; 22-29)
o m p e n s a t i o n a n d w a g e d a t a are gathered by the Bureau from
business establishments, State and local governments, labor unions,
collective bargaining agreements on fde with the Bureau, and secondary
sources.

C

Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index ( e c i ) is a quarterly measure of the rate
of change in compensation per hour worked and includes wages,
salaries, and employer costs of employee benefits. It uses a fixed market
basket of labor—similar in concept to the Consumer Price Index’s fixed
market basket of goods and services—to measure change over time in
employer costs of employing labor. The index is not seasonally
adjusted.
Statistical series on total compensation costs, on wages and salaries,
and on benefit costs are available for private nonfarm workers excluding
proprietors, the self-employed, and household workers. The total
compensation costs and wages and salaries series are also available for
State and local government workers and for the civilian nonfarm
economy, which consists of private industry and State and local
government workers combined. Federal workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability sample consists of about
3,400 private nonfarm establishments providing about 18,000 occupa­
tional observations and 700 State and local government establishments
providing 3,500 occupational observations selected to represent total
employment in each sector. On average, each reporting unit provides
wage and compensation information on five well-specified occupations.
Data are collected each quarter for the pay period including the 12th
day of March, June, September, and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed employment weights from the
1980 Census of Population are used each quarter to calculate the
indexes for civilian, private, and State and local governments. (Prior to
June 1986, the employment weights are from the 1970 Census of
Population.) These fixed weights, also used to derive all of the industry
and occupation series indexes, ensure that changes in these indexes
reflect only changes in compensation, not employment shifts among
industries or occupations with different levels of wages and compensa­
tion. For the bargaining status, region, and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan area series, however, employment data by industry and occupation
are not available from the census. Instead, the 1980 employment
weights are reallocated within these series each quarter based on the
current sample. Therefore, these indexes are not strictly comparable to
those for the aggregate, industry, and occupation series.

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

68
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index for changes in wages and salaries in the
private nonfarm economy was published beginning in 1975. Changes
in total compensation costs—wages and salaries and benefits com­
bined—were published beginning in 1980. The series for changes in
wages and salaries and for total compensation in the State and local
government sector and in the civilian nonfarm economy (excluding
Federal employees) were published beginning in 1981. Historical
indexes (June 1981 = 100) of the quarterly rates of change are presented
in the March issue of the b l s periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts .

Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion of the Employment Cost Index, see
the H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1988), and the following M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w 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; “Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost
Index,” May 1982; and “Introducing new weights for the Employment
Cost Index,” June 1985.
Data on the e c i are also available in b l s quarterly press releases
issued in the month following the reference months of March, June,
September, and December; and from the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s ,
Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).

Collective bargaining settlements
Description of the series
Collective bargaining settlements data provide statistical measures of
negotiated adjustments (increases, decreases, and freezes) in compensa­
tion (wage and benefit costs) and wages alone, quarterly for private
industry and semiannually for State and local government. Compensa­
tion measures cover all collective bargaining situations involving 5,000
workers or more and wage measures cover all situations involving 1,000
workers or more. These data, covering private nonagricultural indus­
tries and State and local governments, are calculated using information
obtained from bargaining agreements on file with the Bureau, parties to
the agreements, and secondary sources, such as newspaper accounts.
The data are not seasonally adjusted.
Settlement data are measured in terms of future specified adjust­
ments: those that will occur within 12 months of the contract effective
date—first-year—and all adjustments that will occur over the life of the
contract expressed as an average annual rate. Adjustments are worker
weighted. Both first-year and over-the-life measures exclude wage
changes that may occur under cost-of-living clauses that are triggered
by future movements in the Consumer Price Index.
Effective wage adjustments measure all adjustments occurring in the
reference period, regardless of the settlement date. Included are changes
from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from
contracts negotiated in earlier periods, and changes under cost-of-living
adjustment clauses. Each wage change is worker weighted. The changes
are prorated over all workers under agreements during the reference
period yielding the average adjustment.
Definitions
Wage rate changes are calculated by dividing newly negotiated wages
by the average straight-time hourly wage rate plus shift premium, at the
time the agreement is reached. Compensation changes are calculated by

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

Notes on the data
Comparisons of major collective bargaining settlements for State and
local government with those for private industry should note differences
in occupational mix, bargaining practices, and settlement characteris­
tics. Professional and white-collar employees, for example, make up a
much larger proportion of the workers covered by government than by
private industry settlements. Lump-sum payments and cost-of-living
adjustment (c o l a ) clauses, on the other hand, are rare in government
but common in private industry settlements. Also, State and local
government bargaining frequently excludes items such as pension
benefits and holidays, that are prescribed by law, while these items are
typical bargaining issues in private industry.

Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion on the series, see the b l s H a n d b o o k o f
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988). Comprehen­
sive data are published in press releases issued quarterly (in January,
April, July, and October) for private industry, and semi-annually (in
February and August) for State and local government. Historical data
and additional detailed tabulations for the prior calendar year appear in
the April issue of the b l s periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts .
M e th o d s,

Workers involved: The number of workers directly involved in the
stoppage.

Number of days idle: The aggregate number of workdays lost by
workers involved in the stoppages.
Days of idleness as a percent of estimated working time: Aggregate
workdays lost as a percent of the aggregate number of standard
workdays in the period multiplied by total employment in the period.
Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one terminated in 1981 that
covered strikes involving six workers or more.

Additional sources of information
Data for each calendar year are reported in a B L S press release issued
in the first quarter of the following year. Monthly and historical data
appear in the b l s periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts . Historical
data appear in the b l s H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tistic s .

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

Work stoppages

provides detailed information annually on salary levels and
distributions for the types of jobs mentioned in the survey’s title in
private employment. Although the definitions of the jobs surveyed
reflect the duties and responsibilities in private industry, they are
designed to match specific pay grades of Federal white-collar employees
under the General Schedule pay system. Accordingly, this survey
provides the legally required information for comparing the pay of
salaried employees in the Federal civil service with pay in private
industry. (See Federal Pay Comparability Act of 1970, 5u.s.c. 5305.)
Data are published in a b l s news release issued in the summer and in a
bulletin each fall; summaries and analytical articles also appear in the
C le r ic a l P a y

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

Definitions
Number of stoppages: The number of strikes and lockouts involving
1,000 workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.

R ev ie w .
E m p lo y e e B e n e f its S u r v e y provides nationwide information on the
incidence and characteristics of employee benefit plans in medium and
large establishments in the United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii.
Data are published in an annual b l s news release and bulletin, as well
as in special articles appearing in the R ev ie w .

PRICE DATA
(Tables 2; 30-41)
d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from retail and
primary markets in the United States. Price indexes are given in relation

P r ic e


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

to a base period (1982 = 100 for many Producer Price Indexes or 1982-84
= 100 for many Consumer Price Indexes), unless otherwise noted).

69

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics

Consumer Price Indexes

Producer Price Indexes

Description of the series

Description of the series

The Consumer Price Index ( c p i ) is a measure of the average change
in the prices paid by urban consumers for a fixed market basket of
goods and services. The c p i is calculated monthly for two population
groups, one consisting only of urban households whose primary source
of income is derived from the employment of wage earners and clerical
workers, and the other consisting of all urban households. The wage
earner index ( c p i - w ) is a continuation of the historic index that was
introduced well over a half-century ago for use in wage negotiations. As
new uses were developed for the c p i in recent years, the need for a
broader and more representative index became apparent. The all urban
consumer index ( c p i - u ) , introduced in 1978, is representative of the
1982-84 buying habits of about 80 percent of the noninstitutional
population of the United States at that time, compared with 32 percent
represented in the c p i - w . In addition to wage earners and clerical
workers, the c p i - u covers 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,
transportation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and
services that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality
of these items are kept essentially unchanged between major revisions
so that only price changes will be measured. All taxes directly
associated with the purchase and use of items are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 21,000 retail establishments and
60,000 housing units in 91 urban areas across the country are used to
develop the “U.S. city average.” Separate estimates for 27 major urban
centers are presented in table 31. The areas listed are as indicated in
footnote 1 to the table. The area indexes measure only the average
change in prices for each area since the base period, and do not indicate
differences in the level of prices among cities.

Producer Price Indexes ( p p i ) measure average changes in prices
received by domestic producers of commodities in all stages of
processing. The sample used for calculating these indexes currently
contains about 3,100 commodities and about 75,000 quotations per
month selected to represent the movement of prices of all commodities
produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining,
gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The stage of processing
structure of Producer Price Indexes organizes products by class of
buyer and degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate
goods, and crude materials). The traditional commodity structure of p p i
organizes products by similarity of end use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price
Indexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the
United States from the production or central marketing point. Price
data are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire.
Most prices are obtained 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.
Since January 1987, price changes for the various commodities have
been averaged together with implicit quantity weights representing their
importance in the total net selling value of all commodities as of 1982.
The detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage-ofprocessing groupings, commodity groupings, durability-of-product
groupings, and a number of special composite groups. All Producer
Price Index data are subject to revision 4 months after original
publication.

Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the way in which homeownership costs are measured for the c p i - u . A rental equivalence method
replaced the asset-price approach to homeownership costs for that
series. In January 1985, the same change was made in the c p i - w . The
central purpose of the change was to separate shelter costs from the
investment component of homeownership so that the index would
reflect only the cost of shelter services provided by owner-occupied
homes. An updated c p i -U and c p i - w were introduced with release of the
January 1987 data.

Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method for computing the c p i , see b l s
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).
The recent change in the measurement of homeownership costs is
discussed in Robert Gillingham and Walter Lane, “Changing the
treatment of shelter costs for homeowners in the c p i , ” M o n th ly L a b o r
R ev ie w , July 1982, pp. 9-14. An overview of the recently introduced
revised c p i , reflecting 1982-84 expenditure patterns, is contained in
T h e C o n s u m e r P r ic e I n d e x : 1 9 8 7 R ev isio n , Report 736 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1987).
Additional detailed c p i data and regular analyses of consumer price
changes are provided in the c p i D e ta ile d R e p o r t, a monthly publication
of the Bureau. Historical data for the overall c p i and for selected
groupings may be found in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin
2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s ,


70
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Notes on the data
Beginning with the January 1986 issue, the R e v ie w is no longer
presenting tables of Producer Price Indexes for commodity groupings,
special composite groups, or sic industries. However, these data will
continue to be presented in the Bureau’s monthly publication P r o d u c e r
P r ic e I n d e x e s .

The Bureau has completed the first major stage of its comprehensive
overhaul of the theory, methods, and procedures used to construct the
Producer Price Indexes. Changes include the replacement of judgment
sampling with probability sampling techniques; expansion to systematic
coverage of the net output of virtually all industries in the mining and
manufacturing sectors; a shift from a commodity to an industry
orientation; the exclusion of imports from, and the inclusion of exports
in, the survey universe; and the respecification of commodities priced to
conform to Bureau of the Census definitions. These and other changes
have been phased in gradually since 1978. The result is a system of
indexes that is easier to use in conjunction with data on wages,
productivity, and employment and other series that are organized in
terms of the Standard Industrial Classification and the Census product
class designations.

Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the methodology for computing Producer Price
Indexes, see b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s, Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988).
Additional detailed data and analyses of price changes are provided
monthly in P r o d u c e r P r ic e I n d e x e s . Selected historical data may be
found in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1985).

International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The b l s International Price Program produces quarterly export and
import price indexes for nonmilitary goods traded between the United
States and. the rest of the world. The export price index provides a
measure of price change for all products sold by U.S. residents to
foreign buyers. (“Residents” is defined as in the national income
accounts: it includes corporations, businesses, and individuals but does
not require the organizations to be U.S. owned nor the individuals to
have U.S. citizenship.) The import price index provides a measure of
price change for goods purchased from other countries by U.S.
residents. With publication of an all-import index in February 1983 and
an all-export index in February 1984, all U.S. merchandise imports and
exports now are represented in these indexes. The reference period for
the indexes is 1985 = 100, unless otherwise indicated.
The product universe for both the import and export indexes includes
raw materials, agricultural products, semifinished manufactures, and
finished manufactures, including both capital and consumer goods.
Price data for these items are collected quarterly by mail questionnaire.
In nearly all cases, the data are collected directly from the exporter or
importer, although in a few cases, prices are obtained from other
sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered refer to prices at the U.S.
border for exports and at either the foreign border or the U.S. border
for imports. For nearly all products, the prices refer to transactions
completed during the first 2 weeks of the third month of each calendar
quarter—March, June, September, and December. Survey respondents
are asked to indicate all discounts, allowances, and rebates applicable to
the reported prices, so that the price used in the calculation of the
indexes is the actual price for which the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices for U.S. exports and imports,
indexes are also published for detailed product categories of exports and
imports. These categories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit level of detail
of the Standard Industrial Trade Classification System ( s i t c ) . The
calculation of indexes by s i t c category facilitates the comparison of
U.S. price trends and sector production with similar data for other
countries. Detailed indexes are also computed and published on a
Standard Industrial Classification (sic-based) basis, as well as by enduse class.

Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are weighted indexes of the
Laspeyres type. Price relatives are assigned equal importance within

each weight category and are then aggregated to the s i t c level. The
values assigned to each weight category are based on trade value figures
compiled by the Bureau of the Census. The trade weights currently used
to compute both indexes relate to 1985.
Because a price index depends on the same items being priced from
period to period, it is necessary to recognize when a product’s
specifications or terms of transaction have been modified. For this
reason, the Bureau’s quarterly questionnaire requests detailed descrip­
tions of the physical and functional characteristics of the products being
priced, as well as information on the number of units bought or sold,
discounts, credit terms, packaging, class of buyer or seller, and so forth.
When there are changes in either the specifications or terms of
transaction of a product, the dollar value of each change is deleted from
the total price change to obtain the “pure” change. Once this value is
determined, a linking procedure is employed which allows for the
continued repricing of the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free
alongside ship) U.S. port of exportation. When firms report export
prices f.o.b. (free on board), production point information is collected
which enables the Bureau to calculate a shipment cost to the port of
exportation. An attempt is made to collect two prices for imports. The
first is the import price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation, which is
consistent with the basis for valuation of imports in the national
accounts. The second is the import price c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and
freight) at the U.S. port of importation, which also includes the other
costs associated with bringing the product to the U.S. border. It does
not, however, include duty charges. For a given product, only one price
basis series is used in the construction of an index.
Beginning in 1988, the Bureau has also been publishing a series of
indexes which represent the price of U.S. exports and imports in foreign
currency terms.

Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method of computing International
Price Indexes, see b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1988).
Additional detailed data and analyses of international price develop­
ments are presented in the Bureau’s quarterly publication U .S. I m p o r t
a n d E x p o r t P r ic e I n d e x e s and in occasional M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w
articles prepared by b l s analysts. Selected historical data may be found
in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1985). For further information on the foreign currency
indexes, see “ b l s publishes average exchange rate and foreign
currency price indexes,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1987, pp.
47-49.

PRODUCTIVITY DATA
(Tables 2; 42-47)

U.S. productivity and related data
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real physical output to real input.
As such, they encompass a family of measures which include single
factor productivity measures, such as output per unit of labor input
(output per hour) or output per unit of capital input, as well as
measures of multifactor productivity (output per unit of combined labor
and capital inputs). The Bureau indexes show the change in output
relative to changes in the various inputs. The measures cover the
business, nonfarm business, manufacturing, and nonfinancial corporate
sectors.

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

Corresponding indexes of hourly compensation, unit labor costs, unit
nonlabor payments, and prices are also provided.

Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant prices produced per hour of labor input.
Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant dollars produced per unit of capital
services input.
Multifactor productivity is output per unit of combined labor and
capital inputs. Changes in this measure reflect changes in a number of
factors which affect the production process such as changes in
technology, shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in

71

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics

capacity utilization, research and development, skill and efforts of the
work force, management, and so forth. Changes in the output per hour
measures reflect the impact of these factors as well as the substitution of
capital for labor.
Compensation per hour is the wages and salaries of employees plus
employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans,
and the wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the selfemployed (except for nonfmancial corporations in which there are no
self-employed)—the sum divided by hours paid for. Real compensation
per hour is compensation per hour deflated by the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compensation costs expended in the
production of a unit of output and are derived by dividing compensa­
tion by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation,
interest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by
subtracting compensation of all persons from current dollar value of
output and dividing by output. Unit nonlabor costs contain all the
components of unit nonlabor payments e x c e p t unit profits.
Unit profits include corporate profits with inventory valuation and
capital consumption adjustments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours paid of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Capital services is the flow of services from the capital stock used in
production. It is developed from measures of the net stock of physical
assets—equipment, structures, land, and inventories—weighted by
rental prices for each type of asset.
Labor and capital inputs combined are derived by combining changes
in labor and capital inputs with weights which represent each compo­
nent’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
Tornquist index-number formula).

Notes on the data
Constant-dollar output for the business sector is equal to constantdollar gross national product but excludes the rental value of owneroccupied dwellings, the rest-of-world sector, the output of nonprofit
institutions, the output of paid employees of private households, general
government, and the statistical discrepancy. Output of the nonfarm
business sector is equal to business sector output less farming. The
measures are derived from data supplied by the Bureau of Economic
Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve
Board. Quarterly manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics to annual measures of manufacturing output
(gross product originating) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Compensation and hours data are developed from data of the Bureau of
Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
The productivity and associated cost measures in tables 42-44
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; utilization of capacity,
energy, and materials; the organization of production; managerial skill;
and the characteristics and efforts of the work force.

Additional sources of information
Descriptions of methodology underlying the measurement of output
per hour and multifactor productivity are found in the b l s H a n d b o o k o f
M e th o d s , Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988). Historical

72
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

data for selected industries are provided in the H a n d b o o k
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).

o f Labor

S ta tis tic s ,

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
(Tables 45-47)

Labor force and unemployment
Description of the series
Tables 45 and 46 present comparative measures of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment—approximating U.S. concepts—for
the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and six European
countries. The unemployment statistics (and, to a lesser extent,
employment statistics) published by other industrial countries are not,
in most cases, comparable to U.S. unemployment statistics. Therefore,
the Bureau adjusts the figures for selected countries, where necessary,
for all known major definitional differences. Although precise compara­
bility may not be achieved, these adjusted figures provide a better basis
for international comparisons than the figures regularly published by
each country.

Definitions
For the principal U.S. definitions of the labor force, employment, and
unemployment, see the Notes section on EMPLOYMENT DATA:
Household Survey Data.

Notes on the data
The adjusted statistics have been adapted to the age at which
compulsory schooling ends in each country, rather than to the U.S.
standard of 16 years of age and over. Therefore, the adjusted statistics
relate to the population age 16 and over in France, Sweden, and from
1973 onward, the United Kingdom; 16 and over in Canada, Australia,
Japan, Germany, the Netherlands, and prior to 1973, the United
Kingdom; and 14 and over in Italy. The institutional population is
included in the denominator of the labor force participation rates and
employment-population ratios for Japan and Germany; it is excluded
for the United States and the other countries.
In the U.S. labor force survey, persons on layoff who are awaiting
recall to their job are classified as unemployed. European and Japanese
layoff practices are quite different in nature from those in the United
States; therefore, strict application of the U.S. definition has not been
made on this point. For further information, see M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w ,
December 1981, pp. 8-11.
The figures for one or more recent years for France, Germany, Italy,
the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom are calculated using
adjustment factors based on labor force surveys for earlier years and are
considered preliminary. The recent-year measures for these countries
are, therefore, subject to revision whenever data from more current
labor force surveys become available.
There are breaks in the date series for Germany (1983), Italy (1986),
the Netherlands (1983), and Sweden (1986). For both Germany and the
Netherlands, the breaks reflect the replacement of labor force survey
results tabulated by the national statistical offices with those tabulated
by the European Community Statistical Office ( e u r o s t a t ) . The Dutch
figures for 1983 onward also reflect the replacement of man-year
employment data with data from the Dutch Survey of Employed
Persons. The impact of the changes was to lower the adjusted
unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage point for Germany and by about
2 percentage points for the Netherlands.
For Italy, the break in series reflects more accurate enumeration of
time of last job search. This resulted in a significant increase in the

number of people reported as seeking work in the past 30 days. The
impact was to increase the Italian unemployment rates approximating
U.S. concepts by about 1 percentage point.
Sweden introduced a new questionnaire. Questions regarding current
availability were added and the period of active workseeking was
reduced from 60 days to 4 weeks. These changes resulted in lowering
Sweden’s unemployment rate by 0.5 percentage point.

Additional sources of information
For further information, see I n te r n a tio n a l C o m p a r is o n s o f U n e m p lo y ­
Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978), Appendix B,
and unpublished Supplements to Appendix B, available on request. The
statistics are also analyzed periodically in the M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w .
The latest article appears in the April 1988 R e v ie w . Additional
historical data, generally beginning with 1959, are published in the
H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s and are available in unpublished statistical
supplements to Bulletin 1979.
m e n t,

Manufacturing productivity and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 47 presents comparative measures of manufacturing labor
productivity, hourly compensation costs, and unit labor costs for the
United States, Canada, Japan, and nine European countries. These
measures are limited to trend comparisons—that is, intercountry series
of changes over time—rather than level comparisons because reliable
international comparisons of the levels of manufacturing output are
unavailable.

Definitions
Output is constant value output (value added), generally taken from
the national accounts of each country. While the national accounting
methods for measuring real output differ considerably among the 12
countries, the use of different procedures does not, in itself, connote
lack of comparability—rather, it reflects differences among countries in
the availability and reliability of underlying data series.
Hours refer to all employed persons including the self-employed in
the United States and Canada; to all wage and salary employees in the

other countries. The U.S. hours measure is hours paid; the hours
measures for the other countries are hours worked.
Compensation (labor cost) includes all payments in cash or kind
made directly to employees plus employer expenditures for legally
required insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans.
In addition, for some countries, compensation is adjusted for other
significant taxes on payrolls or employment (or reduced to reflect
subsidies), even if they are not for the direct benefit of workers, because
such taxes are regarded as labor costs. However, compensation does not
include all items of labor cost. The costs of recruitment, employee
training, and plant facilities and services—such as cafeterias and
medical clinics—are not covered because data are not available for most
countries. Self-employed workers are included in the U.S. and Canadian
compensation figures by assuming that their hourly compensation is
equal to the average for wage and salary employees.

Notes on the data
For most of the countries, the measures refer to total manufacturing
as defined by the International Standard Industrial Classification.
However, the measures for France (beginning 1959), Italy (beginning
1970), and the United Kingdom (beginning 1971), refer to manufactur­
ing and mining less energy-related products and the figures for the
Netherlands exclude petroleum refining from 1969 to 1976. For all
countries, manufacturing includes the activities of government
enterprises.
The figures for one or more recent years are generally based on
current indicators of manufacturing output, employment, hours, and
hourly compensation and are considered preliminary until the national
accounts and other statistics used for the long-term measures become
available.

Additional sources of information
For additional information, see the b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s,
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988), and periodic M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w articles. Historical data are provided in the H a n d b o o k o f
L a b o r S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985). The
statistics are issued twice per year—in a news release (generally in May)
and in a M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w article.

OCCUPATIONAL INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA
(Table 48)
Description of the series
The Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses is designed
to collect data on injuries and illnesses based on records which
employers in the following industries maintain under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970: agriculture, forestry, and fishing; oil and
gas extraction; construction; manufacturing; transportation and public
utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate;
and services. Excluded from the survey are self-employed individuals,
farmers with fewer than 11 employees, employers regulated by other
Federal safety and health laws, and Federal, State, and local govern­
ment agencies.
Because the survey is a Federal-State cooperative program and the
data must meet the needs of participating State agencies, an indepen­
dent sample is selected for each State. The sample is selected to
represent all private industries in the States and territories. The sample
size for the survey is dependent upon (1) the characteristics for which
estimates are needed; (2) the industries for which estimates are desired;

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

(3) the characteristics of the population being sampled; (4) the target
reliability of the estimates; and (5) the survey design employed.
While there are many characteristics upon which the sample design
could be based, the total recorded case incidence rate is used because it
is one of the most important characteristics and the least variable;
therefore, it requires the smallest sample size.
The survey is based on stratified random sampling with a Neyman
allocation and a ratio estimator. The characteristics used to stratify the
establishments are the Standard Industrial Classification (sic) code and
size of employment.

Definitions
Recordable occupational injuries and illnesses are: (1) occupational
deaths, regardless of the time between injury and death, or the length of
the illness; or (2) nonfatal occupational illnesses; or (3) nonfatal
occupational injuries which involve one or more of the following: loss

73

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics

of consciousness, restriction of work or motion, transfer to another job,
or medical treatment (other than first aid).
Occupational injury is any injury such as a cut, fracture, sprain,
amputation, and so forth, which results from a work accident or from
exposure involving a single incident in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal condition or disorder, other than
one resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to
environmental factors associated with employment. It includes acute
and chronic illnesses or disease which may be caused by inhalation,
absorption, ingestion, or direct contact.
Lost workday cases are cases which involve days away from work, or
days of restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workday cases involving restricted work activity are those cases
which result in restricted work activity only.
Lost workdays away from work are the number of workdays
(consecutive or not) on which the employee would have worked but
could not because of occupational injury or illness.
Lost workdays—restricted work activity are the number of workdays
(consecutive or not) on which, because of injury or illness: (1) the
employee was assigned to another job on a temporary basis; or (2) the
employee worked at a permanent job less than full time; or (3) the
employee worked at a permanently assigned job but could not perform
all duties normally connected with it.

The number of days away from work or days of restricted work
activity does not include the day of injury or onset of illness or any days
on which the employee would not have worked even though able to
work.
Incidence rates represent the number of injuries and/or illnesses or
lost workdays per 100 full-time workers.

Notes on the data
Estimates are made for industries and employment-size classes and
for severity classification: fatalities, lost workday cases' and nonfatal
cases without lost workdays. Lost workday cases are separated into
those where the employee would have worked but could not and those
in which work activity was restricted. Estimates of the number of cases
and the number of days lost are made for both categories.


74
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Most of the estimates are in the form of incidence rates, defined as
the number of injuries and illnesses, or lost workdays, per 100 full-time
employees. For this purpose, 200,000 employee hours represent 100
employee years (2,000 hours per employee). Only a few of the available
measures are included in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s . Full detail is
presented in the annual bulletin, O c c u p a tio n a l I n ju r ie s a n d I lln e ss e s in
th e U n ite d S ta te s , b y I n d u s tr y .

Comparable data for individual States are available from the b l s
Office of Safety, Health, and Working Conditions.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to B L S by the Mine Safety and
Health Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration,
respectively. Data from these organizations are included in b l s and
State publications. Federal employee experience is compiled and
published by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Data
on State and local government employees are collected by about half of
the States and territories; these data are not compiled nationally.

Additional sources of information
The Supplementary Data System provides detailed information
describing various factors associated with work-related injuries and
illnesses. These data are obtained from information reported by
e m p lo y e r s to State workers’ compensation agencies. The Work Injury
Report program examines selected types of accidents through an
employee survey which focuses on the circumstances surrounding the
injury. These data are not included in the H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s
but are available from the b l s Office of Safety, Health, and Working
Conditions.
The definitions of occupational injuries and illnesses and lost
workdays are from R e c o r d k e e p in g R e q u ir e m e n ts u n d e r th e O c c u p a ­
tio n a l S a f e ty a n d H e a lth A c t o f 1 9 7 0 . For additional data, see
O c c u p a tio n a l I n ju r ie s a n d I lln e s s e s in th e U n ite d S ta te s , b y I n d u s tr y ,

annual Bureau of Labor Statistics bulletin; b l s H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s,
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988); H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r
S ta tis tic s , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985), pp. 411-14;
annual reports in the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ; and annual U.S.
Department of Labor press releases.

1.

Labor market indicators
1986
Selected indicators

1986

1987

1988

1987
II

III

IV

I

II

III

IV

I

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

Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey)'
Labor force participation ra te ........................................................
Employment-population ra tio ........................................................
Unemployment rate ..................................................
M e n ...............................................
16 to 24 years ........................................................................
25 years and o v e r....................................................................
Women ..............................................................
16 to 24 years ..........................................................
25 years and o v e r....................................................
Unemployment rate, 15 weeks and o ver...................................

65.3
60.7
7.0
6.9
13.7
5.4
7.1
12.8
5.5
1.9

65.6
61.5
6.2
6.2
12.6
4.8
6.2
11.7
4.8
1.7

65.2
60.6
7.2
7.0
14.1
5.4
7.3
13.1
5.7
1.9

65.4
60.8
7.0
7.0
13.9
5.4
7.0
12.7
5.4
1.9

65.4
60.9
6.8
6.9
13.4
5.4
6.8
12.5
5.3
1.9

65.5
61.1
6.6
6.6
13.3
5.1
6.6
12.5
5.0
1.8

65.5
61.4
6.3
6.3
12.9
4.9
6.2
11.8
4.7
1.7

65.6
61.7
6.0
5.9
12.2
4.6
6.1
11.4
4.7
1.6

65.7
61.9
5.9
5.8
11.9
4.4
6.0
11.1
4.7
1.5

65.8
62.1
5.7
5.7
11.9
4.4
5.8
11.0
4.4
1.4

99,610
82,900
24,681
18,994
74,930

102,112
85,049
24,884
19,112
77,228

99,321
82,670
24,702
19,003
74,619

99,804
83,119
24,629
18,939
75,175

100,397
83,498
24,624
18,953
75,773

101,133
84,183
24,733
18,979
76,399

101,708
84,675
24,757
19,015
76,951

102,278
85,240
24,884
19,134
77,394

103,293
86,069
25,164
19,322
78,129

104,284
86,971
25,336
19,418
78,948

34.8
40.7
3.4

34.8
41.0
3.7

34.8
40.7
3.4

34.7
40.7
3.5

34.7
40.8
3.5

34.8
41.0
3.6

34.8
40.9
3.7

34.8
40.9
3.7

34.8
41.2
3.9

34.8
41.1
3.8

Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal workers) ......
Private industry workers ...............................................................
Goods-producing2 ........................................................ .............
Service-producing2 ...................................................................
State and local government workers..................................

3.6
3.2
3.1
3.2
5.2

3.6
3.3
3.1
3.7
4.4

.7
.8
.9
.6
.6

1.1
.7
.6
.8
2.8

.6
.6
.5
.6
.8

.9
1.0
.5
1.3
.8

.7
.7
.7
.7
.3

1.2
1.0
.8
1.0
2.3

.8
.7
1.0
.5
.9

14
15
1.8
1.3
1.3

Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
U nion......................................................
Nonunion .........................................................

2.1
3.6

2.8
3.6

.2
.9

.5
.8

.3
.7

.5
1.1

.5
.7

.6
1.1

1.1
.6

1.6
1.5

Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data), in thousands:1
Total .............................................................................
Private sector .........................................................
Goods-producing...................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................
Service-producing .......................................................
Average hours:
Private sector ..........................................................
Manufacturing .....................................................
Overtime....................................................................
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x

1 Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.

2 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction,


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

producing industries include all other private sector industries.
and manufacturing. Service-

75

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
2.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Comparative Indicators

Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
1986

1988

1987

1986
Selected measures

1987
II

III

II

I

IV

IV

III

I

C o m p e n s a t io n d a ta 1, 2

Employment Cost Index-compensation (wages, salaries,
benefits):
Civilian nonfarm ...................................................................
Private nonfarm ...................................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries
Civilian nonfarm ...................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................

3.6
3.2

3.6
3.3

0.7
.8

1.1
.7

0.6
.6

0.9
1.0

0.7
.7

1.2
1.0

0.8
.7

1.4
1.5

3.5
3.1

3.5
3.3

.8
.9

1.1
.7

.6
.5

1.0
1.0

.5
.7

1.3
1.0

.7
.6

1.0
1.0

1.1

4.4

.6

.6

.3

1.4

1.2

1.3

P r ic e d a t a 1

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

Producer Price Index:
Finished goods.....................................................................
Finished consumer goods...................................................
Capital equipment ...............................................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ....................
Crude materials....................................................................

-2.3
-3.5
2.1
-4.4
-8.9

-.5

2.2
2.6
1.3
5.4
8.9

-.7
-.7
-.8
-.2
-.6

.5
.4
.6
-.9
-1.5

1.1
.8
2.1
-.3
.6

.8
.9
.1
1.3
4.2

1.2
1.6
.3
1.9
5.3

.1
-.2
1.1
.9
-1.4

.2
.3
-.2
1.2
.6

.3

.4
.3
.7
1.0
-.3

P r o d u c t iv it y d a t a 3

Output per hour of all persons:
Business sector...................................................................
Nonfarm business sector ....................................................
Nonfinancial corporations 4 .................................................

1.9
1.6
1.6

.6
.1
-.2

.9
.8
.3

-.1
.0
2.1

1.4
1.4
.7

.5
.4
-2.9

.8
.9

-1.5
-1.0
-1.0

4.7
4.2
3.3

Quarterly percent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly in­
dexes. The data are seasonally adjusted.
4 Output per hour of all employees.
- Data not available.

1 Annual changes are December-to-December change. Quarterly changes
are calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price
data are not seasonally adjusted and the price data are not compounded.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.

3.

-.3
-.6
.9

Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ended-

Quarterly average
Components

I

IV
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector..................................................................
All employees, nonfarm business se cto r..............................................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 2 ...................................................................................
Private nonfarm ..................................................................................
U nion................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
State and local governments..............................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2 ...................................................................................
Private nonfarm ...................................................................................
Union .................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
State and local governments ...............................................................
Total effective wage adjustments3 ...............................................................
From current settlements......................................................................
From prior settlements ..........................................................................
From cost-of-living provision..................................................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements:3
First-year adjustments ...........................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:5
First-year adjustment.............................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract...........................................................

III

II

IV

1988

1986

I

IV

1988

1987
I

III

II

IV

I

3.6
4.0

1.4
1.1

3.3
3.0

3.8
3.6

3.2
3.5

3.5
3.4

3.3
3.4

2.8
2.7

2.8
2.7

3.0
2.9

2.9
2.8

3.4
3.4

.6
.6
.3
.7
.8

.9
1.0
.5
1.1
.8

.7
.7
.5
.7
.3

1.2
1.0
.6
1.1
2.3

.8
.7
1.1
.6
.9

1.4
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.3

3.6
3.2
2.1
3.6
5.2

3.4
3.1
1.6
3.6
5.0

3.3
3.0
1.9
3.4
4.7

3.4
3.3
2.0
3.7
4.2

3.6
3.3
2.8
3.6
4.4

4.1
3.9
3.9
4.0
4.9

.6
.5
.2
.7
.7
.5
.2
.2
.1

1.0
1.0
.4
1.2
.8
.4
.3
.1

.5
.7
.5
.8
.2
1.0
.2
.7
.2

1.3
1.0
.6
1.1
2.3
.9
.2
.6
.1

.7
.6
1.1
.5
.9
.8
.3
.3
.2

1.0
1.0
.4
1.0
.9
.4
.1
.3
.1

3.5
3.1
2.0
3.5
5.4
2.3
.5
1.7
.2

3.5
3.2
1.7
3.5
5.2
2.0
.3
1.5
.1

3.2
3.0
1.7
3.3
5.0
2.2
.3
1.6
.3

3.4
3.3
1.7
3.8
4.1
2.6
.4
1.7
.4

3.5
3.3
2.6
3.6
4.2
3.1
.7
1.8
.5

3.5
3.3
2.6
3.5
4.4
3.2
.8
1.8
.5

2.0
2.1

.8
1.6

2.6
2.9

2.1
2.0

2.4
1.8

2.1
2.3

1.2
1.8

1.2
1.8

1.5
2.0

2.0
2.2

2.2
2.1

2.4
2.2

2.7
2.4

1.1
2.1

4.1
3.9

2.5
2.1

3.4
2.4

1.7
1.8

1.1
1.6

1.2
1.7

1.8
2.1

2.7
2.6

3.0
2.6

3.1
2.5

1 Seasonally adjusted.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.
3 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 1,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.


76
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1987

1986

0

4 Data round to zero.
5 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.

4.

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

(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average

1987

1988

Employment status
1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

182,293
119,540
65.6
111,303

184,490
121,602
65.9
114,177

184,079
121,098
65.8
113,541

184,259
121,633
66.0
114,060

184,421
121,326
65.8
114,018

184,605
121,610
65.9
114,359

184,738
122,042
66.1
114,786

184,904
121,706
65.8
114,615

185,052
122,128
66.0
114,951

185,225
122,349
66.1
115,259

185,370
122,472
66.1
115,494

185,571
122,924
66.2
115,878

185,705
123,084
66.3
116,145

185,847
122,639
66.0
115,839

185,964
123,055
66.2
116,445

61.1
1,706
109,597
3,163
106,434
8,237
6.9
62,752

61.9
1,737
112,440
3,208
109,232
7,425
6.1
62,888

61.7
1,735
111,806
3,250
108,556
7,557
6.2
62,981

61.9
1,726
112,334
3,269
109,065
7,573
6.2
62,626

61.8
1,718
112,300
3,192
109,108
7,308
6.0
63,095

61.9
1,720
112,639
3,212
109,427
7,251
6.0
62,995

62.1
1,736
113,050
3,143
109,907
7,256
5.9
62,696

62.0
1,743
112,872
3,184
109,688
7,091
5.8
63,198

62.1
1,741
113,210
3,249
109,961
7,177
5.9
62,924

62.2
1,755
113,504
3,172
110,332
7,090
5.8
62,876

62.3
1,750
113,744
3,215
110,529
6,978
5.7
62,898

62.4
1,749
114,129
3,293
110,836
7,046
5.7
62,647

62.5
1,736
114,409
3,228
111,182
6,938
5.6
62,621

62.3
1,736
114,103
3,204
110,899
6,801
5.5
63,208

62.6
1,732
114,713
3,228
111,485
6,610
5.4
62,909

87,349
66,973
76.7
62,443

88,476
67,784
76.6
63,684

88,271
67,604
76.6
63,390

88,361
67,802
76.7
63,543

88,442
67,623
76.5
63,543

88,534
67,671
76.4
63,711

88,598
67,937
76.7
63,916

88,683
67,776
76.4
63,949

88,756
67,947
76.6
64,048

88,849
68,019
76.6
64,174

88,924
68,030
76.5
64,245

89,033
68,243
76.6
64,396

89,099
68,343
76.7
64,636

89,168
68,148
76.4
64,332

89,225
68,445
76.7
64,892

71.5
1,551
60,892
4,530
6.8

72.0
1,577
62,107
4,101
6.1

71.8
1,575
61,815
4,214
6.2

71.9
1,566
61,977
4,259
6.3

71.8
1,559
61,984
4,080
6.0

72.0
1,561
62,150
3,960
5.9

72.1
1,575
62,341
4,021
5.9

72.1
1,581
62,368
3,827
5.6

72.2
1,580
62,468
3,899
5.7

72.2
1,593
62,581
3,845
5.7

72.2
1,589
62,656
3,785
5.6

72.3
1,588
62,808
3,847
5.6

72.5
1,577
63,059
3,707
5.4

72.1
1,573
62,759
3,816
5.6

72.7
1,569
63,323
3,553
5.2

94,944
52,568
55.4
48,861

96,013
53,818
56.1
50,494

95,808
53,494
55.8
50,151

95,898
53,831
56.1
50,517

95,979
53,703
56.0
50,475

96,071
53,939
56.1
50,648

96,140
54,105
56.3
50,870

96,221
53,930
56.0
50,666

96,295
54,181
56.3
50,903

96,376
54,330
56.4
51,085

96,446
54,442
56.4
51,249

96,538
54,681
56.6
51,482

96,606
54,740
56.7
51,509

96,679
54,491
56.4
51,507

96,739
54,610
56.5
51,553

51.5
155
48,706
3,707
„

52.6
160
50,334
3,324
6.2

52.3
160
49,991
3,343
6.2

52.7
160
50,357
3,314
6.2

52.6
159
50,316
3,228
6.0

52.7
159
50,489
3,291
6.1

52.9
161
50,709
3,235
6.0

52.7
162
50,504
3,264
6.1

52.9
161
50,742
3,278
6.1

53.0
162
50,923
3,245
6.0

53.1
161
51,088
3,193
5.9

53.3
161
51,321
3,200
5.9

53.3
159
51,350
3,231
5.9

53.3
163
51,344
2,985
5.5

53 3
163
51,390
3,057
5.6

TOTAL

Noninstitutional population 2 .......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed 2 .......................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 ......
Civilian employed ....................
Agriculture ............................
Nonagricultural industries.....
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........
Not in labor force ........................

M e n , 16 y e a rs a n d o v e r

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

W o m e n , 16 y e a rs a n d o v e r

Noninstitutional population 1, 2 .......
Labor force2 ..................................
Participation rate 3 ................
Total employed2 .......................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ...................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ...................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate 5 ...........

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


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

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

the resident Armed

77

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1988

1987

Annual average
Employment status
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

1986

1987

180,587
117,834
65.3
109,597

182,753
119,865
65.6
112,440

182,344
119,363
65.5
111,806

182,533
119,907
65.7
112,334

182,703
119,608
65.5
112,300

182,885
119,890
65.6
112,639

183,002
120,306
65.7
113,050

183,161
119,963
65.5
112,872

183,311
120,387
65.7
113,210

183,470
120,594
65.7
113,504

183,620
120,722
65.7
113,744

183,822
121,175
65.9
114,129

183,969
121,348
66.0
114,409

184,111
120,903
65.7
114,103

184,232
121,323
65.9
114,713

60.7
8,237
7.0
62,752

61.5
7,425
6.2
62,888

61.3
7,557
6.3
62,981

61.5
7,573
6.3
62,626

61.5
7,308
6.1
63,095

61.6
7,251
6.0
62,995

61.8
7,256
6.0
62,696

61.6
7,091
5.9
63,198

61.8
7,177
6.0
62,924

61.9
7,090
5.9
62,876

61.9
6,978
5.8
62,898

62.1
7,046
5.8
62,647

62.2
6,938
5.7
62,621

62.0
6,801
5.6
63,208

62.3
6,610
5.4
62,909

78,523
61,320
78.1
57,569

79,565
62,095
78.0
58,726

79,387
61,970
78.1
58,516

79,474
62,129
78.2
58,673

79,536
62,054
78.0
58,632

79,625
62,106
78.0
58,783

79,668
62,083
77.9
58,825

79,740
62,085
77.9
58,967

79,807
62,211
78.0
59,037

79,885
62,299
78.0
59,164

80,002
62,248
77.8
59,185

80,120
62,440
77.9
59,287

80,203
62,696
78.2
59,625

80,260
62,497
77.9
59,407

80,326
62,791
78.2
59,883

73.3
2,292
55,277
3,751
6.1

73.8
2,329
56,397
3,369
5.4

73.7
2,378
56,138
3,454
5.6

73.8
2,383
56,290
3,456
5.6

73.7
2,316
56,316
3,422
5.5

73.8
2,333
56,450
3,323
5.4

73.8
2,289
56,536
3,258
5.2

73.9
2,345
56,622
3,118
5.0

74.0
2,343
56,694
3,174
5.1

74.1
2,297
56,867
3,135
5.0

74.0
2,298
56,887
3,063
4.9

74.0
2,323
56,964
3,154
5.1

74.3
2,280
57,344
3,071
4.9

74.0
2,253
57,154
3,089
4.9

74.5
2,255
57,627
2,909
4.6

87,567
48,589
55.5
45,556

88,583
49,783
56.2
47,074

88,395
49,494
56.0
46,761

88,464
49,728
56.2
47,028

88,546
49,722
56.2
47,088

88,632
49,886
56.3
47,206

88,685
49,969
56.3
47,308

88,785
49,922
56.2
47,251

88,843
50,095
56.4
47,480

88,923
50,254
56.5
47,634

89,010
50,361
56.6
47,750

89,110
50,558
56.7
47,977

89,178
50,640
56.8
48,005

89,261
50,542
56.6
48,132

89,307
50,612
56.7
48,170

52.0
614
44,943
3,032
6.2

53.1
622
46,453
2,709
5.4

52.9
603
46,158
2,733
5.5

53.2
629
46,399
2,700
5.4

53.2
619
46,469
2,634
5.3

53.3
620
46,586
2,680
5.4

53.3
609
46,699
2,661
5.3

53.2
600
46,651
2,671
5.4

53.4
636
46,844
2,615
5.2

53.6
636
46,998
2,620
5.2

53.6
643
47,107
2,611
5.2

53.8
646
47,331
2,581
5.1

53.8
654
47,351
2,635
5.2

53.9
656
47,476
2,411
4.8

53.9
692
47,478
2,442
4.8

14,496
7,926
54.7
6,472

14,606
7,988
54.7
6,640

14,562
7,899
54.2
6,529

14,595
8,050
55.2
6,633

14,621
7,832
53.6
6,580

14,628
7,898
54.0
6,650

14,649
8,254
56.3
6,917

14,637
7,956
54.4
6,654

14,661
8,081
55.1
6,693

14,663
8,041
54.8
6,706

14,609
8,113
55.5
6,809

14,592
8,177
56.0
6,865

14,588
8,011
54.9
6,779

14,591
7,865
53.9
6,564

14,598
7,919
54.2
6,660

44.6
258
6,215
1,454
18.3

45.5
258
6,382
1,347
16.9

44.8
269
6,260
1,370
17.3

45.4
257
6,376
1,417
17.6

45.0
257
6,323
1,252
16.0

45.5
259
6,391
1,248
15.8

47.2
245
6,672
1,337
16.2

45.5
239
6,415
1,302
16.4

45.7
270
6,423
1,388
17.2

45.7
239
6,467
1,335
16.6

46.6
274
6,535
1,304
16.1

47.0
323
6,542
1,312
16.0

46.5
293
6,486
1,232
15.4

45.0
295
6,269
1,301
16.5

45.6
280
6,380
1,259
15.9

155,432
101,801
65.5
95,660

156,958
103,290
65.8
97,789

156,676
102,972
65.7
97,338

156,811
103,416
65.9
97,829

156,930
103,150
65.7
97,698

157,058
103,248
65.7
97,917

157,134
103,516
65.9
98,181

157,242
103,357
65.7
98,069

157,342
103,669
65.9
98,317

157,449
103,731
65.9
98,492

157,552
103,907
66.0
98,779

157,676
104,252
66.1
99,044

157,773
104,530
66.3
99,474

157,868
104,171
66.0
99,274

157,943
104,574
66.2
99,751

61.5
6,140
6.0

62.3
5,501
5.3

62.1
5,634
5.5

62.4
5,587
5.4

62.3
5,452
5.3

62.3
5,331
5.2

62.5
5,335
5.2

62.4
5,288
5.1

62.5
5,352
5.2

62.6
5,239
5.1

62.7
5,128
4.9

62.8
5,208
5.0

63.0
5,056
4.8

62.9
4,897
4.7

63.2
4,824
4.6

19,989
12,654
63.3
10,814

20,352
12,993
63.8
11,309

20,279
12,778
63.0
11,114

20,312
12,889
63.5
11,129

20,341
12,892
63.4
11,238

20,373
13,039
64.0
11,381

20,396
13,150
64.5
11,513

20,426
13,028
63.8
11,421

20,453
13,152
64.3
11,556

20,482
13,193
64.4
11,589

20,508
13,215
64.4
11,605

20,539
13,222
64.4
11,608

20,569
13,168
64.0
11,504

20,596
13,098
63.6
11,420

20,622
13,078
63.4
11,482

54.1
1,840
14.5

55.6
1,684
13.0

54.8
1,664
13.0

54.8
1,760
13.7

55.2
1,654
12.8

55.9
1,658
12.7

56.4
1,637
12.4

55.9
1,607
12.3

56.5
1,596
12.1

56.6
1,604
12.2

56.6
1,610
12.2

56.5
1,614
12.2

55.9
1,663
12.6

55.4
1,678
12.8

55.7
1,597
12.2

TOTAL

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

M en, 20 y e a rs a n d o v e r

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor force.......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Agriculture...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............

W o m e n , 20 y e a rs on d o v e r

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ...................................
Civilian labor fo rce .......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ..................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ...................................
Agriculture ...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment ra te ..............

B o t h s e x e s , 16 t o 19 y e a r s

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor fo rce .......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Agriculture...............................
Nonagricultural industries.......
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment ra te ..............

W h it e

Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor fo rce .......................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ...................................
Employment-population
ratio2 ...................................
Unemployed...............................
Unemployment rate..............

B la c k

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


78
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

adjusted U6d— Empl0yment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average

1987

Employment status

1988

1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

12,344
8,076
65.4
7,219

12,867
8,541
66.4
7,790

12,770
8,468
66.3
7,686

12,809
8,549
66.7
7,797

12,848
8,468
65.9
7,738

12,887
8,447
65.5
7,762

12,925
8,549
66.1
7,856

12,965
8,581
66.2
7,877

13,003
8,654
66.6
7,935

13,043
8,763
67.2
7,978

13,082
8,772
67.1
8,058

13,115
8,879
67.7
8,238

13,153
9,017
68.6
8,268

13,192
8 803
66 7
8,079

13 230
8 828
66 7
8,010

58.5
857
10.6

60.5
751
8.8

60.2
782
9.2

60.9
752
8.8

60.2
730
8.6

60.2
685
8.1

60.8
693
8.1

60.8
704
8.2

61.0
719
8.3

61.2
785
9.0

61.6
714
8.1

62.8
642
7.2

62.9
749
8.3

61 2
724
8.2

60 fi

Hispanic origin
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ....................................
Civilian labor fo rce .....................
Participation rate ..................
Employed...............................
Employment-population
ratio2 ....................................
Unemployed....................
Unemployment ra te ..............

2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals

6.

9.3

in both the white and black population groups.

Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(In thousands)
Annual average

1987

1988

Selected categories
1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

109,597
60,892
48,706
39,658

112,440
62,107
50,334
40,265

111,806
61,815
49,991
40,021

112,334
61,977
50,357
40,075

112,300
61,984
50,316
40,120

112,639
62,150
50,489
40,262

113,050
62,341
50,709
40,308

112,872
62,368
50,504
40,404

113,210
62,468
50,742
40,556

113,504
62,581
50,923
40,645

113,744
62,656
51,088
40,711

114,129
62,808
51,321
40,404

114,409
63,059
51,350
40,475

114,103
62,759
51,344
40,481

114,713
63,323
51,390
40,459

27,144
5,837

28,107
6,060

28,130
5,971

28,314
5,963

28,282
6,011

28,283
6,033

28,189
6,107

28,069
6,151

28,099
6,178

28,175
6,237

28,249
6,227

28,441
6,168

28,707
6,157

28,805
6,160

28,859
6,055

1,547
1,447
169

1,632
1,423
153

1,599
1,488
170

1,672
1,429
165

1,622
1,403
162

1,625
1,424
153

1,591
1,393
155

1,624
1,415
139

1,705
1,430
140

1,595
1,407
155

1,599
1,450
156

1,666
1,454
138

1,677
1,414
114

1,648
1,423
142

1,678
1,385
155

98,299
16,342
81,957
1,235
80,722
7,881
255

100,771
16,800
83,970
1,208
82,762
8,201
260

100,106
16,518
83,588
1,234
82,354
8,139
268

100,634
16,708
83,926
1,240
82,686
8,157
276

100,510
16,920
83,590
1,163
82,427
8,293
274

100,825
16,876
83,949
1,212
82,737
8,216
266

101,241
16,794
84,447
1,175
83,272
8,214
248

101,282
16,928
84,354
1,100
83,254
8,204
297

101,522
17,033
84,489
1,222
83,267
8,274
242

101,943
17,118
84,825
1,286
83,539
8,222
235

101,997
17,064
84,933
1,200
83,733
8,280
248

102,507
17,197
85,310
1,147
84,163
8,150
237

102,683
16,948
85,735
1,170
84,565
8,312
228

102,279
16,908
85,371
1,175
84,196
8,366
248

102,538
17,015
85,523
1,092
84,431
8,637
281

5,588
2,456
2,800
13,935

5,401
2,385
2,672
14,395

5,394
2,345
2,725
13,940

5,333
2,292
2,677
14,498

5,254
2,345
2,623
14,836

5,428
2,429
2,683
14,437

5,283
2,468
2,526
14,573

5,261
2,213
2,683
14,415

5,353
2,377
2,655
14,488

5,534
2,408
2,696
14,523

5,262
2,284
2,638
14,711

5,367
2,396
2,640
14,571

5,566
2,478
2,598
14,572

5,343
2,520
2,535
14,603

5,194
2,236
2,502
15,016

5,345
2,305
2,719
13,502

5,122
2,201
2,587
13,928

5,104
2,163
2,648
13,544

5,058
2,126
2,603
13,995

4,979
2,176
2,530
14,334

5,154
2,261
2,599
13,953

5,016
2,265
2,463
14,099

4,986
2,034
2,603
13,987

5,067
2,196
2,557
14,011

5,241
2,209
2,597
14,064

5,004
2,111
2,552
14,222

5,145
2,260
2,566
14,096

5,254
2,327
2,457
14,123

5,106
2,325
2,475
14,141

4,924
2,121
2,397
14,592

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

Civilian employed, 16 years and
over.............................................
M e n ..........................................
Women ....................................
Married men, spouse present ..
Married women, spouse
present....................................
Women who maintain families .

M A J O R IN D U S T R Y A N D C L A S S
O F W ORKER

Agriculture:
Wage and salary w orkers.......
Self-employed workers............
Unpaid family w orkers.............
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary workers .......
Government ..........................
Private industries...................
Private households.............
Other ..................................
Self-employed workers............
Unpaid family w orkers.............

PERSONS A T W O RK
P A R T T IM E 1

All industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack work ...............................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time ....................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack work ...............................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time ....................

1 Excludes persons "with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.


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

79

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
7.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics: Employment Data

Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Unemployment rates)
1988

1987

Annual average
Selected categories
1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

Total, all civilian workers.........................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years................................
Men, 20 years and over ....................................
Women, 20 years and over................................

7.0
18.3
6.1
6.2

6.2
16.9
5.4
5.4

6.3
17.3
5.6
5.5

6.3
17.6
5.6
5.4

6.1
16.0
5.5
5.3

6.0
15.8
5.4
5.4

6.0
16.2
5.2
5.3

5.9
16.4
5.0
5.4

6.0
17.2
5.1
5.2

5.9
16.6
5.0
5.2

5.8
16.1
4.9
5.2

5.8
16.0
5.1
5.1

5.7
15.4
4.9
5.2

5.6
16.5
4.9
4.8

5.4
15.9
4.6
4.8

White, total .........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............................
Men, 16 to 19 years ...................................
Women, 16 to 19 years..............................
Men, 20 years and over ..................................
Women, 20 years and o ver.............................

6.0
15.6
16.3
14.9
5.3
5.4

5.3
14.4
15.5
13.4
4.8
4.6

5.5
14.8
16.3
13.3
4.9
4.6

5.4
15.2
17.0
13.3
4.8
4.5

5.3
13.9
14.8
13.0
4.9
4.4

5.2
13.3
13.5
13.1
4.7
4.5

5.2
14.1
15.2
12.9
4.6
4.4

5.1
14.3
15.1
13.4
4.4
4.5

5.2
14.5
15.1
13.8
4.6
4.3

5.1
14.1
14.8
13.3
4.4
4.4

4.9
13.6
14.9
12.3
4.3
4.4

5.0
14.0
14.4
13.6
4.4
4.2

4.8
12.4
12.2
12.7
4.1
4.5

4.7
14.1
15.7
12.4
4.2
3.9

4.6
14.1
14.5
13.7
4.0
3.9

Black, total .........................................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............................
Men, 16 to 19 years ...................................
Women, 16 to 19 years..............................
Men, 20 years and over ..................................
Women, 20 years and over.............................

14.5
39.3
39.3
39.2
12.9
12.4

13.0
34.7
34.4
34.9
11.1
11.6

13.0
37.1
37.8
36.3
11.0
11.6

13.7
37.5
38.3
36.6
12.3
11.6

12.8
33.4
31.4
35.4
11.4
11.3

12.7
32.7
32.4
33.1
11.2
11.4

12.4
30.6
33.7
27.1
10.7
11.3

12.3
30.8
31.5
30.0
10.1
11.7

12.1
33.8
32.5
35.2
9.8
11.0

12.2
33.9
32.2
35.8
10.2
10.8

12.2
33.4
33.5
33.4
10.1
10.9

12.2
35.0
35.1
34.9
10.1
11.1

12.6
38.3
42.0
34.7
11.3
10.4

12.8
36.9
39.0
35.0
11.4
10.9

12.2
31.4
27.6
35.5
10.6
11.3

Hispanic origin, to ta l...........................................

10.6

8.8

9.2

8.8

8.6

8.1

8.1

8.2

8.3

9.0

8.1

7.2

8.3

8.2

9.3

Married men, spouse present............................
Married women, spouse present.......................
Women who maintain families...........................
Full-time workers ................................................
Part-time workers ...............................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and over.......................
Labor force time lost' ........................................

4.4
5.2
9.8
6.6
9.1
1.9
7.9

3.9
4.3
9.2
5.8
8.4
1.7
7.1

4.1
4.4
9.4
5.9
8.6
1.7
7.3

4.0
4.2
9.5
5.9
8.7
1.7
7.2

4.0
4.0
9.5
5.9
7.3
1.7
7.1

3.8
4.2
9.3
5.7
8.1
1.6
6.9

3.7
4.3
9.0
5.6
8.2
1.6
6.9

3.7
4.2
8.8
5.5
8.4
1.6
6.8

3.7
4.2
8.9
5.6
8.3
1.5
6.8

3.5
4.2
8.5
5.5
8.2
1.5
6.8

3.4
4.3
8.4
5.4
8.0
1.5
6.6

3.6
4.2
8.9
5.4
8.3
1.4
6.6

3.4
4.1
8.3
5.3
7.9
1.4
6.6

3.4
4.0
/.b
5.3
7.7
1.4
6.5

3.0
3.8
8.7
5.1
7.4
1.3
6.2

7.0
13.5
13.1
7.1
6.9
7.4
5.1
7.6
5.5
3.6
12.5

6.2
10.0
11.6
6.0
5.8
6.3
4.5
6.9
4.9
3.5
10.5

6.3
11.2
12.0
6.3
6.2
6.4
4.7
7.1
4.8
3.5
9.5

6.3
13.0
12.1
6.3
6.2
6.5
4.4
7.0
4.9
3.4
9.4

6.1
9.5
11.7
5.7
5.4
6.1
4.8
7.1
4.9
3.4
9.3

6.1
7.9
10.8
6.0
6.0
5.9
4.4
6.8
5.1
3.4
10.9

6.0
8.6
11.3
5.6
5.5
5.8
4.4
7.0
4.7
3.7
10.6

5.9
7.4
11.9
5.6
5.4
5.9
4.1
6.4
4.8
3.4
8.6

5.9
8.3
11.2
5.7
5.2
6.5
4.4
6.5
4.7
3.3
10.6

5.8
7.0
10.6
5.3
4.8
5.9
4.5
6.8
4.8
3.4
11.1

5.7
8.0
10.6
5.1
4.8
5.6
4.6
6.2
4.8
3.2
10.9

5.8
7.7
12.2
5.6
5.5
5.8
3.6
6.1
4.9
3.0
11.5

5.7
7.8
11.0
5.6
5.9
5.3
3.6
6.4
4.5
2.8
10.2

5.6
7.9
10.7
5.2
5.2
5.3
4.2
6.8
4.2
2.8
11.0

5.3
8.4
10.6
5.3
4.8
6.0
3.8
5.9
4.1
3.0
10.6

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

IN D U S T R Y

Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ....
Mining..................................................................
Construction .......................................................
Manufacturing ....................................................
Durable goods..................................................
Nondurable goods ...........................................
Transportation and public utilities ......................
Wholesale and retail tra d e .................................
Finance and service industries..........................
Government workers ...............................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers .....................

1 Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.


80
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

8.

Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Civilian workers)
Annual
average

Sex and age

1987

1986

1988

1987
Apr.

June

May

July

Aug.

Oct.

Sept.

Nov.

Jan.

Dec.

Mar.

Feb.

Apr.

Total, 16 years and over .................................................................
16 to 24 years...............................................................................
16 to 19 years .............................................................................
16 to 17 years ..........................................................................
18 to 19 years ..........................................................................
20 to 24 years .............................................................................
25 years and over..........................................................................
25 to 54 years ..........................................................................
55 years and o v e r....................................................................

7.0
13.3
18.3
20.2
17.0
10.7
5.4
5.7
3.9

6.2
12.2
16.9
19.1
15.2
9.7
4.8
5.0
3.3

6.3
12.6
17.3
18.9
15.9
10.1
4.8
5.1
3.4

6.3
12.5
17.6
21.0
15.2
9.8
4.8
5.1
3.6

6.1
12.1
16.0
18.8
14.5
10.0
4.7
4.9
3.2

6.0
11.8
15.8
17.5
13.9
9.7
4.7
5.0
3.1

6.0
11.8
16.2
18.3
14.7
9.4
4.7
4.9
3.2

5.9
11.8
16.4
18.3
15.2
9.4
4.6
4.8
3.3

6.0
11.8
17.2
20.4
14.7
8.8
4.6
4.8
3.1

5.9
11.6
16.6
19.2
14.8
8.9
4.5
4.7
3.4

5.8
11.2
16.1
17.8
14.7
8.5
4.5
4.8
3.2

5.8
11.6
16.0
18.7
14.5
9.1
4.5
4.7
3.5

5.7
11.1
15.4
17.4
13.9
8.7
4.5
4.7
3.3

5.6
11.7
16.5
17.6
15.8
9.1
4.2
4.5
2.9

5.4
11.2
15.9
17.8
14.2
8.7
4.1
4.3
2.9

Men, 16 years and o ve r..............................................................
16 to 24 years ..........................................................................
16 to 19 years........................................................................
16 to 17 years.....................................................................
18 to 19 years.....................................................................
20 to 24 years........................................................................
25 years and o v e r....................................................................
25 to 54 years.....................................................................
55 years and over................................................................

6.9
13.7
19.0
20.8
17.7
11.0
5.4
5.6
4.1

6.2
12.6
17.8
20.2
16.0
9.9
4.8
5.0
3.5

6.4
13.1
18.7
21.0
17.1
10.3
4.9
5.1
3.7

6.4
13.2
19.6
22.7
17.2
9.9
4.9
5.1
3.9

6.2
12.4
16.4
19.1
15.4
10.4
4.8
5.0
3.4

6.0
11.9
15.9
17.1
13.7
9.9
4.7
4.9
3.4

6.1
12.5
17.8
20.5
15.9
9.6
4.7
4.9
3.4

5.8
12.1
17.3
19.7
15.9
9.3
4.5
4.7
3.2

5.9
12.1
17.4
20.9
14.8
9.2
4.5
4.8
3.1

5.8
12.0
17.2
20.4
14.8
9.2
4.4
4.6
3.5

5.7
11.7
17.2
19.3
15.3
8.7
4.4
4.6
3.2

5.8
12.2
16.4
19.4
14.9
9.9
4.4
4.5
4.0

5.6
11.3
15.6
16.9
14.7
9.0
4.3
4.5
3.4

5.7
12.1
17.8
18.5
17.3
9.1
4.3
4.5
3.4

5.3
11.2
15.8
17.2
14.7
8.8
4.1
4.2
3.1

Women, 16 years and o ver.......................................................
16 to 24 years.........................................................................
16 to 19 years ......................................................................
16 to 17 years ...................................................................
18 to 19 years ...................................................................
20 to 24 years ......................................................................
25 years and o ve r...................................................................
25 to 54 years ...................................................................
55 years and o v e r..............................................................

7.1
12.8
17.6
19.6
16.3
10.3
5.5
5.9
3.6

6.2
11.7
15.9
18.0
14.3
9.4
4.8
5.1
3.0

6.3
12.0
15.9
16.6
14.7
10.0
4.8
5.1
2.9

6.2
11.8
15.6
19.1
13.1
9.7
4.7
5.0
3.0

6.0
11.7
15.5
18.4
13.6
9.6
4.5
4.9
2.8

6.1
11.7
15.7
18.0
14.1
9.5
4.7
5.0
2.6

6.0
11.0
14.4
16.0
13.4
9.0
4.7
5.0
2.9

6.1
11.5
15.4
16.9
14.4
9.4
4.7
4.9
3.5

6.1
11.5
16.9
19.9
14.6
8.5
4.7
4.9
3.1

6.0
11.2
16.0
17.9
14.7
8.6
4.7
4.9
3.2

5.9
10.7
14.8
16.2
14.1
8.4
4.7
4.9
3.3

5.9
10.9
15.6
17.9
14.1
8.2
4.6
4.9
2.8

5.9
10.8
15.1
18.0
13.1
8.4
4.7
4.9
3.1

5.5
11.3
15.2
16.6
14.2
9.1
4.1
4.4
2.3

5.6
11.3
16.0
18.4
13.7
8.7
4.2
4.5
2.7

9.

Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average

1987

1988

Reason for unemployment
1986
Job losers ................................................................
On layoff................................................................
Other job losers....................................................
Job leavers ..............................................................
Reentrants ...............................................................
New entrants ...........................................................

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

4,033
1,090
2,943
1,015
2,160
1,029

3,566
943
2,623
965
1,974
920

3,705
963
2,742
955
1,965
918

3,612
924
2,688
931
1,995
999

3,554
919
2,635
959
1,980
854

3,529
916
2,613
989
1,930
844

3,389
874
2,515
992
1,969
855

3,313
820
2,493
981
1,908
882

3,388
944
2,444
960
1,845
914

3,307
878
2,429
926
1,974
855

3,200
856
2,344
946
1,945
909

3,209
888
2,320
1,082
1,917
885

3,207
884
2,323
961
1,951
864

3,139
899
2,240
1,075
1,756
887

2,916
821
2,095
993
1,784
915

48.9
13.2
35.7
12.3
26.2
12.5

48.0
12.7
35.3
13.0
26.6
12.4

49.1
12.8
36.4
12.7
26.1
12.2

47.9
12.3
35.7
12.4
26.5
13.3

48.4
12.5
35.9
13.1
26.9
11.6

48.4
12.6
35.8
13.6
26.5
11.6

47.0
12.1
34.9
13.8
27.3
11.9

46.8
11.6
35.2
13.8
26.9
12.5

47.7
13.3
34.4
13.5
26.0
12.9

46.8
12.4
34.4
13.1
28.0
12.1

45.7
12.2
33.5
13.5
27.8
13.0

45.2
12.5
32.7
15.3
27.0
12.5

45.9
12.7
33.3
13.8
27.9
12.4

45.8
13.1
32.7
15.7
25.6
12.9

44.1
12.4
31.7
15.0
27.0
13.8

3.4
.9
1.8
.9

3.0
.8
1.6
.8

3.1
.8
1.6
.8

3.0
.8
1.7
.8

3.0
.8
1.7
.7

2.9
.8
1.6
.7

2.8
.8
1.6
.7

2.8
.8
1.6
.7

2.8
.8
1.5
.8

2.7
.8
1.6
.7

2.7
.8
1.6
.8

2.6
.9
1.6
.7

2.6
.8
1.6
.7

2.6
.9
1.5
.7

2.4
.8
1.5
.8

PERCENT OF UNEM PLO YED

Job losers..............................................................
On layoff.............................................................
Other job losers..................................................
Job leavers............................................................
Reentrants.............................................................
New entrants ........................................................
PERCENT OF
C IV IL IA N L A B O R F O R C E

Job losers ................................................................
Job leavers ..............................................................
Reentrants ...............................................................
New entrants ...........................................................

10.

Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(Numbers in thousands)
1988

1987

Annual average
Weeks of unemployment
1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

Less than 5 weeks ...........................................
5 to 14 weeks ..................................................
15 weeks and o ve r...........................................
15 to 26 weeks ..............................................
27 weeks and o v e r........................................

3,448
2,557
2,232
1,045
1,187

3,246
2,196
1,983
943
1,040

3,195
2,256
2,060
984
1,076

3,308
2,165
2,067
974
1,093

3,138
2,151
2,029
973
1,056

3,186
2,144
1,920
945
975

3,203
2,142
1,896
834
1,062

3,220
1,949
1,904
917
987

3,223
2,093
1,801
844
957

3,218
2,029
1,834
899
935

3,229
1,968
1,791
892
899

3,089
2,263
1,733
839
894

3,084
2,145
1,740
841
899

3,009
2,101
1,722
887
835

3,125
1,956
1,540
725
816

Mean duration in w eeks....................................
Median duration in weeks.................................

15.0
6.9

14.5
6.5

14.8
6.9

14.8
6.6

14.7
6.6

14.2
6.6

14.3
6.4

14.2
5.8

14.1
6.2

14.0
6.1

14.2
6.0

14.4
6.4

14.4
6.4

13.7
6.6

13.4
5.6


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

81

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

11. Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
State

Mar.
1987

Mar.
1988

Alabama.......................................................
Alaska ..........................................................
Arizona.........................................................
Arkansas ......................................................
California......................................................

9.0
13.4
6.4
9.2
6.3

7.4
10.8
5.5
8.2
5.3

8.8
3.8
3.5
7.0
5.4

7.7
31
36
5.3
4.7

Colorado ......................................
Connecticut ............................
Delaware.............................
District of Columbia.......................
Florida .............................................

Mar.
1987

Mar.
1988

Montana ...................................
Nebraska................................
Nevada ........................................
New Hampshire.............................

9.7
6.0
7.0
2.9

9.2
4.4
6.2
2.8

New Jersey ..........................

4.3

4.4

State

7.0
Ohio ..............................................

Georgia ..................................
Hawaii....................................
Idaho ...................................
Illinois .................................
Indiana .......................................

6.0
3.8
10.1
8.1
7.2

5.8
3.2
8.4
7.8
5.8

Iow a.....................................
Kansas ...................................
Kentucky...............................
Louisiana......................................
Maine....................................

7.3
5.7
10.2
14.0
5.5

5.7
5.0
9.4
11.7
5.2

Maryland ......................................
Massachusetts..........................
Michigan.......................................
Minnesota.................................
Mississippi..........................................
Missouri........................................

4.7
4.5
8.4
6.8
12.0
6.8

4.6
3.6
8.6
4.8
8.6
5.4

I

NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data
published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the

7.9

7.9

4.7

4.1

South Carolina.......................................

6.1

5.1

Utah ...........

7.3

5.8

Vermont.................................

4.7

3.7

7.8

6.2

12.1

7.9

database,

12. Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
State
Alabama....
Alaska .......
Arizona......
Arkansas....
California....

Mar. 1987

Feb. 1988

Mar. 1988»

1,473.2
200.8
1,378.5
816.3
11,503.5

1,511.4
199.1
1,417.8
844.4
11,886.0

1,514.8
201.0
1,422.7
851.5
11,965.5

Colorado ...............
Connecticut ..........
Delaware...............
District of Columbia
Florida...................

1,398.4
1,617.4
307.9
643.3
4,823.3

1,393.1
1,645.6
322.5
656.9
5,061.7

1,393.4
1,657.9
326.5
661.7
5,099.9

Georgia .................
Hawaii....................
Idaho.....................
Illinois....................
Indiana ..................

2,725.5
456.4
323.5
4,840.2
2,239.5

2,777.3
466.0
332.7
4,914.9
2,321.4

Iow a...................................................
Kansas ...............................................
Kentucky............................................
Louisiana............................................
Maine..................................................

1,083.6
991.7
1,290.6
1,464.9
479.7

1,117.0
1,002.9
1,332.2
1,489.7
507.1

Maryland............................................
Massachusetts...................................
Michigan.............................................
Minnesota...........................................
Mississippi...........................................
Missouri..............................................
Montana..............................................

1,982.0
2,996.7
3,678.1
1,906.6
850.0
2,154.0
267.5

2,014.6
3,039.0
3,683.6
1,955.1
877.3
2,172.8
268.3

Mar. 1987

Feb. 1988

Mar. 1988p

Nebraska ....................................................
Nevada .......................................................
New Hampshire..........................................

652.5
483.7
497.8

658.5
510.2
516.9

664.5
515.4
519.1

New Jersey .................................................
New Mexico ...................................
New York............................................
North Carolina ............................................
North Dakota ..............................................

3,519.2
523.6
7,932.1
2,817.0
245.5

3,577.1
530.8
8,051.4
2,902.5
248.9

3,610.4
534.7
8,101.4
2,920.5
250.4

Ohio .................................................
Oklahoma...................................................
2,783.9 Oregon...................................................
467.9 Pennsylvania...............................................
334.4 Rhode Island...............................................
4,942.3
2,340.5 South Carolina............................................
South Dakota..............................................
1,125.7 Tennessee .........................................
1,011.2 Texas ..........................................................
1,337.7 Utah ............................................................
1,494.6
507.0 Vermont......................................................
Virginia....................................................
2,026.0 Washington .................................................
3,067.8 West Virginia.............................................
3,696.4 Wisconsin..............................................
1,964.3
880.4 Wyoming.....................................................
2,200.0 Puerto Rico ...............................................
269.9 Virgin Islands ..............................................

4,485.0
1,102.3
1,067.2
4,815.5
441.2

4,568.8
1,088.5
1,105.3
4,911.2
445.6

4,596.4
1,093.8
1,113.5
4,946.2
449.4

1,366.6
249.1
1,967.1
6,468.2
632.6

1,409.0
250.5
2,029.4
6,523.0
637.0

1,423.9
252.9
2,042.0
6,531.7
641.5

239.7
2,622.3
1,792.2
588.2
2,027.3

249.5
2,709.9
1,858.2
591.2
2,084.3

249.4
2,737.4
1,874.7
594.6
2,091.3

174.7
743.6
39.4

173.3
766.5
40.6

173.2
769.3
40.8

p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere


82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

State

because of the continual updating of the database.

13.

Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted

(In thousands)
1988

1987

Annual average
Industry
1986
T O T A L ...................................................
P R IV A T E S E C T O R ............................
G O O D S - P R O D U C IN G ..........................
M in in g .........................................................

Oil and gas extraction ................
C o n s t r u c t io n ..........................................

General building contractors.......
M a n u f a c t u r i n g ........................................

Production workers .....................
D u r a b le g o o d s .....................................

Production workers .....................
Lumber and wood products ........
Furniture and fixtures...................
Stone, clay, and glass products ...
Primary metal industries ..............
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products......................................
Fabricated metal products...........
Machinery, except electrical........
Electrical and electronic
equipment....................................
Transportation equipment............
Motor vehicles and equipment ....
Instruments and related products
Miscellaneous manufacturing
industries.....................................

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.p

103,827
86,560

104,365
87,063

104,661
87,290

104,835
87,461

99,610
82,900

102,112
85,049

101,598
84,560

101,708
84,677

101,818
84,787

102,126
85,106

102,275
85,229

102,434
85,386

102,983
85,795

103,285
86,072

103,612
86,341

24,681
783
457

24,884
741
425

24,759
729
416

24,752
735
420

24,761
738
425

24,850
744
430

24,886
751
434

24,917
759
439

25,064
764
443

25,169
759
439

25,259
756
436

25,205
746
430

25,354
748
431

25,449
751
436

25,506
767
450

4,904
1,293

5,031
1,278

5,019
1,272

4,999
1,267

5,008
1,266

5,002
1,261

5,006
1,262

4,989
1,260

5,053
1,279

5,074
1,280

5,121
1,290

5,058
1,303

5,185
1,324

5,265
1,328

5,262
1,326

18,994
12,895

19,112
13,021

19,011
12,939

19,018
12,946

19,015
12,958

19,104
13,020

19,129
13,038

19,169
13,072

19,247
13,129

19,336
13,197

19,382
13,241

19,401
13,250

19,421
13,274

19,433
13,268

19,477
13,304

11,244
7,432

11,237
7,457

11,175
7,406

11,175
7,409

11,176
7,421

11,195
7,425

11,248
7,475

11,268
7,494

11,319
7,530

11,367
7,568

11,403
7,597

11,403
7,588

11,415
7,606

11,422
7,601

11,462
7,638

711
497
586
753

739
514
585
751

736
504
586
743

738
509
584
742

735
510
582
746

740
518
582
750

736
518
582
754

740
520
581
764

741
524
583
768

750
526
588
771

753
530
590
771

753
533
585
768

754
532
588
770

752
531
588
771

752
531
591
771

275
1,431

275
1,428

272
1,423

272
1,420

275
1,424

277
1,424

278
1,425

283
1,429

286
1,438

287
1,446

285
1,451

284
1,452

285
1,456

285
1,457

284
1,464

2,060

2,039

2,022

2,025

2,028

2,033

2,044

2,053

2,064

2,074

2,085

2,097

2,102

2,110

2,126

2,123
2,015
865
707

2,101
2,015
842
696

2,092
2,011
847
694

2,087
2,011
843
693

2,080
2,010
842
693

2,088
1,995
814
695

2,095
2,028
848
695

2,096
2,018
837
695

2,111
2,019
838
697

2,118
2,016
835
701

2,128
2,018
832
701

2,130
2,005
820
702

2,128
2,001
819
704

2,134
1,997
820
703

2,133
2,010
830
704

362

369

364

366

368

370

371

372

374

377

376

378

380

379

380

7,750
5,463

7,875
5,564

7,836
5,533

7,843
5,537

7,839
5,537

7,909
5,595

7,881
5,563

7,901
5,578

7,928
5,599

7,969
5,629

7,979
5,644

7,998
5,662

8,006
5,668

8,011
5,667

8,015
5,666

Food and kindred products.........
Tobacco manufactures ................
Textile mill products.....................
Apparel and other textile
products......................................
Paper and allied products ...........

1,617
59
705

1,636
57
730

1,642
56
724

1,633
57
727

1,634
57
729

1,644
57
736

1,632
56
732

1,631
55
735

1,635
55
736

1,645
56
738

1,645
56
739

1,661
57
736

1,662
56
738

1,659
55
736

1,658
54
730

1,106
674

1,113
678

1,104
677

1,107
677

1,108
676

1,130
678

1,110
677

1,117
681

1,123
678

1,128
680

1,121
681

1,117
681

1,114
683

1,115
682

1,113
681

Printing and publishing.................
Chemicals and allied products.....
Petroleum and coal products......
Rubber and misc. plastics
products......................................
Leather and leather products .....

1,457
1,023
169

1,501
1,027
165

1,493
1,018
164

1,497
1,022
164

1,498
1,014
164

1,504
1,026
164

1,508
1,031
164

1,509
1,031
166

1,514
1,035
167

1,522
1,041
167

1,525
1,047
167

1,530
1,048
167

1,536
1,049
165

1,541
1,053
164

1,549
1,059
164

790
151

818
151

809
149

809
150

810
149

815
155

819
152

824
152

833
152

840
152

845
153

847
154

849
154

852
154

855
152

S E R V IC E - P R O D U C IN G ......................

74,930

77,228

76,839

76,956

77,057

77,276

77,389

77,517

77,919

78,116

78,353

78,622

79,011

79,212

79,329

5,244
3,041

5,378
3,150

5,348
3,124

5,344
3,120

5,350
3,128

5,363
3,133

5,377
3,147

5,416
3,183

5,436
3,198

5,459
3,218

5,473
3,233

5,485
3,244

5,507
3,261

5,533
3,282

5,545
3,288

2,203

2,228

2,224

2,224

2,222

2,230

2,230

2,233

2,238

2,241

2,240

2,241

2,246

2,251

2,257

5,735
3,383
2,351

5,797
3,419
2,379

5,772
3,397
2,375

5,775
3,401
2,374

5,781
3,405
2,376

5,797
3,418
2,379

5,807
3,422
2,385

5,815
3,431
2,384

5,831
3,444
2,387

5,851
3,456
2,395

5,871
3,473
2,398

5,884
3,481
2,403

5,905
3,495
2,410

5,930
3,513
2,417

5,945
3,517
2,428

17,845
2,363
2,873

18,264
2,406
2,959

18,197
2,385
2,953

18,205
2,390
2,956

18,226
2,387
2,960

18,274
2,407
2,959

18,256
2,411
2,962

18,314
2,415
2,958

18,408
2,459
2,969

18,443
2,454
2,982

18,458
2,453
2,996

18,619
2,490
3,019

18,706
2,521
3,032

18,687
2,474
3,042

18,703
2,475
3,037

1,943
5,879

1,987
5,994

1,978
5,962

1,978
5,976

1,983
5,982

1,985
5,985

1,985
5,992

1,988
6,018

2,000
6,032

2,003
6,047

2,013
6,064

2,023
6,083

2,041
6,097

2,053
6,114

2,050
6,129

6,297
3,152
1,945
1,200

6,589
3,278
2,044
1,267

6,558
3,272
2,032
1,254

6,576
3,276
2,037
1,263

6,586
3,280
2,037
1,269

6,608
3,291
2,043
1,274

6,624
3,293
2,050
1,281

6,629
3,292
2,054
1,283

6,650
3,296
2,068
1,286

6,657
3,301
2,069
1,287

6,668
3,301
2,082
1,285

6,684
3,309
2,086
1,289

6,689
3,304
2,091
1,294

6,701
3,297
2,099
1,305

6,718
3,301
2,109
1,308

23,099
4,781
6,551

24,137
5,097
6,879

23,926
5,044
6,800

24,025
5,083
6,822

24,083
5,086
6,853

24,214
5,105
6,887

24,279
5,133
6,923

24,295
5,152
6,943

24,406
5,194
6,987

24,493
5,195
7,023

24,612
5,217
7,063

24,683
5,228
7,085

24,902
5,304
7,132

24,990
5,324
7,165

25,044
5,340
7,206

16,711
2,899
3,888
9,923

17,063
2,943
3,952
10,167

17,038
2,933
3,943
10,162

17,031
2,935
3,947
10,149

17,031
2,935
3,932
10,164

17,020
2,936
3,952
10,132

17,046
2,940
3,964
10,142

17,048
2,962
3,957
10,129

17,188
2,965
3,973
10,250

17,213
2,977
3,978
10,258

17,271
2,981
3,996
10,294

17,267
2,977
3,996
10,294

17,302
2,976
4,002
10,324

17,371
2,969
4,019
10,383

17,374
2,962
4,035
10,377

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..............................

Production workers......................

T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic
u t i l i t i e s ......................................................

Transportation..............................
Communication and public
utilities.........................................
W h o le s a le t r a d e ...................................

Durable goods..............................
Nondurable goods.......................
R e ta il t r a d e ..............................................

General merchandise stores.......
Food stores..................................
Automotive dealers and service
stations.......................................
Eating and drinking places..........
F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d r e a l
e s t a t e .........................................................

Finance ........................................
Insurance.....................................
Real estate...................................
S e r v i c e s .....................................................

Business services........................
Health services ............................
G o v e r n m e n t ...........................................

Federal.........................................
State .............................................
Local.............................................

p = preliminary
NOTE: See notes on the data for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.


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

83

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted
Industry

Annual
average
1986

1987

1987
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

1988
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.»

P R IV A T E S E C T O R ........................................................

34.8

34.8

34.7

34.9

34.8

34.8

34.9

34.6

34.9

34.9

34.6

34.8

34.9

34.6

34.9

M A N U F A C T U R IN G ...............................................................

40.7
3.4

41.0
3.7

40.6
3.5

41.0
3.8

41.0
3.7

41.0
3.8

41.0
3.8

40.6
3.6

41.3
4.0

41.2
3.9

41.0
3.8

41.2
3.9

41.0
3.7

41.0
3.7

41.2
4.0

Overtime hours...............................................
Lumber and wood products................................
Furniture and fixtures..........................................
Stone, clay, and glass products.........................
Primary metal industries .....................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products.........
Fabricated metal products ..................................

41.3
3.5
40.3
39.8
42.2
41.9
41.7
41.3

41.5
3.8
40.6
39.9
42.3
43.1
43.6
41.5

41.2
3.6
40.6
39.1
41.9
42.3
42.4
41.2

41.6
3.9
41.0
39.9
42.3
43.1
43.3
41.6

41.5
3.8
40.6
40.0
42.0
43.1
43.5
41.5

41.6
3.8
40.6
40.0
42.2
43.4
44.1
41.4

41.6
4.0
40.4
40.1
42.1
43.5
44.0
41.5

41.0
3.7
39.4
39.3
41.9
43.4
45.2
40.8

41.9
4.1
40.4
40.0
42.6
43.7
44.3
42.0

41.9
4.0
40.8
40.0
42.5
43.7
44.0
42.1

41.5
3.9
40.4
39.8
42.5
43.6
44.3
41.7

41.7
4.0
40.1
39.4
42.0
43.5
44.0
41.9

41.6
3.8
40.4
39.7
42.4
43.2
43.7
41.5

41.6
3.8
40.1
39.3
42.5
43.2
43.5
41.5

41.9
4.2
40.3
39.3
42.4
43.4
43.5
42.0

Machinery except electrical ................................
Electrical and electronic equipment....................
Transportation equipment....................................
Motor vehicles and equipment.........................
Instruments and related products ......................

41.6
41.0
42.3
42.6
41.0

42.2
40.9
42.1
42.3
41.4

41.8
40.6
41.9
42.1
41.0

42.2
40.8
42.2
42.5
41.5

42.2
41.1
41.9
42.0
41.5

42.4
41.1
41.7
41.9
41.6

42.2
41.0
41.9
41.9
41.7

41.6
40.4
41.3
41.3
41.1

42.6
41.1
42.5
43.0
42.1

42.7
41.0
42.4
43.1
41.7

42.5
40.9
41.4
41.4
41.3

42.8
41.2
42.3
42.4
41.9

42.6
40.9
42.1
42.6
41.3

42.5
41.0
42.3
42.8
41.4

42.8
41.2
43.0
43.8
41.8

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s .............................................................

Overtime hours...............................................
Food and kindred products.................................
Textile mill products............................................
Apparel and other textile products.....................
Paper and allied products ...................................

39.9
3.3
40.0
41.1
36.7
43.2

40.2
3.6
40.2
41.9
37.1
43.4

39.7
3.3
39.8
41.4
36.1
43.0

40.2
3.7
40.1
42.0
37.2
43.5

40.2
3.6
40.1
42.1
37.1
43.3

40.3
3.7
39.9
42.4
37.3
43.5

40.3
3.7
40.3
42.1
37.4
43.4

40.1
3.6
40.2
41.3
36.3
43.8

40.5
3.8
40.5
41.9
37.4
43.7

40.4
3.8
40.6
41.8
37.1
43.5

40.3
3.7
40.6
41.7
37.2
43.2

40.4
3.8
40.8
41.7
36.9
43.6

40.3
3.6
40.4
41.9
37.0
43.3

40.1
3.5
40.0
41.4
37.1
43.1

40.2
3.6
40.2
41.7
37.2
43.3

Printing and publishing........................................
Chemicals and allied products............................
Petroleum and coal products..............................

38.0
41.9
43.8

38.0
42.3
43.9

37.7
42.2
43.9

37.9
42.1
44.3

38.1
42.0
43.3

38.1
42.2
44.4

37.9
42.4
43.3

38.2
42.8
43.2

38.0
42.7
43.5

38.0
42.7
43.6

37.9
42.7
44.3

38.0
42.7
44.2

38.1
42.6
43.6

38.1
42.5
43.7

38.0
42.4
44.2

Overtime hours...............................................
D u r a b le g o o d s .....................................................................

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T I L I T I E S .....

39.2

39.1

39.0

39.2

38.8

39.2

39.3

39.1

39.3

39.1

39.0

39.4

39.1

38.7

39.1

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .........................................................

37.7

37.5

38.2

38.3

38.2

38.1

38.3

38.0

38.4

38.3

38.1

38.2

38.3

38.2

38.4

R E T A IL T R A D E .....................................................................

29.2

29.3

29.5

29.4

29.2

29.3

29.6

29.6

29.3

29.2

28.8

29.0

29.2

29.0

29.3

S E R V IC E S ................................................................................

32.5

32.5

32.4

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.6

32.4

32.6

32.9

32.4

32.7

p = preliminary
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent


84
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

benchmark adjustment.

15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry

Industry

Annual
average
1986

P R IV A T E S E C T O R ...............................................................

Seasonally adjusted .........................................

1987

1988

1987
Apr.

May

June

$8.76
-

$8.98
-

$8.91
8.91

$8.93
8.95

$8.92
8.94

July

Aug.

Sept.

$8.91
8.96

$8.94
9.02

$9.06
9.02

Oct.
$9.09
9.08

Nov.
$9.14
9.12

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.»

$9.13
9.11

$9.18
9.15

$9.18
9.13

$9.19
9.17

$9.22
9.22

M I N I N G ........................................................................................

12.44

12.45

12.43

12.42

12.44

12.31

12.32

12.43

12.34

12.47

12.50

12.69

12.61

12.50

12.44

C O N S T R U C T I O N ...................................................................

12.47

12.66

12.55

12.60

12.61

12.57

12.67

12.77

12.79

12.80

12.78

12.93

12.77

12.83

12.83

M A N U F A C T U R I N G ...............................................................

9.73

9.91

9.87

9.87

9.87

9.87

9.86

10.00

9.95

10.01

10.08

10.07

10.06

10.07

10.12

10.29
Lumber and wood products................................ 8.33
7.46
Furniture and fixtures..........................................
Stone, clay, and glass products......................... 10.05
11.86
Primary metal industries .....................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products......... 13.73
Fabricated metal products .................................. 9.89

10.45
8.40
7.67
10.27
11.98
13.84
10.03

10.39
8.34
7.58
10.23
11.96
13.84
9.98

10.40
8.37
7.64
10.26
11.96
13.80
9.97

10.42
8.44
7.66
10.29
11.97
13.83
10.00

10.40
8.46
7.67
10.33
11.97
13.70
9.95

10.42
8.49
7.74
10.31
11.98
13.81
9.97

10.53
8.48
7.75
10.40
12.24
14.17
10.04

10.51
8.44
7.73
10.31
12.05
13.97
10.11

10.57
8.49
7.73
10.34
12.08
13.97
10.15

10.63
8.45
7.79
10.33
12.15
14.03
10.24

10.62
8.52
7.82
10.37
12.10
13.92
10.17

10.60
8.54
7.75
10.35
12.08
13.99
10.18

10.61
8.46
7.78
10.37
12.10
13.98
10.19

10.66
8.48
7.81
10.40
12.20
14.10
10.27

Machinery, except electrical ............................... 10.59
Electrical and electronic equipment.................... 9.65
Transportation equipment................................... 12.81
Motor vehicles and equipment......................... 13.45
9.47
Instruments and related products ......................
Miscellaneous manufacturing.............................. 7.54

10.77
9.90
12.96
13.57
9.74
7.74

10.70
9.82
12.80
13.40
9.67
7.67

10.70
9.83
12.85
13.42
9.69
7.72

10.76
9.84
12.88
13.47
9.70
7.74

10.74
9.89
12.83
13.36
9.74
7.72

10.76
9.90
12.90
13.43
9.78
7.70

10.81
9.98
13.07
13.69
9.80
7.76

10.86
9.95
13.09
13.73
9.81
7.77

10.89
10.00
13.18
13.82
9.87
7.81

10.96
10.05
13.26
13.90
9.88
7.91

10.92
10.03
13.19
13.90
9.97
7.97

10.88
10.04
13.18
13.88
9.95
7.88

10.89
10.05
13.20
13.94
9.87
7.89

10.96
10.10
13.26
14.07
9.85
7.90

8.94
Food and kindred products................................. 8.74
Tobacco manufactures....................................... 12.85
6.93
Textile mill products............................................
5.84
Apparel and other textile products.....................
11.18
Paper and allied products ...................................

9.16
8.92
13.81
7.18
5.95
11.42

9.14
8.95
14.28
7.12
5.94
11.37

9.13
8.96
14.53
7.13
5.89
11.40

9.11
8.91
15.57
7.15
5.91
11.41

9.16
8.88
14.85
7.14
5.89
11.48

9.12
8.80
14.20
7.16
5.90
11.41

9.28
8.92
12.89
7.23
6.01
11.67

9.18
8.86
12.77
7.24
5.99
11.48

9.24
8.96
13.44
7.31
6.00
11.50

9.30
9.05
13.56
7.33
6.01
11.54

9.30
9.05
13.70
7.36
6.04
11.52

9.29
9.05
13.91
7.31
6.03
11.49

9.31
9.05
14.20
7.33
6.05
11.50

9.34
9.10
14.74
7.36
6.06
11.57

9.99
Printing and publishing........................................
Chemicals and allied products............................ 11.98
14.18
Petroleum and coal products..............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products..... 8.73
Leather and leather products .............................
5.92

10.28
12.37
14.57
8.88
6.06

10.14
12.30
14.50
8.82
6.12

10.19
12.31
14.52
8.84
6.05

10.19
12.27
14.43
8.87
6.04

10.25
12.37
14.48
8.93
5.98

10.31
12.34
14.52
8.90
6.01

10.48
12.56
14.71
8.98
6.09

10.42
12.52
14.66
8.91
6.09

10.39
12.56
14.75
8.93
6.11

10.44
12.62
14.72
9.00
6.11

10.39
12.56
14.83
8.97
6.10

10.41
12.55
14.91
8.97
6.14

10.44
12.55
14.92
8.97
6.19

10.40
12.52
15.10
9.00
6.27

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC U T I L I T I E S .....

11.70

12.01

11.94

11.95

11.91

12.00

12.04

12.09

12.09

12.17

12.17

12.11

12.18

12.12

12.09

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E .........................................................

9.35

9.61

9.53

9.57

9.57

9.57

9.62

9.67

9.67

9.74

9.74

9.79

9.80

9.78

9.88

6.06

6.20

6.16

6.19

6.19

6.25

6.24

6.25

6.27

8.81

8.79

8.81

8.94

8.87

9.00

9.06

9.01

9.03

8.61

8.71

8.73

8.79

8.79

8.79

8.81

D u r a b le g o o d s .......................................................................

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..............................................................

R E T A IL T R A D E .....................................................................

6.03

6.12

6.09

6.09

6.08

6.07

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E .....

8.35

8.76

8.71

8.72

8.68

8.69

S E R V IC E S ................................................................................

- Data not available.
p = preliminary


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

8.16

8.47

8.40

8.38

8.35

8.33

8.40

8.55

NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark revision.

85

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

16. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
Annual average

1987

Industry
1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

1988

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.p

P R IV A T E S E C T O R

Current dollars...................................
$304.85 $312.50 $308.29 $310.76 $312.20 $312.74 $315.58 $314.38 $317.24 $318.07 $318.64 $315.79 $316.71 $317.06 $320.86
Seasonally adjusted.......................................
309.18 312.36 311.11 311.81 314.80 312.09 316.89 318.29 315.21 318.42 318.64 317.28 321.78
Constant (1977) dollars ............................
171.07 169.28 168.28 169.17 169.21 169.14 169.76 168.30 169.38 169.64 170.03 167.97 168.19 167.76
M I N I N G ..............................................................

524.97

526.64

519.57

526.61

527.46

518.25

522.37

523.30

526.92

527.48

535.00

531.71

525.84

520.00

529.94

C O N S T R U C T I O N ........................................

466.38

477.28

469.37

485.10

480.44

485.20

489.06

464.83

496.25

474.88

480.53

465.48

462.27

481.13

487.54

396.01
222.23

406.31
220.10

398.75
217.78

403.68
219.75

405.66
219.87

400.72
216.72

403.27
216.93

408.00
218.42

410.94
219.40

414.41
221.02

421.34
224.83

412.87
219.61

409.44
217.44

412.87
218.45

414.92

Lumber and wood products................................
Furniture and fixtures..........................................
Stone, clay, and glass products.........................
Primary metal industries .......................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products .........
Fabricated metal products ...........................

424.98
335.70
296.91
424.11
496.93
572.54
408.46

433.68
341.04
306.03
434.42
516.34
603.42
416.25

427.03
338.60
294.10
430.68
508.30
593.74
408.18

431.60
345.68
301.78
439.13
514.28
598.92
412.76

434.51
348.57
306.40
437.33
517.10
605.75
417.00

426.40
341.78
300.66
439.03
514.71
602.80
405.96

430.35
345.54
311.92
439.21
515.14
600.74
411.76

432.78
338.35
308.45
442.00
531.22
639.07
410.64

439.32
342.66
313.84
443.33
522.97
610.49
424.62

443.94
343.00
312.29
438.42
529.10
613.28
429.35

450.71
341.38
319.39
435.93
537.03
625.74
437.25

441.79
336.54
304.98
424.13
526.35
609.70
425.11

437.78
339.89
302.25
427.46
523.06
614.16
420.43

441.38
337.55
304.20
435.54
525.14
610.93
422.89

444.52
341.74
304.59
443.04
531.92
620.40
428.26

Machinery, except electrical ...............................
Electrical and electronic equipment....................
Transportation equipment...........................
Motor vehicles and equipment.........................
Instruments and related products ......................
Miscellaneous manufacturing..............................

440.54
395.65
541.86
572.97
388.27
298.58

454.49
404.91
545.62
574.01
403.24
304.18

445.12
395.75
536.32
566.82
394.54
297.60

449.40
399.10
542.27
571.69
399.23
302.62

455.15
404.42
539.67
567.09
402.55
304.18

447.86
399.56
526.03
549.10
398.37
299.54

449.77
403.92
530.19
547.94
403.91
303.38

449.70
404.19
538.48
562.66
402.78
302.64

460.46
408.95
553.71
586.27
410.06
310.80

467.18
414.00
561.47
594.26
414.54
309.28

477.86
422.10
566.20
596.31
418.91
314.82

467.38
414.24
560.58
593.53
417.74
310.03

462.40
408.63
553.56
588.51
410.94
305.74

465.00
412.05
562.32
600.81
411.58
308.50

466.90
413.09
570.18
619.08
408.78
306.52

356.71
349.60
480.59
284.82
214.33
482.98

368.23
358.58
531.69
300.84
220.75
495.63

361.03
351.74
536.93
291.21
212.65
486.64

366.11
359.30
571.03
298.75
219.11
493.62

367.13
357.29
624.36
303.16
221.03
494.05

366.40
354.31
527.18
297.02
217.93
495.94

368.45
358.16
512.62
302.87
220.66
492.91

374.91
363.94
501.42
301.49
218.16
514.65

371.79
360.60
526.12
305.53
224.63
501.68

375.14
365.57
551.04
308.48
224.40
502.55

380.37
371.96
549.18
310.06
225.98
508.91

373.86
367.43
537.04
305.44
221.67
502.27

370.67
359.29
538.32
303.37
221.30
494.07

372.40
357.48
565.16
302.00
224.46
494.50

373.60
361.27
561.59
303.23
223.61
498.67

379.62
501.96
621.08

390.64
523.25
639.62

381.26
519.06
635.10

384.16
518.25
637.43

384.16
516.57
624.82

387.45
518.30
645.81

392.81
519.51
631.62

403.48
537.57
644.30

397.00
530.85
642.11

397.94
537.57
646.05

404.03
545.18
652.10

391.70
536.31
651.04

393.50
533.38
641.13

398.81
534.63
650.51

394.16
530.85
665 91

360.55
218.45

369.41
230.89

360.74
224.60

366.86
233.53

370.77
237.37

366.13
230.83

368.46
233.79

371.77
229.59

373.33
235.68

375.95
234.01

382.50
235.24

374.95
229.97

371.36
226.57

373.15
232.13

375.30
230.11

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D P U B L IC
U T I L I T I E S ...........................................

458.64

469.59

463.27

466.05

465.68

472.80

476.78

473.93

475.14

477.06

477.06

471.08

473.80

469.04

470.30

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E ...................................................

359.04

367.10

363.09

366.53

367.49

366.53

369.41

368.43

371.33

373.04

373.04

372.02

372.40

371.64

378.40

R E T A IL T R A D E .....................................

176.08

179.32

177.83

178.44

179.97

182.10

183.62

183.52

179.87

179.51

181.37

177.50

178.46

179.38

181.83

326.89

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Current dollars..................................
Constant (1977) dollars..............................
D u r a b le g o o d s .................................................

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s ..........................................

Food and kindred products.................................
Tobacco manufactures .......................................
Textile mill products ...................................
Apparel and other textile products.....................
Paper and allied products ...................................
Printing and publishing.....................................
Chemicals and allied products............................
Petroleum and coal products..............................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products....................................
Leather and leather products ..........................

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L
E S T A T E ..........................................................................

303.94

317.11

316.17

316.54

315.95

314.58

320.68

316.44

318.92

324.52

319.32

326.70

329.78

322.56

S E R V IC E S ..................................................

265.20

275.28

271.32

271.51

272.21

273.22

276.36

277.02

279.83

283.08

282.85

284.80

287.43

283.921 287.21

Data not available.
p = Preliminary

NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.

17. The Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls bv
industry
’
Not season ally adjusted
Industry

P R IV A T E S E C T O R (in c u r r e n t d o lla r s ) .......................

M ining'..................................
Construction................................
Manufacturing ...................................
Transportation and public utilities ...............
Wholesale trade1 .........................
Retail trade .....................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate1 ........
Services.............................

P R IV A T E S E C T O R [ in c o n s t a n t (1 9 7 7 ) d o lla r s ] ...........

Feb.
1988

172.7

177.0

177.0

177.7

181.3
153.0
175.3
174.8
175.9
160.2
186.7
179.4

184.4
155.2
177.6
178.5
180.5
163.2
195.0
187.3

183.5
156.1
177.8
177.6
180.3
163.8
194.2
187.4

183.4
156.6
178.3
177.3
182.2
164.8
194.6
188.4

94.3

94.0

93.6

-

Mar.
1988p

This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small
relative to the trend-cycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot
be separated with sufficient precision.
- Data not available.

86 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Seasonally adjusted

Apr.
1987

Apr.
1988p

Apr.
1987

Dec.
1987

Jan.
1988

Feb.
1988

172.6

175.7

176.4

176.5

176.8

177.6

153.7
175.0
175.2

154.4
176.9
177.4

157.1
176.9
176.9

155.8
177 3
177.8

156.9
177 5
177.8

157 3

159.8

162.7

163.1

162.7

163.3

164 5

179.4

185.1

186.4

186.0

187.1

188.4

94.2

93.6

93.7

93.6

93.4

-

Mar.
1988p

1988p

177.7

p = preliminary.
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.

18.

Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, data seasonally adjusted

(In percent)
Jan.

Time span and year
Over
1986
1987
1988

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Oct.

Sept.

Nov.

Dec.

1-month span:
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................

53.2
53.5
60.0

48.1
56.8
62.7

48.1
58.6
58.1

53.5
58.4
56.5

52.4
58.6
-

46.8
55.7

52.4
68.6
“

56.2
54.6

55.1
65.4
“

53.2
65.4

59.7
71.9
“

59.7
63.2
“

Over 3-month span:
1986 .......................................................................
1987 .......................................................................
1988 .......................................................................

49.7
58.6
67.0

44.9
59.5
64.9

45.7
61.1
61.4

48.4
61.6

47.6
61.4

45.4
67.3

48.4
66.2
“

55.1
75.1

55.9
69.7

58.1
77.8
~

58.6
75.9
”

60.3
70.5

Over 6-month span:
1986 .......................................................................
1987 .......................................................................
1988 .......................................................................

47.6
61.9
70.3

47.6
62.7
-

43.0
58.9

43.2
67.3

45.4
67.6

48.4
71.1
“

47.3
76.2

53.0
78.6
“

59.2
80.3

58.9
75.7

57.8
76.8

58.9
73.8

43.2
62.2

44.1
63.5
“

46.2
67.3
“

45.7
68.9
”

47.8
73.8
“

49.5
72.4

49.5
76.2

51.6
77.0
“

54.9
76.5
“

52.2
77.6

Over
1986
1987
1988

12-month span:
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
.......................................................................

- Data not available.
NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment rising. (Half of
the unchanged components are counted as rising.) Data are centered within the

19.

_

55.1

56.5

-

-

“

spans. Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each span are preliminary.
See the "Definitions” in this section. See “ Notes on the data” for a description of
the most recent benchmark revision.

Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population

(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

Noninstitutional population....................................

166,460

169,349

171,775

173,939

175,891

178,080

179,912

182,293

184,490

Labor force:
Total (number)..................................................
Percent of population.......................................

106,559
64.0

108,544
64.1

110,315
64.2

111,872
64.3

113,226
64.4

115,241
64.7

117,167
65.1

119,540
65.6

121,602
65.9

100,421
60.3
1,597

100,907
59.6
1,604

102,042
59.4
1,645

101,194
58.2
1,668

102,510
58.3
1,676

106,702
59.9
1,697

108,856
60.5
1,706

111,303
61.1
1,706

114,177
61.9
1,737

98,824
3,347
95,477

99,303
3,364
95,938

100,397
3,368
97,030

99,526
3,401
96,125

100,834
3,383
97,450

105,005
3,321
101,685

107,150
3,179
103,971

109,597
3,163
106,434

112,440
3,208
109,232

Unemployed:
Total (number)............................................
Percent of labor fo rc e ................................

6,137
5.8

7,637
7.0

8,273
7.5

10,678
9.5

10,717
9.5

8,539
7.4

8,312
7.1

8,237
6.9

7,425
6.1

Not in labor force (number) ................................

59,900

60,806

61,460

62,067

62,665

62,839

62,744

62,752

62,888

Employed:
Total (number) .............................................
Percent of population ..................................
Resident Armed Forces............................
Civilian
Total .......................................................
Agriculture............................................
Nonagricultural industries.....................

20.

Annual data: Employment levels by industry

(Numbers in thousands)
Industry

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

Total employment....................................................................
Private sector.........................................................................
Goods-producing.................................................................
Mining.............................................................................
Construction ..................................................................
Manufacturing.................................................................

89,823
73,876
26,461
958
4,463
21,040

90,406
74,166
25,658
1,027
4,346
20,285

91,156
75,126
25,497
1,139
4,188
20,170

89,566
73,729
23,813
1,128
3,905
18,781

90,200
74,330
23,334
952
3,948
18,434

94,496
78,472
24,727
966
4,383
19,378

97,519
81,125
24,859
927
4,673
19,260

99,610
82,900
24,681
783
4,904
18,994

102,112
85,049
24,884
741
5,031
19,112

Service-producing................................................................
Transportation and public utilities...................................
Wholesale trade ..............................................................
Retail trade .....................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate...............................
Services...........................................................................

63,363
5,136
5,204
14,989
4,975
17,112

64,748
5,146
5,275
15,035
5,160
17,890

65,659
5,165
5,358
15,189
5,298
18,619

65,753
5,082
5,278
15,179
5,341
19,036

66,866
4,954
5,268
15,613
5,468
19,694

69,769
5,159
5,555
16,545
5,689
20,797

72,660
5,238
5,717
17,356
5,955
22,000

74,930
5,244
5,735
17,845
6,297
23,099

77,228
5,378
5,797
18,264
6,589
24,137

Government...................................................................
Federal......................................................................
State ..........................................................................
L o ca l.........................................................................

15,947
2,773
3,541
9,633

16,241
2,866
3,610
9,765

16,031
2,772
3,640
9,619

15,837
2,739
3,640
9,458

15,869
2,774
3,662
9,434

16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482

16,394
2,875
3,832
9,687

16,711
2,899
3,888
9,923

17,063
2,943
3,952
10,167

NOTE:

See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.


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

87

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Employment Data

21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural
payrolls, by industry
Industry

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

35.7
6.16
219.91

35.3
6.66
235.10

35.2
7.25
255.20

34.8
7.68
267.26

35.0
8.02
280.70

35.2
8.32
292.86

34.9
8.57
299.09

34.8
8.76
304.85

34.8
8.98
312.50

43.0
8.49
365.07

43.3
9.17
397.06

43.7
10.04
438.75

42.7
10.77
459.88

42.5
11.28
479.40

43.3
11.63
503.58

43.4
11.98
519.93

42.2
12.44
524.97

42.3
12.45
526.64

37.0
9.27
342.99

37.0
9.94
367.78

36.9
10.82
399.26

36.7
11.63
426.82

37.1
11.94
442.97

37.8
12.13
458.51

37.7
12.32
464.46

37.4
12.47
466.38

37.7
12.66
477.28

40.2
6.70
269.34

39.7
7.27
288.62

39.8
7.99
318.00

38.9
8.49
330.26

40.1
8.83
354.08

40.7
9.19
374.03

40.5
9.54
386.37

40.7
9.73
396.01

41.0
9.91
406.31

39.9
8.16
325.58

39.6
8.87
351.25

39.4
9.70
382.18

39.0
10.32
402.48

39.0
10.79
420.81

39.4
11.12
438.13

39.5
11.40
450.30

39.2
11.70
458.64

39.1
12.01
469.59

38.8
6.39
247.93

38.5
6.96
267.96

38.5
7.56
291.06

38.3
8.09
309.85

38.5
8.55
329.18

38.5
8.89
342.27

38.4
9.16
351.74

38.4
9.35
359.04

38.2
9.61
367.10

30.6
4.53
138.62

30.2
4.88
147.38

30.1
5.25
158.03

29.9
5.48
163.85

29.8
5.74
171.05

29.8
5.85
174.33

29.4
5.94
174.64

29.2
6.03
176.08

29.3
6.12
179.32

36.2
5.27
190.77

36.2
5.79
209.60

36.3
6.31
229.05

36.2
6.78
245.44

36.2
7.29
263.90

36.5
7.63
278.50

36.4
7.94
289.02

36.4
8.35
303.94

36.2
8.76
317.11

32.7
5.36
175.27

32.6
5.85
190.71

32.6
6.41
208.97

32.6
6.92
225.59

32.7
7.31
239.04

32.6
7.59
247.43

32.5
7.90
256.75

32.5
8.16
265.20

32.5
8.47
275.28

P r iv a te s e c t o r


88
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Average weekly hours...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars).....................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars) ....................................
M in in g

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
C o n s tr u c tio n

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
M a n u fa c tu r in g

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
W h o le s a le tr a d e

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
R e ta il tr a d e

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , a n d r e a l e s t a t e

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................
S e r v ic e s

Average weekly hours .....................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...............................

22. Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
(June 1981=100)

Series
Mar.

June

1988

1987

1986

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3
months
ended

12
months
ended

Mar. 988
C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 2 .........................................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ............................................................
Service occupations............................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Manufacturing .....................................................................
Service-producing .................................................................
Services..............................................................................
Health services................................................................
Hospitals..........................................................................
Public administration 3 .......................................................
Nonmanufacturing................................. ..............................

P r iv a t e in d u s t r y w o r k e r s .....................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.........................................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations.........
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations
Sales occupations...........................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
Blue-collar workers...........................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair occupation........
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors...........
Transportation and material moving occupations..........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers ....
Service occupations.........................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing................................................................
Construction .....................................................................
Manufacturing...................................................................
Durables ..........................................................................
Nondurables....................................................................
Service-producing ..............................................................
Transportation and public utilities....................................
Transportation..................................................................
Public utilities..................................................................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ...............................................
Wholesale trade ..............................................................
Retail trade .....................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.................................

130.6

131.5

133.0

133.8

135.0

135.9

137.5

138.6

140.6

1.4

4.1

141.2
131.3
139.9

142.2
132.5
140.8

144.2
134.7
142.9

1.4
1.7
1.5

4.1
4.3
3.6
4.3
4.7
4.0
5.2
4.3
5.1
4.3
3.9

133.1
126.2
133.1

134.2
126.8
133.7

136.0
127.8
135.4

136.9
128.4
136.6

138.5
129.1
138.0

139.3
130.1
138.5

126.9
127.7
132.9
138.8
-

128.1
128.7
133.7
139.4
-

128.8
129.3
135.6
142.4
-

129.5
130.1
136.5
143.6
“

130.2
130.7
138.1
145.2
“

131.1
131.5
138.9
145.8
-

132.2
132.7
140.8
149.2
”

133.5
134.1
141.7
150.6

135.8
136.8
143.6
152.8

136.8
131.9

138.0
132.8

140.6
134.6

141.6
135.4

144.1
136.9

144.7
137.8

146.4
139.6

148.1
140.5

150.3
142.3

1.7
2.0
1.3
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.3

128.9

129.9

130.8

131.6

132.9

133.8

135.1

136.0

138.1

1.5

3.9

139.3
“
“

141.2

1.4
1.5
.9
1.4

3.7
4.4
3.5
1.5

131.8
-

134.1

1.9
1.7
2.1
1.6
2.2
1.4

4.9
4.4
4.1
5.0
4.0
4.6
2.9

131.3
-

132.5
-

133.5
“

134.3
“
“
“

136.1
“

-

126.3
131.1

127.2
132.3

127.8
“
“
133.5

“
128.4
“
“
“
134.7

125.7
-

130.9

“

137.0
“
”
“
129.5
“
~
“
135.2

129.9
”
130.7
"
135.3

130.8
—
131.5
136.3

~

“
“
”
“

”

-

-

-

-

131.6
“
-

Health services................................................................
Hospitals ........................................................................

130.8
“
-

-

132.7
“
“

129.2
130.1
“
133.5
“
“
“
*
“

Nonmanufacturing ............................................................

129.7

130.6

131.7

132.4

134.1

135.1

...............................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.........................................................
Blue-collar workers...........................................................
Workers, by industry division:

138.9

139.7

143.6

144.7

145.9

140.0
134.7

140.5
136.3

145.0
138.5

146.0
139.5

147.2

140.8

140.4
136.8

140.8
137.9

145.5
139.4
147.6
149.4
140.6

146.6
141.1
148.4
150.3
141.6

147.3
142.5
148.9
150.5
144.1

S t a t e a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s

Hospitals and other services4 .......................................
Health services.............................................................
Elementary and secondary........................................
Public administration3 .......................................................

126.7
127.7
-

127.8
128.7
-

-

-

-

-

141.5
143.0
136.8

141.7
143.2
138.0

1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index
consists of wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consist of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.


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

128.6
129.3
-

-

-

138.5
“
“
“
“
130.6
“
”
“
”
135.9

_
“
136.7

138.6

131.9

133.2

135.6

132.7
“
“
137.7

134.1

136.8

“
138.4

“
140.2

”
“
“
"
“
-

”
”

1.8
1.2
2.0
2.3
1.3
1.1
1.4
.7
.9

4.4
4.7
4.7
4.5
3.6
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.6
3.6
3.5
.6
5.2
4.2
5.1

“
-

“
“
“

1.2

136.4

137.1

138.9

1.3

3.6

146.3

149.7

151.1

153.1

1.3

4.9

147.5
141.3

151.2
143.3

152.7
144.3

154.8
145.9

1.4

5.2
3.6

147.6

151.8
145.1
154.1
156.5
146.4

153.1
146.3
“
155.5
157.8
148.1

155.2
150.3
“
156.8
158.9
150.3

1.4
2.7

'

143.3
“
149.1
150.7
144.7

1.1

.8
.7
1.5

5.4
5.5
5.0
5.3
5.6
4.3

3 Consist of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
- Data not available.

89

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
23.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group

(June 1981=100)
1986

1987

1988

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3
months
ended

12
months
ended

Mar 1988
C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 1 ...............................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ...............
Blue-collar workers..................
Service occupations................
Workers, by Industry division
Goods-produclng.................
Manufacturing ....................
Service-producing ................
Services ...........................
Health services...............
Hospitals.........................
Public administration 2 .....
Nonmanufacturing ..............

P r iv a t e in d u s tr y w o r k e r s .........................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers................................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations
Executive, administrative, and managerial
occupations..........................................................
Sales occupations.................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
clerical....................................
Blue-collar workers.................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair
occupations........................................................
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors ..
Transportation and material moving occupations .
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and
laborers................................................................
Service occupations ................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing.................................
Construction ......................................
Manufacturing....................................
Durables..........................................
Nondurables....................................
Service-producing................................
Transportation and public utilities ....
Transportation................................
Public utilities..................................
Wholesale and retail trade..............
Wholesale trade ...........................
Retail trade........................... ........
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Services............................................
Health services ..............................
Hospitals....................................... .
Nonmanufacturing .

S t a t e a n d lo c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s .

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers.........................
Blue-collar workers...........................
Workers, by industry division
Services ............................................
Hospitals and other services 3 .......
Health services .............................
Schools...........................................
Elementary and secondary.........
Public administration 2 .......................

124.4
125.3
130.7
136.4
“
•
133.8
129.6

129.3

130.7

131.5

132.8

133.5

135.2

136.1

137.4

1.0

3.5

132.4
124.1
130.0

134.1
125.0
131.7

135.0
125.6
132.8

136.6
126.2
134.2

137.3
127.1
134.7

139.4
128.3
136.0

140.2
129.4
136.6

141.5
130.4
138.0

.9
.8
1.0

3.6
3.3
2.8

125.6
126.5
131.5
137.0
“
134.6
130.4

126.3
127.2
133.4
139.9
-

127.0
127.9
134.2
141.1
138.1
133.0

127.8
128.7
135.8
142.7
140.5
134.5

128.5
129.5
136.5
143.4
141.0
135.2

129.8
130.8
138.5
146.8
-

131.0
132.2
139.2
148.2
-

132.2
133.3
140.5
149.5

143.8
137.8

145.5
139.0

.9
.8
.9
.9
.7
1.0
1.2
.9

3.4
3.6
3.5
4.8
4.0
4.8
3.6
3.3

142.6
137.1

-

-

126.8

127.9

128.8

129.5

130.8

131.7

133.0

133.8

135.1

1.0

3.3

129.6
132.7

131.1
134.0

132.0
135.4

132.7
136.4

134.6
138.4

135.4
139.1

137.0
141.2

137.6
142.6

139.0
144.0

1.0
1.0

3.3
4.0

130.5
122.4

132.1
124.3

132.4
125.2

133.5
124.9

135.6
126.7

136.4
127.1

138.6
127.0

139.2
126.1

139.9
127.5

.5
1.1

3.2
.6

129.6

130.8

131.7

132.7

134.3

135.5

137.1

138.1

140.2

1.5

4.4

123.1

123.7

124.5

125.1

125.6

126.6

127.7

128.9

129.9

.8

3.4

125.3
122.6
118.0

125.7
123.6
118.9

126.7
124.1
119.8

127.4
124.9
120.1

127.9
125.5
120.5

128.8
126.7
121.5

130.2
127.5
122.3

131.1
129.2
122.9

132.1
129.9
123.7

.8
.5
.7

3.3
3.5
2.7

120.0
128.0

120.3
128.0

120.9
128.9

121.4
130.1

121.9
131.4

122.6
131.9

123.7
132.6

125.0
133.2

126.7
134.5

1.4
1.0

3.9
2.4

124.2
118.3
125.3
124.8
126.1
129.0
126.3
“
“
124.5
129.7
122.5
126.6
136.2
“

125.4
119.8
126.5
125.8
127.9
129.9
126.6

126.1
120.5
127.2
126.4
128.5
130.9
127.3
“
126.5
131.8
124.4
129.0
138.2
-

126.8
120.8
127.9
127.2
129.3
131.6
127.5
126.9
133.1
124.5
130.0
139.5
”

127.5
121.7
128.7
127.7
130.5
133.4
128.1
127.9
134.8
125.2
133.5
141.8
*
“

128.3
122.7
129.5
128.7
131.0
134.3
129.3
-

129.6
123.8
130.8
129.7
132.8
135.7
130.0
-

130.8
124.7
132.2
131.1
134.1
136.2
130.2
-

132.0
125.9
133.3
132.1
135.6
137.5
131.3
-

129.9
137.2
127.1
131.5
142.8
-

130.6
137.8
127.8
131.8
145.9
*

130.7
138.5
127.7
131.6
147.1
-

131.9
139.0
129.2
132.9
148.6

.9
1.0
.8
.8
1.1
1.0
.8
.9
.8
.9
.4
1.2
1.0
1.0
.7
1.1

3.5
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.9
3.1
2.5
2.3
2.7
3.1
3.1
3.2

132.8

134.2

134.8

136.0

“
125.8
131.2
123.7
128.0
136.9

"

-

-

-

-

-

-

3
3.9
4.9

127.7

128.7

129.7

130.4

131.9

135.5

136.0

140.4

141.4

142.5

142.8

146.1

147.4

148.7

.9

4.4

136.6
130.4

137.0
131.9

141.8
134.5

142.8
135.1

143.9
136.3

144.1
136.9

147.7
139.0

149.3
139.6

150.5
141.1

.8
1.1

4.6
3.5

136.8
132.4
“
138.0
139.4
133.8

137.1
133.3
138.2
139.4
134.6

142.1
135.8
144.1
145.7
137.5

143.3
137.3
145.1
146.4
138.1

143.9
138.6
145.5
146.5
140.5

144.2
139.4
145.6
146.6
141.0

148.2
141.2

149.5
142.2

150.7
144.5

.8
1.6
.6
.5
.4
1.2

4.7
4.3
4.3
4.9
5.1
3.6

w„..w.ww
«muon, "umcio
Iami anu riuusenoia worxers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.

90FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

137.5
132.2

-

-

150.3
152.0
142.6

-

151.8
153.4
143.8

_

152.6
154.0
145.5

3 Includes, for example, library, social and health services.
- Data not available.

.9

3.1

24.

Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size

(June 1981=100)

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Percent change

1988

1987

1986

Sept.

Dec.

12
months
ended

3
months
ended

Mar.

Mar.

988

C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta t u s 1

Nonmanufacturing ...............................................................

128.4
126.4
131.6
127.0
129.7

128.7
126.7
131.9
126.9
130.4

129.4
127.3
132.8
127.5
131.2

129.8
127.5
133.4
127.9
131.5

130.5
128.0
134.4
128.0
132.6

131.2
128.7
135.2
128.7
133.5

132.0
129.5
135.9
129.5
134.3

133.4
131.3
136.7
131.5
135.1

135.6
134.1
138.0
135.0
136.2

1.6
2.1
1.0
2.7
.8

3.9
4.8
2.7
5.5
2.7

Goods-producing .................................................................
Service-producing................................................................
Manufacturing ..................................................... ...............
Nonmanufacturing ...............................................................

129.0
126.7
130.4
128.1
129.5

130.2
128.2
131.4
129.7
130.4

131.2
129.1
132.5
130.4
131.6

132.1
130.0
133.4
131.4
132.5

133.6
130.8
135.3
132.2
134.3

134.6
131.8
136.4
133.2
135.3

136.1
133.1
137.9
134.6
136.8

136.9
134.1
138.6
135.6
137.5

138.9
136.2
140.5
137.8
139.4

1.5
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.4

4.0
4.1
3.8
4.2
3.8

131.6
128.7
125.9
130.8

133.3
129.6
126.2
131.6

134.2
130.7
127.3
132.1

135.2
131.4
128.1
132.8

137.4
132.1
129.1
134.1

138.6
133.2
130.2
134.2

140.3
134.2
131.2
135.8

141.9
135.4
131.7
136.3

143.7
137.1
134.4
138.3

1.3
1.3
2.1
1.5

4.6
3.8
4.1
3.1

129.5
125.5

130.5
126.4

131.4
127.2

132.2
127.9

133.5
129.0

134.4
130.2

135.8
131.3

136.7
132.0

138.9
133.6

1.6
1.2

4.0
3.6

Nonmanufacturing............................................ ..................

125.6
123.4
129.0
124.2
126.9

126.1
124.1
129.3
124.6
127.4

126.9
124.5
130.5
125.0
128.5

127.2
124.8
130.9
125.5
128.7

127.7
125.0
131.7
125.6
129.5

128.3
125.8
132.2
126.2
130.1

129.1
126.5
132.9
127.0
130.8

130.5
128.5
133.6
129.3
131.5

131.0
128.7
134.4
129.6
132.1

.4
.2
.6
.2
.5

2.6
3.0
2.1
3.2
2.0

Goods-producing .................................................................
Service-producing................................................................
Manufacturing .....................................................................
Nonmanufacturing...............................................................

127.3
124.5
128.9
126.1
127.8

128.5
126.1
129.9
127.7
128.9

129.4
127.0
130.8
128.5
129.8

130.3
127.8
131.7
129.5
130.6

131.8
128.8
133.6
130.6
132.4

132.8
129.6
134.6
131.5
133.4

134.3
131.1
136.2
133.0
134.9

135.0
132.1
136.7
133.9
135.4

136.4
133.6
138.0
135.5
136.8

1.0
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.0

3.5
3.7
3.3
3.8
3.3

129.2
126.8
124.2
128.1

131.3
127.8
124.4
128.9

132.3
128.8
125.3
129.3

133.1
129.4
126.2
130.1

135.4
130.1
127.4
131.2

136.6
131.1
128.5
131.1

138.3
132.1
129.6
133.1

139.7
133.0
129.9
133.5

140.9
134.0
131.3
134.9

.9
.8
1.1
1.0

4.1
3.0
3.1
2.8

127.4
123.6

128.5
124.5

129.4
125.0

130.2
125.6

131.6
126.6

132.4
127.8

133.7
129.1

134.6
129.8

135.8
130.9

.9
.8

3.2
3.4

Goods-producing .................................................................
Service-producing................................................................

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

Midwest (formerly North Central)..........................................
W est.......................................................................................
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan areas.................................................................
Other areas...................... ................... .................................

W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta tu s 1

Goods-producing.................................................................
Service-producing................................................................

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

Midwest (formerly North Central)..........................................
W est.................. ....................................... - ........................•—
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan areas.................................................................
Other areas............................................................................

1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and
industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the


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

M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w Technical
Employment Cost Index,” May 1982.

Note,

“ Estimation

procedures for

the

91

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations

25. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, private
industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
Annual average

Quarterly average

Measure

1986
1985

1987

1988

1986
II

III

IV

I

II

IIP

ivp

I»

S p e c if ie d a d ju s tm e n ts :

Total compensation 1 adjustments,2 settlements
covering 5,000 workers or more:
First year of contract ...........................................
Annual rate over life of contract.........................

2.6
2.7

1.1
1.6

0.7
1.6

0.7
1.2

2.7
2.4

1.1
2.1

4.1
3.9

2.5
2.1

3.4
2.4

1.7
1.8

Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000
workers or more:
First year of contract...........................................
Annual rate over life of contract.........................

2.3
2.7

1.2
1.8

1.3
2.0

.8
1.5

2.0
2.1

.8
1.6

2.6
2.9

2.1
2.0

2.4
1.8

2.1
2.3

3.3
.7

2.3
.5

.7
.2

.5
.1

.5
.2

.4
(4)

1.0
.2

.9
.2

.8
3

.4
1

1.8
.7

1.7
.2

.6
(4)

.5
(4)

.2
.1

.3
.1

.7
.2

.6
.1

.3
.2

.3
.1

E f f e c t i v e a d ju s tm e n ts :

Total effective wage adjustment3 .........................
From settlements reached in period ...................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier
periods.................................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses.............

1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in

compensation or wages.
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
« Between -0.05 and 0.05 percent
p = preliminary.

COmpein® ^ on a" d wage adjustments, major collective bargaining settlements in private
Average for four quarters endingMeasure

1986
II

III

1987
IV

I

II

1988
IVP

IIP

P

Specified total compensation adjustments, settlements covering 5,000
workers or more, all industries:
First year of contract.................
Annual rate over life of contract......

2.0

1.2
1.7

1.8
2.1

2.7
2.6

3.0
2.6

3.1
2.5

1.2
2.0
.8
1.8
1.8
1.8

1.5
1.8
1.3
2.0
1.7
2.1

2.0
2.1
2.0
2.2
1.7
2.5

2.2
2.3
2.1
2.1
1.5
2.5

2.4
2.2
2.5
2.2
1.4
2.7

-1.5
1.3
-3.5
(2)
.8
-.6

-.8
1.3
-2.7
.3
.8
-.2

1.1
2.1
-.1
1.0
1.0
1.2

2.1
2.4
1.3
1.3
1.0
2.1

2.4
2.4
2.4
1.5
1.0
2.7

2.2

2.3
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7

2.4
2.1
2.6
2.8
2.4
2.9

2.3
1.9
2.4
2.7
2.7
2.7

2.3
1.5
2.5
2.7
2.4
2.7

Specified wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or
more:
All industries
First year of contract .....................
Contracts with COLA clauses ..
Contracts without COLA clauses
Annual rate over life of contract..............................................
C o n tra c ts with COLA clauses .
Contracts without COLA clauses
Manufacturing
First year of contract ..................
Contracts with COLA clauses.....
Contracts without COLA clauses ......
Annual rate over life of contract........
Contracts with COLA clauses.......
Contracts without COLA clauses ...
Nonmanufacturing
First year of contract ..............
Contracts with COLA clauses ...
Contracts without COLA clauses ....................................................
Annual rate over life of contract.......................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses ...
Contracts without COLA clauses ..
Construction
First year of contract ......................
Contracts with COLA clauses......
Contracts without COLA clauses ....
Annual rate over life of contract.......
Contracts with COLA clauses .
Contracts without COLA clauses ....
Data do not meet publication standards.

Digitized for92
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1.6
1.8
1.5
2.2
2.5
2.1

1.2

1.2

1.7

.9
1.8

.7
-.4
1.4
2.0

3.4
2.4
2.8
3.3
2.6

1.9
2.3

2.0
2.3
2.1

2.1
2.4
2.2

2.3

2.3

2.2

2.4
1.6
2.4

2.4
1.2
2.6

2.3

1.4
2.6
Between -0.05 and 0.05 percent.
1 = preliminary.

2.7
3.7
2.7
2.9
3.8
2.9

3.0

O
(1)
3.2
(1)
0

2.9
(1)
3.1
0
(1)

2.9
{ ')

(’)

(’)
3.1
(1)
(1)

27. Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in p e r c e n t ) _____________________________
Average for four quarters ending-

F o r a ll w o r k e r s : 1

From settlements reached in period .................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period.......................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses...........................................

III

IV

I

II

lllp

IVp

lp

2.3
.5
1.6
.2

2.3
.5
1.7
.2

2.0
.3
1.5
.1

2.2
.3
1.6
.3

2.6
.4
1.7
.4

3.1
.7
1.8
.5

3.2
.8

3.1
1.7
3.8
1.0

2.8
1.6
3.9
1.0

2.4
1.1
3.7
.6

2.8
.9
3.5
1.8

3.2
1.8
3.3
2.3

3.6
2.9
3.3
2.6

3.8
2.9
3.3

F o r w o r k e r s r e c e iv in g c h a n g e s :

From settlements reached in period .................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period.......................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses...........................................

1988

1987

1986

Effective wage adjustment

1 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.

p

= preliminary.

28. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, State and
local government collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)________________ _______
Annual average
Measure

1985

1986

1987

4.2
5.1

6.2
6.0

4.9
4.8

4.6
5.4

5.7
5.7

4.9
5.1

5.7
4.1
1.6
(4)

5.5
2.4
3.0
(4)

4.9
2.7
2.2
(4)

Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments,2 settlements covering 5,000 workers or more:

Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or more:

Effective adjustments:

Deferred from settlements reached in earlier periods ................................................................................................

1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in

compensation or wages.
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
4 Less than 0.05 percent.

29. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
1988 p

1987

Annual totals
Measure
1986

1987

Apr.

July

June

May

Sept.

Aug.

Nov.p

Oct.

Dec.p

AprT

Mar.

Feb.

Jan.

Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period.....................
In effect during period................

69
72

46
51

2
5

3
7

8
12

6
14

3
11

7
15

1
12

6
11

0
5

3
6

5
8

Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in
thousands).................................
In effect during period (in
thousands).................................

533.0

174.4

2.7

7.0

16.1

14.1

18.4

45.2

1.3

11.8

.0

7.2

17.5

6.7

0

24.2

14.9

Days idle:
Number (in thousands)...............
Percent of estimated working
time1 ..........................................

899.5

377.7

8.9

13.9

25.8

31.1

36.0

71.9

53.7

22.2

8.9

10.8

21.1

1,186.1

4,480.7

151.3

201.2

278.0

471.0

361.4

1,155.1

353.3

222.9

159.4

36.6

337.0

.05

.02

.01

.01

.01

.02

.02

.05

.02

.01

.01

.02

.02

1 Agricultural and government employees are included in the total employed and total
working time: private household, forestry, and fishery employees are excluded. An explanation of the measurement of idleness as a percentage of the total time worked is found
in '“ Total economy’ measure of strike idleness," M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1968,


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

1
6

0

203.6 207.9
.08

.09

pp. 54-56.
p = preliminary

93

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics: Price Data

30. Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)

Series

Annual
average

1987

1988

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

113.6
340.4

112.7
337.7

113.1
338.7

113.5
340.1

113.8
340.8

114.4
342.7

115.0
344.4

115.3
345.3

115.4
345.8

115.4
345.7

115.7
346.7

116.0
347.4

116.5
349.0

117.1
350.8

109.1
109.0
107.3
110.9
104.5
103.3
109.4
109.4
109.0
106.5
110.4
109.2
112.5
111.1

113.5
113.5
111.9
114.8
110.5
105.9
119.1
110.5
111.0
108.1
107.5
113.8
117.0
114.1

112.8
112.8
111.3
114.3
108.6
105.3
120.1
110.6
110.7
108.0
108.5
113.3
116.1
113.3

113.3
113.3
112.0
114.6
109.6
105.7
121.8
110.5
110.8
108.5
108.0
113.4
116.4
113.6

113.8
113.8
112.6
114.7
110.4
105.5
124.1
110.2
111.2
107.8
106.8
113.7
116.8
114.0

113.7
113.7
112.1
115.2
111.4
105.3
119.6
110.0
111.1
108.4
105.9
114.1
117.2
114.4

113.8
113.8
112.1
115.3
111.9
105.7
117.4
110.4
111.3
108.3
105.9
114.8
117.5
114.7

114.2
114.1
112.4
115.4
112.7
106.4
117.4
110.3
111.6
107.8
105.8
114.6
118.0
114.9

114.3
114.3
112.4
115.6
112.0
106.9
117.8
110.6
111.6
107.4
106.7
114.7
118.3
115.2

114.3
114.2
112.1
116.2
111.2
106.9
117.4
110.2
111.4
108.0
105.0
115.1
118.6
115.4

114.8
114.7
112.8
116.8
110.3
106.7
123.4
110.0
111.0
107.7
104.8
115.0
118.9
115.4

115.7
115.7
114.1
118.1
111.0
107.4
126.4
111.3
112.2
108.5
106.9
115.9
119.3
115.8

115.8
115.7
113.9
118.7
110.6
107.3
124.7
111.8
112.2
109.5
107.7
116.1
119.7
116.8

116.0
115.9
113.9
118.9
111.2
107.2
123.0
112.0
112.6
110.3
107.7
116.3
120.2
117.4

116.7
116.6
114.6
119.8
111.5
107.1
126.0
112.1
112.3
110.3
107.8
116.6
120.7
118.0

Housing ..........................................................................................
S helter.........................................................................................
Renters'costs (12/82—100)...................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters' costs ...............................................................
Homeowners’ costs (12/82=100)...........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (12/82—1 00)..................................
Household insurance (12/82=100)......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities....................................
Fuel and other utilities.................................................................
Fuels .........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity....................................................
Other utilities and public services.....„ .....................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies.............................................................
Housekeeping services.............................................................

110.9
115.8
121.9
118.3
118.6
119.4
119.4
119.2
107.9
111.2
103.7
104.1
99.2
77.6
105.7
117.9
105.2
102.2
108.2
108.5

114.2
121.3
128.1
123.1
127.4
124.8
124.8
124.0
111.8
114.8
107.8
103.0
97.3
77.9
103.8
120.1
107.1
103.6
111.5
110.6

113.2
120.2
127.1
122.0
127.1
123.6
123.6
122.4
110.3
112.8
107.2
101.3
94.7
77.5
100.8
119.7
107.2
104.0
111.1
110.3

113.6
120.5
127.3
122.3
127.1
124.0
124.1
123.0
110.2
112.3
107.5
102.2
96.1
77.1
102.5
119.8
107.1
103.5
111.7
110.6

114.3
120.8
127.9
122.3
129.1
124.2
124.2
123.6
111.1
113.7
107.8
104.9
100.8
77.2
108.1
119.4
107.1
103.5
111.9
110.5

114.7
121.3
129.3
123.0
132.8
124.4
124.4
124.5
113.2
116.8
108.4
105.0
100.4
77.1
107.6
120.5
107.2
103.6
111.7
110.8

115.4
122.2
130.1
123.8
133.3
125.4
125.4
125.1
112.9
116.5
108.2
105.9
101.4
77.8
108.7
121.1
107.3
103.8
111.5
110.9

115.6
122.5
129.8
124.4
130.5
126.0
126.0
125.5
112.7
116.3
107.8
105.5
101.0
77.6
108.2
120.8
107.5
103.9
111.8
111.0

115.5
123.2
129.4
124.8
127.7
127.1
127.2
125.8
112.8
116.4
108.1
103.2
96.9
78.5
103.3
121.2
107.4
103.6
112.3
111.2

115.5
123.4
129.2
124.8
126.7
127.4
127.5
125.9
113.5
116.9
108.9
102.4
95.5
80.3
101.4
121.3
107.4
103.6
112.4
111.2

115.6
123.7
129.1
125.6
124.1
128.0
128.0
126.2
113.3
116.6
109.1
102.0
95.1
80.5
100.9
120.9
107.3
103.3
112.5
111.4

116.2
124.6
130.8
126.0
129.4
128.5
128.6
126.9
113.7
117.4
108.7
102.4
95.6
80.8
101.5
121.3
107.5
103.5
113.1
111.5

116.6
125.0
131.3
126.3
130.4
129.0
129.0
127.1
114.3
117.9
109.5
102.8
96.0
80.9
101.9
121.8
107.7
103.7
113.2
111.6

117.0
125.6
132.9
126.4
136.6
129.2
129.2
127.8
113.3
116.4
109.2
102.7
95.8
80.5
101.7
121.7
108.3
104.7
112.9
111.7

117.3
125.8
132.9
126.6
136.0
129.4
129.5
128.2
115.3
119.4
109.7
102.8
95.7
80.2
101.6
122.3
109.1
104.9
113.8
114.7

Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Apparel commodities...................................................................
Men’s and boys’ apparel..........................................................
Women's and girls' apparel .....................................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ apparel...................................................
Footwear...................................................................................
Other apparel commodities.......................................................
Apparel services..........................................................................

105.9
104.2
106.2
104.0
111.8
101.9
101.7
115.1

110.6
108.9
109.1
110.4
112.1
105.1
108.0
119.6

111.5
110.0
109.2
112.8
114.1
105.8
105.9
118.6

111.1
109.5
109.9
111.2
113.1
106.5
105.8
119.3

109.3
107.6
109.0
107.6
110.1
105.6
107.6
119.5

107.3
105.3
107.8
104.2
107.7
103.4
108.2
120.0

109.4
107.6
108.3
108.4
109.0
104.2
109.3
119.8

113.3
111.8
110.6
115.3
112.1
105.7
110.3
119.9

115.4
114.0
112.0
118.3
116.2
107.3
110.7
120.8

115.4
114.0
112.5
117.7
116.7
108.0
110.7
121.1

112.7
111.0
110.7
112.6
114.5
107.2
111.3
121.4

110.4
108.6
109.0
108.2
113.6
106.1
112.9
121.6

110.2
108.3
109.1
107.8
111.4
105.8
113.1
122.0

114.3
112.7
111.6
115.3
114.0
107.3
113.6
122.2

117.0
115.5
112.9
119.6
117.1
109.4
114.6
122.6

Transportation ................................................................................
Private transportation...................................................................
New vehicles.............................................................................
New cars.................................................................................
Used c a rs ..................................................................................
Motor fu e l..................................................................................
Gasoline..................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services.....................................
Public transportation...................................................................

102.3
101.2
110.6
110.6
108.8
77.1
77.0
110.3
115.1
96.3
118.8
117.0

105.4
104.2
114.4
114.6
113.1
80.2
80.1
114.8
120.8
96.9
125.6
121.1

104.2
103.0
113.5
113.6
111.3
78.5
78.4
114.3
119.4
96.0
124.0
120.9

104.7
103.5
113.8
114.0
113.4
79.1
79.0
114.3
119.7
96.7
124.2
120.6

105.4
104.3
114.1
114.3
114.7
80.8
80.7
114.4
120.3
96.7
125.0
120.2

106.0
104.9
114.4
114.7
115.4
82.2
82.1
114.5
120.8
96.3
125.7
120.2

106.5
105.4
114.0
114.4
115.5
84.3
84.3
115.1
120.7
96.8
125.5
121.5

106.6
105.4
113.8
114.1
116.0
84.0
84.0
115.7
121.1
97.6
125.8
122.1

107.1
106.0
115.0
115.2
116.2
83.2
83.1
116.1
122.8
98.0
127.8
121.2

107.8
106.8
116.3
116.6
116.5
83.2
83.1
116.5
123.8
97.6
129.2
122.0

107.6
106.5
116.4
116.6
116.3
82.0
81.8
116.9
123.8
97.5
129.2
122.1

107.1
106.0
116.1
116.2
116.0
79.7
79.5
117.2
124.7
98.2
130.1
121.8

106.8
105.7
116.0
116.2
116.0
78.3
78.1
117.7
125.0
98.1
130.6
120.8

106.5
105.4
115.7
116.0
116.1
77.5
77.3
118.5
124.9
98.3
130.3
121.4

107.2
106.0
115.6
115.9
116.6
79.4
79.2
118.8
125.0
98.2
130.5
122.4

Medical c a re ...................................................................................
Medical care commodities..........................................................
Medical care services..................................................................
Professional services................................................................
Hospital and related services...................................................

122.0
122.8
121.9
120.8
123.1

130.1
131.0
130.0
128.8
131.6

128.7
129.0
128.7
127.5
129.7

129.2
129.9
129.0
127.9
130.1

129.9
130.8
129.6
128.8
130.6

130.7
131.6
130.4
129.5
132.0

131.2
132.2
131.0
130.0
133.0

131.7
132.7
131.5
130.7
133.3

132.3
133.5
132.0
131.2
134.2

132.8
134.2
132.5
131.5
135.4

133.1
134.9
132.7
131.8
135.9

134.4
135.4
134.1
133.2
137.6

135.5
136.1
135.3
134.5
139.0

136.3
137.0
136.1
135.4
140.0

136.9
138.1
136.6
136.0
140.7

Entertainment.................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services................................................................

111.6
107.9
116.8

115.3
110.5
122.0

114.5
109.9
121.0

114.8
110.3
121.2

114.9
110.3
121.4

115.4
110.7
122.0

115.6
110.6
122.5

116.1
110.7
123.5

116.9
111.2
124.5

117.3
112.2
124.3

117.4
112.6
124.3

118.1
112.9
125.4

118.3
112.9
125.7

119.0
113.4
126.5

119.6
114.2
127.0

Other goods and services.............................................................
Tobacco products.......................................................................
Personal care...............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances.............................
Personal care services.............................................................
Personal and educational expenses...........................................
School books and supplies......................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................

121.4
124.7
111.9
111.3
112.5
128.6
128.1
128.7

128.5
133.6
115.1
113.9
116.2
138.5
138.1
138.7

126.6
131.6
114.2
113.2
115.1
136.1
136.2
136.3

126.9
131.8
114.9
113.7
116.0
136.3
136.4
136.5

127.2
132.4
114.9
113.7
116.1
136.7
136.5
136.8

128.0
135.0
115.3
114.3
116.2
136.9
136.5
137.2

128.5
135.3
115.6
114.3
116.8
137.7
136.7
137.9

131.1
135.9
116.0
114.7
117.2
142.1
141.3
142.3

131.6
136.3
116.2
114.9
117.4
142.8
142.3
143.1

131.8
136.5
116.3
115.0
117.5
143.1
142.3
143.4

132.1
137.0
116.5
115.0
117.9
143.4
142.4
143.6

133.4
140.8
117.3
116.1
118.4
143.9
144.6
144.0

134.2
142.2
117.8
116.4
119.1
144.7
146.3
144.8

134.6
142.8
118.1
116.8
119.2
145.0
146.2
145.1

134.8
142.9
118.5
117.4
119.5
145.2
146.3
145.3

1986

1987

All ite m s.................................................................................
All items (1967=100) ......................................................................

109.6
328.4

Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food.............................................................................................
Food at home ...........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products.................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs................................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at home..............................................................
Sugar and sweets................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared foods..........................................................
Food away from home .............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R A L L U R B A N C O N S U M E R S :

See footnotes at end of table.

Digitized for
94FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

30. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for Ail Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)

Series

1988

1987

Ann ual
aver age

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

115.0
108.9
114.2
105.5
103.5
111.8
101.6
108.3

115.3
109.3
114.3
106.1
104.2
114.0
101.5
108.8

115.4
109.5
114.3
106.5
104.3
114.0
101.8
109.6

115.4
109.3
114.8
105.7
103.1
111.0
101.5
109.5

115.7
109.2
115.7
105.1
102.1
108.6
101.2
109.4

116.0
109.1
115.8
105.0
101.9
108.3
101.0
109.4

116.5
109.8
116.0
105.9
103.4
112.7
101.0
109.5

117.1
110.7
116.7
106.9
105.0
115.5
102.0
109.7

121.2
126.9
115.8
122.0
131.0
125.6

121.7
127.2
115.5
122.5
131.5
127.9

121.9
128.0
113.5
123.4
132.0
128.7

122.0
128.1
112.6
124.5
132.5
128.8

122.2
128.5
112.3
124.6
132.7
129.0

122.9
129.4
112.7
125.1
134.1
129.6

123.4
129.8
113.1
125.2
135.3
130.2

123.8
130.4
113.0
125.4
136.1
130.7

124.1
130.6
113.7
125.8
136.6
131.0

113.8
111.8
115.3
112.7
104.1
101.3
101.1
107.3
123.7
119.4
91.1
117.1
118.0
111.2
81.8
122.0

114.5
112.3
115.9
113.3
104.9
102.6
102.0
108.1
124.2
120.1
92.7
117.6
118.6
111.6
83.8
122.7

115.1
113.0
116.5
113.9
105.7
104.0
102.2
109.0
124.9
120.6
92.3
118.3
119.4
112.9
83.5
123.2

115.5
113.2
116.6
114.2
106.3
104.6
102.1
109.4
124.6
120.8
89.8
118.9
120.1
113.7
82.9
123.9

115.7
113.3
116.8
114.4
106.7
104.8
102.4
109.5
124.6
120.8
89.0
119.2
120.5
114.1
83.1
124.2

115.5
113.2
116.6
114.3
106.0
103.7
102.1
109.1
124.6
121.0
88.3
119.2
120.4
113.5
82.0
124.4

115.7
113.3
116.9
114.6
105.5
102.8
101.9
109.1
125.3
121.7
87.4
119.7
120.8
113.2
80.0
125.2

116.0
113.5
117.1
114.8
105.4
102.7
101.9
109.0
125.8
122.1
87.0
120.0
121.1
113.3
78.8
125.7

116.6
114.0
117.7
115.3
106.3
104.1
101.9
109.8
126.0
122.4
86.5
120.6
121.9
114.6
78.0
126.1

117.2
114.7
118.4
115.9
107.3
105.6
102.9
111.0
126.5
122.8
87.3
121.2
122.4
115.5
79.7
126.5

88.0
29.4

87.8
29.3

87.3
29.2

86.9
29.0

86.7
29.0

86.5
28.9

86.6
28.9

86.4
28.8

86.2
28.8

85.8
28.7

85.4
28.5

111.9
333.4

112.4
334.9

112.7
335.6

113.3
337.4

113.8
339.1

114.1
340.0

114.3
340.4

114.2
340.2

114.5
341.0

114.7
341.6

115.1
343.0

115.7
344.7

112.6
112.5
111.0
114.3
108.5
105.1
119.5
110.4
110.5
107.9
108.4
113.1
116.0
113.2

113.1
113.1
111.7
114.5
109.5
105.6
121.1
110.4
110.7
108.3
108.1
113.2
116.2
113.5

113.6
113.6
112.3
114.8
110.4
105.3
123.9
110.1
111.1
107.6
106.8
113.5
116.7
113.9

113.5
113.5
111.9
115.2
111.3
105.1
119.6
109.9
111.0
108.2
105.9
113.9
117.0
114.2

113.6
113.6
111.9
115.3
111.8
105.5
117.3
110.3
111.3
108.1
106.0
114.6
117.4
114.4

114.0
114.0
112.2
115.4
112.7
106.2
117.1
110.2
111.5
107.6
106.0
114.4
117.9
114.6

114.1
114.1
112.2
115.7
112.0
106.7
117.5
110.5
111.6
107.3
106.9
114.5
118.2
114.9

114.1
114.0
111.9
116.2
111.2
106.7
117.4
110.1
111.2
107.9
105.2
114.9
118.5
115.2

114.5
114.5
112.5
116.9
110.1
106.4
123.0
109.8
110.9
107.6
104.9
114.8
118.8
115.1

115.4
115.4
113.7
118.1
110.8
107.1
125.7
111.3
112.1
108.4
107.2
115.7
119.1
115.6

115.5
115.4
113.5
118.8
110.5
107.0
124.0
111.7
112.1
109.5
107.9
115.8
119.6
116.6

115.7
115.6
113.5
118.9
111.1
106.9
122.2
111.9
112.4
110.3
108.0
116.0
120.0
117.3

116.3
116.2
114.2
119.9
111.4
106.9
125.2
112.0
112.2
110.2
107.9
116.4
120.6
117.9

112.8
118.8
114.6
122.9
128.2
113.8
113.7
114.1
111.3
114.7
106.0
102.7
97.1
77.6
103.6
120.1
106.7
103.1
111.8
110.9

111.8
117.7
113.8
121.9
128.3
112.7
112.7
112.5
110.2
113.2
105.2
101.0
94.4
77.3
100.6
119.6
106.9
103.4
111.5
110.7

112.2
118.1
114.0
122.1
128.6
113.1
113.1
113.1
110.2
112.5
106.0
101.8
95.8
76.8
102.2
119.7
106.7
103.0
112.0
110.9

112.9
118.2
114.2
122.2
129.7
113.2
113.2
113.8
111.0
113.9
106.3
104.6
100.7
77.0
108.0
119.4
106.7
102.9
112.1
110.9

113.2
118.8
115.3
122.8
133.6
113.4
113.4
114.6
112.6
116.9
106.3
104.7
100.2
76.9
107.4
120.4
106.8
103.1
112.1
111.1

114.0
119.6
116.0
123.6
134.2
114.3
114.3
115.1
112.4
116.6
106.2
105.6
101.3
77.5
108.6
121.0
106.9
103.3
111.9
111.2

114.1
120.0
116.2
124.2
132.2
114.8
114.8
115.5
112.1
116.4
105.8
105.2
100.8
77.3
108.1
120.7
107.1
103.4
112.2
111.3

114.0
120.7
116.0
124.5
129.3
115.9
115.9
115.8
112.2
116.0
106.3
102.8
96.5
78.2
103.0
121.1
107.0
103.1
112.7
111.4

113.9
120.9
115.9
124.6
128.1
116.2
116.2
115.9
112.7
116.5
106.9
102.0
95.1
80.1
101.1
121.2
107.0
103.1
112.8
111.4

114.1
121.2
115.9
125.3
124.5
116.6
116.6
116.1
112.5
115.9
107.1
101.7
94.8
80.2
100.7
120.9
106.9
102.9
112.9
111.6

114.6
121.9
116.9
125.7
129.2
117.1
117.1
116.7
113.0
117.1
106.9
102.0
95.2
80.4
101.2
121.2
107.1
103.0
113.5
111.7

115.0
122.4
117.3
126.1
130.0
117.6
117.6
116.7
113.6
117.6
107.5
102.5
95.6
80.6
101.6
121.8
107.2
103.1
113.6
111.8

115.4
122.9
118.4
126.2
136.9
117.8
117.8
117.2
112.8
116.6
107.1
102.3
95.4
80.2
101.4
121.7
107.8
104.1
113.4
111.9

115.6
123.0
118.4
126.3
136.1
118.0
118.0
117.3
114.7
119.8
107.5
102.5
95.4
79.9
101.4
122.3
108.7
104.2
114.3
115.6

110.4

111.4

110.9

109.1

107.1

109.1

112.9

115.2

115.2

112.6

110.3

110.0

113.9

116.3

July

Aug.

113.5
107.7
113.8
103.8
100.7
107.6
99.6
108.2

113.8
107.6
113.7
103.8
100.6
105.3
100.5
108.4

114.4
108.2
113.8
104.6
102.0
107.6
101.5
108.3

119.3
125.1
112.3
120.9
129.0
124.4

120.1
125.4
114.8
121.3
129.6
124.7

120.5
126.0
115.1
121.7
130.4
125.1

112.7
110.8
114.2
111.7
103.9
101.3
99.1
106.9
121.6
117.8
86.4
116.4
117.4
111.5
78.5
120.9

113.0
111.1
114.6
112.1
104.0
101.4
99.5
107.2
122.1
118.2
87.4
116.7
117.6
111.7
79.1
121.2

113.5
111.7
115.1
112.5
104.1
101.4
100.3
107.4
123.2
119.0
90.7
116.9
117.7
111.4
80.6
121.4

88.0
29.4

88.6
29.6

88.4
29.5

108.6
323.4

112.5
335.0

111.6
332.3

Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food.............................................................................................
Food at h om e ...........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products.................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs................................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at home..............................................................
Sugar and sweets................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared fo o d s..........................................................
Food away from home .............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................

108.9
108.8
107.1
110.9
104.4
103.2
109.4
109.1
109.0
106.4
110.0
109.0
112.5
111.1

113.3
113.3
111.7
114.8
110.4
105.7
118.8
110.4
110.9
107.9
107.5
113.6
116.9
113.9

Housing ..........................................................................................
S helter.........................................................................................
Renters’ costs (12/84=100)...................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters’ costs ...............................................................
Homeowners’ costs (12/84=100)...........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (1 2/8 4= 1 0 0 )..................................
Household insurance (12/84 = 100)......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities....................................
Fuel and other utilities.................................................................
Fuels .........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity.....................................................
Other utilities and public services............................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies.............................................................
Housekeeping services.............................................................

109.7
113.5
109.5
118.2
119.1
108.8
108.8
109.4
107.7
110.5
103.1
103.9
99.2
77.8
105.7
117.7
105.0
101.9
108.5
109.1

Apparel and upkeep......................................................................

105.8

1986

1987

Apr.

May

All ite m s............................................................................................
Commodities...................................................................................
Food and beverages....................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ....................................
Apparel commodities..............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ..................
Durables....................................................................................

109.6
104.4
109.1
101.4
97.8
104.2
95.9
106.6

113.6
107.7
113.5
104.0
101.1
108.9
99.5
108.2

112.7
107.2
112.8
103.6
100.7
110.0
98.3
107.7

113.1
107.5
113.3
103.7
100.9
109.5
98.7
107.9

Services..........................................................................................
Rent of shelter (1 2 /8 2 -1 0 0 ).....................................................
Household services less rent of’ shelter (12/82=100).............
Transportation services...............................................................
Medical care services..................................................................
Other services ....................................... .....................................

115.4
120.2
112.8
116.3
121.9
119.4

120.2
125.9
113.1
121.9
130.0
125.7

118.9
124.8
111.4
120.9
128.7
124.1

Special indexes:
All items less food ......................................................................
All items less shelter..................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/82=100).......................
All items less medical care.........................................................
Commodities less fo o d ................................................................
Nondurables less food ................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables................................................................................
Services less rent o f shelter (12/82 = 100)...............................
Services less medical c a re .........................................................
Energy..........................................................................................
All items less energy..................................................................
All items less food and energy ..................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ...................................................................
Services less energy....................................................................

109.8
108.0
111.2
108.8
101.7
98.5
96.9
103.5
118.7
114.6
88.2
112.6
113.5
108.6
77.2
116.5

113.6
111.6
115.1
112.6
104.3
101.8
100.3
107.5
123.1
119.1
88.6
117.2
118.2
111.8
80.2
122.0

Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1982-84-$1.00...........................................................................
1967—$1.00................................................................................

91.3
30.5

All items .........................................................................................
All Items (1967-100) ......................................................................

June

Sept.

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R U R B A N W A G E E A R N E R S
A N D C L E R IC A L W O R K E R S :

See footnotes at end of table.


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

95

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

30. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)

Series

Annual
average

1987

1986

1987

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Apparel commodities.............................................
Men’s and boys’ apparel................................................
Women’s and girls’ apparel ...............................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ apparel................................................
Footwear.............................................................
Other apparel commodities.....................................................
Apparel services..........................................................

104.2
105.9
103.8
113.5
102.1
101.6
115.0

108.8
108.5
110.3
114.0
105.5
107.4
119.2

109.9
108.3
113.0
115.9
106.1
105.5
118.4

109.4
109.0
111.4
115.3
106.7
105.1
118.9

107.4
108.2
107.7
111.7
105.8
107.0
119.1

105.3
106.9
104.4
109.7
103.9
107.3
119.5

107.4
107.7
108.2
110.6
104.7
108.2
119.3

Transportation ......................................................................
Private transportation.................................................................
New vehicles............................................................................
New ca rs................................................................................
Used c a rs ................................................................................
Motor fu e l..................................................................................
Gasoline..................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services....................................
Public transportation ...................................................................

101.7
100.9
110.4
110.4
108.8
77.1
76.9
110.6
113.8
96.3
117.1
116.8

105.1
104.1
114.0
114.3
113.1
80.3
80.2
115.1
119.0
96.7
123.4
120.4

103.8
102.8
113.2
113.3
111.3
78.5
78.5
114.6
117.5
95.7
121.8
120.3

104.4
103.4
113.5
113.7
113.4
79.2
79.1
114.6
117.8
96.4
122.0
120.3

105.1
104.3
113.7
114.0
114.7
80.9
80.8
114.7
118.5
96.6
122.8
119.7

105.8
104.9
113.9
114.4
115.4
82.3
82.2
114.9
118.9
96.3
123.4
119.7

Medical c a re ............................................................................
Medical care commodities ..........................................................
Medical care services................................ ...............................
Professional services................................................................
Hospital and related services ..................................................

122.0
122.2
122.0
120.9
122.6

130.2
130.2
130.3
129.0
131.1

128.8
128.2
128.9
127.6
129.1

129.3
129.1
129.3
128.1
129.5

130.0
130.1
130.0
128.9
130.0

Entertainment................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services................................................................

111.0
107.8
116.5

114.8
110.6
121.8

114.0
110.0
120.8

114.4
110.5
121.1

Other goods and services .............................................................
Tobacco products .......................................................................
Personal care...........................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances.............................
Personal care services .....................................................
Personal and educational expenses.........................................
School books and supplies......................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................

120.9
124.8
111.9
111.2
112.6
128.5
127.8
128.6

127.8
133.7
115.0
113.9
116.1
138.2
137.9
138.4

125.9
131.7
114.1
113.1
115.0
135.9
136.2
136.1

All item s...............................................................
Commodities.............................................................
Food and beverages .............................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ....................................
Apparel commodities.......................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ........
Durables...............................................................

108.6
103.9
108.9
100.8
97.3
104.2
95.3
104.9

112.5
107.3
113.3
103.6
100.8
108.8
99.2
106.6

Services...............................................................
Rent of shelter (1 2 /8 4 -1 0 0 )...........................................
Household services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 100)..............
Transportation services...............................................................
Medical care services..................................................................
Other services .....................................................................

114.7
109.0
103.9
115.4
122.0
118.7

Special indexes:
All items less food ..............................................................
All items less shelter ...............................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/84—100)...............
All items less medical ca re ...............................................
Commodities less fo o d ...............................................
Nondurables less food ..........................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables...............................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (1 2/8 4=1 0 0 )................................
Services less medical c a re .........................................................
Energy........................................................................
All items less energy ..................................................................
All items less food and energy ...................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ...................................................................
Services less energy...................................................................
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1982-84 = $1.00...........................................................................
1967—$1.00................................................................................

Digitized96
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1988
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

111.5
109.8
115.2
113.9
106.0
109.8
119.4

113.9
111.5
118.2
118.6
107.9
110.4
120.3

113.9
112.0
117.6
118.7
108.6
110.5
120.7

111.1
110.4
112.6
116.4
108.0
110.6
120.9

108.6
108.6
108.2
115.2
106.8
112.2
121.1

108.3
108.7
107.9
113.3
106.4
112.0
121.5

112.4
111.1
114.9
116.0
107.7
112.8
121.6

114.9
112.2
118.8
119.1
109.6
113.9
122.0

106.3
105.5
113.5
114.0
115.5
84.5
84.4
115.4
118.7
96.7
123.1
120.8

106.4
105.5
113.3
113.8
115.9
84.1
84.1
116.0
119.1
97.3
123.4
121.4

106.9
106.1
114.5
114.9
116.1
83.3
83.2
116.3
121.0
97.7
125.8
120.7

107.6
106.7
115.9
116.2
116.4
83.3
83.2
116.7
122.0
97.2
127.1
121.2

107.3
106.4
116.1
116.3
116.2
82.0
81.9
117.0
122.0
97.4
127.1
121.3

106.8
105.9
115.8
115.9
115.9
79.7
79.5
117.4
122.9
98.1
128.0
121.2

106.4
105.6
115.7
116.0
116.0
78.3
78.1
117.8
123.2
98.0
128.5
120.4

106.2
105.3
115.3
115.7
116.1
77.5
77.3
118.6
123.1
98.1
128.2
120.8

106.8
105.9
115.3
115.7
116.6
79.4
79.2
118.9
123.0
97.9
128.3
121.7

130.8
130.9
130.8
129.6
131.4

131.4
131.3
131.4
130.2
132.4

132.0
131.9
132.0
130.9
132.8

132.6
132.6
132.6
131.4
133.7

133.0
133.4
133.0
131.7
134.9

133.4
134.1
133.2
132.0
135.4

134.6
134.7
134.6
133.4
136.9

135.8
135.4
135.8
134.7
138.4

136.5
136.1
136.6
135.5
139.3

137.1
137.2
137.1
136.1
140.1

114.5
110.5
121.2

115.0
110.9
121.8

115.1
110.8
122.2

115.6
110.9
123.2

116.3
111.3
124.3

116.7
112.2
124.1

116.9
112.6
124.0

117.4
112.8
124.9

117.6
112.9
125.2

118.2
113.5
126.0

118.9
114.2
126.5

126.2
131.8
114.7
113.6
115.9
136.1
136.3
136.3

126.6
132.5
114.8
113.6
116.0
136.4
136.4
136.7

127.5
135.1
115.1
114.1
116.2
136.7
136.4
137.0

128.0
135.4
115.4
114.3
116.7
137.4
136.6
137.7

130.3
136.0
115.8
114.6
117.1
141.8
140.7
142.1

130.8
136.5
116.1
115.0
117.3
142.4
141.8
142.7

131.0
136.7
116.2
115.0
117.4
142.8
141.8
143.1

131.3
137.2
116.4
115.1
117.8
143.0
141.9
143.3

132.7
141.0
117.1
116.0
118.3
143.4
143.9
143.6

133.6
142.3
117.5
116.2
118.9
144.3
145.3
144.5

134.0
143.0
117.7
116.5
119.0
144.6
145.2
144.8

134.2
143.1
118.1
117.0
119.3
144.7
145.4
144.9

111.6
106.7
112.6
103.0
100.2
109.9
97.9
106.0

111.9
107.0
113.1
103.3
100.4
109.4
98.4
106.4

112.4
107.3
113.6
103.4
100.4
107.4
99.3
106.6

112.7
107.3
113.5
103.5
100.4
105.3
100.3
106.9

113.3
107.9
113.6
104.3
101.8
107.4
101.4
106.8

113.8
108.5
114.0
105.1
103.1
111.5
101.5
106.9

114.1
108.9
114.1
105.7
103.8
113.9
101.3
107.4

114.3
109.1
114.1
106.0
104.0
113.9
101.6
108.0

114.2
108.9
114.5
105.4
102.8
111.1
101.2
108.0

114.5
108.8
115.4
104.7
101.7
108.6
100.8
107.9

114.7
108.7
115.5
104.5
101.4
108.3
100.5
107.9

115.1
109.3
115.7
105.3
102.7
112.4
100.4
108.0

115.7
110.1
116.3
106.3
104.3
114.9
101.6
108.1

119.4
114.0
104.0
120.8
130.3
124.7

118.1
113.0
102.4
119.7
128.9
123.2

118.5
113.4
103.2
119.8
129.3
123.5

119.3
113.5
105.7
120.2
130.0
123.7

119.7
114.0
105.9
120.6
130.8
124.1

120.4
114.9
106.6
120.7
131.4
124.6

120.9
115.2
106.3
121.2
132.0
126.9

121.1
115.9
104.2
122.5
132.6
127.7

121.2
116.1
103.4
123.5
133.0
127.8

121.3
116.4
103.1
123.6
133.2
127.9

122.0
117.1
103.5
124.1
134.6
128.5

122.5
117.5
103.9
124.4
135.8
129.0

122.8
118.0
103.8
124.5
136.6
129.5

123.1
118.2
104.4
124.8
137.1
129.8

108.5
107.4
102.8
107.8
101.2
98.0
96.4
103.3
107.1
113.9
87.4
111.5
112.3
107.6
77.2
115.8

112.2
111.0
106.4
111.5
103.9
101.4
100.0
107.2
110.8
118.2
88.0
116.0
116.8
110.8
80.3
121.2

111.3
110.1
105.5
110.6
103.3
100.8
98.7
106.6
109.5
116.9
85.8
115.3
116.0
110.5
78.6
120.1

111.6
110.5
105.9
111.0
103.6
101.0
99.2
106.9
109.9
117.4
86.8
115.6
116.3
110.7
79.2
120.4

112.1
111.1
106.4
111.5
103.7
101.0
100.0
107.2
111.1
118.1
90.1
115.7
116.3
110.5
80.7
120.6

112.4
111.2
106.6
111.7
103.8
101.1
101.0
107.2
111.5
118.5
90.5
115.9
116.6
110.3
82.0
121.1

113.1
111.8
107.1
112.3
104.6
102.4
101.9
107.9
112.0
119.2
92.2
116.4
117.2
110.8
84.1
121.8

113.7
112.4
107.7
112.9
105.4
103.6
102.0
108.8
112.5
119.7
91.8
117.1
117.9
111.8
83.8
122.4

114.0
112.6
107.8
113.1
105.9
104.2
101.9
109.2
112.2
119.9
89.3
117.7
118.7
112.7
83.0
123.1

114.3
112.7
108.0
113.3
106.3
104.4
102.2
109.2
112.2
119.9
88.6
118.0
119.1
113.1
83.2
123.4

114.1
112.5
107.8
113.2
105.6
103.3
101.8
108.8
112.2
120.1
87.8
118.0
119.0
112.6
82.1
123.7

114.2
112.7
108.0
113.4
105.0
102.4
101.5
108.8
112.8
120.7
86.8
118.5
119.3
112.3
80.0
124.3

114.4
112.8
108.1
113.6
104.9
102.2
101.4
108.7
113.2
121.1
86.3
118.7
119.6
112.4
78.7
124.8

115.0
113.2
108.6
114.0
105.7
103.4
101.4
109.4
113.4
121.4
85.8
119.3
120.3
113.5
77.9
125.2

115.5
113.9
109.2
114.6
106.6
104.9
102.5
110.5
113.9
121.7
86.7
119.9
120.8
114.3
79.7
125.6

92.0
30.9

89.0
29.9

89.6
30.1

89.3
30.0

88.9
29.9

88.7
29.8

88.2
29.6

87.8
29.5

87.6
29.4

87.4
29.4

87.5
29.4

87.3
29.3

87.2
29.3

86.8
29.2

86.4
29.0

31.

Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: ail items

(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Urban Wage Earners

All Urban Consumers
Area1

Pricing Other
sche­ index
base
dule2

May

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

Apr.

May

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

M

112.7

113.1

115.4

115.7

116.0

116.5

117.1

111.6

111.9

114.2

114.5

114.7

115.1

115.7

M

115.0

115.4

118.3

118.9

119.2

119.6

120.4

114.1

114.5

117.4

117.9

118.1

118.4

119.2

118.5

119.3

R e g io n a n d a r e a s iz e 3

Size A - More than
1 200 000 .............................
Size B - 500,000 to
1 200,000 .............................
Size C - 50,000 to
500,000 ................................
Size A - More than
1 200 000 .............................
Size B - 360,000 to
1 200 000 .............................
Size C - 50,000 to
360,000 ................................
Size D - Nonmetro­
politan (less

M

115.7

116.2

119.4

120.0

119.9

120.4

121.3

114.1

114.7

117.8

118.1

118.0

M

113.3

113.6

115.6

116.2

117.0

117.5

118.2

112.3

112.6

114.5

115.1

116.0

116.4

117.0

119.6
111.5

119.8
111.8

119.8
112.3

120.7
113.0

Size A - More than
1,250,000 .............................
Size B - 330,000 to
1 250 000 .............................
Size C - 50,000 to
330 000 ................................
Size classes:
A ...........................................
B ...........................................
C ..........................................
D ..........................................

117.2
114.3

118.2
114.9

116.1
109.0

116.3
109.3

118.8
111.4

114.7

115.1

115.7

109.1

109.3

111.4

111.6

112.1

112.5

113.1

113.5

114.2

115.0

108.4

108.5

110.7

110.9

111.1

111.8

112.6

M
M

113.8
110.9

113.8
111.1

116.2
113.3

117.1
113.4

117.2
113.7

M

111.5

111.7

113.9

114.1
113.3

M

111.1

111.1

113.0

M

110.6

111.1

113.6

113.4

113.4

114.6

115.2

109.5

110.0

112.6

112.4

112.3

113.4

114.0

108.9
111.5

109.1
111.8

110.9
114.0

110.6
114.1

110.5
114.4

111.1
114.8

111.8
115.4

108.5
110.9

108.7
111.3

110.7
113.5

110.4
113.6

110.2
113.8

110.6
114.2

111.3
114.7

M

112.4

112.8

114.9

114.9

115.2

115.5

116.0

111.6

112.0

114.2

114.1

114.4

114.7

115.1

M

112.1

112.2

114.5

114.8

115.1

115.8

116.3

110.3

110.5

112.7

112.9

113.0

113.6

114.1

113.3

113.4

114.0

114.5

111.1

111.5

113.3

113.6

113.8

114.3

114.9

112.8
116.7

112.7
116.9

112.7
117.5

113.6
117.9

110.3
112.6

110.9
113.0

113.3
115.0

113.5
115.5

113.4
115.6

113.4
116.2

114.2
116.6

119.2

112.5

113.0

114.8

115.3

115.6

116.2

116.6

112.5

112.9

115.2

116.0

115.7

116.0

_

M
M
Size A - More than
1 200 000 ...........................
Size B - 450,000 to
1 200,000 .............................
Size C - 50,000 to
450 000 ................................
Size D - Nonmetro­
politan (less

1988

1987

1988

1987
Apr.

_

M

110.7

111.1

112.8

M
M

109.6
113.7

110.2
114.1

112.6
116.2

M

114.8

115.3

117.2

117.9

118.2

118.9

115.8

115.6

115.9

M

112.3

112.6

115.0

M

113.3

112.9

116.0

116.0

115.9

116.2

116.8

112.7

112.3

115.4

115.3

115.3

115.6

116.2

102.2
112.2
111.7
110.0

102.5
112.3
111.9
110.5

104.7
114.5
114.2
112.7

105.0
115.0
114.5
112.9

105.3
115.2
114.6
113.1

105.7
115.8
115.1
113.5

106.3
116.4
115.8
114.1

102.2
110.8
112.0
110.2

102.6
111.1
112.2
110.7

104.7
113.2
114.6
113.1

105.0
113.6
114.8
113.2

105.2
113.8
114.9
113.4

105.6
114.3
115.4
113.7

106.1
114.9
116.1
114.3

M

112.8

113.3

115.7

115.3

116.6

116.9

117.1

109.5

109.9

112.2

111.9

112.9

113.2

113.3

M

116.0

116.8

118.5

118.9

119.7

120.6

121.1

113.3

114.1

115.7

115.9

116.6

117.5

118.0

116.6
115.5

117.3
116.4

120.6
118.9

121.3
119.3

121.1
119.3

121.5
119.6

122.6
120.0

115.3
115.3

116.0
116.2

119.1
119.0

119.6
119.3

119.3
119.0

119.7
119.5

120.6
119.8

114.8

115.0

117.4

118.4

117.9

119.1

118.7

113.9

113.9

116.4

117.5

117.0

117.9

117.8

116.2
120.2
109.3
113.8
113.0
117.6

.

117.3
121.8
110.2
114.3
113.8
118.5

_

M
M
M
M

12/86

S e l e c t e d lo c a l a r e a s

Chicago, ILLos Angeles-Long
New York, NYM
M

_

San FranciscoM
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2

_
_

_
_

_
_
_

_

_

_
_

112.2
111.2
106.4
110.8

113.7
115.3
111.6
111.1
111.3
115.3

_
_
_

_

_
_
_

_

113.9
112.6
107.3
113.0

116.8
120.1
113.9
114.5
113.4
118.3
_
_
_

_
_
_
_
_

114.0
113.7
108.0
113.3

117.7
122.1
115.1
115.1
114.2
119.2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

113.2
115.2
107.0
110.3
110.9
114.6

115.4
114.4
108.2
114.5

111.7
108.6
106.1
106.4

-

-

-

-

113.8
109.8
107.4
108.6

-

-

.

113.8
110.9
108.1
108.9

-

_

-

114.8
111.9
108.1
110.1

—

1 Area is the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA), exclu­
sive of farms and military. Area definitions are those established by the Of­
fice of Management and Budget in 1983, except for Boston-Lawrence-Salem, MA-NH Area (excludes Monroe County); and Milwaukee, Wl Area (in­
cludes only the Milwaukee MSA). Definitions do not include revisions made
since 1983.
2 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas;
most other goods and services priced as indicated:.
M - Every month.
1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December.


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

3 Regions are defined as the four Census regions.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI pro­
gram. Because each local index is a small subset of the national index, it
has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more
sampling and other measurement error than the national index. As a result,
local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although
their long-term trends are quite similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI
for use in escalator clauses.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
32.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups

(1982-84 = 100)
Series
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All Items:
Index................................
Percent change...........................
Food and beverages:
Index................................
Percent change............................
Housing:
Index...................................
Percent change..........................
Apparel and upkeep:
Index...................................
Percent change....................................
Transportation:
Index..........................................
Percent change...............................
Medical care:
Index........................................
Percent change...................................
Entertainment:
Index.............................................
Percent change..................................
Other goods and services:
Index...........................................
Percent change...................................
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers:
All items:
Index....................................................
Percent change.................................

98

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

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

72.6
11.3

82.4
13.5

90.9
10.3

96.5
6.2

99.6
3.2

103.9
4.3

107.6
3.6

109.6
1.9

113 6
3.6

79.9
10.7

86.7
8.5

93.5
7.8

97.3
4.1

99.5
2.3

103.2
3.7

105.6
2.3

109.1
3.3

113.5
4.0

70.1
12.3

81.1
15.7

90.4
11.5

96.9
7.2

99.5
2.7

103.6
4.1

107.7
4.0

110.9
3.0

114.2
3.0

84.9
4.3

90.9
7.1

95.3
4.8

97.8
2.6

100.2
2.5

102.1
1.9

105.0
2.8

105.9
.9

110.6
4.4

70.5
14.3

83.1
17.9

93.2
12.2

97.0
4.1

99.3
2.4

103.7
4.4

106.4
2.6

102.3
-3.9

105 4
3.0

67.5
9.2

74.9
11.0

82.9
10.7

92.5
11.6

100.6
8.8

106.8
6.2

113.5
6.3

122.0
7.5

130 1
6.6

76.7
6.7

83.6
9.0

90.1
7.8

96.0
6.5

100.1
4.3

103.8
3.7

107.9
3.9

111.6
3.4

115 3
3.3

68.9
7.2

75.2
9.1

82.6
9.8

91.1
10.3

101.1
11.0

107.9
6.7

114.5
6.1

121.4
6.0

128 5
5.8

73.1
11.4

82.9
13.4

91.4
10.3

96.9
6.0

99.8
3.0

103.3
3.5

106.9
3.5

108.6
1.6

112 5
3.6

33.

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

(1982 = 100)
1988

1987

Annual average
G r o u p in g

F in is h e d g o o d s ........................................................

Finished consumer goods ........................
Finished consumer foods.......................
Finished consumer goods excluding
foods ......................................................
Nondurable goods less food ...............
Durable goods .....................................
Capital equipment.....................................

1986

1987

May

June

July

Aug.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

103.2
101.4
107.3

105.4
103.6
109.5

105.4
103.7
110.6

105.5
103.9
110.6

106.0
104.4
110.9

105.9
104.3
109.5

105.7
104.2
110.5

106.2
104.4
109.7

106.3
104.5
109.8

105.8
104.0
108.9

106.2
104.3
110.6

105.9
104.0
109.4

106.2
104.3
110.0

106.9
105.1
110.2

98.5
93.3
108.9
109.7

100.7
94.9
111.5
111.7

100.3
94.4
111.2
111.6

100.6
94.8
111.2
111.4

101.2
95.7
111.3
111.6

101.8
96.6
110.9
111.7

101.1
96.1
110.0
111.2

101.9
95.8
113.4
112.5

101.9
95.9
113.0
112.5

101.6
95.9
112.2
112.4

101.3
95.3
112.5
112.7

101.3
95.4
112.5
112.9

101.4
95.4
112.7
113.2

102.5
96.9
112.8
113.6

99.1

101.5

100.9

101.5

102.1

102.5

102.7

103.1

103.4

103.6

104.2

104.1

104.6

105.5

105.5
102.7
102.6
106.2
108.7

105.8
101.5
102.9
107.1
108.8

106.3
102.8
103.4
108.1
109.0

107.2
101.9
104.5
110.2
109.3

107.5
100.6
104.9
111.1
109.5

108.1
99.9
105.5
112.9
109.8

109.3
102.0
107.0
114.4
110.3

109.5
101.9
107.6
113.9
110.7

110.4
101.7
109.5
114.5
111.1

111.5
102.8
110.9
116.6
111.4

Sept.

I n t e r m e d i a t e m a t e r ia ls , s u p p lie s , a n d
c o m p o n e n t s ..............................................................

Materials and components for
manufacturing ..........................................
Materials for food manufacturing...........
Materials for nondurable manufacturing .
Materials for durable manufacturing.......
Components for manufacturing..............
Materials and components for
construction..............................................
Processed fuels and lubricants.................
Containers..................................................
Supplies.....................................................
C r u d e m a t e r ia ls f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e s s in g ...

Foodstuffs and feedstuffs........................
Crude nonfood materials.........................

102.2
98.4
98.1
101.2
107.5

105.3
100.8
102.2
106.2
108.8

104.6
102.7
101.3
104.5
108.5

105.1
102.3
102.5
104.9
108.5

108.1
72.7
110.3
105.6

109.8
73.3
114.5
107.7

108.9
72.5
114.0
107.3

109.3
74.5
114.2
107.6

109.8
76.0
114.2
107.8

110.2
77.3
114.4
107.8

110.7
75.9
115.4
108.2

111.2
74.6
116.1
108.8

111.9
74.4
116.5
109.5

112.4
72.9
116.1
109.9

113.5
71.2
116.7
110.6

113.7
70.2
116.9
110.5

114.2
69.7
117.5
111.1

115.0
70.5
118.2
111.7

87.7
93.2
81.6

93.7
96.2
87.9

94.8
101.6
86.4

95.1
99.7
88.0

96.0
98.4
90.3

96.5
97.1
91.8

95.7
96.6
90.8

95.3
96.1
90.5

94.7
95.3
90.1

94.4
95.9
89.2

93.4
96.9
87.1

94.6
99.6
87.3

94.1
99.7
86.4

95.7
101.2
88.0

101.9
63.0
109.7
109.7
110.6

104.0
61.8
112.3
112.5
113.3

103.7
61.6
112.4
112.6
113.0

103.9
62.5
112.3
112.7
112.9

104.3
63.4
112.7
113.1
113.3

104.7
64.9
112.3
112.6
113.4

104.2
63.4
112.4
112.8
113.1

105.1
62.4
113.1
113.4
114.5

105.1
62.5
113.2
113.4
114.5

104.9
61.4
112.9
113.1
114.5

104.7
59.0
113.8
114.2
115.0

104.8
58.4
113.6
113.9
115.3

105.0
58.1
114.0
114.3
115.6

105.8
60.9
114.3
114.5
115.9

111.1

114.2

113.7

113.7

114.2

114.3

114.1

115.6

115.6

115.7

116.3

116.7

117.0

117.2

116.5

116.9

117.3

117.4

117.6

118.4

119.2

119.8

120.2

120.5

S p e c ia l g r o u p in g s

Finished goods, excluding fo o d s.................
Finished energy goods ................................
Finished goods less energy........................
Finished consumer goods less energy.......
Finished goods less food and energy........
Finished consumer goods less food and
energy.........................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and
energy.........................................................
Intermediate materials less foods and
fe e d s...........................................................
Intermediate foods and feeds.....................
Intermediate energy goods .........................
Intermediate goods less energy..................
Intermediate materials less foods and
energy.........................................................
Crude energy materials................................
Crude materials less energy.......................
Crude nonfood materials less energy.........


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

113.1

116.3

115.6

115.7

99.3
96.2
72.6
104.5

101.7
99.2
73.0
107.3

100.9
100.4
72.2
106.7

101.6
100.7
74.1
107.1

102.2
100.7
75.7
107.4

102.7
99.6
77.0
107.7

102.8
101.0
75.6
108.3

103.2
100.6
74.4
109.1

103.6
101.4
74.1
109.5

103.7
102.0
72.7
110.1

104.2
103.1
70.9
110.9

104.2
101.7
70.0
111.1

104.8
102.0
69.4
111.8

105.7
103.5
70.2
112.8

104.9

107.8

107.0

107.5

107.9

108.2

108.7

109.6

110.1

110.6

111.7

111.9

112.8

113.7

71.8
95.4
103.1

75.0
100.9
115.7

74.5
103.5
110.5

75.6
102.8
113.5

77.8
102.4
115.7

78.9
102.3
118.7

76.7
103.0
122.9

75.4
103.6
126.4

74.7
103.1
127.1

73.6
103.7
127.3

70.7
104.8
128.6

70.5
107.2
130.6

68.8
107.9
132.8

70.5
109.2
133.6

99

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

34. Producer Price indexes, by durability of product
(1982 = 100)
Annual average

1987

1988

G r o u p in g

1986

1987

May

June

July

Aug.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

Total durable g oods.....................................
Total nondurable goods...............................

107.5
94.8

109.9
97.5

109.2
97.6

109.3
98.2

109.7
98.8

110.0
99.0

110.2
98.8

111.4
98.5

111.7
98.6

112.0
98.3

112.6
98.5

112.8
98.5

113.2
98.7

113.8
99.8

Total manufactures......................................
Durable......................................................
Nondurable ................................................

101.7
107.5
96.0

104.4
109.6
99.2

104.0
109.1
98.9

104.3
109.1
99.5

104.8
109.4
100.1

105.1
109.7
100.5

105.1
109.7
100.4

105.8
110.9
100.7

106.0
111.1
100.9

106.0
111.4
100.6

106.5
112.0
101.0

106.5
112.1
101.0

107.0
112.5
101.6

107.8
113.1
102.6

Total raw or slightly processed goods .......
Durable......................................................
Nondurable................................................

92.3
107.8
91.5

94.2
122.6
92.9

94.8
114.6
93.8

95.4
118.6
94.2

96.2
121.8
95.0

96.2
125.7
94.7

95.9
130.9
94.3

94.9
137.3
92.9

94.7
138.0
92.6

94.5
138.3
92.4

94.1
139.5
92.0

94.2
143.4
91.9

93.8
145.7
91.4

94.9
146.6
92.5

Sept.

35. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1982=100)
In d e x

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

100.0
100.0
100.0

101.6
101.3
102.8

103.7
103.3
105.2

104.7
103.8
107.5

103.2
101.4
109.7

F in is h e d g o o d s :

Total ....................................................................
Consumer goods.............................................
Capital equipment ...........................................

69.8
69.4
71.3

77.6
77.5
77.5

88.0
88.6
85.8

96.1
96.6
94.6

I n t e r m e d i a t e m a te r ia ls , s u p p lie s , a n d
c o m p o n e n ts :

Total ....................................................................
Materials and components for
manufacturing.................................................
Materials and components for construction ....
Processed fuels and lubricants......................
Containers.......................................................
Supplies...........................................................

69.5

78.4

90.3

98.6

100.0

100.6

103.1

102.7

99.1

72.0
76.5
49.9
71.0
72.9

80.9
84.2
61.6
79.4
80.2

91.7
91.3
85.0
89.1
89.9

98.7
97.9
100.6
96.7
96.9

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.2
102.8
95.4
100.4
101.8

104.1
105.6
95.7
105.9
104.1

103.3
107.3
92.8
109.0
104.4

102.2
108.1
72.7
110.3
105.6

73.4
87.3
57.5
48.2

85.9
100.0
69.6
57.3

95.3
104.6
84.6
69.4

103.0
103.9
101.8
84.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.3
101.8
100.7
105.1

103.5
104.7
102.2
105.1

95.8
94.8
96.9
102.7

87.7
93.2
81.6
92.2

C r u d e m a t e r ia ls f o r fu r t h e r p ro c e s s in g :

Total ....................................................................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs...............................
Nonfood materials except fuel .......................
Fuel ..................................................................

Digitized100
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

36. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(June 1977=100, unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o r y

1974
SITO

(9 /8 3 -1 0 0 )...............................................................

1985
Sept.

1986

Dec.

Mar.

June

99.6

99.7

99.4

99.1

1987

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

1988

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

102.2

102.8

104.9

106.4

97.9

99.0

99.9

(3 /8 3 =10 0 )........................................................................................
Meat (3 /8 3 -1 0 0 ).................................................................................
Fish (3/83 —100) .......................................................................................
Grain and grain preparations (3/80=100) ...............................................
Vegetables and fruit (3/83=100) .............................................................
Feedstuffs for animals (3/83 —100)..........................................................
Misc. food products (3 /8 3 -1 0 0 )..............................................................

0
01
03
04
05
08
09

97.3
99 7
100.7
93.8
104.8
101.7
99.9

100 7
103 6
100.6
98.8
98.2
114.0
99.5

97 2
102 5
100.2
91.7
98.6
120.0
98.0

97 1
105 2
108.6
89.0
108.6
114.8
97.0

86 0
1113
111.9
66.3
114.6
123.9
98.7

90 1

87 3

115.9
72.5
117.5
119.7
99.9

117.1
68.3
115.3
117.0
100.1

125.8
71.0
112.4
123.8
100.6

131.1
67.8
101.1
123.1
100.3

138.5
77.4
100.5
145.2
100.3

139.7
79.8
97.5
134.6
102.3

(6/83—100).......................................................
Beverages (9/83 = 100).............................................................................
Tobacco and tobacco products (6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 )...........................................

1
11
12

100.2
100.2

99.4
99.5

96.6
96.3

97.4
97.1

97.3
97.0

102.6
102.6

102.6
102.6

105.0
105.0

105.5
_
105.5

107.0
_
107.0

109.6
_
109.8

(6 /8 3 -1 0 0 ).....................................................................
Raw hides and skins (6/80 = 1 00)............................................................
Oilseeds and oleaginous fruit (9 /7 7 =10 0 )...............................................
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaimed) (9 /8 3 = 10 0 )...............
W ood..........................................................................................................
Pulp and waste paper (6/83 = 100) ..........................................................
Textile fibers...............................................................................................
Crude fertilizers and minerals...................................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap ..........................................................

2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

98.3
100.8
94.9
100.6
98.0
97.3
101.7
100.8
97.4

98.1
110.0
94.7
99.7
101.9
96.7
96.4
99.2
94.8

101.4
108.7
99.1
99.7
101.5
104.2
100.2
100.0
100.3

102.2
117.1
98.1
99.9
101.2
116.4
98.0
98.4
98.0

99.6
108.3
97.5
99.6
102.9
129.0
73.0
98.0
100.4

102.4
115.9
95.2
98.9
107.9
129.4
90.9
96.8
96.8

105.7
131.9
90.4
99.9
111.2
144.2
97.8
94.4
98.8

114.5
149.6
101.6
101.0
116.2
149.9
112.4
94.0
107.0

118.7
147.7
95.1
102.8
141.7
153.0
116.5
91.6
117.4

125.2
157.1
109.6
105.3
146.0
160.4
111.6
91.6
125.9

129.7
171.4
115.6
104.5
150.2
169.6
107.5
92.4
131.0

M in e r a l f u e l s ..............................................................................................................................

3

99.5

97.0

83.6

76.8

77.4

77.8

81.3

82.8

84.6

82.5

79.4

A n im a l a n d v e g e t a b l e s o ils , fa ts , a n d w a x e s ......................................................

Fixed vegetable oils and fats (6/83—100)...............................................

4
42

91.2
93.3

82.5
80.3

74.3
71.3

67.7
70.6

62.1
60.2

71.8
64.6

73.9
67.3

78.8
71.9

78.5
71.2

81.6
75.4

92.7
85.7

C h e m ic a ls

(3 /8 3 -1 0 0 )...............................................................................
Organic chemicals (12/83-100) ..............................................................
Fertilizers, manufactured (3/83 —100)......................................................

5
51
56

100.2
101.0
99.9

99.6
99.2
100.5

99.8
98.5
98.9

98.0
93.1
93.0

95.7
91.6
85.1

95.2
92.4
77.4

99.6
101.9
85.6

106.7
118.4
91.6

107.7
116.1
100.9

112.9
123.5
106.5

117.9
135.1
110.6

I n t e r m e d i a t e m a n u f a c t u r e d p r o d u c ts ( 9 / 8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................

6
61
62
64
67
68
69

99.8
97.0
99.5
99.2
99.7
99.3
100.0

99.8
98.0
99.7
97.9
100.9
98.9
100.2

101.3
97.3
100.7
100.5
100.3
104.2
100.4

102.5
103.8
100.1
104.7
100.2
103.1
100.8

103.8
104.2
100.5
109.1
102.3
105.3
100.8

104.2
107.8
100.9
110.8
101.9
102.6
100.8

106.4
123.6
102.0
114.7
102.9
106.6
101.5

107.9
126.9
102.5
117.0
102.9
113.0
101.3

110.3
128.7
103.9
120.1
100.7
123.0
102.3

111.2
118.0
104.1
122.4
102.9
124.4
103.4

114.4
125.7
105.2
126.2
106.1
134.0
104.5

7
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79

100.1
100.1
100.2
100.4
100.4
99.7
99.9
100.0
100.1
100.8

100.2
101.3
100.4
101.3
100.4
99.1
100.1
98.9
100.9
101.1

100.7
102.3
100.6
101.9
100.9
99.9
99.2
99.5
101.0
102.1

100.8
102.4
100.3
102.0
101.6
99.0
98.9
99.2
101.7
103.1

101.0
102.5
100.4
103.0
102.5
98.8
99.7
99.7
101.9
102.8

101.6
103.7
100.6
104.2
103.3
98.2
101.3
100.3
103.3
103.5

101.7
104.6
100.0
105.8
104.2
96.0
101.9
101.7
103.1
104.5

101.8
103.7
100.1
106.7
104.5
96.1
101.4
102.1
103.5
105.5

102.1
104.8
100.5
107.8
104.6
95.7
101.4
102.5
103.8
105.8

102.4
105.2
100.9
108.2
105.4
95.5
101.9
101.8
104.6
106.6

103.2
107.1
102.1
109.3
107.0
95.8
102.3
103.1
104.5
107.4

8
84
87

100.1
100.5

100.3
100.6

102.3
102.0

103.5
103.1

103.4
103.0

103.8
103.5

104.6
_
104.4

105.2
105.5

105.4
_
106.3

105.6

_

106.8

107.1

109.4

88

99.2

100.1

101.9

102.6

102.4

102.1

102.7

102.5

99.0

97.9

97.6

Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s...............................................

89

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

G o ld , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................

971

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

A L L C O M M O D IT IE S
Food

B e v e r a g e s a n d to b a c c o

C r u d e m a t e r ia ls

Leather and furskins (9 /7 9 = 10 0 ).............................................................
Rubber manufactures ...............................................................................
Paper and paperboard products (6 /7 8 = 10 0 )..........................................
Iron and steel (3/82=100) .......................................................................
Nonferrous metals (9/81-100) ................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s. (3/82=100) ..................................................

M a c h in e r y a n d t r a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t , e x c lu d in g m ilit a r y

(12/78-100) ...................................................
Power generating machinery and equipment (12/78 —100) ....................
Machinery specialized for particular industries (9/78=100) ....................
Metalworking machinery (6/78=100) ......................................................
General industrial machines and parts n.e.s. 9 /7 8 -1 0 0 ).......................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment ...................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing equipment.......
Electrical machinery and equipment.........................................................
Road vehicles and parts (3/80—100)......................................................
Other transport equipment, excl. military and commercial aviation.......

a n d c o m m e r c ia l a ir c r a f t

O t h e r m a n u f a c t u r e d a r t i c l e s ....................................................................

Apparel (9 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ).................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and apparatus........
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches and
clocks (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )................................................................................

_

- Data not available.


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

101

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

37. U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(June 1977=100, unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o r y

1974
SITC

(9 /8 2 -1 0 0 )...............................................................

1986
Mar.

June

1987

Sept.

Dec.

1988

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

98.6

98.7

101.1

102.3

106.5

110.0

110.9

112.7

114.1

(9 /7 7 -1 0 0 )........................................................................................
M e a t...........................................................................................................
Dairy products and eggs (6/81 =100) ....................................................
Fish.............................................................................................................
Bakery goods, pasta products, grain and grain preparations
(9/77-100) ..............................................................................................
Fruits and vegetables ...............................................................................
Sugar, sugar preparations, and honey (3 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ).................................
Coffee, tea, cocoa.....................................................................................

0
01
02
03

113.7
98.7
108.0
107.0

107.3
96.0
108.7
110.5

112.0
104.3
111.3
114.1

109.1
109.2
113.8
119.1

105.2
105.0
119.3
121.8

108.3
108.0
122.3
126.0

109.1
114.4
121.7
130.4

112.5
113.4
125.1
131.0

114.1
111.5
125.6
132.5

04
05
06
07

110.4
97.6
106.8
143.7

112.5
100.0
104.6
117.2

117.8
106.0
106.2
121.5

118.8
104.3
106.5
104.9

122.3
101.9
107.4
89.9

126.2
110.1
109.6
87.0

124.8
110.0
109.0
85.1

130.7
116.2
107.0
90.6

135.8
115.4
109.6
94.3

B e v e r a g e s a n d t o b a c c o ....................................................................................................

1
11

103.4
104.4

105.2
106.1

103.9
107.5

106.8
109.5

107.8
112.1

112.8
114.2

112.2
114.8

113.5
116.2

116.0
118.7

Crude rubber (inc. synthetic & reclaimed) (3/84—100)...........................
Wood (9/81-100) ....................................................................................
Pulp and waste paper (12/81 = 1 0 0 )........................................................
Crude fertilizers and crude minerals (12/83-100) ..................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap (3 /8 4 -1 0 0 ).....................................
Crude vegetable and animal materials, n.e.s.............................................

2
23
24
25
27
28
29

103.2
104.8
101.8
94.1
99.5
112.1
111.4

106.4
99.5
104.3
100.3
99.0
121.6
111.3

109.5
97.7
107.6
108.0
98.4
124.8
112.4

109.1
98.4
104.8
116.9
98.6
118.3
111.9

115.1
98.4
113.5
127.0
98.2
122.8
113.0

116.2
103.7
110.2
132.0
99.6
124.5
109.0

120.3
110.7
117.4
133.4
99.2
128.7
107.6

122.1
120.1
108.8
141.0
99.9
137.9
118.3

129.2
121.7
112.4
151.0
100.4
151.2
135.8

(6/82 —100)..................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products (6/82=100) ......................................

3
33

60.8
58.4

51.5
49.0

52.2
50.0

55.9
55.0

67.4
67.4

74.1
74.4

74.3
75.2

67.2
67.8

61.8
62.0

(9/83 —100) ..........................................................................
Vegetable oils (9/83—100).......................................................................

4
42

68.3
-

66.7
-

61.2
-

83.4
-

82.9
-

87.9
-

96.4
-

102.1
-

106.4
-

(9 /8 2 -1 0 0 )...............................................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products (3/84—100) ..............................
Manufactured fertilizers (3/84 —100)........................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s. (9 /8 4 -1 0 0 )..............................

5
54
56
59

100.3
109.5
91.4
108.8

99.7
111.2
93.0
110.1

99.8
115.9
89.8
111.3

99.0
113.6
89.9
112.7

102.6
120.1
92.9
115.1

104.8
123.4
94.6
117.7

105.6
124.3
109.3
120.6

110.1
126.3
133.6
124.8

114.2
135.3
133.7
138.7

(12/77-100) ..............................
Leather and furskins..................................................................................
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s........................................................................
Cork and wood manufactures ...................................................................
Paper and paperboard products ...............................................................
Textiles.......................................................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s...................................................
Iron and steel (9/78-100) .......................................................................
Nonferrous metals (12/81 = 100) ..............................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s..........................................................................

6
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69

102.1
105.3
100.2
108.0
100.5
103.9
106.9
99.1
98.0
104.8

103.6
106.3
101.2
111.0
100.8
105.4
110.5
98.9
98.9
107.9

105.8
108.8
102.0
112.7
101.0
107.4
116.6
100.0
103.3
107.7

106.7
107.2
101.8
117.4
104.9
107.9
117.9
100.9
101.5
108.3

108.6
110.9
104.3
118.0
104.8
110.4
120.5
102.7
102.5
112.1

112.5
116.6
104.6
124.3
104.9
111.8
126.7
106.6
112.4
112.7

116.3
117.8
103.2
128.3
110.3
114.6
130.4
109.4
120.9
114.6

121.3
124.4
104.6
128.2
112.3
118.6
133.4
114.0
135.7
117.8

125.4
131.8
106.0
133.8
117.2
120.0
137.4
120.0
139.4
121.1

= 1 0 0 ) ...........................................
Machinery specialized for particular industries (9/78=100) ....................
Metalworking machinery (3/80—100) ......................................................
General industrial machinery and parts, n.e.s. (6/81=100) ....................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment
(3 /8 0 -1 0 0 ).............................................................................................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing apparatus
(3 /8 0 -1 0 0 ).............................................................................................
Electrical machinery and equipment (12/81 = 100) ..................................
Road vehicles and parts (6 /8 1 -1 0 0 )......................................................

7
72
73
74

107.0
113.2
113.6
111.2

110.4
116.9
113.0
116.2

113.0
122.7
117.7
119.9

114.4
123.0
120.9
120.9

117.5
130.4
126.4
127.9

119.9
136.1
128.1
130.8

119.9
134.3
130.2
130.1

123.1
142.1
135.5
137.0

125.2
146.8
138.5
140.3

75

104.8

109.1

109.9

108.9

110.0

114.0

114.8

118.3

117.9

76
77
78

102.8
103.1
107.9

106.4
106.4
110.8

109.2
108.8
112.9

108.9
109.8
116.1

110.5
112.4
118.6

110.3
115.8
120.5

110.2
115.1
120.6

112.1
118.2
122.6

112.8
122.4
125.2

8
81
82
84
85

105.1
105.7
107.1
100.4
107.1

106.8
108.6
108.0
100.7
108.0

109.7
111.1
110.7
101.7
110.7

110.3
110.8
112.3
102.6
112.3

114.5
111.6
114.8
106.4
114.8

117.8
117.0
119.8
109.2
119.8

118.5
116.2
119.0
111.9
119.0

121.8
121.0
124.3
112.3
124.3

124.1
123.4
125.4
115.0
125.4

A L L C O M M O D IT IE S
Food

Beverages .................................................................................................
C r u d e m a t e r i a l s .......................................................................................................................

F u e ls a n d r e la te d p r o d u c ts

F a ts a n d o ils

C h e m ic a ls

I n t e r m e d i a t e m a n u fa c t u r e d p r o d u c ts

M a c h in e r y a n d tr a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t ( 6 / 8 1

(3/80—100).................................................
Plumbing, heating, and lighting fixtures (6/80—100) ...............................
Furniture and parts (6/80—100) ...............................................................
Clothing (9/77-100) .................................................................................
Footwear....................................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
apparatus (12/79 —100)...........................................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
clocks (3 /8 0 -1 0 0 )..................................................................................
Mise, manufactured articles, n.e.s. (6/82—1 00)......................................

87

112.1

117.9

122.6

122.5

131.3

135.9

132.7

138.7

140.0

88
89

110.5
-

113.8

118.0

119.0
-

123.7
-

126.0
-

122.1
-

127.3
-

129.2
-

G o ld , n o n - m o n e t a r y ( 6 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................

971

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

M ls c . m a n u fa c t u r e d a r tic le s

- Data not available.


102
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

-

-

-

38.

U.S. export price indexes by end-use category

(September 1983 = 100 unless otherwise indicated)

C a te g o r y

Foods, feeds, and beverages .......................................................
Raw materials.................................................................................
Capital goods (12/82=100)..........................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines (12/82=100) ................
Consumer goods............................................................................
Durables......................................................................................
Nondurables.................................................................................

39.

Percentage
of 1980
trade
value

1986

Mar.

16.294
30.696
30.186
7.483
7.467
3.965
3.501

June

96.7
97.7
100.6
101.2
102.2
101.1
103.7

1987

Sept.

96.2
96.0
100.6
101.9
103.3
102.8
103.7

Dec.

87.2
95.1
100.7
102.3
103.6
102.9
103.8

Mar.

90.2
96.3
101.1
103.5
105.2
104.9
104.3

June

87.4
100.8
101.4
103.4
105.9
105.5
105.4

1988

Sept.

91.5
106.1
101.6
103.6
106.3
106.6
104.3

Dec.

88.0
109.1
101.8
104.0
106.9
107.3
104.6

Mar.

96.6
111.8
102.1
104.5
108.0
107.9
106.3

98.4
114.2
103.3
104.3
110.1
110.5
107.4

U.S. import price indexes by end-use category

(December 1982=100)

C a te g o r y

Foods, feeds, and beverages ...............................................
Petroleum and petroleum products, excl. natural g a s ..................
Raw materials, excluding petroleum .............................................
Raw materials, nondurable.........................................................
Raw materials, durable................................................................
Capital goods.............................................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines.......................................
Consumer goods............................................................................
Durable ....................................................................................
Nondurable...................................................................................

Per­
centage
of 1980
trade
value

1986

Mar.

7.477
31.108
19.205
9.391
9.814
13.164
11.750
14.250
5.507
8.743

June

1987
Sept.

Dec.

111.0
58.5

106.1
49.1

109.8
50.0

-

_

_

_

Mar.

108.4
54.7

_

_

_

_

_
_

106.7
107.7
104.9

110.7
110.4
107.1

113.5
112.7
110.1

114.2
114.6
110.5

_

_

_

_

-

-

-

-

June

1988

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

105.2
67.2

107.8
74.1

109.0
74.7

112.1
67.6

113.7
61.9

118.7
116.5
114.2

122.2
118.4
116.9

121.9
118.4
118.2

126.6
120.6
121.4

128.5
123.7
124.2

-

-

-

-

-

_

- Data not available.

40.

U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
1986

1987

In d u s tr y g r o u p

Mar.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products (6/83 = 100) ............
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
(6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 )........................................
Furniture and fixtures (9/83=100) ......................
Paper and allied products (3 /8 1 = 1 0 0 )........................
Chemicals and allied products (12/84=100)..........
Petroleum and coal products (1 2/8 3= 1 0 0 )..................
Primary metal products (3/82=100) ..........................
Machinery, except electrical (9 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ).........................
Electrical machinery (12/80=100) .........................
Transportation equipment (12/7 8=1 0 0 )...................
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
(6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 )........................................................

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

1988
Sept.

Dec.

98.0

97.2

97.4

100.2

102.0

107.4

107 1

116 3

103.6
103.0
91.8
99.2
75.4
102.6
100.5
99.6
103.8

103.4
103.7
97.9
98.0
61.8
102.6
100.1
99.5
104.7

104.8
104.0
102.3
95.8
65.1
109.3
100.1
99.9
104.8

108.8
104.1
104.9
95.8
67.6
106.9
100.1
100.8
106.0

112.8
108.0
109.3
100.5
73.5
110.6
99.6
101.9
106.2

116.2
108.6
112.3
107.6
80.5
117.2
99.4
102.1
106.7

138.9
108 7
115.5
108 7
81.4
122.3
99 4
102.5
106 9

142 5
111 2
119 3
113 fi

102 2
107 fi

103.4

104.5

104.7

105.3

105.8

106.8

106.6

107.1

Mar.

78 8

126 6
99 7

108.7

1 SIC - based classification.


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

103

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
41.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
1988

1987

1986
In d u s tr y g r o u p

Mar.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products (6/77—100) .................................
Textile mill products (9/82—100).............................................
Apparel and related products (6/77—100)..............................
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
(6/77-100) ............................................................................
Furniture and fixtures (6/80—100)...........................................
Paper and allied products (6 /7 7 -1 0 0 )....................................
Chemicals and allied products (9/82—1 00 )............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products
(1 2 /8 0 -1 0 0 )..........................................................................
Leather and leather products ...................................................
Primary metal products (6/81—100) .......................................
Fabricated metal products (1 2 /8 4 -1 0 0 ).................................
Machinery, except electrical (3 /8 0 -1 0 0 )................................
Electrical machinery (9/84—100).............................................
Transportation equipment (6/81—1 00 )....................................
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
(1 2 /7 9 -1 0 0 )..........................................................................
Miscellaneous manufactured commodities
(9/82-100) ............................................................................

Sept.

June

Mar.

Dec.

June

Sept.

Mar.

Dec.

98.0
104.6
100.5

97.3
106.8
101.2

99.7
109.2
102.4

103.0
110.6
103.0

103.8
114.1
107.0

106.3
116.1
109.4

108.4
119.4
112.3

110.6
124.3
113.4

114.0
127.4
116.2

103.7
107.2
96.4
100.6

106.3
109.4
97.3
103.3

109.0
111.4
98.6
104.3

109.0
111.6
103.3
102.6

114.8
116.1
105.1
105.7

115.0
117.0
105.9
106.2

120.3
118.3
110.9
107.2

115.4
118.9
113.6
112.2

119.5
122.2
119.1
116.8

103.6
102.4
96.5
107.2
111.1
100.9
109.8

105.3
103.2
97.1
110.5
114.9
104.3
112.8

106.6
105.3
102.3
111.1
118.2
106.9
114.7

107.9
106.4
101.3
111.7
118.9
107.0
117.3

110.6
109.3
102.7
116.7
123.4
109.4
119.9

113.6
113.3
110.4
117.5
127.4
110.7
122.1

112.3
113.3
115.2
119.8
127.8
110.2
122.5

115.7
118.4
123.8
123.2
133.9
112.5
124.6

117.2
120.7
125.2
127.7
135.8
114.8
127.0

112.6

117.8

122.6

122.4

128.8

132.5

128.8

134.0

135.7

102.4

104.7

110.7

112.2

115.1

118.1

121.4

123.8

127.7

1 SIC - based classification.

42.

Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted

(1977 = 100)
Quarterly Indexes

IV

110.1
187.3
100.3
170.2
168.6
169.6

111.3
189.1
100.3
169.8
172.2
170.7

110.9
190.6
100.2
171.8
170.8
171.4

111.1
192.2
100.2
173.0
170.2
172.0

107.6
184.9
100.2
171.8
167.4
170.3

108.0
186.3
99.7
172.5
169.2
171.4

109.1
187.9
99.7
172.2
173.0
172.5

108.8
189.5
99.6
174.1
171.8
173.3

109.1
191.1
99.7
175.2
171.3
173.8

110.5
181.0
99.4
168.7
163.8
183.2
127.7
163.7
163.8

109.7
180.8
98.0
169.7
164.8
184.1
132.2
165.9
165.2

109.9
182.0
97.5
170.9
165.6
186.6
132.9
167.8
166.3

110.8
183.3
97.2
171.0
165.5
187.3
142.1
171.4
167.5

110.5
184.8
97.1
172.5
167.2
188.0
137.0
170.2
168.2

129.8
184.3
101.2
142.0

130.8
183.9
99.6
140.5

132.9
184.8
98.9
139.0

134.1
185.4
98.3
138.2

134.3
186.3
97.9
138.7

III

IV

109.5
180.7
100.1
165.0
163.1
164.3

109.7
182.2
101.3
166.2
163.9
165.4

109.6
183.6
101.5
167.5
165.7
166.9

109.6
185.2
101.7
169.0
162.4
166.7

109.7
185.8
100.7
169.4
166.0
168.2

105.9
178.3
99.2
168.3
160.8
165.7

107.7
180.0
99.8
167.2
164.7
166.4

107.7
181.3
100.8
168.4
165.2
167.3

107.5
182.6
100.9
169.8
167.0
168.8

107.5
184.4
101.2
171.5
163.9
168.8

109.2
173.8
97.6
163.7
159.1
177.5
142.5
165.2
161.2

108.9
175.7
97.8
166.0
161.4
179.4
128.7
161.6
161.5

109.8
177.2
98.2
166.3
161.5
180.7
129.7
162.8
161.9

109.7
178.4
99.2
167.2
162.6
180.6
129.5
162.7
162.7

109.9
179.5
99.2
168.5
163.2
184.2
130.6
165.4
164.0

125.3
178.0
100.0
142.1

126.1
180.2
100.3
142.9

127.6
181.0
100.3
141.9

128.4
182.1
101.3
141.8

129.3
183.1
101.2
141.7

IV

108.2
177.0
99.5
163.6
161.8
163.0

107.9
179.3
99.7
166.1
160.2
164.0

106.4
176.2
99.0
165.7
163.4
164.9

I

I

II

I

III

II

III

1988

1987

1986

1985

Item

B u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Unit labor c o s ts .....................................................
Unit nonlabor payments .......................................
Implicit price d eflator............................................

N o n f a r m b u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per h our........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Unit labor c o s ts ....................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.......................................
Implicit price deflator ............................................

N o n f ln a n c la l c o r p o r a t io n s :

Output per hour of all employees........................
Compensation per h our........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Total unit costs...................... ,.............................
Unit labor c o s ts ..................................................
Unit nonlabor co sts ............................................
Unit profits.............................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.......................................
Implicit price deflator............................................

-

“

M a n u fa c tu r in g :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Unit labor c o s ts ....................................................
- Data not available.


104
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

135.3
188.1
98.1
139.0

43.

Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years

(1977=100)
Item

1960

1970

1973

1976

1978

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

P r iv a t e b u s in e s s

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons..........................
Output per unit of capital services.....................
Multifactor productivity.....................................
O utput.................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons..........................................
Capital services ..........................................
Combined units of labor and capital inp u t........
Capital per hour of all persons.............................

67.3
102.1
78.1
55.3

88.4
101.9
92.9
80.2

95.9
105.3
99.1
93.0

98.4
97.2
98.0
94.5

100.8
102.0
101.2
105.8

99.2
94.2
97.4
106.6

100.6
92.4
97.7
108.9

100.3
86.7
95.3
105.4

103.1
88.4
97.7
109.9

105.7
92.8
101.0
119.2

107.6
92.8
102.2
124.0

109.7
92 8
103.4
128.1

82.2
54.2
70.8
65.9

90.8
78.7
86.3
86.7

96.9
88.3
93.8
91.1

96.1
97.2
96.5
101.2

105.0
103.8
104.5
98.8

107.5
113.1
109.4
105.3

108.2
117.8
111.5
108.8

105.2
121.7
110.7
115.7

106.7
124.4
112.6
116.6

112.8
128.5
118.1
113.9

115.2
133.6
121.3
116.0

116.8
138.0
123.8
118.2

70.7
103.6
80.9
54.4

89.2
102.8
93.7
79.9

96.4
106.0
99.6
92.9

98.5
97.3
98.1
94.4

100.8
101.9
101.2
106.0

98.7
93.4
96.9
106.6

99.6
91.1
96.7
108.4

99.1
85.1
94.1
104.8

102.5
87.3
97.0
110.1

104.7
91.3
99.9
119.3

105.9
90.8
100.5
123.7

107.6
90 5
101.4
127.6

77.0
52.5
67.3
68.2

89.6
77.8
85.3
86.8

96.3
87.6
93.3
91.0

95.8
97.0
96.2
101.3

105.1
104.0
104.7
98.9

108.0
114.1
110.0
105.6

108.8
119.0
112.2
109.4

105.7
123.2
111.4
116.5

107.4
126.1
113.5
117.4

114.0
130.6
119.4
114.6

116.8
136.3
123.1
116.7

118.5
141.0
125.8
119.0

62.2
102.5
71.9
52.5

80.8
98.6
85.2
78.6

93.4
111.4
97.9
96.3

97.1
96.2
96.8
93.1

101.5
102.1
101.7
106.0

101.4
91.2
98.7
103.2

103.6
89.2
99.8
104.8

105.9
81.8
99.2
98.4

112.0
86.9
105.1
104.7

118.1
95.7
112.2
117.5

124.2
97.8
117.0
122.5

128.8
99.3
120.6
125.9

84.4
51.2
73.0
60.7

97.3
79.7
92.2
82.0

103.1
86.4
98.4
83.8

95.9
96.7
96.1
100.9

104.4
103.7
104.2
99.4

101.7
113.1
104.5
111.2

101.1
117.5
105.0
116.2

92.9
120.3
99.2
129.4

93.5
120.6
99.7
129.0

99.5
122.8
104.7
123.5

98.7
125.3
104.8
127.0

97.8
126.8
104.4
129.7

P r iv a t e n o n f a r m b u s in e s s

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons..........................
Output per unit of capital services....................
Multifactor productivity.......................................
O utput..........................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...........................................
Capital services .................................................
Combined units of labor and capital inp u t........
Capital per hour of all persons.............................

M a n u f a c t u r in g

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons..........................
Output per unit of capital services.....................
Multifactor productivity.......................................
O utput..................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons.........................................
Capital services ................................................
Combined units of labor and capital inputs......
Capital per hour of all persons.............................


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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

44.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

International Comparison Data

Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years

(1977=100)
1960

Item

1970

1973

1976

1978

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

B u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Unit labor c o s ts ....................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.......................................
Implicit price deflator............................................

67.6
33.6
68.9
49.7
46.4
48.5

88.4
57.8
90.3
65.4
59.4
63.2

95.9
70.9
96.8
73.9
72.5
73.4

98.3
92.8
98.8
94.3
93.3
94.0

100.8
108.5
100.9
107.6
106.7
107.3

99.3
131.5
96.7
132.5
118.7
127.6

100.7
143.7
95.8
142.7
134.6
139.8

100.3
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.6
148.1

103.0
161.5
98.2
156.7
146.4
153.0

105.6
168.0
98.0
159.1
156.5
158.2

107.5
175.9
99.1
163.6
160.3
162.4

109.5
182.8
101.1
166.9
163.8
165.8

110.5
188.2
100.4
170.3
169.4
170.0

71.0
35.3
72.3
49.7
46.3
48.5

89.3
58.2
90.9
65.2
60.0
63.4

96.4
71.2
97.2
73.9
69.3
72.3

98.5
92.8
98.9
94.3
93.0
93.8

100.8
108.6
100.9
107.7
105.6
107.0

98.8
131.3
96.6
132.9
118.5
127.8

99.8
143.6
95.8
144.0
133.5
140.3

99.2
154.8
97.2
156.0
136.5
149.2

102.5
161.5
98.3
157.6
148.3
154.3

104.6
167.8
97.9
160.4
156.4
159.0

105.8
175.2
98.7
165.6
161.3
164.1

107.5
182.0
100.6
169.3
165.2
167.8

108.4
187.1
99.8
172.7
170.4
171.9

73.4
36.9
75.5
49.4
50.2
47.0
59.8
51.5
50.7

91.1
59.2
92.5
64.8
65.0
64.2
52.3
60.1
63.3

97.5
71.6
97.7
72.7
73.4
70.7
65.6
68.9
71.9

98.4
92.9
98.9
94.8
94.3
96.2
89.4
93.8
94.2

100.6
108.4
100.8
107.3
107.8
105.7
102.0
104.4
106.6

99.1
131.1
96.4
133.4
132.3
136.7
85.2
118.6
127.6

99.6
143.3
95.5
147.7
143.8
159.1
98.1
137.8
141.7

100.4
154.3
96.9
159.5
153.8
176.4
78.5
142.1
149.8

103.5
159.9
97.3
159.5
154.5
174.3
110.9
152.1
153.7

106.0
165.8
96.7
160.8
156.5
173.6
136.5
160.6
157.9

108.2
172.8
97.3
164.4
159.7
178.3
133.9
162.7
160.7

109.9
178.9
98.9
167.7
162.8
182.2
129.3
163.7
163.1

110.2
182.7
97.5
171.0
165.8
186.5
136.1
168.9
166.8

62.2
36.5
74.8
58.7
60.0
59.1

80.8
57.4
89.6
71.0
64.1
69.0

93.4
68.8
93.9
73.7
70.7
72.8

97.1
92.1
98.1
94.9
93.5
94.5

101.5
108.2
100.6
106.6
101.9
105.2

101.4
132.4
97.4
130.6
97.8
121.0

103.6
145.2
96.8
140.1
111.8
131.8

105.9
157.5
98.9
148.7
114.0
138.6

112.0
162.4
98.8
145.0
128.5
140.2

118.1
168.0
98.0
142.2
138.6
141.2

124.2
176.9
99.6
142.4
134.7
140.2

128.8
182.7
101.0
141.8
137.9
140.7

133.1
185.1
98.7
139.1
-

N o n f a r m b u s in e s s :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r........................ .......
Unit labor c o s ts ....................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.......................................
Implicit price deflator .............................................

N o n f ln a n c ia l c o r p o r a t io n s :

Output per hour of all employees........................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Total unit costs.....................................................

Unit nonlabor payments .......................................
Implicit price deflator ............................................

M a n u fa c tu r in g :

Output per hour of all persons.............................
Compensation per hour........................................
Real compensation per h o u r................................
Unit nonlabor payments.......................................
Implicit price deflator ............................................
- Data not available.


106
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

45. Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts, in nine countries, quarterly data
seasonally adjusted
1986

1987

IV

III

1988

1987

1986

Annual average
Country

I

IV

III

II

I

T o t a l la b o r f o r c e b a s is

United States.....................................
Canada ..............................................
Australia ............................................
Japan .................................................

6.9
9.5
8.0
2.8

6.1
8.8
8.1
2.9

6.9
9.6
8.2
2.9

6.8
9.4
8.3
2.9

6.5
9.6
8.3
3.0

6.2
9.0
8.1
3.1

5.9
8.8
8.0
2.8

5.8
8.2
7.9
2.7

France ...............................................
Germany............................................
Italy \ 2 ..............................................
Sweden3 ...........................................
United Kingdom.................................

10.4
7.1
6.2
2.6
11.2

10.8
6.8
7.7
1.9
10.2

10.6
6.8
7.3
2.6
11.2

10.6
6.7
7.7
2.6
11.1

10.9
6.7
7.4
2.0
10.9

11.0
6.8
7.6
1.9
10.5

10.8
6.8
7.9
1.9
10.0

10.6
6.8
7.9
1.7
9.4

United States....................................
Canada ..............................................
Australia ............................................
Japan .................................................

7.0
9.6
8.1
2.8

6.2
8.9
8.1
2.9

7.0
9.7
8.3
2.9

6.8
9.4
8.4
2.9

6.6
9.6
8.3
3.0

6.3
9.1
8.2
3.1

6.0
8.8
8.0
2.8

5.9
8.2
8.0
2.8

France ...............................................
Germany............................................
Italy1, 2 ...............................................
Sweden3 ..........................................
United Kingdom.................................

10.7
7.2
6.3
2.7
11.2

11.1
6.9
7.9
1.9
10.3

10.8
6.9
7.4
2.6
11.3

10.8
6.8
7.8
2.6
11.2

11.2
6.8
7.6
2.0
11.0

11.2
6.9
7.8
1.9
10.6

11.1
7.0
8.1
1.9
10.0

10.8
7.0
8.0
1.7
9.5

5.6
7.8
“
10.6
6.8
7.8
1.7
9.0

C iv ilia n la b o r f o r c e b a s is

1 Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
2 Many Italians reported as unemployed did not actively seek
work In the past 30 days, and they have been excluded for com­
parability with U.S. concepts. Inclusion of such persons would
about double the Italian unemployment rate in 1985 and earlier
years and increase it to 11-12 percent for 1986 onward.
3 Break In series beginning in 1987. The 1986 rate based on the
new series was 2.2 percent.

5.7
7.9
“
10.8
6.9
8.0
1.7
9.0

- Data not available.

NOTE: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, and the
United Kingdom are calculated by applying annual adjust­
ment factors to current published data and therefore should
be viewed as less precise indicators of unemployment under
U.S. concepts than the annual figures.

46. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, approximating U.S. concepts,
10 countries
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status and country

1978

1979

1980

102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,460
26,000
20,570
5,010
4,203
26,260

104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,670
26,250
20,850
5,100
4,262
26,350

106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,800
26,520
21,120
5,310
4,312
26,520

63.2
62.7
61.9
62.8
57.5
53.3
47.8
48.8
66.1
62.8

63.7
63.4
61.6
62.7
57.5
53.3
48.0
49.0
66.6
62.6

96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
21,250
25,130
19,720
4,750
4,109
24,610

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

108,670
11,904
6,810
56,320
22,930
26,650
21,320
5,520
4,327
26,590

110,204
11,958
6,910
56,980
23,160
26,700
21,410
5,570
4,350
26,740

111,550
12,183
6,997
58,110
23,130
26,650
21,590
5,600
4,369
26,790

113,544
12,399
7,133
58,480
23,290
26,760
21,670
5,620
4,385
27,180

115,461
12,639
7,272
58,820
23,340
26,980
21,800
5,710
4,418
27,370

117,834
12,870
7,562
59,410
23,480
27,180
21,990
5,760
4,437
27,540

119,865
13,121
7,736
60,050
23,610
27,260
22,340
5,780
4,480
27,760

63.8
64.1
62.1
62.6
57.2
53.2
48.2
50.2
66.9
62.5

63.9
64.8
61.9
62.6
57.1
52.9
48.3
51.4
66.8
62.2

64.0
64.1
61.7
62.7
57.1
52.6
47.7
51.2
66.8
62.3

64.0
64.4
61.4
63.1
56.6
52.3
47.5
50.9
66.7
62.1

64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.4
47.3
50.5
66.6
62.6

64.8
65.2
61.8
62.3
56.2
52.6
47.2
50.7
66.9
62.7

65.3
65.7
63.0
62.1
56.2
53.0
47.5
50.8
67.2
62.7

65.6
66.2
63.0
61.9
56.0
53.1
48.2
50.5
67.4
63.0

98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
19,930
4,830
4,174
24,940

99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,330
25,750
20,200
4,980
4,226
24,670

100,397
11,006
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,560
20,280
5,010
4,219
23,800

99,526
10,644
6,415
55,620
21,240
25,140
20,250
4,980
4,213
23,710

100,834
10,734
6,300
56,550
21,170
24,750
20,320
4,890
4,218
23,600

105,005
11,000
6,490
56,870
20,980
24,790
20,390
4,930
4,249
24,000

107,150
11,311
6,670
57,260
20,900
24,950
20,490
5,110
4,293
24,310

109,597
11,634
6,952
57,740
20,970
25,210
20,610
5,200
4,319
24,450

112,440
11,955
7,177
58,320
20,970
25,370
20,590
5,240
4,396
24,910

59.3
57.5
58.0
61.3
54.4
51.5
45.9
46.3
64.6
58.8

59.9
58.7
57.8
61.4
54.0
51.7
45.9
46.4
65.3
59.2

59.2
59.3
58.3
61.3
53.5
51.7
46.1
47.0
65.6
58.1

59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
45.9
46.6
65.1
55.7

57.8
57.0
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
45.2
45.8
64.7
55.3

57.9
56.7
55.3
61.4
51.8
48.6
44.7
44.5
64.4
54.7

59.5
57.4
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
44.5
44.3
64.5
55.3

60.1
58.4
56.6
60.6
50.4
48.7
44.4
45.4
65.0
55.7

60.7
59.4
57.9
60.4
50.2
49.1
44.6
45.9
65.4
55.7

61.5
60.3
57.9
60.1
49.7
49.4
44.4
45.8
66.2
56.6

6,202
908
405
1,240
1,210
870
850
260
94
1,650

6,137
836
408
1,170
1,370
780
920
270
88
1,420

7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
920
330
86
1,850

8,273
898
394
1,260
1,730
1,090
1,040
510
108
2,790

10,678
1,314
495
1,360
1,920
1,560
1,160
590
137
3,030

10,717
1,448
697
1,560
1,960
1,900
1,270
710
151
3,190

8,539
1,399
642
1,610
2,310
1,970
1,280
690
136
3,180

8,312
1,328
602
1,560
2,440
2,030
1,310
600
125
3,060

8,237
1,236
610
1,670
2,510
1,970
1,380
560
118
3,090

7,425
1,167
629
1,730
2,620
1,890
1,760
540
84
2,850

6.1
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.4
3.3
4.1
5.2
2.2
6.3

5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
4.4
5.3
2.1
5.4

7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
4.4
6.2
2.0
7.0

7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.5
4.1
4.9
9.2
2.5
10.5

9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.8
5.4
10.6
3.1
11.3

9.6
11.9
10.0
2.7
8.5
7.1
5.9
12.7
3.5
11.9

7.5
11.3
9.0
2.8
9.9
7.4
5.9
12.3
3.1
11.7

7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.5
6.0
10.5
2.8
11.2

7.0
9.6
8.1
2.8
10.7
7.2
6.3
9.7
2.7
11.2

6.2
8.9
8.1
2.9
11.1
6.9
7.9
9.3
1.9
10.3

L a b o r fo rc e

United S tates.......................................................
Canada .................................................................
Australia................................................................
Japan ....................................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy.......................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
P a r t ic ip a t io n r a t e '

United S tates........................................................
Canada .................................................................
Australia.................................................................
Japan ....................................................................
France ...................................................................
Germany................................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands...........................................................
Sweden..................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
E m p lo y e d

United S tates........................................................
Canada ..................................................................
Australia.................................................................
Japan ....................................................................
France...................................................................
Germany................................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands...........................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
E m p lo y m e n t - p o p u la tio n r a tio 2

United S tates........................................................
Canada .................................................................
Australia.....................................................
Japan .......................................................
France ...................................................................
Germany................................................................
Italy....................................................................
Netherlands...........................................................
Sweden....................................................
United Kingdom...........................................
U n e m p lo y e d

United States .....................................
Canada ........................................................
Australia........................................................ ........
Japan ........................................................
France ...................................................................
Germany................................................................
Italy.......................................................
Netherlands...........................................................
Sweden..................................................................
United Kingdom...............................................
U n e m p lo y m e n t r a te

United S tates.................................................
Canada ..................................................................
Australia.................................................................
Japan .....................................................
France ....................................................
Germany................................................................
Italy..............................................................
Netherlands...........................................................
Sweden..................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................

1 Labor force as a percent of the civilian working-age population.
2 Employment as a percent of the civilian working-age population.


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

NOTE: See notes for information on breaks in series for Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden.

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
47.

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Productivity Data

Annual indexes of manufacturing productivity and related measures, 12 countries

(1977 = 100)
Item and country

1960

1970

1973

O u tp u t p e r h o u r

1975

1976

1977

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

62.2
50.7
23.2
33.0
37.2
36.4
40.3
35.4
32.4
54.6
42.3
55.9

80.8
75.6
64.8
60.4
65.6
69.6
71.2
72.7
64.3
81.7
80.7
80.4

93.4
90.3
83.1
78.8
83.3
82.3
84.0
90.9
81.5
94.6
94.8
95.5

92.9
88.6
87.7
86.5
94.6
88.5
90.1
91.1
86.2
96.8
100.2
94.9

97.1
94.8
94.3
95.3
98.2
95.1
96.5
98.9
95.8
99.7
101.7
99.1

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.4
102.0
114.8
111.9
106.5
109.7
108.2
110.5
112.3
107.1
110.9
102.5

101.4
98.2
122.7
119.2
112.3
110.6
108.6
116.9
113.9
106.7
112.7
101.8

103.6
102.9
127.2
127.6
114.2
114.0
111.0
124.8
116.9
107.0
113.2
107.0

105.9
98.3
135.0
135.2
114.6
122.0
112.6
129.6
119.4
109.8
116.5
113.5

112.0
105.4
142.3
148.2
120.2
125.2
119.2
135.7
127.5
117.2
125.5
123.2

118.1
116.8
152.5
154.4
118.6
129.0
123.6
144.4
140.5
123.9
131.0
129.8

124.2
119.7
163.7
159.0
118.3
133.0
128.7
146.6
145.1
125.2
136.1
134.7

128.8
119.4
168.2
163.1
119.9
135.6
130.6
148.3
144.7
124.4
136.4
139.5

52.5
41.3
19.2
41.9
49.2
35.4
50.0
36.4
44.8
55.1
52.6
71.2

78.6
73.5
69.9
78.6
82.0
73.3
86.6
78.0
84.4
86.9
92.5
95.0

96.3
93.5
91.9
96.4
95.9
88.6
96.1
90.5
95.8
99.5
100.3
104.8

84.9
89.9
86.2
92.7
95.0
90.0
91.0
86.9
92.7
101.0
106.1
96.3

93.1
96.5
94.8
99.7
99.6
96.1
98.0
97.9
99.0
101.4
106.1
98.2

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

108.1
108.5
113.9
104.1
105.4
105.3
106.6
108.6
106.1
100.3
103.6
100.5

103.2
103.6
124.1
106.8
110.1
104.6
106.6
115.4
106.6
98.8
104.0
91.7

104.8
107.4
129.8
105.7
106.6
102.9
104.9
115.1
106.7
97.7
100.6
86.2

98.4
93.6
137.3
110.1
108.3
104.0
102.4
113.4
105.0
97.4
100.1
86.4

104.7
99.6
148.2
114.8
115.6
103.8
103.6
111.5
107.0
97.2
105.2
88.9

117.5
114.9
165.4
117.5
119.7
104.0
106.4
116.2
113.3
102.6
111.5
92.5

122.5
121.2
179.3
119.9
123.4
103.3
110.1
118.0
116.0
105.2
115.3
95.2

125.9
123.9
182.1
122.0
126.7
103.0
112.8
121.9
117.3
107.0
115.2
96.2

84.4
81.4
82.7
127.1
132.4
97.2
123.8
102.8
138.4
101.0
124.4
127.3

97.3
97.2
107.9
130.2
125.1
105.3
121.7
107.4
131.2
106.4
114.6
118.1

103.1
103.6
110.7
122.3
115.2
107.7
114.4
99.6
117.6
105.1
105.7
109.8

91.4
101.5
98.2
107.1
100.4
101.7
101.0
95.4
107.6
104.3
105.9
101.5

95.9
101.8
100.6
104.6
101.4
101.2
101.6
99.0
103.3
101.7
104.3
99.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

106.5
106.3
99.3
93.0
99.0
95.9
98.5
98.2
94.4
93.6
93.4
98.0

101.7
105.5
101.2
89.6
98.0
94.6
98.1
98.7
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.1

101.1
104.3
102.0
82.8
93.4
90.3
94.6
92.2
91.2
91.3
88.9
80.6

92.9
95.2
101.7
81.4
94.5
85.2
91.0
87.5
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.2

93.5
94.5
104.2
77.5
96.2
82.9
86.9
82.2
83.9
82.9
83.9
72.2

99.5
98.3
108.5
76.1
100.9
80.6
86.1
80.5
80.6
82.8
85.1
71.2

98.7
101.2
109.6
75.4
104.3
77.7
85.6
80.5
79.9
84.0
84.7
70.7

97.8
103.8
108.3
74.8
105.7
75.9
86.4
82.2
81.1
86.0
84.5
69.0

36.5
27.5
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.1
18.8
8.4
12.5
15.8
14.7
15.1

57.4
47.9
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.5
48.0
26.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
31.3

68.8
60.0
55.1
53.5
56.1
52.1
67.5
43.7
60.5
54.5
54.2
47.5

85.1
78.9
84.2
79.0
81.0
76.5
84.5
70.2
82.2
77.2
77.3
76.0

92.1
90.3
90.7
89.5
90.4
88.7
91.3
84.2
91.9
88.8
91.5
88.3

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

118.6
118.6
113.4
117.5
123.1
128.4
116.1
134.7
117.0
116.0
120.1
137.4

132.4
131.3
120.7
130.4
135.9
148.5
125.6
160.2
123.6
128.0
133.6
167.4

145.2
151.1
129.8
144.5
149.7
172.0
134.5
198.4
129.1
142.8
148.1
193.9

157.5
167.0
136.6
150.7
162.9
203.9
141.0
238.3
137.5
156.0
158.9
209.3

162.4
177.2
140.7
159.7
174.2
225.2
148.3
282.8
144.0
173.5
173.3
224.4

168.0
185.5
144.9
173.0
184.4
247.3
155.5
314.5
150.0
188.3
189.7
238.8

176.9
194.7
152.0
184.9
196.1
267.3
164.9
347.3
157.7
204.8
212.4
254.6

182.7
202.3
157.3
191.8
207.7
279.2
172.5
362.1
161.5
224.6
228.1
273.5

58.7
54.2
38.4
41.7
33.8
41.5
46.6
23.7
38.5
29.0
34.8
27.1

71.0
63.4
52.3
57.8
55.4
52.5
67.4
36.0
60.7
46.4
47.7
38.9

73.7
66.5
66.4
67.9
67.4
63.4
80.3
48.1
74.3
57.6
57.2
49.8

91.7
89.1
96.0
91.2
85.6
86.5
93.8
77.1
95.4
79.7
77.1
80.2

94.9
95.3
96.2
93.9
92.1
93.3
94.6
85.1
96.0
89.1
90.0
89.1

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

117.0
116.2
98.8
105.0
115.7
117.0
107.3
121.9
104.1
108.2
108.3
134.1

130.6
133.7
98.4
109.4
121.0
134.3
115.7
137.0
108.5
120.0
118.6
164.5

140.1
146.7
102.0
113.2
131.1
151.0
121.2
158.9
110.4
133.4
130.9
181.2

148.7
170.0
101.2
111.4
142.2
167.2
125.2
184.0
115.2
142.1
136.3
184.4

145.0
168.1
98.9
107.8
144.9
179.9
124.4
208.4
113.0
148.0
138.1
182.2

142.2
158.8
95.0
112.1
155.4
191.6
125.8
217.8
106.8
152.0
144.8
183.9

142.4
162.6
92.9
116.3
165.7
200.9
128.1
236.9
108.7
163.5
156.1
189.0

141.8
169.4
93.5
117.6
173.2
205.9
132.1
244.1
111.6
180.5
167.3
196.1

58.7
59.4
28.5
30.0
29.5
41.6
25.9
33.7
25.1
21.7
30.1
43.6

71.0
64.5
39.1
41.7
44.4
46.7
42.9
50.6
41.2
34.5
41.1
53.5

73.7
70.6
65.6
62.7
67.2
70.2
70.4
73.1
65.6
53.4
58.7
70.0

91.7
93.1
86.7
89.1
89.6
99.3
88.7
104.3
92.8
81.4
83.2
102.0

94.9
102.7
86.9
87.2
91.5
96.1
87.3
90.5
89.1
86.9
92.3
92.1

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

117.0
105.4
121.3
128.3
132.0
135.2
135.9
129.5
127.4
113.8
112.9
163.1

130.6
121.5
116.8
134.3
129.0
156.4
147.9
141.4
134.1
129.3
125.3
219.2

140.1
130.0
123.8
109.6
110.3
136.4
124.9
123.2
108.9
123.6
115.4
210.2

148.7
146.3
108.8
87.2
102.3
124.9
119.7
119.9
105.8
117.1
96.9
184.8

145.0
144.9
111.5
75.5
95.1
116.1
113.1
121.1
97.1
107.9
80.4
158.3

142.2
130.3
107.2
69.5
90.1
107.8
102.6
109.5
81.6
99.1
78.2
140.9

142.4
126.5
104.3
70.2
93.9
110.0
101.1
109.6
80.4
101.3
81.1
140.5

141.8
129.5
148.7
94.3
128.4
146.2
141.3
144.5
111.9
129.8
104.9
164.9

O u tp u t

T o ta l h o u rs

C o m p e n s a t io n p e r h o u r

U n it la b o r c o s t s :

U n it la b o r c o s t s :

National currency basis

U.S. dollar basis

I
- Data not available.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
108
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

I

48.

Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case1
1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

P R IV A T E S E C T O R 3

Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday ca ses................................................
Lost workdays......................................................................

9.4
4.1
63.5

9.5
4.3
67.7

8.7
4.0
65.2

8.3
3.8
61.7

7.7
3.5
58.7

7.6
3.4
58.5

8.C
3.7
63.4

7.9
3.8
64.9

7.9
3.6
65.8

11.6
54
80.7

11.7
57
83.7

11.9

12.3

11.8

11.9

11.4

11.2

82.7

82.8

86.0

90.8

12.0
G1
90.7

91.3

93.6

11.5
6.4
143.2

11.4
6.8
150.5

11.2
6.5
163.6

11.6
6.2
146.4

10.5
5.4
137.3

8.4
4.5
125.1

9.7
5.3
160.2

8.4
4.8
145.3

7.4
4.1
125.9

16.0
6.4
109.4

16.2
6.8
120.4

15.7
6.5
117.0

15.1
6.3
113.1

14.6
6.0
115.7

14.8
6.3
118.2

15.5
6.9
128.1

15.2
6.8
128.9

15.2
6.9
134.5

15.9
6.3
105.3

16.3
6.8
111.2

15.5
6.5
113.0

15.1
6.1
107.1

14.1
5.9
112.0

14.4
6.2
113.0

15.4
6.9
121.3

15.2
6.8
120.4

14.9
6.6
122.7

16.6
6.2
110.9

16.6
6.7
123.1

16.3
6.3
117.6

14.9
6.0
106.0

15.1
5.8
113.1

15.4
6.2
122.4

14.9
6.4
131.7

14.5
6.3
127.3

14.7
6.3
132.9

15.8
6.6
111.0

16.0
6.9
124.3

15.5
6.7
118.9

15.2
6.6
119.3

14.7
6.2
118.6

14.8
6.4
119.0

15.8
7.1
130.1

15.4
7.0
133.3

15.6
7.2
140.4

13.2
5.6
84.9

13.3
5.9
90.2

12.2
5.4
86.7

11.5
5.1
82.0

10.2
4.4
75.0

10.0
4.3
73.5

10.6
4.7
77.9

10.4
4.6
80.2

10.6
4.7
85.2

22.6
11.1
178.8

20.7
10.8
175.9

18.6
9.5
171.8

17.6
9.0
158.4

16.9
8.3
153.3

18.3
9.2
163.5

19.6
9.9
172.0

18.5
9.3
171.4

18.9
9.7
177.2

17.5
6.9
95.9

17.6
7.1
99.6

16.0
6.6
97.6

15.1
6.2
91.9

13.9
5.5
85.6

14.1
5.7
83.0

15.3
6.4
101.5

15.0
6.3
100.4

15.2
6.3
103.0

16.8
7.8
126.3

16.8
8.0
133.7

15.0
7.1
128.1

14.1
6.9
122.2

13.0
6.1
112.2

13.1
6.0
112.0

13.6
6.6
120.8

13.9
6.7
127.8

13.6
6.5
126.0

17.0
7.5
123.6

17.3
8.1
134.7

15.2
7.1
128.3

14.4
6.7
121.3

12.4
5.4
101.6

12.4
5.4
103.4

13.3
6.1
115.3

12.6
5.7
113.8

13.6
6.1
125.5

19.3
8.0
112.4

19.9
8.7
124.2

18.5
8.0
118.4

17.5
7.5
109.9

15.3
6.4
102.5

15.1
6.1
96.5

16.1
6.7
104.9

16.3
6.9
110.1

16.0
6.8
115.5

14.4
5.4
75.1

14.7
5.9
83.6

13.7
5.5
81.3

12.9
5.1
74.9

10.7
4.2
66.0

9.8
3.6
58.1

10.7
4.1
65.8

10.8
4.2
69.3

10.7
4.2
72.0

8.7
3.3
50.3

8.6
3.4
51.9

8.0
3.3
51.8

7.4
3.1
48.4

6.5
2.7
42.2

6.3
2.6
41.4

6.8
2.8
45.0

6.4
2.7
45.7

6.4
2.7
49.8

11.5
5.1
78.0

11.6
5.5
85.9

10.6
4.9
82.4

9.8
4.6
78.1

9.2
4.0
72.2

8.4
3.6
64.5

9.3
4.2
68.8

9.0
3.9
71.6

9.6
4.1
79.1

6.9
2.6
37.0

7.2
2.8
40.0

6.8
2.7
41.8

6.5
2.7
39.2

5.6
2.3
37.0

5.2
2.1
35.6

5.4
2.2
37.5

5.2
2.2
37.9

5.3
2.3
42.2

11.8
4.5
66.4

11.7
4.7
67.7

10.9
4.4
67.9

10.7
4.4
68.3

9.9
4.1
69.9

9.9
4.0
66.3

10.5
4.3
70.2

9.7
4.2
73.2

10.2
4.3
70.9

A g r ic u lt u r e , f o r e s t r y , a n d fis h in g 3

Total cases.............................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................................
Lost workdays.......................................................................

M in in g

Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................................
Lost workdays......................................................................

C o n s tr u c tio n

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday ca ses......................................................
Lost workdays.............................................................................
General building contractors:
Total cases.................................................................................
Lost workday cases .............................................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
Heavy construction contractors:
Total cases.............................................................................
Lost workday ca ses..................................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................
Special trade contractors:
Total cases.........................................................................
Lost workday ca ses.....................................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................

M a n u fa c tu r in g

Total cases........................................................
Lost workday ca ses.................................................
Lost workdays.....................................................

D u r a b le g o o d s

Lumber and wood products:
Total cases.................................................................
Lost workday ca ses.........................................................
Lost workdays.....................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total cases..........................................................
Lost workday ca ses..................................................
Lost workdays..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total cases......................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................................
Lost workdays.....................................................
Primary metal industries:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday ca ses........................................................
Lost workdays.......................................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total cases................................................................
Lost workday cases ..................................................
Lost workdays........................................................
Machinery, except electrical:
Total cases............................................................
Lost workday cases ..................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................
Electric and electronic equipment:
Total cases..................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses..................................................................
Lost workdays...............................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total cases...............................................................................
Lost workday ca ses....................................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Instruments and related products:
Total cases..........................................................................
Lost workday ca ses..................................................................................
Lost workdays.................................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
Total cases.....................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...........................................................................
Lost workdays......................................................................................
See footnotes at end of table.


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

109

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

June 1988

•

Current Labor Statistics:

Injury and Illness Data

48. Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case1
1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s

Food and kindred products:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Tobacco manufacturing:

19.4
8.9
132.2

19.9
9.5
141.8

18.7
9.0
136.8

17.8
8.6
130.7

16.7
8.0
129.3

16.5
7.9
131.2

16.7
8.1
131.6

16.7
8.1
138.0

16.5
8.0
137.8

8.7
4.0
58.6

9.3
4.2
64.8

8.1
3.8
45.8

8.2
3.9
56.8

7.2
3.2
44.6

6.5
3.0
42.8

7.7
3.2
51.7

7.3
3.0
51.7

6.7
2.5
45.6

10.2
3.4
61.5

9.7
3.4
61.3

9.1
3.3
62.8

8.8
3.2
59.2

7.6
2.8
53.8

7.4
2.8
51.4

8.0
3.0
54.0

7.5
3.0
57.4

7.8
3.1
59.3

6.5
2.2
32.4

6.5
2.2
34.1

6.4
2.2
34.9

6.3
2.2
35.0

6.0
2.1
36.4

6.4
2.4
40.6

6.7
2.5
40.9

6.7
2.6
44.1

6.7
2.7
49.4

13.5
5.7
103.3

13.5
6.0
108.4

12.7
5.8
112.3

11.6
5.4
103.6

10.6
4.9
99.1

10.0
4.5
90.3

10.4
4.7
93.8

10.2
4.7
94.6

10.5
4.7
99.5

7.0
2.9
43.8

7.1
3.1
45.1

6.9
3.1
46.5

6.7
3.0
47.4

6.6
2.8
45.7

6.6
2.9
44.6

6.5
2.9
46.0

6.3
2.9
49.2

6.5
2.9
50.8

7.8
3.3
50.9

7.7
3.5
54.9

6.8
3.1
50.3

6.6
3.0
48.1

5.7
2.5
39.4

5.5
2.5
42.3

5.3
2.4
40.8

5.1
2.3
38.8

6.3
2.7
49.4

7.9
3.4
58.3

7.7
3.6
62.0

7.2
3.5
59.1

6.7
2.9
51.2

5.3
2.5
46.4

5.5
2.4
46.8

5.1
2.4
53.5

5.1
2.4
49.9

7.1
3.2
67.5

17.1
8.1
125.5

17.1
8.2
127.1

15.5
7.4
118.6

14.6
7.2
117.4

12.7
6.0
100.9

13.0
6.2
101.4

13.6
6.4
104.3

13.4
6.3
107.4

14.0
6.6
118.2

11.7
4.7
72.5

11.5
4.9
76.2

11.7
5.0
82.7

11.5
5.1
82.6

9.9
4.5
86.5

10.0
4.4
87.3

10.5
4.7
94.4

10.3
4.6
88.3

10.5
4.8
83.4

10.1
5.7
102.3

10.0
5.9
107.0

9.4
5.5
104.5

9.0
5.3
100.6

8.5
4.9
96.7

8.2
4.7
94.9

8.8
5.2
105.1

8.6
5.0
107-1

8.2
4.8
102.1

7.9
3.2
44.9

8.0
3.4
49.0

7.4
3.2
48.7

7.3
3.1
45.3

7.2
3.1
45.5

7.2
3.1
47.8

7.4
3.3
50.5

7.4
3.2
50.7

7.7
3.3
54.0

8.9
3.9
57.5

8.8
4.1
59.1

8.2
3.9
58.2

7.7
3.6
54.7

7.1
3.4
52.1

7.0
3.2
50.6

7.2
3.5
55.5

7.2
3.5
59.8

7.2
3.6
62.5

7.5
2.8
39.7

7.7
3.1
44.7

7.1
2.9
44.5

7.1
2.9
41.1

7.2
2.9
42.6

7.3
3.0
46.7

7.5
3.2
48.4

7.5
3.1
47.0

7.8
3.2
50.5

2.1
.8
12.5

2.1
.9
13.3

2.0
.8
12.2

1.9
.8
11.6

2.0
.9
13.2

2.0
.9
12.8

1.9
.9
13.6

2.0
.9
15.4

2.0
.9
17.1

5.5
2.4
36.2

5.5
2.5
38.1

5.2
2.3
35.8

5.0
2.3
35.9

4.9
2.3
35.8

5.1
2.4
37.0

5.2
2.5
41.1

5.4
2.6
45.4

5.3
2.5
43.0

Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Textile mill products:
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Apparel and other textile products:
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Paper and allied products:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays........................................................................ ...................
Printing and publishing:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Chemicals and allied products:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Petroleum and coal products:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total cases................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................... ............................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Leather and leather products:
Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................

T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s

Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays ..........................................................................................

W h o le s a le a n d r e ta il tr a d e

Total cases.................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................
Wholesale trade:
Total cases................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............ ................. .................. ...... ....................................
Retail trade:
Total cases................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses...................................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................................

F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , a n d re a l e s t a te

Total cases................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..................................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................................

S e r v ic e s

Total cases................................................................................................
Lost workday ca ses..................................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................................
1 Total cases include fatalities.
2 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers and were calculated as:
(N/EH) X 200,000, where:
N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
110
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

EH = total hours worked by all employees during calendar year.
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per
week, 50 weeks per year.)
3 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.

BLS International Price Data
Quarterly measures of price change for U.S.
imports anc1 exports under various classifications,
useful for different types of analysis:
• S1TC, a United Nations classification for
international comparisons;
• SIC-based, used for industry comparisons;
• End use, for use with National Accounts data.

How to obtain:
Mailing List:
To obtain the quarterly news release, ask
to be put on a mailing list. Call Bureau
of Labor Statistics, Division of
International Prices (202) 272-5020.

Electronic News Release:
Quickest. Accessible electronically
immediately at release time through BLS
news release service. Write to the Office
of Publications, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Washington D.C. 20212, or call
(202) 523-1913.

Data Diskettes:

Monthly Labor Review:

mlr

Quarterly import and export price
indexes are available on diskettes for
the most recent eight quarters. For
inform ation, call the Office of
Publications, Bureau of Labor Statistics
(202) 523-1090.

Articles twice a year provide in-depth
analyses of import and export price
movements and developments in U.S.
trade. Subscription available from
Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402, for $16 a year;
$4.75 single copy.


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

Telephone:
For comparisons of United States,
German, and Japanese export price
indexes at the detailed product level, call
Division of International Prices
(202) 272-5027.

BLS Periodicals

BLS periodicals
provide timely information
on employment, occupations,
wages, and prices.
Current Wage Developments

Monthly Labor Review
the oldest and most authoritative
Government research journal in
economics and social sciences
Regular’ features include current
labor statistics and developments in
industrial relations.

reports monthly on specific wage and
benefit changes from collective
bargaining agreements Includes
data on strikes or lockouts, major
agreements expiring, and compensa­
tion changes

$16 a year

$12 a year

Occupational Outlook
Quarterly

CPI Detailed Report
is the most comprehensive report on
monthly consumer price indexes and
rates of change.

helps students and guidance
counselors learn about new occupa­
tions, training opportunities, salary
trends, and career counseling
programs. Written in nontechnical
language and illustrated in color

$16 a year

$5 a year

Producer Price Indexes

Employment and Earnings

includes monthly price movements
of both farm and industrial com­
modities. by industry and stage of
processing. Includes annual supplement.

gives current monthly employment
and earnings statistics for the Nation
as a whole, for States and for more
than 200 areas. Included are
household and establishment data
seasonally and not seasonally
adjusted. Includes annual supplement.

$21 a year

$22 a year

Superintendent of Documents Subscriptions Order Form

*6194

Order processing code:
□ YES, please send me the following indicated subscriptions:
□
□
□
□
□
□

Monthly Labor Review
Occupational Outlook Quarterly
Employment and Earnings
Current Wage Developments
CPI Detailed Report'
Producer Price Indexes

1. The total cost of my order is $_
customers please add 25%.

□
□
□
□
□
□

1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year

$16
$ 5
$22
$12
$16
$21

or

□
□
□
□
□
□

2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years

. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling and are subject to change. International

Please Type or Print
2. ______________

(Company or personal name)

(Additional address/attention line)

3. Please choose method of payment:
□ Check payable to the Superintendent of Documents
□ GPO Deposit Account
□ VISA

□

]-□

MasterCard Account

(Street address)
Thank you for your order!
(City, State, Zip Code)

1

(Credit card expiration date)

(Signature)
(Daytime phone including area code)

4. Mall To: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D C. 20402-9371
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Employment
and Wages
Annual Averages
1986

Employment and Wages
Annual Averages, 1986
U.S.
« Über
Suras« as tabor StaJisries

U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Bulletin 2297
A comprehensive portrait
of American business by State

Data available
• Number of reporting units, employment,
total annual wages, and average weekly
wages for 1,005 industries

Coverage
• 99 percent of American wage and salary
workers

Source of data
• Quarterly tax reports submitted to State
agencies by employers subject to unem­
ployment insurance laws

Uses
•
•
•
•

Marketing research and analysis
Economic forecasting
Business investment decisions
Government policymaking and regulation

Publications are available
from the
Superintendent
of Documents,
U.S. Government
Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402,
or the Bureau of
Labor Statistics,
Publications Sales Center
P.O. Box 2145
Chicago, IL. 60690


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

r................................................. .....
Order Form
Please send------ copies of E m p lo y m e n t a n d W ages, A n n u a l A v e ra g e s 1986,
Bulletin 2297, Stock No. 029-001-02940-3, $25 each, for a total of $ ------------------------------□ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents.
|

□ Charge to GPO deposit account no.___________________. Order No------------------------

\

□ Charge to □
Credit Card No_____________________ ____ ___ Expiration date------------------------Total charge $ ________________________________________________________ __

i

Name

i

Address
City, State, Zip Code

U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, D.C. 20212

Second-Ciass Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
ISSN-0098-1818

Official Business
Penalty for private use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED

MLR
LI BRA442 L I SSDUE01QR
1
LIBRARY
FED RESERVE BANK OF ST LOUI S
PO BOX 442
SAI NT LOUI S
MO 6 3 1 6 6

United
States r
/ /
Department^ J / ^
o f L a b o r^ F


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

Y ea rs o f
■W o r k in g fo r
^ ^ A m e r ic a s
F u tu r e