View original document

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

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

Multifactor productivity
also in this issue:

Leontief and the BLS
Displaced workers
Information technology workers

U.S. Department of Labor
Elaine L. Chao, Secretary
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Katharine G. Abraham, Commissioner
The Monthly Labor Review (usps 9 8 7 -8 0 0 ) is published
m onthly by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics o f the U .S.
Department o f Labor. The Review w elcom es articles on the
la b o r fo r c e , la b o r -m a n a g e m e n t r e la tio n s , b u s in e ss
c o n d itio n s , in d u stry p r o d u c tiv ity , c o m p e n s a tio n ,
occupational safety and health, demographic trends, and
other econom ic developm ents. Papers should be factual
and analytical, not polem ical in tone. Potential articles, as
w ell as com m unications on editorial matters, should be
submitted to:
Editor-in-Chief

Monthly Labor Review
Bureau o f Labor Statistics
Washington, dc 20212
Telephone: (202) 6 9 1-5900
E-mail: mlr@bls.gov
Inquiries on subscriptions and circulation, including address
changes, should be sent to: Superintendent o f Documents
G overn m en t P rin tin g O ffic e W ash in gton , dc 2 0 4 0 2
Telephone: (202) 5 1 2-1800
Subscription price per year— $43 domestic; $53.75 foreign.
Single copy— $13 domestic; $16.25 foreign. Make checks
payable to the Superintendent o f Documents.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the Monthly
Labor Review ( issn 0 0 9 8 -1 8 1 8 ) and other governm ent
publications are set by the Government Printing Office, an
agency o f the U.S. Congress.
The Secretary o f Labor has determined that the publication of
this periodical is necessary in the transaction o f the public
business required by law o f this Department. Periodicals
postage paid at Washington, dc , and at additional mailing
addresses.
U n le s s stated o th e r w is e , a rticles ap p earin g in th is
publication are in the public domain and may be reprinted
without express permission from the Editor-in-Chief. Please
cite the specific issue o f the Monthly Labor Review as the
source.

Information is available to sensory impaired individuals
upon request:
Voice phone: (202) 691-5200
Federal Relay Service: 1 -8 0 0 -8 7 7 -8 3 3 9 .
P ostmaster :
Send address changes to Monthly Labor
Review, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, dc
2 040 2 -0 0 0 1 .

Cover designed by Keith Tapscott


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

MONTHLY LABOR

REVIEW
Volume 124, Number 6
June 2001

M ultifactor productivity trends in manufacturing industries

3

Most manufacturing industries experienced productivity increases;
however, there was a wide dispersion in growth rates within industries
Ziaul Z. Ahmed and Patricia S. Wilder

Worker displacement in a strong labor market

13

Over the 1997-98 period, many displaced workers
found new jobs with little or no change in weekly earnings

Ryan T. Helwig

The Leontief-BLS partnership: framework for measurement

29

The collaboration confirmed the utility of input-output analysis,
and resulted in tables that remained useful to the Bureau for decades

Martin C. Kohli

Reports
Lack of a disability measure in today’s CPS

38

Thomas W. Hale

Information Technology workers in the new economy

41

Margaret Hilton

Departments
Labor month in review
Research summaries
Précis
Book reviews
Current labor statistics

2

38
46
47
48

Editor-in-Chief: Deborah P. Klein • Executive Editor Richard M. Devens • Managing Editor Anna Huffman Hill • Editors: Brian I. Baker,
Bonita L. Boles, Richard Hamilton, Leslie Brown Joyner, Lawrence H. Leith • Book Reviews: Roger A. Comer, Chaquita M. Goode • Design and
Layout Catherine D. Bowman, Edith W. Peters • Contributor: Horst Brand


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

Labor Month in Review

The June Review

interested in such issues should also be
on the lookout for the forthcoming 2001

Multifactor productivity is an extremely
sophisticated piece o f econom ic infor­
mation. A s Ziaul Z. Ahmed and Patricia
S. Wilder note, multifactor productivity
is actually calculated as a residual— that
is, the part o f the change in an industry’s
output that is not due to m easured
changes in labor, capital, or intermedi­
ate purchases. Their more positive state­
ment is that this residual provides infor­
mation on the impact o f other factors,
such as econom ies o f scale, organiza­
tional efficiency, labor skill, management
effectiveness, capacity utilization, and
technical change. These are the very fac­
tors that many observers think is the “im­
portant stuff.” The two industries with
multifactor productivity gains far beyond
the others were electronic components
and accessories and computer and of­
fice equipment, which shows just how
important these “residual” factors can
be.
The years 1997 and 1998 seem almost
like a history lesson, given today’s pace
o f change. We should remember, how ­
ever, that the late 1990s were a time o f
strong econom ic expansion. As Ryan T.
H elw ig reports: “during this 2-year pe­
riod, payroll employment rose by 6.4 mil­
lion jobs, and the unemployment rate fell
below 5 percent for the first time since
the early 1970s. As a result o f these im ­
proved labor market conditions, both the
level and incidence o f job displacement
continued to d ecline.” Still, displace­
ment affected a large number o f work­
ers: in 1997 and 1998, about 1.9 m illion
workers with 3 or more years o f service
permanently lost those positions.
Martin C. Kohli actually does give
us a history lesson. His article traces the
developm ent o f input-output analysis at
the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. One o f
the important, albeit indirect, impacts he
finds is the requirement that consistency
and linkages be established among the
various econom ic classification systems
used by the Bureau. Readers who are

Report on the American Workforce,

2

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

which traces the historical evolution of
industrial, demographic, and com pen­
sation classification and measurement
issues.
Thom as W. H ale sum m arizes the
challenges facing researchers w ho are
looking for a way to identify and m ea­
sure the number o f persons with disabili­
ties. After examining the data available,
including data from the Current Popu­
lation Survey ( c p s ) , Hale concludes no
data exist that are without significant
flaws. In particular, he argues against
relying on the c p s instruments, as cur­
rently constituted, for sound measures
o f the population with d isabilities.
Margaret Hilton provides a summary
o f the work being done at the National
Research Council on the development
o f the workforce needed for the infor­
mation economy. Workers with informa­
tion technology skills are going to be
needed throughout the econom y and the
need is projected to grow at a net rate of
a little better than 7 percent per year—
about 5 times the net rate o f overall job
creation.

Industry productivity
in 1999
In 1999, labor productivity— as m ea­
sured by output per hour— increased
in 70 percent o f the 119 manufacturing
industries m easured by the Bureau o f
Labor Statistics. Output rose in 61 per­
cent o f the industries, w hile hours o f
labor increased in 33 percent o f the in­
dustries.
Four out o f the five largest manufac­
turing industries, those with more than
500,000 em ployees, recorded growth in
output per hour in 1999. O f these, the
largest productivity gain occurred in elec­
tronic components and accessories with
an increase o f 39.3 percent follow ed by
a 9.0-percent increase in motor vehicles

and equipment; a 5.5-percent increase
in m iscellaneous plastics products, not
elsewhere classified; and a 4.8-percent in­
crease in commercial printing. Labor pro­
ductivity declined by 0.1 percent in meat
products manufacturing.
During the same period, unit labor
costs declined in 50 o f the manufactur­
ing industries measured by the Bureau
o f Labor Statistics. Unit labor costs—
the cost o f the labor input required to
produce one unit o f output— are com ­
puted by dividing total compensation by
real output.
The largest declines in unit labor
costs in 1999 were in the follow ing in­
dustries: computer and office equipment
(-2 4 .8 percent); w om en’s and children’s
undergarments (-2 2 .9 percent); e le c ­
tronic co m p o n en ts and a c c e sso r ie s
( - 2 1 .7 p ercen t); and p h o to g ra p h ic
equipment and supplies (-1 4 .3 percent).

Contingent workers
and alternative work
From February 1999 to February 2001,
the proportion o f U .S. workers holding
contingent jobs edged down from 4.3
percent to 4.0 percent. Contingent work­
ers are persons w ho do not expect thenjobs to last or w ho report that their jobs
are temporary. Under the broadest o f
three definitions, there were 5.4 m illion
contingent workers.
In addition to contingent workers, the
February 2001 survey also identified
persons in alternative work arrange­
m ents. The survey found 8.6 m illion
independent contractors (6 .4 percent
o f total employment), 2.1 m illion on-call
workers (1.6 percent o f total em p lo y ­
m en t), 1.2 m illio n tem porary h elp
agen cy w orkers (0 .9 percent o f the
em ployed), and 63 3 ,0 0 0 contract com ­
pany w orkers (0 .5 p ercen t o f total
employment). The proportions o f work­
ers em p lo y ed in all four a ltern ative
arrangements were about unchanged
since February 1999.
□

Multifactor Productivity

Multifactor productivity trends
in m anufacturing industries, 1987-96
Over the 1987-96 period , multifactor productivity—measured
as output per unit o f combined inputs— increased
in manufacturing as a whole and in most o f the 108 published
three-digit industries within manufacturing; within the three-digit
industries, however, there was wide dispersion in the growth rates

Ziaul Z. Ahm ed
and
Patricia S. Wilder

Ziaul Z. Ahmed and
Patricia S. Wilder are
economists in the
Office of Productivity
and Technology,
Bureau of Labor
Statistics.


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

abor productivity, the m ost widely used
measure o f productivity, can grow as a
result o f increases in the quantities o f
capital services and intermediate inputs used in
production and as a result o f other factors. In
order to provide an alternative picture o f pro­
ductivity change focusing on these other fac­
tors— such as econom ies o f scale, changes in
organizational efficiency, improvements in labor
and management skill, changes in capacity utili­
zation, and changes in technology— the Bureau
o f Labor Statistics recently developed multifac­
tor productivity series for detailed manufactur­
ing industries. These data show that between
1987 and 1996, multifactor productivity, measured
as output per unit o f combined inputs, rose in a
majority of the 108 industries presented here. For
more than 85 percent of these industries, how­
ever, multifactor productivity did not grow as much
as labor productivity (defined as output per hour).
The faster growth o f labor productivity reflects
increases in the contributions of capital and inter­
mediate purchases over the period.1
More specifically, multifactor productivity
relates an index o f output to an index o f com ­
bined inputs o f labor, capital, and intermediate
purchases (materials, fuels, electricity, and ser­
vices). Multifactor productivity is calculated as
a residual that m easures the change in an
industry’s output that is not due to measured
changes in labor, capital, or intermediate pur­
chases inputs.

L

The Bureau o f Labor Statistics has published
multifactor productivity measures for major sec­
tors o f the econom y since 1983 and for a limited
number o f detailed industries since 1987. In 2000,
multifactor productivity measures were completed
for all 140 manufacturing industries at the threedigit Standard Industrial Classification (sic )2 level
o f detail— a major expansion over the 10 multifac­
tor productivity measures previously available.3
The industry labor productivity and multifactor
productivity indexes are developed from second­
ary data sources that have been compiled for pur­
poses other than productivity measurement. A s a
result, staff from the b l s O ffice o f Productivity
and Technology evaluated the reliability o f these
measures and their com ponents and developed
publication criteria; the industry series that did
not meet the criteria are not published.4 This ar­
ticle analyzes measures for the 108 published threedigit manufacturing industries covering 89 percent
o f employment in the total manufacturing sector.
We analyze changes from 1987 to 1996, the entire
period for which the new multifactor productivity
series are presently available. Both years are at
roughly comparable points in the econom ic cycle,
representing years that were w ell into the economic
expansions o f the 1980s and 1990s.

Manufacturing sector overview
Between 1987 and 1996, multifactor productivity
at the total manufacturing level increased at an
Monthly Labor Review June 2001

3

Multifactor Productivity

average annual rate o f 0.7 percent.5 Within manufacturing,
there was significant variation among industries in the aver­
age annual rates o f change in multifactor productivity. For
manufacturing industries classified at the two-digit SIC level,
the average annual rates o f change in multifactor productivity
ranged from a decline o f 1.4 percent per year in printing and
publishing (S ic 27) to an increase o f 4.7 percent per year in
electronic and other electrical equipment (s ic 36).
There was an even greater dispersion over the period in the
multifactor productivity rates at the more detailed three-digit
SIC industry level. Average annual multifactor productivity
change ranged from a decline o f 3.5 percent per year in new s­
papers ( s ic 271) to an increase o f 14.8 percent per year in elec­
tronic components and accessories (SIC 367). Table 1 shows
the average annual rates o f change for multifactor productiv­
ity, output, and combined inputs, and for the specific inputs o f
labor, capital, and intermediate purchases for the 1987-96 pe­
riod; chart 1 shows the distribution o f the changes among the
108 manufacturing industries over the same period. As the
chart clearly shows, a large majority (84) o f the published in­
dustries experienced average annual rates o f change in multi­
factor productivity that ranged from a decline o f 0.9 percent
per year to an increase o f 1.9 percent per year.
A m ong the 108 published industries, 2 had gains in multi­
factor productivity between 1987 and 1996 that far exceeded
those o f all other manufacturing industries— electronic com ­
ponents and accessories (14.8 percent per year) and computer
and office equipment (SIC 3 5 7 ,1 4 .4 percent per year). In addi­
tion, 3 other industries recorded gains o f more than 3 percent
per year: communications equipment (SIC 366, 4.4 percent),
ophthalmic goods (SIC 385, 3.2 percent), and pens, pencils,
office, and art supplies (sic 395,3.1 percent). Another 5 indus­
tries experienced gains between 2.0 and 2.9 percent per year:
metal cans and shipping containers (SIC 341, 2.4 percent); in­
dustrial machinery, not elsewhere classified (sic 3 5 9 ,2 .4 per­
cent); hydraulic cement (sic 324, 2.4 percent); tires and inner
tubes (SIC 301,2.1 percent); and sugar and confectionery prod­
ucts (SIC 206 ,2 .1 percent). An additional 24 industries posted
multifactor productivity growth in the range o f 1.0 percent per
year to 1.9 percent per year, and 33 industries had increases in
the range o f 0.0 percent to 0.9 percent. A total o f 41 industries
had declining multifactor productivity over the period. O f the
industries with multifactor productivity declines, two-thirds
had drops o f less than 1 percent per year, on average.

advanced in 9 o f the 10 industries. These 10 manufacturing
industries ranged in size from 345,000 em ployees to 967,000
em ployees and represented more than 25 percent o f em ploy­
ment in the manufacturing sector. (See chart 2.)
It has been noted widely that the computer and sem icon­
ductor industries appear to be major contributors to the over­
all productivity growth o f recent years.7 The electronic com ­
ponents and accessories industry— which includes sem icon­
ductors— and the computer and office equipment industry are
important not only because they experienced the two greatest
annual rates o f change in multifactor productivity, but also
because they were the third and eighth largest industries, re­
spectively, in terms o f em ployment size. Multifactor produc­
tivity rose by 14.8 percent per year in the electronic com po­
nents and accessories industry, as output jumped 20.3 percent
per year, far surpassing the 4.8 percent per year increase in
combined inputs. Inputs showed divergent trends, with labor
input rising at a low rate o f 0.3 percent and capital services
surging 8.1 percent, while intermediate purchases were up 6.2
percent. The second largest gain in multifactor productivity
(14.4 percent per year) occurred in the computer and office
equipment industry. This gain resulted from a strong increase
in output o f 20.4 percent per year and a rise in combined inputs
o f 5.3 percent per year. Labor input fell 2.7 percent, while capi­
tal input rose 5.7 percent and intermediate purchases grew at a
rate o f 8.2 percent per year.
The other three large industries with multifactor productiv­
ity gains showed more m odest increases. Average annual
growth in multifactor productivity was 2.4 percent in industrial
machinery, not elsewhere classified, 0.6 percent in metalwork­
ing machinery (SIC 354), and 0.5 percent in miscellaneous plas­
tics products, not elsewhere classified (sic 308).
Multifactor productivity declines were recorded in three of
the 10 largest industries. The largest decline recorded occurred
in the newspapers industry, where output declined by 3.5 per­
cent and the level o f combined inputs was unchanged. An
increase in capital services (1.4 percent per year) was offset by
a decline in labor input o f 0.7 percent and a drop o f 0.4 percent
in intermediate purchases. The largest industry, motor vehicles
and equipment (sic 371), posted a decline in multifactor pro­
ductivity o f 0.9 percent per year as the increase in combined
inputs (3.6 percent) surpassed the gain in output (2.6 percent).
Labor and capital inputs rose by similar rates (1.8 percent and
1.9 percent, respectively), while the increase in intermediate
purchases was much stronger (4.3 percent).

Trends in the 10 largest industries
Multifactor versus labor productivity
The multifactor productivity performance was m ixed for the
10 largest manufacturing industries (those with more than
300,000 em ployees in 1996) reported on in this article.6 Multi­
factor productivity grew in five o f the industries for the 1987—
96 period. Two o f the industries had no growth while three
industries recorded declines. Conversely, labor productivity
4

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

One benefit o f multifactor productivity analysis is that it pro­
vides information about the impact on labor productivity o f
changes in the use o f capital and intermediate purchases.
Multifactor productivity is equal to output per hour minus the
effects o f changes in capital per hour and intermediate pur-

Table 1.

Multifactor productivity and related variables for three-digit manufacturing industries, 1987-96

(Average annual percent change)

SIC
code

Industry

M ultifactor
productivity

Output

C om bin ed
inputs

Labor

C ap ital

In te rm e d ia te
purchases

202
203
204
205
206

Dairy products.................................................................
Preserved fruits and vegetables...................................
Grain mill p ro d u c ts .........................................................
Bakery products.............................................................
Sugar and confectionery p roducts...............................

-0.1
-.3
-.7
-.4
2.1

0.5
1.7
1.3
-.7
1.7

0.7
2.0
2.0
-.3
-.5

-1.1
.7
.5
-.2
.2

1.6
2.1
2.5
1.9
1.4

0.8
2.2
2.1
-1 .0
-1 .7

207
208
209
221
222

Fats and o ils ....................................................................
Beverages.......................................................................
Miscellaneous food and kindred products....................
Broadwoven fabric mills, c o tto n ....................................
Broadwoven fabric mills, m a nm ad e..............................

.3
1.6
.9
-.5
1.5

1.0
2.2
2.2
-.1
.9

.7
.6
1.3
.4
-.6

-.1
-1 .2
1.2
-3 .5
-3 .4

.3
-.1
1.4
-1 .9
.1

.8
1.3
1.1
2.2
.3

224
225
226
227
228

Narrow fabric m ills ..........................................................
Knitting m ills ....................................................................
Textile finishing, except w o o l.........................................
Carpets and ru g s ............................................................
Yarn and thread m ills ......................................................

1.9
1.9
.9
.8
-.3

1.3
2.2
-1.1
.3
1.2

-.6
.3
-2 .0
-.5
1.5

-1 .3
-2 .3
1.5
.3
-3.1

.6
.8
-.3
.3
1.0

-.5
1.4
-3.1
-.7
2.9

229
232
233
234
235

Miscellaneous textile g o o d s ..........................................
Men’s and boys’ furnishings..........................................
Women’s and misses’ outerwear....................................
Women’s and children’s undergarm ents.......................
Hats, caps, and m illinery...............................................

.2
-.6
1.0
-.2
-1 .5

2.2
-.3
.5
-.5
.7

2.0
.3
-.4
-.3
2.2

-.1
-3 .6
-3 .3
-6 .5
2.9

2.3
.4
.3
-.6
2.0

2.6
2.0
.6
2.4
1.7

238
239
242
243
244

Miscellaneous apparel and accessories.......................
Miscellaneous fabricated textile Droducts...................
Sawmills and planing m ills .............................................
Millwork, plywood, and structural m em bers.................
Wood con tainers............................................................

-.3
.4
1.8
-.3
1.0

-.3
2.3
.4
-.1
3.4

.1
1.9
-1 .3
.2
2.3

-2 .3
1.6
-1 .2
.8
2.6

-.6
2.6
-1 .5
1.4
.1

1.2
1.8
-1 .4
-.2
2.5

245
249
251
252
253

Wood buildings and mobile hom es................................
Miscellaneous wood p ro d u c ts .......................................
Household furniture........................................................
Office fu rn itu re ................................................................
Public building and related fu rn itu re .............................

-.4
-.4
.6
-.7
.2

2.5
1.7
.7
-.6
11.8

2.9
2.1
.2
.2
11.6

2.9
.2
-1 .4
-1 .3
4.6

.1
1.5
.5
2.1
5.1

3.5
2.9
.9
.4
14.2

254
259
262
263
265

Partitions and fix tu re s ....................................................
Miscellaneous furniture and fix tu re s ............................
Paper m ills.......................................................................
Paperboard m ills ..............................................................
Paperboard containers and boxes................................

-.4
-.4
-1.1
-1 .0
-.1

1.4
1.7
.4
1.2
1.6

1.8
2.T
1.5
2.2
1.7

1.7
.3
-.8
-.7
1.0

2.1
2.3
2.9
2.9
1.4

1.9
2.9
1.8
2.6
2.0

267
271
275
276
277

Miscellaneous converted paper products.....................
Newspapers.....................................................................
Commercial prin ting........................................................
Manifold business form s................................................
Greeting ca rd s.................................................................

.0
-3 .5
.0
-3 .0
-2 .6

1.8
-3 .5
1.9
-4 .4
.9

1.8
.0
1.8
-1 .4
3.6

.4
-.7
1.0
-1.3
2.0

2.2
1.4
4.1
.0
1.6

2.0
-.4
1.7
-1 .9
6.1

278
279
281
282
283

Blankbooks and bookbinding.........................................
Printing trade se rv ic e s ...................................................
Industrial inorganic chem icals.......................................
Plastics materials and synth etics................................
Drugs................................................................................

-.8
1.6
.0
.3
-2.1

.8
1.3
.7
2.1
3.4

1.7
-.3
.7
1.8
5.7

-.7
-1 .3
-.3
-.4
2.1

2.3
2.6
-1 .4
2.9
6.4

3.6
-.8
1.7
2.0
6.5

285
286
287
289
291

Paints and allied products.............................................
Industrial organic chem icals..........................................
Agricultural ch e m ica ls....................................................
Miscellaneous chemical products..................................
Petroleum refining...........................................................

-.9
-2 .4
.4
-.8
.8

.6
-.4
1.7
.9
1.3

1.5
2.1
1.3
1.8
.6

-1 .9
-.3
.6
-.1
-2 .5

.6
3.3
-.8
2.0
1.4

2.6
2.1
2.4
2.3
.6

295
299
301
305
306

Asphalt paving and roofing m a trials.............................
Miscellaneous petroleum and coal products................
Tires and inner tu b e s......................................................
Hose and belting and gaskets and p a c k in g................
Fabricated rubber products, n.e.c.................................

.5
-1 .5
2.1
.2
1.4

1.7
.5
2.8
3.3
2.9

1.2
2.0
.6
3.1
1.5

.3
2.0
-.9
2.5
.7

1.5
1.2
-.5
-.3
1.3

1.2
2.1
1.8
4.4
2.0

308
314
321
322
323

Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.........................
Footwear, except rubber.................................................
Flat glass..........................................................................
Glass and glassware, pressed or blow n.......................
Products of purchased g la s s ........................................

.5
-.3
1.8
1.5
1.1

4.8
-4 .6
.8
.4
4.4

4.2
-4 .3
-1 .0
-1 .0
3.2

2.3
-7 .0
.6
-1 .7
2.1

4.7
-2 .8
-.8
-.2
3.7

5.0
-3 .4
-1 .9
-1.1
3.6

324
325
326
327
329

Cement, hydraulic...........................................................
Structural clay products.................................................
Pottery and related products.........................................
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products.....................
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral products................

2.4
1.4
1.0
.8
1.1

1.4
.5
2.9
1.0
1.3

-1 .0
-.9
1.9
.2
.2

-1 .4
-1 .5
.9
.2
.2

-3 .0
-1 .2
.6
-1 .4
-1 .0

.4
-.4
3.7
.5
.8


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

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

5

Multifactor Productivity

T a b le 1.

Continued— Multifactor productivity and related variables for three-digit manufacturing industries, 1987-96

(Average annual percent change)

SIC
code

Industry

M ultifactor
productivity

Output

Labor

C ap ital

In term e d iate
purchases

331
333
335
336
339

Blast furnace and basic steel p ro d u c ts .......................
Primary nonferrous m e ta ls ............................................
Nonferrous rolling and d ra w in g ......................................
Nonferrous foundries (castings)....................................
Miscellaneous primary metal p ro d u cts.........................

1.1
-1.7
-.6
1.2
1.6

3.2
1.0
-.1
3.0
6.1

2.1
2.7
.6
1.7
4.4

-1.1
-.2
-.5
.7
1.5

-1 .5
-.2
.7
1.6
.5

4.9
4.0
.9
2.4
7.7

341
342
343
344
347

Metal cans and shipping containers.............................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardw are.................................
Plumbing and heating, except e le c tric .........................
Fabricated structural metal products............................
Metal services, n.e.c......................................................

2.4
-.4
.5
-.1
1.1

.7
1.2
1.2
1.5
4.8

-1 .7
1.6
.7
1.6
3.7

-4.1
-.7
-.7
.8
1.9

.5
.9
.4
.5
3.1

-1 .5
3.2
1.5
2.2
5.0

348
349
351
352
353

Ordnance and accessories, n.e.c.................................
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products....................
Engines and turbines......................................................
Farm and garden m achinery..........................................
Construction and related m achinery.............................

-1 .8
-.1
.3
.5
.8

-6 .6
2.7
2.6
4.3
3.8

-4.8
2.8
2.4
3.7
3.0

-5 .2
1.8
-.9
.7
1.4

-1 .2
1.7
2.1
.6
-.1

-6 .4
3.6
3.7
5.6
4.1

354
355
356
357
358

Metalworking m achinery................................................
Special industry m achinery...........................................
General industrial m achinery.........................................
Computer and office equipm ent.....................................
Refrigeration and service m achinery............................

.6
.9
-.3
14.4
.2

3.0
5.2
2.6
20.4
3.6

2.4
4.3
2.9
5.3
3.3

1.4
1.9
1.6
-2 .7
2.0

1.0
2.8
1.3
5.7
2.1

3.6
6.0
4.3
8.2
4.3

359
361
362
363
364

Industrial machinery, n.e.c.............................................
Electric distribution equipm ent......................................
Electrical industrial apparatus.......................................
Household appliances....................................................
Electric lighting and wiring equipm ent...........................

2.4
1.7
1.4
.8
.3

5.7
1.7
3.5
1.6
1.1

3.3
.1
2.1
.8
.8

1.7
-2 .3
-1 .3
-1.1
-.7

2.2
.0
.7
.3
.6

5.2
1.3
4.6
1.4
1.6

366
367
369
371
372

Communications equipment...........................................
Electronic components and accessories......................
Miscellaneous electrical equipment & su p p lie s ...........
Motor vehicles and equipm ent.......................................
Aircraft and p a rts ...........................................................

4.4
14.8
1.2
-.9
.0

9.4
20.3
1.5
2.6
-2 .9

4.8
4.8
.3
3.6
-2 .9

-.2
.3
-.8
1.8
-4 .2

4.0
8.1
2.7
1.9
2.4

8.3
6.2
.4
4.3
-3.1

373
375
376
381
382

Ship and boat building and re p a irin g ............................
Motorcycles, bicycles, and p a rts ..................................
Guided missiles, space vehicles, p a rts .......................
Search and navigation equipm ent................................
Measuring and controlling d e v ic e s...............................

-1 .3
1.8
-1.9
.8
.6

-1 .6
9.7
-6.1
- 4.1
4.2

-.4
7.7
-4 .2
-4 .9
3.5

-1 .5
7.0
-8 .7
-7 .7
-.4

-.9
2.3
-.9
-1 .4
3.9

.5
8.5
-2.1
-3 .3
6.5

384
385
386
391
393

Medical instruments and s u p p lie s................................
Ophthalmic goods............................................................
Photographic equipment & sup p lie s .............................
Jewelry, silverware, and plated w a re ............................
Musical instrum ents.......................................................

.7
3.2
.5
-.7
-1 .6

6.3
6.7
.2
-.5
-.4

5.6
3.4
-.3
.2
1.3

2.4
-.5
-2 .6
-.7
2.3

6.7
6.8
1.0
-.5
-1 .2

6.9
5.3
-1 .0
.8
1.5

394
395
399

Toys and sporting g o o d s ................................................
Pens, pencils, office, and art supplies.........................
Miscellaneous manufactures.........................................

.6
3.1
1.2

4.0
3.4
2.5

3.4
.4
1.3

1.9
-.7
1.2

1.6
1.4
2.0

4.3
.4
1.4

chases per hour. These effects are measured as the change in
the ratio o f nonlabor to labor inputs where the nonlabor input
is weighted by its share in the total cost o f output. The capital
effect, for example, is the change in the capital-labor ratio
weighted by capital’s share in the total cost o f output. When­
ever the combination o f the capital effect and the intermediate
purchases effect is positive, multifactor productivity growth
is less than labor productivity growth.
Table 2 show s the relationship between multifactor pro­
ductivity and labor productivity. Over the 1987-96 period,
multifactor productivity changed by less than the change in
labor productivity in 93 three-digit manufacturing industries.
6

C om bined
inputs

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

A lso, 65 industries recorded growth in the capital effect over
the period, and 95 industries recorded growth in the interme­
diate purchases effect; som e industries recorded growth in
both measures.
The rate o f growth in capital services exceeded that o f
labor in 80 industries, and the rate o f growth in intermediate
purchases exceeded that o f labor in 96 industries. Changes in
the capital-labor ratio and the intermediate purchases-labor
ratio can have varying influences on labor productivity de­
pending on the shares o f capital and intermediate purchases
in the total cost o f output. For instance, in aircraft and parts
(SIC 372), the capital-labor ratio grew at a high rate o f 6.9 per-

Chart 1.
Number of
industries

Distribution of long-term trends in multifactor productivity for 108 manufacturing
industries, 1987-96

Number of
industries
35

35

-4.0 or less -3.0 to -3.4 -2.0 to -2.9 -1.0 to -1.9 -0.1 to -0.9

0 to 0.9

1.0 to 1.9

2.0 to 2.9

3.0 to 3.9

4.0 to 4.9

5.0 to 5.9

6.0 or more

Average annual percent change

Chart 2.

Trends in muitifactor productivity and labor productivity for the 10 largest manufacturing
industries, 1987-96
Average annual percent change

M o to r v e h ic le s and
e q u ip m e n t, s ic 371 (967,000)

Miscellaneous plastics
products, n.e.c., sic 308 (717,000)
Electronic components and
accessories, sic 367 (6i7,ooo)
Commercial printing,
SIC 275 (566,000)

Aircraft and parts,

|

Multifactor productivity

SIC 372 (458,000)

Newspapers,

II

Labor productivity

SIC 271 (441,000)

Fabricated structural metal
products, SIC 344 (439,000)
Computer and office
equipment, s ic 357 (362,000)
Industrial machinery, n.e.c.,
SIC 359 (350,000)

Metalworking machinery,
SIC 354 (345,000)

n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified
N o te : Employment levels for 1996 are shown in parentheses.


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

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

7

Multifactor Productivity

Table 2.

Multifactor productivity growth and its relationship to output per hour for three-digit manufacturing industries, 1987-96

(Average annual rate of change) '

SIC
code

Industry

M ultifactor
productivity

Output
p e r hour

C ap ital
e ffe c t2

In te rm e d ia te
purchases
e ffe c ts

202
203
204
205
206

Dairy products.............................................................
Preserved fruits and veg etab le s..............................
Grain mill p ro d u cts .....................................................
Bakery products.........................................................
Sugar and confectionery products...........................

-.1
-.3
-.7
-.4
2.1

1.7
1.0
.9
-.5
1.4

0.2
.4
.5
.3
.4

1.6
.9
1.1
-.4
-1 .0

207
208
209
221
222

Fats and o ils ................................................................
Beverages...................................................................
Miscellaneous food and kindred products...............
Broadwoven fabric mills, cotton ...............................
Broadwoven fabric mills, m a nm ad e..........................

.3
1.6
.9
-.5
1.5

1.1
3.4
1.0
3.6
4.4

.0
.3
.1
.1
.5

.8
1.4
.0
4.0
2.4

224
225
226
227
228

Narrow fabric m ills ......................................................
Knitting m ills ................................................................
Textile finishing, except w o o l.....................................
Carpets and ru g s ........................................................
Yarn and thread m ills ..................................................

1.9
1.9
.9
.8
-.3

2.6
4.6
-2 .6
.0
4.4

.4
.6
-.2
.0
.4

.3
2.1
-3 .2
-.8
4.3

229
232
233
234
235

Miscellaneous textile g o o d s ......................................
Men’s and boys’ furnishings......................................
Women’s and misses’ outerwear...............................
Women’s and children’s undergarm ents..................
Hats, caps, and m illinery...........................................

.2
-.6
1.0
-,2~
-1 .5

2.3
3.4
3.9
6.4
-2 .2

.3
.8
.5
1.1
-.2

1.8
3.2
2.4
5.5
-.6

238
239
242
243
244

Miscellaneous apparel and accessories..................
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products...............
Sawmills and planing m ills .........................................
Millwork, plywood, and structural m em bers.............
Wood con tainers........................................................

-.3
.4
1.8
-.3
1.0

2.1
.6
1.6
-.9
.7

.2
.1
-.1
.0
-.2

2.2
.1
-.1
-.6
-.1

245
249
251
252
253

Wood buildings and mobile hom es............................
Miscellaneous wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Household fu rn itu re ....................................................
Office fu rn itu re ...........................................................
Public building and related fu rn itu re .........................

-.4
-.4
.6
-.7
.2

-.4
1.5
2.2
.7
6.8

-.3
.1
.2
.6
.0

.4
1.8
1.4
.9
6.7

254
259
262
263
265

Partitions and fix tu re s ...............................................
Miscellaneous furniture and fix tu re s ........................
Paper m ills...................................................................
Paperboard m ills.........................................................
Paperboard containers and boxes............................

-.4
-.4
-1.1
-1 .0
-.1

-.3
1.4
1.2
1.9
.7

.0
.2
.8
1.0
.0

.1
1.5
1.5
1.9
.7

267
271
275
276
277

Miscellaneous converted paper products.................
Newspapers.................................................................
Commercial prin ting....................................................
Manifold business form s............................................
Greeting cards.............................................................

.0
-3 .5
.0
-3 .0
-2 .6

1.4
-2 .8
.9
-3.1
-1.1

.4
.6
.5
.3
-.1

1.0
.1
.4
-.3
1.7

278
279
281
282
283

Blankbooks and bookbinding.....................................
Printing trade s ervice s...............................................
Industrial inorganic chem icals...................................
Plastics materials and synth etics............................
Drugs............................................................................

-.8
1.6
.0
.3
-2.1

1.5
2.6
1.1
2.5
1.3

.7
.8
-.2
.7
1.8

1.6
.1
1.2
1.6
1.7

285
286
287
289
291

Paints and allied products.........................................
Industrial organic chem icals......................................
Agricultural che m icals................................................
Miscellaneous chemical products.............................
Petroleum refining.......................................................

-.9
-2.4
.4
-.8
.8

2.6
-.1
1.1
1.1
4.0

.5
.8
-.4
.4
.3

2.9
1.5
1.1
1.5
2.8

295
299
301
305
306

Asphalt paving and roofing m a te ria ls.......................
Miscellaneous petroleum and coal products............
Tires and inner tub es..................................................
Hose and belting and gaskets and p a c k in g ............
Fabricated rubber products, n.e.c.............................

.5
-1 .5
2.1
.2
1.4

1.4
-1 .5
3.7
.8
2.1

.2
-.1
.0
-.4
.0

.7
.1
1.5
1.0
.7

See footnotes at end of table.

8

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

T ab le 2.

Continued— Multifactor productivity growth and its relationship to output per hour for three-digit manufacturing
industries, 1987-96

(Average annual rate of change)1
SIC
code

Industry

M ultifactor
p r o d u c tiv ity

O u tpu t
p e r hour

C a p ita l
e ffe c t2

In t e r m e d ia t e
p u rc h a s e s
e ffe c t3

308
314
321
322
323

Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c..................
Footwear, except rubber..........................................
Flat g la ss...................................................................
Glass and glassware, pressed or blow n................
Products of purchased g la s s .................................

0.5
-.3
1.8
1.5
1.1

2.5
2.6
.2
2.2
2.2

0.4
.5
-.5
.5
.3

1.5
2.4
-1.1
.2
.8

324
325
326
327
329

Cement, hydraulic.....................................................
Structural clay products..........................................
Pottery and related products..................................
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products..............
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral products .......

2.4
1.4
1.0
.8
1.1

2.8
2.0
2.0
1.1

-.5
.0
-.1
-.2
-.3

.9
.6
1.0
.2
.3

331
333
335
336
339

Blast furnace and basic steel p ro d u c ts ............
Primary nonferrous m e ta ls ......................................
Nonferrous rolling and d ra w in g ...............................
Nonferrous foundries (castings).............................
Miscellaneous primary metal p ro d u cts..................

1.1
-1 .7
-.6
1.2
1.6

4.4
1.2
.4
2.3
4.6

-.1
-.2
.1
.0
-.2

3.4
3.1
1.0
1.0
3.1

341
342
343
344
347

Metal cans and shipping containers.......................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardw are...........................
Plumbing and heating, except e le c tric ..................
Fabricated structural metal products......................
Metal services, n.e.c................................................

2.4
-.4
.5
-.1
1.1

5.0
1.9
1.9
.7
2.8

.4
.2
.2
-.1
.2

2.1
2.0
1.2
.9
1.5

348
349
351
352
353

Ordnance and accessories, n.e.c...........................
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products..............
Engines and turbines................................................
Farm and garden m achinery....................................
Construction and related machinery.......................

-1 .8
-.1
.3
.5
.8

-1 .5
.9
3.5
3.6
2.3

.9
.0
.5
.0
-.2

-.5
1.0
2.8
3.0
1.7

354
355
356
357
358

Metalworking m achinery..........................................
Special industry m achinery.....................................
General industrial m achinery...................................
Computer and office equipm ent..............................
Refrigeration and service m achinery......................

.6
.9
-.3
14.4
.2

1.6
3.3
1.0
23.8
1.5

-.1
.1
-.1
1.7
.0

1.1
2.3
1.4
6.4
1.3

359
361
362
363
364

Industrial machinery, n.e.c.......................................
Electric distribution equipm e nt...............................
Electrical industrial apparatus................................
Household appliances.............................................
Electric lighting and wiring equipment.....................

2.4
1.7
1.4
.8
.3

3.9
4.1
4.9
2.7
1.7

.0
.4
.3
.2
.3

1.5
2.0
3.2
1.7
1.2

366
367
369
371
372

Communications equipment.....................................
Electronic components and accessories...............
Miscellaneous electrical equipment & s u p p lie s....
Motor vehicles and equipm ent................................
Aircraft and p a rts .....................................................

4.4
14.8
1.2
-.9
.0

9.7
20.0
2.3
.8
1.4

.9
1.8
.4
.0
.7

4.0
2.6
.7
1.7
.6

373
375
376
381
382

Ship and boat building and re p a irin g ......................
Motorcycles, bicycles, and p a rts ...........................
Guided missiles, space vehicles, p a rts ................
Search and navigation equipm e nt..........................
Measuring and controlling de v ic e s .........................

-1 .3
1.8
-1 .9
.8
.6

-.1
2.6
2.9
4.0
4.6

.0
-.3
1.9
1.2
.7

1.2
1.0
2.9
1.9
3.3

384
85
386
391
393

Medical instruments and s u p p lie s..........................
Ophthalmic goods.....................................................
Photographic equipm ents sup p lie s .......................
Jewelry, silverware, and plated w a re ......................
Musical instrum ents.................................................

.7
3.2
.5
-.7
-1 .6

3.8
7.3
2.8
.3
-2 .6

1.1
.9
1.8
.0
-.7

2.0
3.1
.5
.9
-.4

394
395
399

Toys and sporting g o o d s .........................................
Pens, pencils, office, and art supplies..................
Miscellaneous m anufactures..................................

.6
3.1
1.2

2.0
4.1
1.3

-.1
.4

1.5
.7

.0

.1

.8

1
The growth rate of multifactor productivity is equal to the growth rate of outputmultifactor productivity for larger rates of change.
2 The capital effect is the change in capital relative to labor over the given
per hour minus the growth rates of the capital effect and the intermediate purchases
time period weighted by the share of capital in the total cost of output.
effect. The rates of change used in this table are the commonly used compound
3 The intermediate purchases effect is the change in intermediate pur­
average annual rates. Only logarithmic rates of change are strictly additive. Therefore,
chases relative to labor over the given time period weighted by the share of
the compound rates of change for labor productivity minus the rates for the capital
intermediate purchases in the total cost of output.
effect and the intermediate purchases effect do not exactly equal the rate for


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

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

9

Multifactor Productivity

cent per year, but the capital effect grew at a rate o f only 0.7
percent, as the value share weight for capital represented only
11 percent o f total costs.8 However, the capital effect grew at
1.7 percent per year, on average, for the photographic equip­
ment and supplies industry (SIC 386), despite a more modest
3.7-percent gain in its capital-labor ratio because the cost share
w eight for capital averaged 48 percent.
Similarly, the intermediate purchases effect also depends
on both the change in the ratio o f intermediate purchases to
labor and the share o f intermediate purchases in total output.
In the dairy products industry (sic 202), for example, the cost
share o f intermediate purchases averaged 81 percent, and there­
fore the intermediate purchases effect grew at nearly the same
rate— 1.6 percent per year— as the 1.9 percent annual growth in
the ratio o f intermediate purchases to labor. The blankbooks and
bookbinding industry (SIC 278), on the other hand, had a much
smaller intermediate purchases cost share of 37 percent. In that
industry, a much faster 4.3 percent annual growth in the ratio of
intermediate purchases to labor resulted in the same growth rate
(1.6 percent per year) in the intermediate purchases effect as for
the dairy products industry.
There was a wide range o f production technologies among
the three-digit manufacturing industries, as exhibited by the
variation in the input share weights o f labor, capital, and in­
termediate purchases. (See exhibit 1.) The m ost capital in­

Exhibit 1.

tensive industries include the photographic equipment and
supplies industry, with a capital share o f 48 percent in 1996,
the drugs industry (SIC 283), with a capital share o f 42 per­
cent, and the greeting cards industry (sic 277), with a capital
share o f 35 percent. The public building and related furni­
ture industry (s ic 253) had the low est capital share (5 per­
cent). Industries that are the m ost intermediate purchases
intensive include petroleum refining (s ic 291), with an in­
termediate purchases share o f 88 percent in 1996, the fats
and oils industry (sic 207), with an intermediate purchases
share o f 86 percent, and the dairy products industry with an
intermediate purchases share o f 81 percent. The printing
trade services industry (SIC 279) had the low est intermedi­
ate purchases share (30 percent). Labor cost shares were
highest in printing trade services, with a labor share o f 50
percent, the search and navigation equipment industry (SIC
381), with a labor share o f 42 percent, and industrial ma­
chinery, not elsewhere classified, with a labor share o f 41
percent. The petroleum refining industry had the low est la­
bor share (3 percent).
Within the three-digit manufacturing industries, 65 recorded
growth in the capital effect, while 18 industries had no change
and 25 reported declines. Guided m issiles, space vehicles,
and parts (sic 376) had the highest capital effect growth (1.9
percent per year). The intermediate purchases effect grew for

Input cost shares can vary greatly am ong industries: percent distribution of average
cost shares for selected industries, 1 9 8 7 -9 6
Photographic equipment and supplies

Petroleum refining

Printing trade services

II

Labor cost

10

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

Capital cost

Intermediate purchases cost

95 industries, w hile one industry experienced no change and
12 experienced declines. Public building and related furni­
ture recorded the highest rate o f growth in the intermediate
purchases effect (6.5 percent per year).
In som e industries, the capital and intermediate purchases
contributions are so small that multifactor productivity change
accounts for a large portion o f the change in labor productiv­
ity. In 17 industries, multifactor productivity growth accounts
for more than half o f the change in labor productivity. In 7 o f
these industries, multifactor productivity growth accounted
for 70 percent or more o f the change in labor productivity. In
m iscellaneous manufactures ( s ic 399), for exam ple, 1.2 per­
centage points o f the 1.3-percent annual growth rate in out­
put per hour were accounted for by multifactor productivity
growth. Similarly, in miscellaneous food and kindred products
(SIC 209), o f the 1.0-percent annual growth rate in labor pro­
ductivity, 0.9 percentage points were a result o f multifactor
productivity growth.
Other industries show a different pattern. For example, in
public building and related furniture, only 0.2 percentage
points o f the 6.8-percent average annual gain in labor produc­
tivity were due to multifactor productivity growth. In 28 in­
dustries, the change in multifactor productivity was negative,
w hile the change in labor productivity was positive. In these
industries, the com bined changes in the capital effect and the
intermediate purchases effect were greater than the change in
labor productivity. Multifactor productivity change was higher
than labor productivity change in only 11 industries, indicat­
ing that the com bined effects o f capital and intermediate pur­
chases were negative. In each o f these industries, the ratio o f
intermediate purchases to labor declined during the period; in
6 o f 11, the ratio o f capital to labor also declined.
A s shown in table 2, large variations in the capital effects
and intermediate purchases effects exist among industries.
A s a result, there is no consistent relationship between the
multifactor productivity growth rates and the labor produc­
tivity growth rates. A m ong the industries with the 20 highest

multifactor productivity growth rates, only 11 were also in
the group having the 20 highest labor productivity growth
rates. The same held true for the industries with the 20 worst
multifactor productivity performances— only 9 were in the
group having the 20 worst labor productivity growth rates.
For example, at 2.1 percent per year, the sugar and confection­
ery products industry ranked 9th in multifactor productivity
growth, but in terms of labor productivity growth, it ranked 63rd,
at 1.4 percent. Guided missiles and space vehicles had the 6th
worst multifactor productivity growth rate, with a decline of
1.9 percent per year (trailing 102 other industries), but it had
the 29th best growth rate in labor productivity, at 2.9 percent.
Output growth was related to gains in multifactor pro­
ductivity. Among the 88 industries with output gains, 61 re­
corded multifactor productivity gains. In contrast, o f the 20
industries with average annual declines in output, 17 had de­
clines in m ultifactor productivity. The largest m ultifactor
productivity gains o f 14.8 percent and 14.4 percent per year
were recorded by the industries with the largest output gains
o f 20.3 and 20.4 percent— electronic com ponents and ac­
cessories, and computer and office equipment. Ordnance and
accessories, not elsewhere classified (SIC 348) recorded the
sharpest drop in output (6.6 percent per year), w hile at the
same time recording a substantial decline in multifactor pro­
ductivity (1.8 percent per year) over the study period.
u l t i f a c t o r p r o d u c t i v i t y i n m a n u f a c t u r i n g as a w hole
grew at a rate o f 0.7 percent per year, on average, for the
1987-96 period. The multifactor productivity series for the
108 three-digit SIC manufacturing industries presented in this
article document the wide dispersion o f growth rates around
that average. While labor productivity measures include the ef­
fects o f changes in capital per hour and intermediate purchases
per hour, multifactor productivity measures do not. Because
these effects vary widely from industry to industry, there is
no predictable relationship between labor productivity growth
rates and multifactor productivity growth rates.
□

M

Notes
1 Published indexes for multifactor productivity and related series
are available at http//stats.bls.gov/iprhome.htm. Series for unpub­
lished industries are available upon request. E-mail requests for informa­
tion may be sent to dipsweb@bls.gov. b l s is planning to extend the
industry multifactor productivity series to 1999 in the latter part of
2001 .
2 For more information on the Standard Industrial Classification
(sic) system, see Standard Industrial Classification Manual: 1987 (Of­
fice of Management and Budget, 1987).
3 The Bureau of Labor Statistics also produces measures of labor
productivity, as measured by output per employee hour, for individual
manufacturing industries at the 2-, 3-, and four-digit sic level. The
number of industries for which labor productivity series are maintained
has steadily increased. By 1998, all 457 four-digit manufacturing indus­
tries and 140 three-digit industries were covered.


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

4
Publication criteria included employment size, variability of an­
nual labor productivity changes, and an evaluation of capital compensa­
tion measures for each industry.
s The multifactor productivity data for manufacturing and the twodigit manufacturing industry groups are available at http://stats.bls.gov/
mprhome.htm.
6 One large industry, meat products (sic 201), did not meet publica­
tion standards and therefore is not included in this discussion.
7 See Robert J. Gordon, “Does the ‘New Economy’ Measure up to
the Great Inventions of the Past?” Journal of Economic Perspectives,
Volume 14, Number 4, Fall 2000, pages 49-74.
8 Data for three-digit industry value share weights for labor, capital,
and intermediate purchases are available upon request.

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

11

Multifactor Productivity

Appendix:

Measurement of multifactor productivity

Multifactor productivity indexes relate the change in output to the
change in the combination of labor, capital, and intermediate pur­
chases inputs consumed in producing that output. Because they in­
corporate a measure of combined inputs, multifactor productivity
measures are not influenced by the substitution of capital and inter­
mediate inputs for labor, as are measures of labor productivity. Mul­
tifactor productivity is calculated by dividing a Tomqvist index of
output by a Tomqvist index of combined inputs.1
Output. Output quantities for most industries are based on the
value of output adjusted for price change. The value of shipments of
primary products—wherever they are made—for each product class
is taken from the Annual Surveys of Manufactures ( a s m ) conducted
by the Bureau of the Census. These product class values are deflated
with matching b l s producer price indexes (P P is) and are Tomqvist
aggregated to the four-digit sic industry level. For each year, special
coverage ratios for the industry are used to adjust the wherever-made
indexes to an industry basis. The resultant industry indexes are fur­
ther adjusted to reflect changes in inventories to yield a measure of
production during the given year.
Every 5 years, benchmark output indexes are prepared that incor­
porate data from the Censuses of Manufactures ( c m ) and that are
more detailed than those available in the a s m s . Adjustments are pre­
pared from these data to remove resales and intra-industry transac­
tions to avoid double counting of output. The annual output indexes
based on a s m data are adjusted to the quinquennial benchmark levels
using linear interpolation.
Each four-digit industry output index is Tomqvist aggregated to
the three-digit industry level. In the process of this last aggregation,
adjustments are made to remove a second level of double counting—
those transactions between four-digit industries within the same threedigit industry.
Combined inputs. The index of combined inputs is a Tomqvist
aggregate of separate indexes of labor input, capital input, and inter­
mediate purchases input. The labor share weight is based on the total
value of labor compensation including fringe benefits. The intermedi­
ate purchases share weight is based on the total value of materials
(adjusted to remove intra-industry transactions), fuels, electricity,
and purchased services. The capital share weight is a residual calcu­
lated as the value of net production minus the value of labor compen­
sation minus the value of intermediate purchases.
Labor input. The labor input indexes are developed by dividing the
aggregate employee hours for each year by the base-period aggregate.
Because of data limitations, employee hours are treated as homoge­
neous and additive with no distinction made between hours of differ­
ent groups of employees. Annual hours of all employees are derived
by summing the aggregate hours for production workers and the
estimated hours for nonproduction workers. Data on employment
and hours are based on BLS surveys.
Capital input. The measure of capital input is based on the flow of
services derived from the stock of physical assets. Physical capital is
composed of equipment, structures, land, and inventories. Capital
services are estimated by calculating capital stocks; changes in the
stocks are assumed to be proportional to changes in capital services
for each asset. Stocks of different asset types are Tomqvist aggre­
gated using estimated rental prices to construct the weights for assets
of different types. Capital stocks are calculated using the perpetual
inventory method, which takes into account the continual additions
12

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

to and subtractions from the stock of capital as new investment and
retirement of old capital occur. The perpetual inventory method mea­
sures stocks at the end of a year equal to a weighted sum of all past
investments, where the weights are the asset’s efficiency relative to a
new asset. A hyperbolic age-efficiency function is used to calculate
the relative efficiency of an asset at different ages.
Price change must be removed from the investment data before
calculating stocks. Industry-specific price deflators for each asset
category are constructed by combining detailed price indexes (mostly
PPis) with weights based on the capital flow tables from the Bureau of
Economic Analysis ( b e a ) . These deflators are used to convert the
current-dollar investment to constant dollars. The various equip­
ment, structure, inventory, and land stock series in constant dollars
are aggregated into one capital input measure using implicit rental
prices to construct the weights.2
Intermediate purchases input. The index of intermediate purchases
input is constructed as a Tomqvist aggregate of separate indexes of
change in the quantity of materials, services, fuels, and electricity
consumed by an industry. Except for electricity, for which direct
quantity data are available, quantities are derived by deflating current
dollar values with appropriate price deflators. Annual current dollar
values of total materials consumed for each industry come from the
a s m and c m .
To avoid double counting, the materials estimates exclude, when­
ever possible, the value of intra-industry purchases. Estimates of
materials purchased from other establishments within the industry
are subtracted from the gross measure of materials costs to derive
estimates of “net” materials consumed.
Constant dollar net materials consumed by each industry are de­
rived by dividing the annual current dollar values by an industryspecific materials price deflator. To construct the materials price de­
flator, detailed producer price indexes are weighted together with
weights based on the values of specific materials consumed by each
industry. Data to construct these weights come from the CM and the
b e a benchmark input-output tables.
Annual data on the total value of all fuels consumed by industry
(which also come from the a s m and c m ) are deflated with industryspecific price deflators. Producer price indexes for six types of fuel
are aggregated using weights based on the nominal values of specific
fuels consumed, by industry. Data for estimating the weights are
from the a s m and the Department of Energy. Because both the value
and the quantity of purchased electricity are available annually by
industry from the ASM and CM , electricity is treated as a separate
component of intermediate purchases. Estimates of price and quan­
tity of electricity are derived directly from the a s m and c m data.
The data for annual cost of materials does not include the value of
purchased services. As a result, current dollar services purchased by
each industry are estimated based on proportions from the b e a bench­
mark input/output tables. Because of a lack of historical data on price
indexes for services, the aggregate, fixed-weight materials deflator is
used for deflating current dollar services as well as materials.
1 A Tom qvist index o f output is developed by com puting a w eighted average o f
the growth rates o f the various industry products between tw o periods, with w eights
based on the products’ shares in industry value o f production. The w eight for each
product equals its average value share in the tw o periods. For a more com plete d iscus­
sion o f the Tom qvist m ethodology see Kent Kunze, Mary Jablonski, and Virginia
Klarquist, “BLS m odernizes industry labor productivity program,” Monthly Labor
Review, July 1995, pp. 3 -1 2 .
2 For a more extensive discussion o f the measurement o f capital, see Multifactor
Productivity Measures for three-digit sic Manufacturing Industries, Report 948
(Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Decem ber 2000).

ma

Displaced Workers

■

Worker displacem ent
in a strong labor m arket
As economic growth continued in 1997 and 1998,
job losses declined, and the displacement rate
was the lowest o f the 1990s;
many displaced workers were able to find
new jobs with little or no change in weekly earnings

Ryan T. Helwig

Ryan T. Helwig is an
economist in the
Division of Labor Force
Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics,
e-mail:
Helwig_R@bls.gov


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

he U .S. econom y continued to expand in
1997 and 1998, experiencing its seventh
and eighth consecutive years o f economic
growth. During this 2-year period, payroll em ­
ployment rose by 6.4 m illion jobs, and the unem­
ployment rate averaged less than 5 percent for
the first time since the early 1970s.1 A s a result
o f these improved labor market conditions, both
the level and incidence o f job displacement con­
tinued to decline.
W hile many workers benefited from an e x ­
panding econom y in the late 1990s, job loss
continued to affect a substantial number o f
workers. During the 1 9 9 7 -9 8 period, 1.9 m il­
lion workers perm anently lost jobs they had
held for 3 or more years because their plant or
com pany closed dow n or m oved, their p o si­
tions or shifts were abolished, or there was
insufficient work.2 This compares with 2.2 m il­
lion workers displaced during 1 9 9 5 -9 6 , and 2.4
m illion during 1 9 9 3 -9 4 . A s the displacem ent
decline suggests, the likelihood o f losing a job
also fell. The displacem ent rate— the propor­
tion o f long-tenured workers w ho were d is­
placed from their jobs— w as 2.5 percent in
1 9 9 7 -9 8 , dow n from 2.9 percent in 1 9 9 5 -9 6 ,
and the low est in nearly a decade.
O f long-tenured workers w ho lost jobs in
1 9 9 7 -9 8 , more than three-fourths w ere reem ­
p lo y e d w h en su rv ey ed in February 2 0 0 0 .
W h ile this p ercen tage rem ained rela tiv ely
high, it w as dow n slightly from the 1 9 9 5 -9 6

T

period. Workers d isplaced during 1 9 9 7 -9 8
found new jobs m ore quickly than did those in
the early and m id -1 9 9 0 s. Furthermore, d is­
placed workers w ho w ere reem ployed in fu ll­
tim e jobs had essen tially no change in their
m edian w eekly earnings.
The U .S . Departm ent o f L abor’s E m p loy­
m ent and Training A dm inistration sponsors
b ie n n ia l su rv e y s o f d isp la c e d w o rk ers as
supplem ents to the Current Population Survey
(C P S ). U sin g the survey data, this article e x ­
am ines job lo ss and reem ploym ent in the late
1990s, focu sin g on characteristics o f workers
displaced in 1 9 9 7 -9 8 and their experiences fo l­
low in g a job lo ss. A tim e series has been co n ­
structed using 2 years o f data from each sur­
vey, beginning w ith the 1 9 8 1 -8 2 period (from
the first survey in 1984) and ending w ith the
1 9 9 7 -9 8 period (from the 2 0 0 0 survey). (See
appendix for a description o f the D isp laced
Worker Survey.)
The fo llo w in g d iscu ssion fo cu ses on longtenured workers— displaced workers w ho lost
or left jobs they had held for 3 years or m ore.
The basis for restricting the analysis to these
workers is the assum ption that at least 3 years
w ith the sam e em p lo y er d en o tes a nontrivial
em p lo y m en t re la tio n sh ip . In other w ords,
displaced workers are more lik ely to be those
w ho lo st their jobs due to labor market co n d i­
tions— not as a result o f a “bad m atch” with
their employer.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

13

Displaced Workers

Characteristics of the displaced

the unemployment rate during the 1997-98 period averaged
8.7 percent for high school dropouts, compared with 2.0 per­
cent for college graduates. Educational differences in dis­
placement rates, however, are not as large as those for unem­
ployment rates; the 1997-98 displacement rates were remark­
ably similar. A s the follow ing tabulation shows, displace­
ment rates declined across all education groups during the
1997-98 period:

Age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. Displacem ent rates for
adults (aged 20 and older), whites, blacks, and Hispanics
continued to decline in 1997-98. Their rates were the low est
since the late 1980s, which also was a period o f strong labor
market conditions.4 Although lower than the rate from the
1998 survey, the displacement rate for those aged 55 and
older (3.1 percent) was again higher than those aged 2 5 -5 4
(2.3 percent). In fact, the 0.8-percent gap between these two
groups was the widest since the survey was first conducted.
(See table 1.)
Displacem ent rates for men and women— 2.4 percent and
2.5 percent, respectively— were virtually identical in 19 9 7 98. D isplacem ent rates for whites (2.5 percent) and blacks
(2.3 percent) were som ewhat lower than those for Hispanics
(3.1 percent).

Educational attainment. Workers with higher education
tend to fare better in the labor market than their less-educated
counterparts. For instance, among persons aged 20 and older,

Table 1.

D isplacem en t rates

1995-96
Total, 20 years and older......... ....
Less than a high school diploma .......
High school graduate, no college .......
Some college, no degree................ ....
Associate’s degree......................... ....
College graduates.......................... ....

2.9
3.7
3.0
3.2
3.0
2.5

1997-98
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.9
2.6
2.0

Although college graduates (at 2.0 percent) had slightly lower
rates than individuals with less education, all rates were be­
low 3.0 percent.

Displacem ent rates ot long-tenured workers by a g e , sex, race, and Hispanic origin, 1981-98

[Percent]
C haracteristic

1981-82

1983-84

1985-86

1987-88

1989-90

1991-92'

1993-94'

1995-96'

1997-9

Total

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............
20 to 24 yea rs............................
25 to 54 yea rs............................
25 to 34 y e a rs .......................
35 to 44 y e a rs .......................
45 to 54 y e a rs .......................
55 years and o ld e r.....................
55 to 64 y e a rs .......................
65 years and o ld e r ...............

3.9
4.0
4.0
5.0
3.8
3.0
3.6
3.8
3.2

3.1
2.0
3.3
3.9
3.1
2.6
3.1
3.1
2.9

3.1
1.8
3.3
3.5
3.3
3.0
2.9
3.0
2.3

2.4
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.7
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.9

3.1
2.2
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.3
2.4

3.9
2.0
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
4.4
4.5
3.8

3.3
2.5
3.4
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.1
3.0
3.2

2.9
1.9
2.9
2.9
3.0
3.0
3.3
3.3
3.5

2.5
1.7
2.3
2.2
2.4
2.4
3.1
3.2
2.9

Men, 20 years and o ld e r.............
Women, 20 years and o ld e r........

4.3
3.4

3.2
2.9

3.3
2.8

2.4
2.4

3.2
2.8

4.1
3.5

3.4
3.2

2.8
3.2

2.4
2.5

3.8
4.2
3.3

3.1
3.2
2.9

3.1
3.3
2.8

2.4
2.4
2.4

3.0
3.2
2.8

3.8
4.1
3.4

3.3
3.4
3.2

3.0
2.8
3.2

2.5
2.4
2.6

4.8
5.3
4.3

3.9
4.0
3.8

3.4
4.1
2.6

2.0
1.6
2.4

3.5
3.9
3.2

3.8
3.9
3.7

3.5
4.2
2.9

2.7
2.6
2.8

2.3
2.6
2.0

4.3
4.3
4.4

3.9
3.9
3.8

3.9
4.1
3.5

2.9
2.6
3.3

4.3
4.1
4.7

4.7
5.2
3.8

3.6
3.9
3.1

4.0
3.2
5.3

3.1
2.7
3.7

White

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............
M e n ............................................
W o m e n .......................................
Block

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............
M e n ............................................
W om e n.......................................
Hispanic origin

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............
M e n ............................................
W o m e n .......................................

—

I'.u. uiv iv
/ ui

iw u ,

o v u y \j \j 11 i p a i a u i c w i l l I

earlier periods due to differences in estimation methodology.
Note: Displacement rates are calculated by dividing the number of dis­
placed workers in a specified worker group by a tenure-adjusted, 2-year

14

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

average estimate of employment for the same worker group. Employment
estimates for each year were adjusted, using job-tenure data from the Janu­
ary 1983, 1987, 1991, and February 1996 and 1998 CPS supplements, to
include only those workers with 3 years of tenure or more. A 2-year average
was then computed using those adjusted employment estimates.

Industry and occupation. Displacement rates declined for
m ost major industry groups between the 1998 and 2000 D isT ab le 2.

placed Worker surveys, although mining and agriculture experienced rate increases. (See table 2.)

Displacem ent rates of long-tenured workers by industry, class of worker, and occupation of lost job,
1981-98

[Percent]
1981-82

1983-84

1985-86

1987-88

3.9

3.1

3.1

2.4

Nonagricultural private wage and
salary w orkers...........................

5.3

4.2

4.3

Mining..........................................
Construction...............................
Manufacturing............................
Durable g o o d s ........................
Nondurable goods..................

13.6
7.6
8.2
9.3
6.4

9.2
5.5
6.5
7.0
5.6

17.8
7.0
5.2
5.8
4.1

C haracteristic

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............

1989-90

1991-92'

1993-94’

1995-961

1997-98'

2.5

3.1

3.9

3.3

2.9

3.2

4.1

5.1

4.4

3.8

3.2

6.1
4.2
3.9
4.0
3.7

10.0
5.9
5.0
5.1
4.9

7.4
8.4
7.1
8.4
5.2

7.2
4.3
5.8
6.3
5.1

4.5
3.4
5.1
4.6
5.8

10.1
3.4
4.2
4.3
4.1

Industry an d class of w orker

Transportation and
public utilities..........................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ........
Finance, insurance, and real
e s ta te ......................................
S ervices......................................

4.1
3.7

3.8
3.1

3.1
4.3

1.8
3.6

3.6
3.9

4.4
4.7

4.3
4.6

3.8
4.3

2.5
3.4

1.4
2.3

1.3
2.1

3.5
2.3

2.8
1.7

3.5
2.1

5.5
2.9

4.7
2.8

3.5
2.5

3.3
2.2

Agricultural wage and salary
w orke rs.......................................
Government w o rk e rs .....................

5.4
1.2

9.7
.6

4.1
.4

2.5
.4

3.2
.4

3.8
1.1

3.4
1.3

2.2
1.4

4.0
.7

White-collar occupations2 .............
Managerial and professional
specialty..................................
Executive, administrative and
managerial...........................
Professional spe cia lty...........
Technical, sales, and
administrative su p p o rt...........
Technicians and related
support.................................
Sales occupations.................
Administrative support,
including clerical.................

2.6

2.1

2.6

2.1

2.7

3.7

3.3

2.9

2.4

2.1

1.8

2.1

1.8

2.3

3.6

2.9

2.3

2.3

2.5
1.7

2.4
1.2

2.8
1.4

2.5
1.1

3.4
1.3

4.8
2.4

3.5
2.4

2.7
2.0

2.9
1.6

3.0

2.4

3.1

2.5

3.1

3.7

3.7

3.6

2.5

3.3
3.7

2.9
2.8

3.0
3.2

2.2
2.7

3.2
2.9

3.7
3.6

3.4
3.4

3.6
3.8

2.5
2.7

2.5

2.0

3.1

2.4

3.2

3.8

3.9

3.5

2.3

Service occupations......................
Protective services....................
Other service occupations........

2.0
1.3
2.1

1.8
1.9
1.7

1.9
.5
2.2

1.5
.6
1.6

1.6
1.2
1.7

2.1
.8
2.3

1.8
0.6
2.1

2.1
2.0
2.2

1.4
.8
1.6

Blue-collar occupations3 ...............
Precision production, craft,
and re p a ir...............................
Mechanics and re paire rs.......
Construction tra d e s ...............
Other precision production
occupations........................
Operators, fabricators, and
laborers...................................
Machine operators,
assemblers, and inspectors
Transportation and material
moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners,
helpers, and labo rers.........
Farming, forestry, and fis h in g ......

7.3

5.7

4.7

3.3

4.5

5.3

4.2

3.5

3.1

6.2
4.8
5.3

4.5
3.8
4.0

3.9
2.1
4.1

2.7
2.1
2.4

4.2
3.4
4.2

5.1
3.7
5.5

3.4
3.3
2.2

3.1
3.1
2.4

2.7
2.0
2.8

8.5

5.6

5.5

3.7

5.1

6.4

4.7

3.8

3.6

8.2

6.7

5.5

3.8

4.8

5.5

5.0

3.8

3.5

9.6

8.1

5.9

4.5

6.2

6.7

5.5

4.9

4.0

5.7

3.7

4.8

3.1

3.6

4.1

4.1

2.1

2.1

8.0
.9

7.6
2.1

5.2
1.6

3.0
.8

3.0
1.5

4.9
1.4

5.4
.8

3.9
1.4

4.3
1.8

O cc up atio n

'Data, beginning with the 1991-92 period, are not directly comparable
with earlier periods due to differences in estimation methodology.
2White-collar occupations are made up of the “managerial and professional
specialty” and “technical, sales, and administrative support” categories.
3 Blue-collar occupations are the sum of the “precision production, craft,
and repair,” and “operators, fabricators, and laborers” categories.


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

Note: Displacement rates are calculated by dividing the number of dis­
placed workers in a specified worker group by a tenure-adjusted, 2-year
average estimate of employment for the same worker group. Employment
estimates for each year were adjusted, using job-tenure data from the Janu­
ary 1983, 1987, 1991, and February 1996 and 1998 CPS supplements, to
include only those workers with 3 years of tenure or more. A 2-year average
was then computed using those adjusted employment estimates.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

15

Displaced Workers

Although the gap in displacement rates between goodsproducing and service-producing industry workers has nar­
rowed since the early 1980s, workers in goods-producing in­
dustries— mining, construction, and manufacturing— contin­
ued to be more likely to be displaced from their job than those
in service-producing industries. Am ong goods-producing
industries, construction continued to post the low est dis­
placement rate (3.4 percent). Workers in both durable and
nondurable goods manufacturing experienced their low est
Table 3.

risk o f job loss in a decade. During the 1997-98 period, the
displacement rate declined more for nondurable goods manu­
facturing than for any other major industry (4.1 percent in
1997-98, down from 5.8 percent in the m id-1990s).
Displacement rates in the service-producing industries fell
for the third consecutive 2-year period. At 2.2 percent, the
services industry, which includes business, health, and edu­
cational services, continued to have the low est rate o f job
loss. Transportation and public utilities, and the w holesale

Displacem ent rates by tenure on the lost job, 1981-98

[Percent]
Tenure on th e lost jo b

rotal displaced, 20 years
and o ld e r...........................................
Less than 3 y e a rs ..........................
3 years or m o re ..............................
3 to 4 y e a rs .................................
5 to 9 y e a rs .................................
10 years or m o re .........................
10 to 14 years..........................
15 to 19 years..........................
20 years or m o re.....................

1981-82

5.7
8.9
3.9
5.8
4.4
2.6
3.1
2.5
2.0

1983-84

4.1
5.7
3.1
4.3
3.5
2.2
2.7
2.1
1.7

1985-86

1987-88

1989-90

1991-92'

1993-94'

4.0
5.4
3.1
4.0
3.6
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.1

3.2
4.7
2.4
3.5
2.6
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.5

4.3
6.5
3.1
4.4
3.3
2.2
2.5
2.5
1.7

4.9
6.6
3.9
5.7
4.3
2.8
3.0
2.7
2.7

4.4
6.5
3.3
5.0
3.2
2.5
2.6
2.5
2.4

1Data, beginning with the 1991 -9 2 period, are not directly comparable with
earlier periods due to differences in estimation methodology.
Note: Displacement rates are calculated by dividing the number of dis­
placed workers in a specified worker group by a tenure-adjusted 2-year aver-

Table 4.

1995-96'

3.9
5.5
2.9
3.7
3.3
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.1

1997-9

3.4
5.0
2.5
3.1
2.5
2.1
2.0
2.4
1.9

age estimate of employment for the same worker group. Employment esti­
mates for each year were adjusted, using job-tenure data from the January
1983,1987,1991, and February 1996 and 1998 CPS supplements, to include
only those workers with 3 years of tenure or more. A 2-year average was then
computed using those adjusted employment estimates.

Long-tenured displaced workers who lost jobs in 1997 or 1998 by a g e, sex, ed u catio nal attainm ent, an d reason
for job loss

[Numbers in thousands]
Percent distribution
A g e , sex, a n d
e d u c a tio n a l attain m ent

Displaced
workers

Plant or
c o m p a n y closed
do w n or m o v e d

Total, 20 years and o ld e r....................................
20 to 24 years ...............................................
25 to 54 y e a rs ................................................
25 to 34 y e a rs ............................................
35 to 44 y e a rs ............................................
45 to 54 y e a rs ............................................
55 years and o ld e r.........................................
55 to 64 y e a rs ............................................
65 years and o ld e r.....................................
Men, 20 years and o ld e r.....................................
Women, 20 years and o ld e r...............................

1,920
48
1,453
344
602
507
420
331
89
1,045
875

50.3
(1)
48.0
51.2
47.2
46.7
55.5
57.7
47.2
48.9
51.9

20.8
(1)
21.5
25.6
23.4
16.6
18.8
15.7
30.3
22.0
19.4

29.0
(')
30.5
23.3
29.4
36.7
25.7
26.6
22.5
29.1
28.8

191
640
441
177
319
152

57.6
56.4
52.4
48.6
36.7
38.8

34.0
22.7
20.6
22.0
11.3
15.1

8.4
20.9
27.0
28.8
52.0
46.1

Insufficient
work

Position or
shift a b olis hed

Educational attainm ent

Less than a high school d iplo m a.......................
High school graduate, no c o lle g e ......................
Some college, no d e gree....................................
Associate's degree .............................................
Bachelor’s degree...............................................
Advanced d e g re e ...............................................

1Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
N ote: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their

16

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

and retail trade industries had lower displacement rates in
1997-98, after having the highest among service-producing
industries in 1995-96.
Compared with the 1995-96 period, the risk of displace­
ment fell for most major occupational groups. Although whitecollar workers continued to be less likely than blue-collar
workers to lose their jobs, the gap in displacement rates be­
tween the two groups has narrowed considerably since the
early 1980s.5 In 1981-82, the displacement rate for blue-collar
workers was 7.3 percent, compared with 2.6 percent for whitecollar workers. In 1997-98, the displacement rates were 3.1
percent and 2.4 percent, respectively.

Tenure on the lost job. During the 1997-98 period, 4.2 million
workers were displaced, regardless o f their tenure on the lost
job. While a substantial number had been with their employer
for 10 years or more, the risk o f job loss generally declined
with increasing tenure. (See table 3.)
Em ployees with less than 3 years o f experience with their
employer made up half o f all displaced workers, and their risk
o f displacement was 5 percent— twice as high as that for thenT ab le 5.

more experienced counterparts (2.5 percent). Unlike in earlier
years, experience has generally had less influence on displace­
ment rates. For example, the displacement rate for em ployees
with 3 to 4 years o f experience with their employer was only
about two-fifths higher in each o f the last 2 surveys than for
people with 15 to 19 years experience. Prior to that, the rate
was generally at least twice as high. As in past surveys,
workers with at least 20 years o f tenure had the low est risk of
job loss— only a 1.9 percent displacement rate in 1997-98.
P ercent
D isplacem ent
D istribution
rate
Tenure on the lost jo b

Total displaced, age 20 years and older . 100.0
Less than 3 years................................ . 51.5
3 years or m o re................................... . 45.6
3 to 4 y ears....................................... . 13.6
5 to 9 years....................................... . 13.8
10 years or m o re............................... . 17.9
7.0
10 to 14 years................................. .
4.9
15 to 19 years................................. .
6.0
20 years or m o re............................. .
2.9
Tenure not available............................. .

3.4
5.0
2.5
3.1
2.5
2.1
2.0
2.4
1.9
_

Long-tenured displaced workers who found new jobs by w eeks without work, a g e, sex, educational attainm ent,
and em ploym ent status in February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]
W eeks without w ork b e fo re finding a jo b
C haracteristic

Total w h o
found jobs

Less than
5 w ee ks

5 to 14
weeks

15 to 26
w eeks

27 to 52
weeks

52 w ee ks
or m o re

M e d ia n w ee ks
without work

Total, 20 years and o ld e r....................
25 to 54 y e a rs .................................
25 to 34 y e a rs ..............................
35 to 44 y e a rs..............................
45 to 54 y e a rs ..............................
55 years and o lde r..........................

1,541
1,241
301
503
437
258

757
605
183
219
204
127

340
282
60
124
97
53

200
173
34
73
66
22

184
134
18
68
47
43

60
47
6
19
23
13

5.3
5.4
3.0
6.3
6.2
5.7

Employed........................................
Unemployed....................................
Not in the labor fo rc e .....................

1,421
53
68

721
15
21

308
11
21

180
9
12

161
12
11

51
6
3

4.4
(1)
(1)

879
816
25
36

461
439
12
10

187
168
5
13

105
100
1
4

103
87
7
8

23
22
0
1

4.2
4.1
(1)
(1)

663
605
26
31

296
283
3
11

153
140
5
8

96
80
8
8

81
74
4
2

37
28
6
2

6.4
5.9
(1)
(1)

140
499
336
151
289
125

71
217
162
68
161
77

36
120
65
27
71
22

6
88
50
18
30
8

25
55
56
20
14
14

2
19
3
18
13
4

4.4
7.0
6.0
6.1
4.0
1.0

Men

Men, 20 years and o ld e r................
Employed........................................
Unemployed....................................
Not in the labor fo r c e ..................
Women

Women, 20 years and o ld e r...........
Employed........................................
Unemployed....................................
Not in the labor fo r c e ..................
Educational attainm ent

Less than a high school diplo m a......
High school graduate, no c o lle g e .....
Some college, no degree....................
Associate's degree .............................
Bachelor’s degree...............................
Advanced d e g re e ...............................

iData not shown where base is less than 75,000.
Note:

Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job


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

they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

17

Displaced Workers

Table 6.

Long-tenured d isplaced workers who found new jobs by weeks without work, industry, class of worker,
and occupation of the lost job

[Numbers in thousands]
W eeks w ithout w ork b e fo re finding a jo b
Total w h o
found jobs

C haracteristic

Less than
5 w ee ks

5 to 14
w eeks

1,541

757

340

1,403
27
95
454
288
167
95
83
222
109
320
184
38
79

679
8
50
204
139
65
56
36
120
61
144
90
27
47

Managerial and professional specialty.....................
Executive, administrative, and m anagerial...........
Professional specialty.............................................

487
319
170

Technical, sales, and administrative s u p p o rt.........
Technicians and related su p p o rt..........................
Sales occupations.................................................
Administrative support, including c le ric a l...........
Service occupations..................................................
Protective s e rv ic e s..............................................
Other service occupations...................................

15 to 26
weeks

27 to 52
w
ookc
TYCvhO

52 w ee ks
or m o re

200

184

60

5.3

310
3
20
87
51
36
22
20
51
22
86
52
10
14

186
0
11
62
34
28
7
22
27
9
49
16
1
8

176
12
14
79
46
33
9
4
19
11
28
15
0
7

52
4
0
22
18
5
1
1
5
6
13
11
0
3

5.6
(’)
2.7
7.6
5.6
8.4
3.8
7.7
4.1
3.6
6.2
5.5
(1)
3.5

254
171
83

108
67
42

50
33
17

58
37
21

17
11
7

4.1
3.6
5.6

424
62
175
185
94
9
85

208
30
90
88
47
6
41

86
14
31
40
27
0
27

65
10
29
26
4
0
4

43
5
20
17
6
0
6

22
3
5
14
10.0
3
7.0

5.4
4.9
4.3
6.1
4.5
(1)
5.7

Precision production, craft, and repair...................
Mechanics and re paire rs......................................
Construction tra d e s ..............................................
Other precision production occupations.............
Operators, fabricators, and laborers.......................
Machine operators, assemblers, and
inspectors...........................................................
Transportation and material-moving
occupations........................................................
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers,
and laborers........................................................

206
51
78
76
279

113
30
46
37
112

35
11
16
8
66

28
9
9
10
44

30
1
7
21
47

0
0
0
0
10

3.0
(1)
2.3
5.7
7.8

153

62

27

22

33

9

8.0

54

15

16

14

9

0

(1)

73

35

24

8

5

1

(1)

Farming, forestry, and fis h in g ................................

35

21

10

4

0

0

0

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.........................................

M e d ia n w ee ks
without work

Industry a n d class of worker

Nonagricultural private wage and salary w orkers....
M in in g .....................................................................
C onstruction..........................................................
M anufacturing........................................................
Durable g o o d s ....................................................
Nondurable g o o d s .............................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s........................
Wholesale tra d e .....................................................
Retail tra d e .............................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ...................
S e rv ic e s .................................................................
Professional s e rv ic e s ......................................
Agricultural wage and salary w o rk e rs ...................
Government w orkers...............................................
O ccupation

1 Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
N ote: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their

The displacem ent experience

plant or company closed down or moved; there was insufficient work for
them to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

Reason for job loss. One-half o f the 1.9 m illion long-tenured

with a college degree reported that their position or shift had
been abolished. By contrast, fewer than 10 percent o f high
school dropouts cited this reason.

workers displaced during 1997-98 had lost their job because
their plant or company closed or moved. (See table 4, page 16)
About 1 in 3 reported that their position or shift was abolished.
The remaining one-fifth lost their job because o f insufficient
work. These proportions differed little from the 1998 survey.
Displaced workers without a college degree were much
more likely to cite plant or company closings as the reason for
losing their job. More than one-half o f displaced workers

Weeks without work. D isplaced workers w ho found new
jobs were asked how long they went without work. In the
2000 survey, the median period between jobs for these 1.5
m illion long-tenured displaced workers was 5.3 w eeks. (See
table 5, page 17.) This duration was lower than the median
7.6 weeks measured in 1995-96, down considerably from the
median 8.3 weeks in 1993-94. Many workers displaced dur-

18

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

Table 7.

Long-tenured displaced workers by receipt an d exhaustion of unem ploym ent insurance benefits and
em ploym ent status at the time of the survey

[Numbers in thousands]
1981-82

1983-84

1985-86

1987-88

1989-90

1991-92'

Dis­
p la c ­
Per­
ed
cent
work­
ers

Dis­
p la c ­
Per­
ed
cent
w ork­
ers

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
w ork­
ers

2,445 100.0 2,238

1993-94'

1995-96'

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
w ork­
ers

Per­
cent

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
w ork­
ers

Per­
cent

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
work­
ers

Per­
ce n t

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
w ork­
ers

Per­
cent

2,361

100.0

1,920

100.0

1,996

100.0

1,623

100.0

2,192

100.0

2,816

100.0

1,725

73.1

1,223

63.7

1,239

62.1

929

57.2

1,301

59.4

1,746

62.0

980

41.5

668

33.5

451

27.8

733

33.4

878

31.2

Employed..............
Received
benefits2.........
Exhausted
be nefits.......

1,517

100.0

1,363

100.0

1,533

100.0

1,278

100.0

1,600

100.0

2,113

100.0

1,072

70.7

851

62.4

931

60.7

701

54.9

902

56.4

1,267

60.0

1,002

52.2

911

469

30.9

-

-

443

28.9

277

21.7

424

26.5

499

23.6

468

24.4

Unemployed..........
Received
benefits2.........
Exhausted
benefits.......

480

100.0

240

100.0

192

100.0

124

100.0

293

100.0

313

100.0

177 100.0

405

84.4

176

73.3

146

76.0

88

71.0

210

71.7

241

77.0

117

326

67.9

105

54.7

60

48.4

161

54.9

185

59.1

79

364

100.0

317

100.0

271

100.0

221

100.0

299

100.0

390

100.0

248

68.1

196

61.8

162

59.8

140

63.3

189

63.2

238

185

50.8

-

-

120

44.3

114

51.6

148

49.5

194

C haracterisic

Total, 20 years
and o ld e r...............
Received
benefits2 ..........
Exhausted
benefits..........

Not in the labor
fo rc e .................
Received
benefits2 ........
Exhausted
be nefits.......

-

_

-

_

Per­
cent

Dis­
p la c ­
ed
w ork­
ers

1,302

53.3

687

28.1

619

1,920 100.0

1,846

1,142

Per­
cent

1997-98’
Dis­
p la c ­
Per­
ed
cent
w o rk­
ers

100.0 1,920

100.0

51.0

883

46.0

27.7

437

22.8

100.0 1,496

100.0

49.3

636

448

24.3

251

16.8

114

100.0

108

100.0

66.1

74

64.9

75

69.4

44.6

43

37.7

52

48.1

348 100.0

278

100.0

316

100.0

61.0

183

52.6

157

56.5

172

54.4

49.7

140

40.2

128

46.0

134

42.4

42.5

'Data, beginning with the 1991-92 period, are not directly comparable with
earlier periods due to differences in estimation methodology.
2Data will not sum to totals or 100 percent because the numbers of dis­
placed workers who reported that they did not receive benefits or did not
answer are not shown separately.

Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left because their plant or company closed or moved; there
was Insufficient work for them to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

ing 1997-98 obviously benefited from the strong labor market.
Other findings from the 2000 survey indicated that per­
sons aged 25 to 34 spent the least time without work— 3 weeks,
compared with roughly 6 weeks for their counterparts aged 35
and older. The median duration for women (6.4 weeks) was
slightly more than 2 weeks longer than that for men (4.2 weeks).
Job losers with more education typically spend less time
without a job. O f those who found jobs, individuals with a
bachelor’s degree only and those with advanced degrees were
without work for the shortest time period— 4 weeks and 1
week, respectively. Interestingly, the median number o f weeks
high school dropouts spent without work also was relatively
low— 4.4 weeks.
In terms o f industry, displaced construction workers spent
the least time without work— 2.7 weeks. By contrast, dis­
placed workers whose last job was in manufacturing or whole­
sale trade went the longest time jobless— nearly 8 weeks.
(See table 6.) With regard to occupation, individuals dis­
placed from precision production and managerial occupa­
tions spent the few est w eeks without work— 3.0 and 4.1
w eeks, respectively. In comparison, the median number of

jobless weeks was greatest for operators, fabricators, and
laborers— 7.8 weeks.


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

Dash indicates data not available.

Receipt o f unemployment insurance. Nearly half o f the 1.9
m illion long-tenured displaced workers used unemployment
insurance to replace some lost incom e follow ing job loss,
and about one-fifth had exhausted their benefits. These pro­
portions were roughly the same as in the 1 9 9 3 -9 4 and 1 9 9 5 96 periods, although the share o f workers w ho exhausted
benefits during 1 9 9 7 -9 8 decreased alm ost 5 percentage
points from the prior period. Nearly 7 in 10 unemployed indi­
viduals at the time o f the survey had received unemployment
insurance benefits, and nearly one-half had exhausted their
benefits. (See table 7.)
Displaced workers who spent more time between jobs, in
general, were more likely to exhaust unemployment insur­
ance benefits. In fact, one-half o f those who spent a year or
more between their old and new jobs exhausted their ben­
efits. (See table 8.)
The receipt o f unemployment insurance during the last 2
decades appeared to vary with the econom y’s overall condi-

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

19

Displaced Workers

tion. That is, when econom ic conditions were generally
good— as in the late 1980s and late 1990s— fewer job losers
collected unemployment insurance. When conditions were
relatively bad— as in the early 1980s and early 1990s— more
job losers received benefits. Both the receipt and exhaustion
o f unemploym ent insurance benefits among workers d is­
placed in 1997-98 reached the low est levels since the D is­
placed Worker Survey began— 46 percent and 23 percent,
respectively. (See table 7.)

Table 8.

Long-tenured displaced workers by receipt
and exhaustion of unem ploym ent insurance
benefits, an d w eeks without work

[Numbers in thousands]
Percent distribution
W eeks
without work

R e c e iv e d benefits
Total
Total

Did no t r e c e iv e
unem ploym ent
Exhausted
insurance
benefits
benefits

Total who found

L o s s o f h e a lth in s u ra n c e . Many workers rely on, and partici­

pate in, group health insurance plans offered by their em ­
ployer. A s a result, those who lose or leave a job may expe­
rience a period without health insurance coverage. About 70
percent o f workers displaced during 1997-98 had participated
in an em ployer-provided health plan. (See table 9.)
The likelihood o f displaced workers having health insur­
ance in February 2000 depended on their em ployment sta­
tus.6 For example, nearly 86 percent o f the em ployed were
covered by som e group insurance plan, whereas the unem­
ployed and those w ho had left the labor force had lower
coverage rates— 73 and 74 percent, respectively. However,
these groups were more likely to be insured in February 2000
than in past surveys. In fact, the unemployed had more than
doubled their coverage rate since the prior survey.

jo b s .....................
Less than 5 weeks ...
5 to 14 w eeks...........
15 to 26 w e e ks.........
27 to 51 w e e ks.........
52 weeks or m o re ....

1,522
750
340
200
95
137

43.3
16.9
65.9
71.0
75.8
68.6

17.9
4.5
12.1
32.0
65.3
51.8

56.7
83.1
34.1
29.0
24.2
31.4

N ote: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Whites and Hispanics who had lost a job in 1997 or 1998
had about the same reemployment rates in February 2000 (77
percent). Among blacks, 86 percent o f displaced workers were
reemployed, and less than 5 percent were unemployed. These
post-displacement outcomes were big improvements from the
prior two surveys— unemployment rates o f 11 to 12 percent,
and reemployment rates o f 74 and 81 percent, respectively.
M o v in g to a n o th e r a r e a . Follow ing a job loss, some workers

After displacem ent
E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s . The reemployment rate— the proportion

o f displaced workers em ployed at the time o f the survey—
was 78 percent in February 2000, down from 83 percent in the
prior survey. The share o f displaced workers who were unem­
ployed was nearly 6 percent, about the same as in February
1998. (See table 10.)
More job losers had m oved out o f the labor force in the
February 2000 survey compared with the prior survey. Nearly
17 percent were neither em ployed nor actively looking for
work, compared with 12 percent in the prior survey. A higher
share o f older displaced workers leaving the labor force largely
attributed to this increase. Among displaced workers aged 55
and older, 40 percent were out o f the labor force. This, in part,
also explained the decline in the overall reemployment rate o f
displaced workers.7
Compared with the prior survey, reemployment rates de­
clined for all major demographic groups, despite improving
econom ic conditions in the late 1990s. However, these rates
were still relatively high. The reemployment rate for displaced
workers aged 25 to 54 was 84 percent. As in past surveys,
men were more likely than women to be reemployed. The
reemployment rate for men, 82 percent, was 9 percentage
points higher than for women.

20

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

might m ove to another area to look for work or take another
job. Only 9 percent o f workers displaced in 1997 or 1998 had
moved for one o f these reasons. Those w ho had m oved were
more likely to be reemployed in February 2000— 91 percent o f
them w ere reem p loyed , com pared w ith 77 percent o f
nonmovers. (See table 11.)

The new jobs
M any displaced
workers must enter a new industry or pursue an entirely new
line o f work in order to find a new job. Nearly half o f all
workers displaced in 1997 or 1998, and who were reemployed
in February 2000 had found a new job in a different major
industry. (See table 12.) However, industry switching was
less prevalent in this m ost recent survey than in the past.
The shares o f displaced workers w ho found jobs in the
same industry varied significantly in February 2000. For ex ­
ample, less than one-quarter w ho lost w holesale trade jobs
were reemployed in the same industry. By contrast, nearly 7
in 10 workers displaced from finance, insurance, and real es­
tate, and more than 6 in 10 from the services industry, were
reemployed in those same industries.
In 1997-98, U.S. employment growth continued to be con­
centrated in the services industry.8 The industry accounted
S w itc h in g in d u s tr i e s a n d o c c u p a ti o n s .

Table 9.

Long-tenured d isplaced workers by incidence of group health insurance c o v e ra g e on lost and current job, and
by sex, race, Hispanic origin, and employment status in February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]

C o v e re d b y a grou p he alth
insurance p lan on lost jo b 1
C haracteristic

Total
Total

P ercen t c o v e re d b y an y
group health insurance plan
in February 2000
Yes

No

N o t c o v e re d
on lost jo b

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..................................
E m ployed......................................................
U nem ployed..................................................
Not in the labor fo rc e ...................................

1,920
1,496
108
316

1,353
1,057
85
211

83.1
85.8
72.9
73.9

15.8
13.1
27.1
25.1

551
423
23
105

Men, 20 years and o ld e r...................................
E m ployed.......................................... ...........
U nem ployed..................................................
Not in the labor fo rc e ...................................

1,045
855
54
136

756
614
42
100

81.3
84.4
(2)
70.0

18.0
14.8
(2)
30.0

282
234
12
36

Women, 20 years and o lde r.............................
E m ployed......................................................
U nem ployed..................................................
Not in the labor fo rc e ..................................

875
641
54
181

597
443
43
112

85.4
87.8
(2)
76.8

13.1
10.6
(2)
21.4

269
189
11
69

1,662
911
751

1,158
648
509

85.2
81.9
89.6

14.1
17.3
10.0

490
257
233

190
104
86

147
80
67

66.0
80.0
(2)

29.3
20.0
(2)

41
22
18

212
115
96

127
61
67

82.7
(2)
(2)

17.3
(2)
(2)

84
54
30

White3

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.................................
M e n ..................................................................
W o m e n .............................................................
B lack3

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..................................
M e n ..................................................................
W o m e n .............................................................
Hispanic o rig in 3

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..................................
M e n ..................................................................
W o m e n .............................................................

’ Health insurance coverage excludes Medicare or Medicaid. Detail will not
sum to totals or 100 percent because a small number of respondents did not
know about their coverage on their past and/or current job.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
3Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
because data for the “other races” group are not presented, and Hispanics are

for more than one-half o f the 5.8 m illion increase in private
nonagricultural employment. More than one-quarter o f all
reem ployed displaced workers in February 2000 had taken a
job in this industry. Manufacturing workers were m ost likely
to have switched to a service-industry job.
Follow ing a job loss, workers were less likely to change
occupations than industries. Sixty-one percent o f the reem­
ployed in February 2000 worked in the same broad occupa­
tional category. (See table 13.) Across industries, many oc­
cupations often require job-specific know ledge or skills. A
majority o f displaced workers generally find new jobs within
the same major occupation group. Displaced white-collar work­
ers were more likely to have remained in the same occupation
than blue-collar workers— 67 and 53 percent, respectively.
O f the 1.5 m illion workers displaced in 1997 or 1998 and
reemployed in February 2000, 10 percent had taken service
jobs. Such occupations include private household workers,


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

included in both the white and black population groups.
Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

food preparation and service, cleaning and building service,
healthcare, and personal service. These jobs were generally
the low est paid and offered the few est em ployee benefits.9
Displaced blue-collar workers were twice as likely as whitecollar workers to hold service jobs at the time o f the survey.

Earnings. More than 90 percent o f the 1.9 m illion long-ten­
ured workers displaced in 1997-98 had been employed in full­
time wage and salary jobs. When surveyed in February 2000,
67 percent were once again working in full-time wage and sal­
ary jobs, 6 percent held part-time jobs, and 5 percent were selfemployed or working as unpaid family workers. The remain­
ing 21 percent were either unemployed or no longer in the
labor force. (See table 14.)
Workers who lost a full-time wage and salary job in 1 9 9 7 98 were just as likely to be reemployed in such jobs as those
displaced in the prior 2-year period. However, displaced work-

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

21

Displaced Workers

Table 10.

Long-tenured displaced workers by a g e, sex, race, Hispanic origin, and em ploym ent status in February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]
P ercent distribution
b y e m p lo y m e n t status in February 2000

Displaced
workers

C haracteristic

Employed

Unem ployed

Not in the
la b o r fo rc e

16.5

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.....................................
20 to 24 yea rs...................................................
25 to 54 yea rs...................................................
25 to 34 y e a rs .............................................
35 to 44 y e a rs .............................................
45 to 54 y e a rs .............................................
55 years and o ld e r..........................................
55 to 64 y e a rs .............................................
65 years and o ld e r......................................

1,920
48
1,453
344
602
507
420
331
89

77.9
(1)
84.2
86.5
83.4
83.7
53.8
60.7
27.9

5.6
(’)
5.5
4.6
5.0
6.9
6.3
6.3
5.9

10.2
9.0
11.6
9.5
40.0
32.9
66.3

Men, 20 years and o ld e r......................................
Women, 20 years and o ld e r................................

1,045
875

81.9
73.2

5.2
6.2

13.0
20.7

1,662
911
751

77.0
81.0
72.3

5.5
4.9
6.2

17.5
14.2
21.5

190
104
86

86.2
90.8
80.6

4.8
5.8
3.6

9.0
3.4
15.8

212
115
96

76.6
87.2
63.9

6.7
5.8
7.7

16.7
7.0
28.4

0

White2

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.....................................
M e n....................................................................
W omen...............................................................
Black2

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.....................................
M e n....................................................................
W omen...............................................................
Hispanic origin2

Total, 20 years and o ld e r.....................................
M e n ...................................................................
W o m e n ..............................................................

'Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
2Detail for the race and Hispanic-origin groups may not sum to totals
because data for the “other races” group are not presented, and Hispanics are
included in both the white and black population groups.

Table 11

Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Long-tenured displaced workers by a g e, sex, and whether they m oved to a different city or county to find or
take another job, February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]
M overs

Nonmovers
A g e a n d sex
Total

Employed in
February 2000

Percent

Total

Em ployed in
February 2000

Percent

Total

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............................
25 to 54 y e a rs.............................................
55 years and o ld e r......................................

1,769
1,316
409

1,358
1,097
218

76.8
83.4
53.3

151
137
11

138
127
8

91.4
92.7
(1)

941
679
228

757
600
123

80.4
88.4
53.9

104
96
5

99
91
5

95.2
94.8
(1)

828
637
180

601
496
95

72.6
77.9
52.8

48
41
7

39
36
3

(')
(')
(1)

M ai

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............................
25 to 54 y e a rs.............................................
55 years and o ld e r......................................
Women

Total, 20 years and o ld e r..............................
25 to 54 y e a rs .............................................
55 years and o ld e r......................................

'Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
N ote: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their

22

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Table 12.

Long-tenured displaced workers by industry of lost job and percent reem plo yed in the sam e industry
or in the services industry, February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]
Industry of lost jo b

Total, nonagricultural private wage and
salary w orkers..............................................................
M inin g.............................................................................
Construction..................................................................
Manufacturing................................................................
Durable go o d s............................................................
Nondurable g o o d s ......................................................
Transportation and public u tilities...............................
Wholesale tr a d e ...........................................................
Retail tra d e ....................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate...........................
S ervices........................................................................

Total
reem p lo yed

Total

1Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
Note:

Table 13.

Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job

P ercent in
th e services
industry

26.6
(1)
3.3
21.9
20.0
25.8
7.7
16.5
17.8
11.7
62.5

52.8
(1)
56.7
54.3
47.2
45.4
34.1
24.1
48.6
68.5
62.5

1,357
23
90
453
290
163
91
79
214
111
296

1,753
40
111
571
348
223
116
105
280
148
381

P ercent in
th e sa m e
industry

they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed down or moved; there was insufficient work for them
to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

Long-tenured displaced workers by occupation of lost job and percent reem ployed in the sam e occupation
or in service occupations, February 2000

[Numbers in thousands]
Percent in
th e s a m e
oc cu p atio n

P ercen t in
service
occupations

Total

Total
reem p lo yed

Total, 20 years and o ld e r......................................................

1,920

1,496

60.6

9.8

White-collar occu pation s'...................................................
Managerial and professional specialty..............................
Executive, administrative, and managerial...................
Professional s p e c ia lty ....................................................
Technical, sales, and administrative sup port................
Technicians and related s u p p o rt....................................
Sales occupations..........................................................
Administrative support, including clerical......................

1,128
590
384
205
538
68
219
250

892
477
316
161
415
60
171
185

67.2
67.3
57.9
63.4
67.0
(2)
53.8
60.5

5.2
3.8
3.8
3.7
6.7
(2)
9.9
5.9

O c c u p a tio n of lost jo b

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

118

88

53.4

53.4

Blue-collar occupations'.......................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair...........................
Operators, fabricators, and laborers..............................

613
258
355

469
199
270

53.3
53.8
53.0

11.5
7.5
14.4

Farming, forestry, and fis h in g ..............................................

42

31

(2)

(2)

'See text endnote for a definition of the white- and blue-collar occupations.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
Note:

Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job

ers in the more recent survey reported almost no loss in m e­
dian weekly earnings, compared with a 4.1 percent earnings loss
for those displaced in 1 9 9 5 -9 6 .10 (See table 14.) In February
2000,61 percent o f reemployed full-time wage and salary work­
ers earned as much or more than they had on their lost job.
This proportion rose throughout the mid- and late 1990s, and
stands at its highest level to date. Although more displaced
workers earned at least what they did previously, 24 percent of
the reemployed earned at least 20 percent less than they had on
their lost job.
In a recent analysis o f the February 2000 Displaced Worker
Survey, Professor Henry Farber o f Princeton University notes
that, on average, earnings losses for displaced workers were


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

they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed down or moved; there was insufficient work for them
to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

indeed less severe.11 However, Farber finds that workers who
remained employed during the full survey reference period
(1997-99) experienced an average increase o f 10 percent in
weekly earnings. Thus while it may appear that displaced
workers suffered little in earnings losses, many actually missed
out on the increased wages they would have received had
they not been displaced.
In the 2000 survey, median weekly earnings declined for
older displaced workers on their new jobs. Persons aged 4 5 64 were, in fact, the only age group that suffered an earnings
loss.12 (See table 15.) Younger displaced workers fared better
on their new jobs, earning almost 8 percent more in weekly
earnings. Men and women had similar declines in median

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

23

Displaced Workers

Table 14.

Median w eekly earnings of long-tenured displaced full-time w ag e and salary workers on their lost jobs and on
jobs held at the time of the survey

[Numbers in thousands]
R e e m p lo y e d in full-tim e w a g e a n d salary jobs

Survey d a te ,
a n d re fe re n c e
p e rio d for jo b loss

Dis­
p la c e d
full-time
w age
and
salary
workers

Earnings relative
to those of lost jo b
Part
tim e

Total2

Total
A t least
who
20
repo rted
earnings p e rc e n t
be low

Self­
em p lo yN o t in
ed
Un­
the
and
e m p lo y ­
labor
unpaid
ed
Percent
fo rc e
family
c h an g e
workers

M e d ia n w e e k ly
earnings on:

Equal or
Below,
a b o v e , A t least
but
but
20
within
within
pe rc e n t
20
20
above
p e rc e n t
p e rc e n t

Lost
job

Job
h e ld a t
survey
d a te

January:
1984,1981-82 ...........

2,157

151

1,135

1,023

33.7

17.5

27.0

21.8

$340

$293

-13.8

114

446

309

1986,1983-84 ...........

1,798

122

1,087

1,086

26.5

13.9

27.1

32.5

329

330

0.3

90

233

266

1988,1985-86 ...........

1,855

111

1,187

1,105

32.9

14.8

29.3

23.0

412

353

-14.3

143

179

235

1990,1987-88 ...........

1,464

83

995

878

27.2

18.8

25.1

28.9

416

391

-6 .0

92

115

179

1992,1989-90 ...........

2,011

131

1,201

1,088

31.1

17.1

28.1

23.7

439

410

-6 .6

149

275

252

February:
1994,1991-92' ..........

2,563

201

1,536

1,386

34.4

17.8

28.4

19.4

553

473

-14.5

210

295

322

1996.1993-94’ ..........

2,167

143

1,396

1,245

33.7

19.8

25.2

21.3

539

461

-14.5

184

156

288

1998,1995-96’ ..........

2,011

188

1,358

1,192

26.1

19.3

30.2

24.4

558

535

-4.1

122

104

240

2000,1997-98’ ..........

1,738

109

1,171

1,005

23.7

15.7

34.5

26.1

567

565

-.4

89

101

269

'Data, beginning with the 1991-92 period, are not directly comparable with
earlier periods due to differences in estimation methodology,
in clud es some workers who did not report earnings.

earnings follow ing job loss. Earnings were essentially un­
changed for both whites and blacks. For reemployed Hispanics, however, w eekly earnings increased 27 percent. Many
Hispanics benefited from this large gain— 73 percent reported
equal or higher earnings at their new job.
Weekly earnings for workers displaced from most indus­
tries showed little change. However, displaced workers from
retail trade and other services experienced relatively large pay
increases follow ing displacement. Median weekly earnings
for displaced retail trade workers rose 10 percent, while earn­
ings for those who lost jobs in other services rose 16 percent.
Thirty-one percent o f displaced workers from both industries
reported new job earnings o f at least 20 percent more than
those on their lost job. (See table 16.)

Regions
Workers in all four census regions were less likely to lose their
jobs in 1997-98 than 2 years earlier.13 Displacement rates fell
below 3.0 percent in each region. A s in previous surveys,
these rates were highest in the Northeast and West. (See
table 17.)
Following displacement, workers in the four census regions
had similar success in finding a new job. Reemployment rates
in the Northeast, M idwest, and West regions centered around
80 percent, while nearly 73 percent o f workers in the South

24

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left because their plant or company closed or moved; there
was insufficient work for them to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

found work follow ing job loss.
I n t h e l a t e 1990 s , a downward trend continued in both the
incidence and likelihood o f job loss. An expanding econom y
and continued job growth led not only to lower unemploy­
ment, but also to greater job security. Workers in all major
demographic groups, and in most industries and occupations,
reaped the benefits o f greater job security.
In 1997 and 1998, 1.9 m illion long-tenured workers were
displaced from their jobs, down from 2.2 m illion reported in
1995-96 (also a period o f rising employment). Displacement
rates declined among all major demographic groups. For work­
ers aged 20 and older, the displacement rate declined to 2.5
percent in the 2000 survey— the low est rate o f the 1990s—
down from 2.9 percent in the prior survey.
O f long-tenured workers who lost jobs in the late 1990s, 78
percent were reemployed in February 2000. This proportion
declined from 83 percent in the prior survey, but remained
relatively high. Displaced workers who found new jobs spent
a median 5.3 weeks without work— at least 2 w eeks less than
those displaced in the m id-1990s. During this spell without
work, workers displaced in 1997-98 were less likely to use or
exhaust unemployment insurance benefits than any other time
since the survey’s inception. Moreover, on average, reem­
ployed full-time workers had essentially no change in median
weekly earnings.

Table 15.

M edian w eekly earnings of long-tenured displaced full-time w a g e an d salary workers on their lost jobs an d on
jobs held in February 2000, by age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, and educational attainment

[Numbers in thousands]

R eem ployed in full-tim e w a g e a n d salary jobs in February 2000

C haracteristic

Dis­
p la c e d
full-tim e
w age
and
salary
workers

Total, 20 years and
o lde r............................ 1,738
30
20 to 24 y e a rs .............
25 to 54 y e a rs............. 1,339
314
25 to 34 y e a rs ..........
548
35 to 44 y e a rs ..........
477
45 to 54 years ..........
297
55 to 64 y e a rs.............
72
65 years and o ld e r.....
Men, 20 years and
o lde r............................
Women, 20 years and
o lde r............................

Earnings relative
to those o f lost jo b
Part
tim e
Total'

Selfe m p lo y­
N o tin
ed
Un­
the
and
e m p lo y­
labo r
unpaid
ed
fo rc e
Percent
fam ily
change
workers

M edian w eekly
earnings on:

Equal or
Total
A t least Below, ab ove, A t least
who
but
20
but
20
re ported
within
p e rcent
within
earnings pe rcent
20
a b o ve
below
20
pe rcent pe rcent

Lost
jo b

Job
he ld in
Febru­
ary
2000

109
3
64
15
30
19
40
3

1,171
26
1,000
255
389
356
131
15

1,005
26
861
217
347
297
109
11

23.7
(2)
23.9
29.0
18.7
26.3
25.7
(2)

15.7
(2)
16.1
17.1
19.0
12.1
11.0
(2)

34.5
(2)
33.7
16.6
36.0
43.4
44.0
(2)

26.1
(2)
26.2
37.3
26.2
18.2
19.3
(2)

$567
(2)
581
508
619
608
551
(2)

$565
(2)
581
548
621
575
506
(2)

-.4
(2)
0.0
7.9
.3
-5 .4
-8 .2
(2)

89
0
79
11
36
31
10
0

101
1
73
11
30
33
21
5

269
0
124
22
63
38
95
50

1,003

39

713

616

23.9

15.4

32.0

28.7

602

592

-1 .7

73

53

125

735

71

458

390

23.3

16.2

38.7

21.8

515

509

-1.2

16

47

143

1,494
871
623

98
33
65

984
604
380

871
540
332

21.9
22.4
21.4

16.5
16.5
16.6

36.4
33.9
40.4

25.1
27.2
21.7

573
606
522

572
584
545

-.2
-3 .6
4.4

82
70
12

84
44
40

247
120
126

179
104
75

3
2
1

145
90
55

103
65
39

41.7
(2)
(2)

10.7
(2)
(2)

20.4
(2)
(2)

27.2
(2)
(2)

539
(2)
(2)

540
(2)
(2)

.2
(2)
(2)

7
3
4

9
6
3

16
4
12

194
112
82

5
5
0

145
89
56

127
79
48

12.6
6.3
(2)

14.2
19.0
(2)

40.2
32.9
(2)

33.1
41.8
(2)

403
393
(2)

510
510
(2)

26.6
29.8
(2)

6
6
0

14
7

7

23
5
19

170

12

97

89

13.5

5.6

46.1

34.8

354

400

13.0

7

18

37

584

29

436

359

27.6

17.5

24.5

30.4

466

490

5.2

8

38

72

389
163
295
137

28
18
20
3

236
110
209
83

203
100
182
71

22.2

16.7
18.0
17.6
(2)

36.5
32.0
39.0
(2)

24.6
17.0
19.2
(2)

608
611
728
(2)

623
570
718
(2)

2.5
-6 .7
-1 .4
(2)

31

15
12
5
13

79
16
40
26

White3
Total, 20 years and
older............................
M e n ..............................
W o m e n .........................
Black3

Total, 20 years and
olde r............................
M e n ..............................
W o m e n .........................
H isp an ic orig in3

Total, 20 years and
o lde r............................
M e n ..............................
Women .........................
E du cational
a tta in m e n t

Less than a high school
diploma........................
High school graduate,
no college....................
Some college, no
degree.........................
Associate's degree ........
Bachelor’s degree..........
Advanced d e g re e ..........

33.0
24.2
(2)

’ Includes 166,000 who did not report earnings on their lost job.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
3Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
because data for the “other races” group are not presented and Hispanics are
included in both the white and black population groups.


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

7
22
13

Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job
they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

25

Displaced Workers

Table 16.

M edian w ee kly earnings of long-tenured d isplaced full-time w a g e and salary workers on their lost jobs an d on
jobs held in February 2000, by industry and class of worker of lost job

[Numbers in thousands]
R e e m p lo y e d in full-tim e w a g e an d salary jobs in February 2000

Industry a n d class
of w o rke r
of lost jo b

Total, 20 years
and o ld e r...............
Nonagricultural private
wage and salary
w orke rs.......................
M ining..........................
Construction...............
M anufacturing............
Durable go ods..........
Nondurable g o o d s ....
Transportation and
public u tilities..........
Transportation ..........
Communications
and other public
u tilitie s ..................
Wholesale and retail
tra d e ........................
Wholesale tra d e ......
Retail tra d e ..............
Finance, insurance,
and real e s ta te ....
S ervices......................
Professional
se rv ic e s ..............
Other services........
Agricultural wage
and salary w orkers....
Government w o rk e rs ....

Dis­
p la c e d
full-time
w age
and
salary
workers

Earnings relative
to those of lost jo b
Part
tim e
Total'

Total
A t least
who
20
rep o rted
earnings p e rc e n t
below

Selfe m p lo y ­
N ot in
ed
Un­
the
and
e m p lo y ­
labor
unpaid
ed
fo rc e
Percent
family
change
workers

M e d ia n w ee kly
earnings on:

Equal or
Below,
a b o v e , A t least
but
20
but
within
p e rc e n t
within
20
above
20
p e rc en t
p e rc e n t

Lost
job

Job
held in
Febru­
ary
2000

1,738

109

1,171

1,005

23.7

15.7

34.5

26.1

$567

$565

-0 .4

89

101

269

1,608
40
106
548
330
218

97
2
5
24
11
12

1,080
15
76
396
252
144

941
8
72
332
204
128

24.0
(2)
(2)
22.9
17.6
31.3

15.4
(2)
(2)
15.4
15.2
15.6

35.1
(2)
(2)
38.3
40.7
33.6

25.5
(2)
(2)
23.5
26.5
19.5

572
(2)
(2)
588
588
589

563
(2)
n
572
573
570

-1 .6
(2)
(2)
-2 .7
-2 .6
-3 .2

83
6
5
17
14
2

93
12
6
31
14
18

255
5
13
81
39
42

113
51

1
1

78
36

73
37

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

10
7

8
5

16
2

62

0

41

36

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

3

3

14

333
105
228

16
0
16

224
67
158

205
60
144

24.4
(2)
22.2

12.7
(2)
13.9

33.2
(2)
33.3

29.8
(2)
30.6

454
(2)
427

492
(2)
470

8.4
(2)
10.1

15
12
2

12
3
9

66
23
43

134
334

17
32

77
214

64
187

(2)
23.5

(2)
25.1

(2)
33.7

(2)
17.6

(2)
648

(2)
637

(2)
-1 .7

9
21

6
18

25
49

193
134

28
1

121
91

109
78

28.4
16.7

28.4
20.5

34.9
32.1

8.3
30.8

683
575

623
667

-8 .8
16.0

9
12

7
7

27
22

36
79

0
12

33
45

33
27

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)

0
6

4
4

0
12

'Includes 166,000 who did not report earnings on their lost job.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.
Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job

they had lost or left between January 1997 and December 1998 because their
plant or company closed or moved; there was insufficient work for them to do;
or their position or shift was abolished.

Notes
Data on nonfarm payroll employment are derived from the Current
Employment Statistics (C E S) Survey, a monthly sample survey that
collects information on employment, hours, and earnings from about
400.000 business establishments. The unemployment rate is derived
from the Current Population Survey (C PS), a sample survey of about
50.000 households, conducted monthly by the Census Bureau for the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The CPS collects information about
the demographic characteristics and employment status of the civilian
noninstitutional population aged 16 years and older.
2

In addition to those who lost jobs, the count of displacement includes
workers who left jobs in anticipation of losing them. Debriefing data
collected as part of the quality assessment research conducted on the
February 2000 Displaced Worker Survey indicate that 77 percent of
the displaced were job losers, 22 percent were job leavers, and 1 percent
retired. Thus, the group referred to as “job losers” includes some
workers who left or retired from their jobs prior to losing them.

26

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

3

Displacement rates are calculated by dividing the number of displaced
workers in a specified worker group by a tenure-adjusted, 2-year aver­
age estimate of employment for the same worker group. Employment
estimates for each year were adjusted, using job-tenure data from the
January 1983, 1987, 1991, and February 1996 and 1998 CPS supple­
ments, to include only those workers with 3 years of tenure or more. A
2-year average was then computed using those adjusted employment
estimates.
4 For instance, the average unemployment rate during 1988-89 was 5.4
percent, compared with 4.7 percent during 1997-98. Nonfarm payroll
employment rose by 5.1 million during the 1989-90 period, compared
to 6.4 million during 1997-98.
5 For the purposes of this analysis, blue-collar occupations are defined
as the sum of the “precision production, craft, and repair” and “opera­
tors, fabricators, and laborers” categories. The white-collar occupa­
tions are made up of the “managerial and professional specialty” and

Table 17.

Reemployment rates and displacem ent rates of long-tenured displaced workers, by census region and division,
1995-96 and 1997-98

[Numbers in thousands]
19 97-9 8

19 95-96
Census designation

Displaced
workers

R eem ploym ent
rate'

Displacem ent
ra te 2

Displaced
workers

R eem ploym ent
ra te 1

Displacem ent
ra te 2

Total, 20 years and o ld e r............

2,238

82.5

2.9

1,920

77.9

2.5

Northeast......................................
New E n g la n d .............................
Middle A tlantic...........................

482
123
359

73.9
80.5
71.6

3.1
3.0
3.1

417
105
312

78.9
80.5
78.3

2.5
2.7

M idw est........................................
East North C entral.....................
West North C entral....................

554
405
149

84.3
82.0
90.6

2.9
3.0

449
333
115

82.8
81.2
87.6

S outh ............................................
South A tlantic............................
East South C e n tra l...................
West South C ental.....................

656
395
95
166

84.9
85.3
80.0
86.7

2.1
2.1

589
308
104
177

72.5
68.5
82.7
73.6

W e s t..............................................
Mountain.....................................
P a c ific ........................................

547
142
405

85.0
84.5
85.2

3.5
3.4
3.6

466
105
360

79.1
75.2
80.2

'Reemployment rates are calculated by dividing the number of displaced
workers in a specified worker group who were reemployed at the time of the
survey by the total number displaced in the same worker group.
2Displacement rates are calculated by dividing the number of displaced
workers in a specified worker group by a tenure-adjusted, 2-year average
estimate of employment for the same worker group. Employment estimates
for each year were adjusted, using job-tenure data from the January 1983,
1987,1991, and February 1996 and 1998 CPS supplements, to include only

“technical, sales, and administrative support” categories.
6 In the survey, the question concerning health insurance on the lost job
specifically relates to receiving coverage from the former employer
and excludes any other sources. The question posed to respondents at
the time of the survey relates to health insurance coverage from any
source.
7 By applying the age distribution of displaced workers from 1995-96
to the total number of displaced workers in 1997-98, and assigning the
reemployment rates for 1997-98, one can isolate the impact on reem­
ployment rates of any change in the age composition of displaced
workers across the two surveys. This exercise shows that about onethird of the 4.6 percentage point decline in the reemployment rate for
all displaced workers aged 20 years and older can be attributed to a
change in the age distribution of displaced workers. Specifically, there
was a larger share of displaced workers in 1997-98 who were 55 years
or older. These older displaced workers generally have lower reemploy­
ment rates, and a larger share of older displaced workers will thus tend
to lower the overall rate of reemployment.
8 For a comprehensive overview of jobs in the services industry, see
Joseph R. Meisenheimer II, “The services industry in the ‘good’ versus
‘bad’ jobs debate,” Monthly Labor Review, February 1998, pp. 22-47.
9 Unlike the services industry, which is very large and diverse, the
service occupations tend to be concentrated in the lower end of the
earnings spectrum. For example, among full-time workers in 2000,
median weekly earnings for those with service jobs were $355, com­
pared to $576 for all workers. In terms of health insurance and pen­
sions in 1999, 38 percent of workers in service occupations had health
insurance from their employer, and 28 percent had an employer-pro­
vided pension. By contrast, for all workers in 1999, employer-pro­
vided health insurance and pension coverage rates were 60 and 50
percent, respectively.
10 Note that the impact of decreases are somewhat understated, and the
impact of increases overstated, as the earnings data are not adjusted for


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

2.6
2.5
2.9

2.6

2.3
2.4

2.0
2.2
2.2
2.3

2.2
2.9
2.4
3.0

those workers with 3 years of tenure or more. A 2-year average was then
computed using those adjusted employment estimates.
Note: Data refer to persons who had 3 or more years of tenure on a job they
had lost or left between January 1995 and December 1996 and January 1997
and December 1998 because their plant or company closed or moved; there
was insufficient work for them to do; or their position or shift was abolished.

inflation.
11 See Henry S. Farber, “Job Loss in the United States, 1981-1999,”
Working Paper 453 (Industrial Relations Section, Princeton Univer­
sity, June 2001).
12 Charles Schultze, in analyzing data on those displaced during 1993
through 1996 who were subsequently reemployed, found that earnings
losses were much greater for those workers who had longer tenure on
the lost job. Schultze found that displaced older workers with more
tenure experienced especially large earnings losses during this period.
He attributes this drop in earnings to the substantial “seniority premi­
ums” earned on the lost job, and the perception of potential new em­
ployers that older workers will not remain with a job long enough to
justify the significant training costs associated with “promising jobs.”
See Charles Schultze, “Has Job Security Eroded for American Work­
ers?” Margaret Blair and Thomas Kochan, ed., The New Relationship:
Human Capital in the American Corporation (Washington, DC, The
Brookings Institution, 2000).
13 The four census regions of the United States are the Northeast, South,
Midwest, and West. Within the Northeast, the New England division
includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, and Vermont; and the Middle Atlantic division includes New
Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. Within the South, the South At­
lantic division includes Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Geor­
gia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Vir­
ginia; the East South Central division includes Alabama, Kentucky,
Mississippi, and Tennessee; and the West South Central division in­
cludes Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas. Within the Mid­
west, the East North Central division includes Illinois, Indiana, Michi­
gan, Ohio, and Wisconsin; the West North Central division includes
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South
Dakota. Within the West, the Mountain division includes Arizona,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyo­
ming; and the Pacific division includes Alaska, California, Hawaii, Or­
egon, and Washington.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

27

Displaced Workers

A

p p e n d ix :

Scope and method of the study

The data presented in this article were collected through a supple­
ment to the February 2000 Current Population Survey (CPS), a
monthly survey of about 50,000 households that provides basic
data on employment and unemployment for the Nation. The
supplement’s purpose was to obtain information on the number and
characteristics of persons who had been displaced (as defined be­
low) from their jobs during the prior 3 calendar years.
The first question asked of survey respondents aged 20 years
and older was, “During the last 3 calendar years, that is, January
1997 through December 1999, did (you/name) lose or leave a job
because a plant or company closed or moved, (your/his/her) posi­
tion or shift was abolished, insufficient work, or another similar
reason?” If the answer to that question was “yes,” then the respon­
dent was asked to identify which reason, among the following, best
described the reason for the job loss:
•
•

•
•

Plant or company closed down or moved
Plant or company operating but lost job because of:
Insufficient work
Position or shift abolished
Seasonal job completed
Self-operated business failed
Some other reason

3)

4)

5)

6)
Respondents who provided one of the first three reasons—plant
or company closed or moved, insufficient work, or position or shift
abolished— were classified as displaced and asked additional ques­
tions about the lost job, including how many years they had worked
for their employer; the year the job was lost; the earnings, industry,
and occupation of the lost job; and whether health insurance had
been provided. Other questions were asked to determine what oc­
curred before and after the job loss, such as: Was the respondent
notified of the upcoming dismissal? How long did he/she go without
work? Did he/she receive unemployment benefits? And, if so, were
the benefits exhausted? Did the person move to another location
after the job loss to take or look for another job?
Information was also collected about current health insurance
coverage (other than medicare and medicaid) and current earnings for
those employed in February 2000. Most data presented here refer
to workers who lost or left jobs they had worked for 3 or more years.
There are several important differences between the February
1994, 1996, 1998, and 2000 surveys, and surveys conducted every
other January from 1984 to 1992, in the counting of displaced work­
ers that render the data not strictly comparable:
1)

In January 1994, there was a major change made to the CPS—
the implementation of a redesigned survey questionnaire and
collection methodology. (For more information on these
changes, see “Revisions in the Current Population Survey Ef­
fective January 1994” in the February 1994 issue of E m ploy­
m ent an d Earnings.)

2)

28

The reference period used when asking questions about dis­
placement was shortened from “the prior 5 years” in earlier
surveys to “the prior 3 calendar years” in surveys conducted
since February 1994. This was done because the data reliabil­
ity appears to decrease as the reference period length increases.
For example, in the January 1992 survey, the number of dis­

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

7)

placements in the first 2 years—that is, 1987 and 1988— were
markedly lower than when those 2 years were the third and
fourth years in the January 1990 survey’s reference period, a
clear indication of recall problems in the years farthest from the
survey data.
This article also excludes displacements that occurred in the
year closest to the survey date. This was done to reduce the
likelihood of including persons who, having lost their jobs rela­
tively recently, were counted as displaced when their job losses
eventually prove to be temporary rather than permanent.
Displaced workers who cited one of the three displacement
reasons for job loss, and then responded later in the question­
naire that their “class of worker” on their lost job was selfemployed, were excluded from the count of displaced workers
in the surveys conducted since 1994, whereas they had been
included in prior ones.
In the surveys conducted since February 1994, respondents
who reported that they had lost their jobs in the year closest to
the survey date (for example, 1999 in the February 2000 sur­
vey), and expected to be recalled within the next 6 months,
were left out of the displaced workers count. In earlier surveys,
respondents were not asked directly about their expectation of
recall.
Since 1994, displaced worker surveys have been conducted in
February, whereas the five previous surveys were conducted in
January. In 1994, the survey was postponed 1 month to help
ease the transition of the redesigned survey and collection meth­
odology that occurred in January 1994. Also, the reference
periods in the 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000 surveys were the
prior three calendar years (for example, 1997, 1998, and 1999
in the February 2000 survey.) Prior to the 1994 survey, those
losing jobs in the weeks of January prior to the survey were
counted as displaced.
Displaced worker surveys conducted prior to the February
1994 survey also are not completely comparable to those from
1994 forward because the earlier surveys were not adjusted for
supplement nonresponse. (It should be noted that supplement
nonresponse was much lower in Displaced Worker Surveys
conducted prior to 1996.) A proportion of the people who
complete the basic CPS questionnaire on labor force status do
not provide usable responses to the supplementary questions.
Respondents may choose to answer none of the supplement
questions, or they may not provide answers to key questions
within the supplement. Reweighting is one of the methods
historically used to adjust for such supplement nonresponse.
It accounts for missing information by increasing the weights
assigned to the individuals from whom information was ob­
tained. Currently, the Census Bureau calculates supplement
weights for all CPS supplemental questionnaires.

During and after the administration of the February 1996 and
1998 Displaced Worker Surveys, quality assessment research was
conducted as part of the Bureau’s ongoing effort to improve the
quality of its surveys. For more information on the research con­
ducted on the February 1996 survey, see James L. Esposito and
Sylvia Fisher, “A Summary of Quality-Assessment Research Con­
ducted on the 1996 Displaced-Worker/Job-Tenure/OccupationalMobility Supplement,” BLS Statistical Note Number 43.

Leontief-BLS Partnership

The Leontief-BLS partnership:
a new fram ework for m easurem ent
The ongoing collaboration between Wassily Leontief
and the Bureau o f Labor Statistics was mutually beneficial,
bringing to Leontief confirmation o f the utility
o f input-output analysis and to the Bureau
tables that remained useful fo r decades to come
MartinC. Kohli

Martin C. Kohli is an
economist in the New York
Office of the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, New York,
New York. E-mail:
Kohli_M@bls.gov.


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

lh e Department o f Labor,” according to
Wassily Leontief, “was the first govern­
ment agency to take an active interest in
the ‘input-output’ approach to the study o f the
American econom y and the continual coopera­
tive relationship with its Bureau o f Labor Sta­
tistics has benefited our work most decisively.”1
The specifics o f the Bureau’s role, however, are
not w ell known. Referring to the forecasts the
Bureau made during the last year o f World War
II that the postwar demand for steel would be
strong, contrary to the opinion o f many experts,
Leontief held that the accuracy o f this forecast
provided evidence that input-output analysis
was a useful tool for decisionmakers.2
Although he cited this episode, L eontief
never provided a comprehensive account o f the
Bureau’s role in the development o f input-out­
put analysis, thus leaving the door open for a
number o f interpretations. Robert Dorfman
pointed out that the Bureau’s resources made it
possible for the A gency to formulate and de­
velop “very large and detailed input-output
tables.” 3 Tjalling C. Koopmans described the
early work on interindustry econom ics as “ini­
tiated, developed, and stimulated largely by
L eontief and given statistical expression by
measurements and tabulations produced by the
Bureau o f Labor Statistics,” thereby distin­
guishing between the intellectual work accom ­
plished by Leontief and the presumably rou­
tine data gathering done by the Bureau.4 These

T

accounts suggest that the Bureau’s relationship
with Leontief was significant largely because the
A g en cy supplied the resources needed to
transform his ideas from an academic curios­
ity into an operational tool for policymakers.
Indeed, a closer examination shows that the
Bureau did more than just supply resources.
This article proposes that the Department of
Labor’s interest stimulated the development o f
tables that were more useful for policymakers
than Leontief’s first formulation was. W hile the
Battelle Memorial Institute summarizes many
o f the key facts, it gives short shrift to the
Bureau’s conceptual contributions.5
The Bureau’s work with Leontief also had a
number o f effects on the A gency itself. When
a still-being-assem bled u n i v a c computer in­
verted a 1947 matrix, the Bureau found itself at
the vanguard o f computing technology. H ow ­
ever, neither the Battelle study nor the history
o f Government statistics from 1926 to 1976 by
Joseph W. Duncan and William C. Shelton ex­
amined how the input-output work affected the
relationships among the Bureau’s programs.6
Such an examination, undertaken in this article,
shows that, as a result o f its input-output work,
the Bureau attempted to treat some o f its m eas­
ured price, quantity, and value magnitudes as
part o f a new framework— a consistent system
o f national econom ic accounts— and this ap­
proach revealed inadequacies in at least one
b l s program.
Monthly Labor Review June 2001

29

Leontief-BLS Partnership

In 1953, D efense Department funding for input-output
analyis dried up, and in 1954, the Bureau’s work on the subject
came to a halt. In 1961, the Bureau and Leontief began a sec­
ond chapter in their partnership, but that story w ill need to be
told elsewhere; this article confines itself to the developments
that occurred between 1941 and 1953 and to some o f their
consequences.

The first input-output tables
In 1932, freshly arrived at Harvard after a brief stint with the
National Bureau o f Econom ic Research, Leontief began the
unusual project o f constructing a tableau économique for the
United States. François Quesnay, the 18th-century French
econom ist, had used his tableau to analyze how changes,
such as an increase in spending on luxuries, would affect the
net product o f France and its distribution among the various
French social classes. In a similar manner, Leontief used his
table to demonstrate “how the outputs o f various industries
and the prices o f their products w ould have reacted” to
changes in parameters for industrial productivity and savings.7
Leontief treated this demonstration o f conditional reactions as
a goal toward the satisfaction o f which he assembled and rec­
onciled a m assive amount o f information.
Having set his goal, Leontief began the journey by describ­
ing an accounting scheme that covered “all branches o f indus­
try, agriculture, and transportation [and] also the individual
budgets o f all private persons.”8 The key account was the
expenditure and revenue account, which included all expend­
itures leaving, and all revenues entering, an establishment over
a particular period. For the purpose o f understanding the de­
velopm ent o f input-output analysis, the critical feature o f
L eontief’s schema was that the expenditure account explicitly
included “capital outlays.”9 The accounts for an industry could
be derived by consolidating the accounts o f the establish­
ments within it— adding up all the purchases from and sales to
other establishments. Because one industry’s sales to another
would be recorded as the latter’s purchases from the former,
the industry accounts could be represented in what w e now
call a transactions table. Table 1 provides part o f the transac­
tions table for 1929. Note that for any individual sector, ex ­
penditures could exceed, equal, or fall short o f receipts. But
for the econom y as a whole, the sum o f expenditures would
necessarily equal the sum o f receipts.
The detailed transaction tables for 1919 and 1929 contained
44 sectors, 41 o f which were producing sectors. The 42nd sec­
tor was foreign trade, which consumed exports and produced
imports. The inputs, or consumption, o f households, the 43rd
sector, produced services, which were measured in dollars.
The only formal difference between households and other sec­
tors was that the transactions table showed two types o f in­
come: wages and salaries under one subtotal and capital and
entrepreneurial services under the other. The last sector was
30

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

undistributed, which reflected a lack o f income-expenditure
accounts for wholesale and retail trade, banking and finance,
nonrail transportation, and Federal, State, and local govern­
ments. This sector functioned as an accounting balance; for
example, because the automobile industry produced $5,454
m illion worth o f cars in 1929 and the other sectors absorbed
$4,903 million, $551 million was charged to the undistributed
sector. Undistributed charges accounted for 19.8 percent and
19.4 percent o f total gross output in the 44-sector versions o f
the 1919 and 1929 tables, respectively, reflecting large lacunae
in our factual knowledge about the economy.
The construction o f the tables required data from a large
number o f sources, some o f which Leontief documented in
Appendix II o f The Structure o f American Economy and the
rest o f which he made available on request. In the appendix,
m ost o f the discussion focused on the tables’ bottom rows,
which covered labor compensation, the returns to capital and
entrepreneurial services, undistributed items, and gross out­
lays. Industrial censuses from the Bureau o f the Census pro­
vided figures on total production and, in som e cases, on wages
and salaries. Estimates o f compensation for capital and entre­
preneurial services were based on tax data from the Bureau of
Internal Revenue and Simon Kuznets’s pathbreaking National
Income, 1929-1932. Gross outlays included spending on in­
vestment, estimates o f which were developed using data from
the Federal Reserve, Kuznets, the Bureau o f Internal R ev­
enue, the Department o f Agriculture, the financial press, and
other sources.10 The data that were the m ost difficult to ob­
tain were the amounts o f interindustry transactions. For each
manufacturing industry, the Census Bureau had a figure on
the combined cost o f materials, fuels, energy purchased, and
contract work. In virtually every industry, L eontief needed
additional information to disaggregate the Census figures on
intermediate inputs.
To achieve his goal o f understanding the system ’s behav­
ior, in addition to the table, he needed a model. A thorough
discussion o f the m odel’s features is beyond the scope o f this
article, but several o f the m odel’s characteristics are relevant.11
The m odel began with a set o f equations, one for each sector,
describing, in Leontief’s words, “a hypothetical state o f simple
reproduction which knows neither savings nor investment.”12
Each sector produced a good or service that was com pletely
consumed by the other sectors, so that
output o f product i - S quantities o f i consumed
by other sectors = 0.

(1)

A second model not presented here, focused on prices and
stipulated that the value o f a sector’s output equaled the value
o f that sector’s inputs.
To m ove from equation (1) to a solution for the quantities
produced, one needs to make som e assumptions about the
relationship between a sector’s output and its inputs. L eontief

Table 1.

Selected interindustry transactions, United States, 1929

[In millions of dollars]
Distribution of output (re v e n u e )
Distribution of outlays

O ther iron
a n d steel

Exports

14

15

42

43

1,274

548
1,445

807
532

1,151
2,926

12,865
5,454

842
6,978
7,175
14,153

4,997
45,603
26,194
71,797

75,646

251,502

14
15

Other iron and s te e l.......................................
Autom obiles....................................................

42
43a
43b
43c

Im ports.............................................................
Wages and salaries......................................
Capital and entrepreneurial s ervice s..........
Total s e rv ic e s................................................

4,226
1,347
5,573

871
496
1,367

Total outlays........................................................

13,667

5,734

20

Note: Dash indicates amounts smaller than 0.1 percent. Numbers associated with names of sectors are from Leontief’s table.

argued that he would use a particularly simple functional form,
because “the numerical values o f all the parameters must be
ascertainable on the basis o f available statistical informa­
tion.”13 In this simple form, the quantity o f input i consumed
by industry j equaled a unit input coefficient times the level of
output; that is,
amount o f i consumed by industry j = a
x output o f product j ,

(2)

where a is the unit input coefficient.
Leontief, however, m odified equation (2) to incorporate
the fact o f investment spending, embodied in his accounting
data. If expenditures exceeded revenues, a sector was said to
be investing. To represent this phenomenon, he introduced a
sectoral savings coefficient, w hose initial value was the ratio
o f sectoral receipts to sectoral expenditures. To com plete the
m odel o f quantities, Leontief m odified the input functions of
equation (2) to reflect these and other factors and then substi­
tuted the m odified functions into the balance equation (1). In
the quantity and price m odels, quantities and prices were de­
termined by the unit-input coefficients. Thus, these coeffi­
cients were the ultimate objects o f L eontief’s efforts at m eas­
urement, with the transaction table being an intermediate step.
The question then arises as to what one can do with the
two m odels. Leontief wanted to demonstrate how the relative
prices and quantities would respond to variations in the in­
dustry productivity and savings parameters. D eploying his
formidable powers o f analysis, he was able to derive formulas
and calculate the values o f quasi elasticities for both 1919 and
1929, showing how the systems o f prices and quantities would,
in theory, respond.
In 1941, Harvard University Press published Leontief’s first
input-output articles, supplemented with additional material,


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

Total
output

Autom obiles

5,230

Consumption

Source: Wassily Leontief, Structure o f American Economy, 1919-1939,
table 6.

as The Structure o f American Economy, 1919-1929. A s
Dorfman noted, the first tables “established that even at that
time statistical resources and computational facilities were
adequate to make the construction o f input-output tables a
practical enterprise.”14 Nonetheless, the quantity m odel had
little connection with the dominant econom ic concern o f the
1930s: the Great Depression. Nor did the model have any policy
levers, such as tax and spending variables. One could sug­
gest that the industry savings parameters depended on tax
and spending policies, but even if the m odel were extended in
this direction, it would determine only relative quantities, which
had little apparent interest to policymakers.

The BLS-produced table for 1939
In 1941, Commissioner of Labor Statistics Isador Lubin requested
$96,500 from Congress to fund the first year of a study o f the
economic effects of demobilization. The assignment was given
to Donald Davenport, who had recently left Harvard, where he
had known Leontief, and had joined the Bureau’s Postwar D ivi­
sion. Later that year the Bureau hired Leontief, opened an office
o f its Postwar D ivision in Cambridge, M assachusetts, and
began work on a 95-sector table for 1939.
In 1944, L eontief published a transactions table for 1939,
which differed in several ways from its predecessors. The first
difference was that the 11-sector version stated that its source
was the “United States Department o f Labor, Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, Employment and Occupational Outlook Branch,
Postwar D ivision.” Richard Stone and others identified the
1947 table as the first official table, but Leontief and several of
his collaborators recognized the priority o f the 1939 table.15
Other differences between the table for 1939 and its prede­
cessors can be attributed to the form er’s different purpose.
The article presenting the table began with a question: “H ow
Monthly Labor Review June 2001

31

Leontief-BLS Partnership

w ill the cessation o f war purchases o f planes, guns, tanks,
and ships— if not compensated by increased demand for other
types o f com m odities— affect the national level o f em ploy­
ment?”16 This was a w hat-if question o f the general type that
L eontief’s m odel was intended to answer. However, the spe­
cifics o f the question could not have been answered with the
earlier tables and model.
To begin with, the question assumed that labor was measured
not in dollars, as it had been in the earlier tables, but in employee
years. Using data from the industrial censuses, the 1939 table
provided consistent values of output and employment by sector.
Because, at the time, the Bureau benchmarked its survey o f pay­
roll jobs to those censuses, the employment figures in the
table were consistent with figures from the payroll series.
A second difference concerned the selection o f sectors
worthy o f interest. The problem posed by L eontief required
taking government spending, or at least the military portion of
it, as exogenous. In the 1919 and 1929 tables, government had
been lumped, along with trade, finance, and nonrail transpor­
tation, into the undistributed sector; in the 1939 table, it stood
alone in the 11-sector version that L eontief published, and it
was also alone in the 43-sector version included in the Bureau’s
unpublished study on postwar em ploym ent.17 Data on g o v ­
ernment purchases came from a 1939 Bureau study o f Federal
contracts and a study by the Temporary National Econom ic
Committee. The 1939 table also improved on its predecessors
by breaking out trade as a separate sector. Even with the
inclusion o f these additional sectors, 15 percent o f gross out­
put was still charged to the undistributed account.
Another change concerned the representation o f invest­
ment. In his first book, Leontief had pointed out the theoreti­
cal relationship between the transactions table and the na­
tional income accounts. Follow ing up on this idea, the Bureau
sought to reconcile its transactions table with those same
accounts. Marvin Hoffenberg, who had the responsibility for
this work, realized the desirability o f m oving capital-account
purchases out o f the transactions table. A s W. Duane Evans
and Hoffenberg would point out, there was no a priori reason
why the ratio o f investment spending to output would be
stable.18 For example, to produce more bread, a bakery would
need more flour, but not necessarily more ovens. Thus, the
1939 table had an investment column, which showed how
much o f an industry’s output was purchased for domestic
private investment, and a row, which would have shown de­
preciation if the data had been available. After removing in­
vestm ent spending and taking into account changes in inven­
tories, the Bureau sought to im pose the constraint that the
value o f output (the row sum) equaled the value o f inputs (the
column sum), although data limitations prevented the achieve­
ment o f this goal in all industries.
With government and investment represented explicitly,
the 1939 table, unlike L eontief’s earlier tables, had estimates
o f all four o f the com ponents o f the product side o f g n p . In
32

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

1942, the Department o f Commerce released its first estimates
o f the product side. Perhaps because these were not w ell
documented, Hoffenberg’s reconciliation concerned only the
incom e aspect. The Bureau’s estimates indicated that house­
holds received $61.2 billion in incom e from businesses and
$10 billion from government, for a total o f $71.2 billion. The
Bureau noted that the Commerce Department’s estimate was
$400 m illion, or 0.6 percent, less, because o f different treat­
ments o f contingency reserves, bad-debt allow ances, and in­
ventory revaluations.19
Measuring interindustry flow s led the Bureau into new
types o f statistical work. A s Joseph P. Goldberg and W illiam
T. M oye noted, the Bureau’s traditional way o f operating was
to conduct voluntary surveys, in which em ployers or house­
holds were asked more or less directly about strikes, labor
conditions, prices paid, or quantities purchased. Schedules
were checked for internal consistency, but not for consist­
ency with values for an industry.20 In the 1930s, many b l s
surveys covered only selected parts o f the econom y. For ex ­
ample, the W holesale Price Index, which later became the Pro­
ducer Price Index, covered less than half the value o f the
products produced by the mining and manufacturing sectors.21
In the case o f constructing a transaction table, the Bureau
em ployed a classification system that covered the entire
economy. After defining total industry output and input and
determining their values, the primary problem was to disaggre­
gate purchases o f intermediate inputs, subject to a set o f ac­
counting constraints. This is essentially a problem o f inferring
economic transactions from noneconomic data. The documenta­
tion for the 1939 table provides some examples: to estimate the
use of coal by the trade, services, and housing sectors, for in­
stance, the staff assumed that coal consumption would be pro­
portional to the square footage o f the areas that needed to be
heated, and then they developed estim ates o f the square foot­
age in the three sectors.22 Moreover, w hile b l s staff could
improvise inferences for specific cells, the double-entry char­
acter o f the table required that all o f these measurements be
consistent with each other.

The Bureau’s first applications
L eontief’s 1944 article provided the tools for analyzing the
effects on em ployment o f alternative b ills o f goods, but it did
not actually perform such an analysis for specific alterna­
tives. A s the Battelle study documented, the first such analy­
sis occurred in 1944, when the War Production Board ap­
proached the Bureau about forecasting postwar em ployment.
U sing the 1939 table and the Board’s assumptions about de­
creases in war spending and increases in personal consum p­
tion, the Bureau produced its first set o f com prehensive and
consistent projections o f em ployment by industry.23 Around
the same time, the Bureau created a 20-sector table for Ger­
many, using the U .S. table and a highly confidential German

census o f production. The Office o f Strategic Services used this
table to guide its efforts to cripple the German economy; later, the
table was used to analyze the issue o f German reparations. These
were apparently the first occasions on which government agen­
cies applied Leontief’s model to specific problems.
In 1945, as the Battelle study noted, the Office o f War
M obilization and Reconversion asked the Bureau to examine
the postwar demand for capital goods. Many people believed
that, with the end o f the war, the econom y could slump into
depression again. Because tanks, battleships, and other m ili­
tary goods were steel intensive, it seem ed likely that the steel
industry would suffer significant unused capacity. With the
1939 table, the Bureau had data on the steel intensiveness o f
consumer durables, such as motor vehicles, and construc­
tion. Assum ing pent-up demand for construction, the Bureau
concluded that the wartime increase in steel capacity might
not prove adequate in the postwar years. This study, how ­
ever, was not intended for public use.
The Bureau’s first published application o f input-output
analysis was undertaken to explore the extent to which inter­
national conditions could contribute to the achievem ent o f
fu ll em p loym ent in the postw ar years.24 Author Jerome
Cornfield’s immediate goal was to understand the direct and
indirect connections between actual exports and industrial
em ployment. He found that the largest numbers o f jobs that
were directly dependent on exports were in the metal fabrica­
tion, motor vehicles and industrial equipment, and fuel and
power industries, w hile the largest numbers o f jobs that were
indirectly dependent on exports were in trade, transportation,
and business and consumer services. One o f the more striking
features o f C o rn field ’s 1945 M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w article is
that imports and their relationship to domestic employment
are not mentioned at all! A year later, Leontief revisited the
issue o f trade and em ployment in considerably more detail.25
He introduced a distinction betw een com petitive imports
(which had dom estically produced counterparts) and non­
com petitive imports (which did not), although this distinction
did not play a role in the analysis.
The Bureau’s first comprehensive projections o f output
and em ployment by industry for the public examined whether,
under plausible assumptions, the econom y would achieve full
employment in 1950. Cornfield, Evans, and Hoffenberg coau­
thored a 1947 Monthly Labor Review article that made as­
sumptions about demand from households, about investment,
about government, and about the rest o f the world and then,
using an input-output table to determine a consistent set of
outputs, projected whether the levels o f output would pro­
duce full employment. They declared, “N o unconditional fore­
casts. . .are presented at any place in the text”; instead, their
purpose, they said, was “to investigate the logical con se­
q uences o f these assum ptions” about dem and and other
data.26 This method o f constructing scenarios based upon
observed parameter values is consistent with L eontief’s meth-


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

odological beliefs discussed earlier.
On the one hand, the input coefficients from the 1939 table,
modified to incorporate expected changes in technology, along
with the assumed final demands, generated 34.4 m illion pri­
vate nonagricultural jobs, somewhat less than the 39.0 million
that would have assured full employment. On the other hand,
this level o f em ployment was greater than many people had
feared it would be. b l s econom ists then considered output
levels for several products measured in physical units— tons
o f steel ingots, thousands o f tractors, kilowatt hours o f elec­
tricity— at full em ployment and found that in m ost cases the
required level exceeded previous peaks. This was true not
only for consumer goods, but also for steel and other com ­
modities “com m only regarded as the sinew s o f war.”27 A c­
cording to Battelle, the Bureau’s projections, “alone among
postwar predictions,” did not foresee a depression, and their
correctness greatly enhanced the standing o f input-output
analysis in the upper echelons o f the Federal Government.28
L eontief noted that the accuracy o f the sectoral output fore­
casts impressed decisionmakers in large industrial companies,
such as Western Electric.29

The 500-sector study and price indexes
By 1947, Evans had decided that the 1939 table needed to be
updated. In the same year, Marshall Wood became ch ief o f
the Planning Research D ivision o f the Air Force. Interested in
techniques for coordinating the Air Force’s training and ma­
terials procurement activities, he had the Bureau’s input-output work included in an Air Force initiative known as Project
s c o o p (Scientific C om putation o f O ptim um Program s).30
With the resources o f the Pentagon behind it, the Bureau
assembled a staff o f 50 to 75 people to com pile the 1947 table.
The Council o f Econom ic Advisers, the Budget Bureau, and
the National Security Resources Board formed a joint advi­
sory committee that helped coordinate work across agencies.31
The Air Force also supplied funds to the Census Bureau, in
order to obtain more detailed information on materials manu­
facturing, and to Leontief, who, in 1948, launched the Harvard
Econom ic Research Project, which carried out input-outputrelated research. U sing b l s data, as w ell as data from other
sources in the private and public sectors, L eontief’s staff as­
sembled a matrix o f capital coefficients. The capital co effi­
cients for construction were based on a b l s study o f the
industry,32 and where industry studies were not available, the
staff used com m odity flow sheets developed by the Bureau.33
The result o f the coordination among agencies and the
abundant resources was an unprecedented level o f detailed
information— on 450 industrial and 50 autonomous sectors,
which were reduced to 37 and 5, respectively, in L eontief’s
first published version o f this new table.34 The undistributed
account declined to a mere 3 percent o f gross output, a sig ­
nificant improvement over the 1939 table.
Monthly Labor Review June 2001

33

Leontief-BLS Partnership

The Bureau also made several conceptual changes. One o f
these concerned international trade. A s net exports were rec­
ognized as a component o f g n p , it was natural to add to the
final demand quadrant colum ns for exports and imports o f
goods and services that had domestic counterparts. Imports
that had no domestically produced rivals had a separate row.35
The classification o f the com petitive imports by industry al­
low ed Leontief, in a pioneering study, to compute how much
labor and capital would have been absorbed if the demand for
these imports had been met by domestically produced goods.36
The study raised a number o f issues about the status o f the
Hecksher-Ohlin theory o f international trade that are beyond
the scope o f this article. Suffice it to say that, until imports
were classified in this manner, it was not possible to measure
how trade influenced the em ployment o f factors.
A second change concerned secondary products— com ­
m odities that fall outside the scope o f the industry in which
the establishment is classified. Evans and Hoffenberg dealt
with these in several ways. When the industrial censuses did
not provide enough detail to identify the type o f commodity,
the value o f the products was charged to the unallocated
sector. In other cases, the Bureau created “transfers”— ficti­
tious sales— from the industry that produced the secondary
product to the industries that were the primary producers o f
the com m odities. This treatment had the effect o f inflating the
value o f gross output. A s Evans and Hoffenberg conceded,
that was not a satisfactory solution. N onetheless, the fact
that they addressed the problem directly and admitted the
problematic nature o f the transfers set the stage for the even­
tual solution.37
During the developm ent o f data for construction, it be­
came apparent to the Bureau that data on output from the
Department o f Commerce were not consistent with the v o l­
umes o f materials consumed. A s a result, the Bureau raised its
estimate o f construction output from $24.8 billion to $28.7
billion, a difference o f 16 percent.38 The Commerce Depart­
ment data also were used in the national incom e accounts.
According to Ezra Glaser, an official with the Office o f Statis­
tical Standards o f the Budget Bureau (now the O ffice o f Man­
agement and Budget), the reconciliation o f the input-output
table with the national income accounts revealed serious gaps
and om issions in ocean transportation and services, as w ell
as construction.39
In 1953, the D efen se Department stopped funding the
Bureau’s input-output work, but the reconciliation issue did
not disappear. In 1956, the Budget Bureau asked the National
Bureau o f Econom ic Research ( n b e r ) to review the U .S. na­
tional incom e accounts. In its report, the n b e r ’ s National A c­
counts R eview Committee recognized that input-output tables
served as a tool for identifying deficiencies in the aggregated
figures. Specifically, the committee asserted, “It was the work
on the 1947 input-output table which pointed more conclu­
sively than anything else to the shortcomings o f the current
34

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

construction statistics and gave impetus to the drive for im ­
proving these statistics.”40 That drive, which the committee
endorsed, was one o f the reasons it gave for recommending
that the Federal Government resume the work o f developing
the tables.
The National Accounts R eview Committee also revisited a
second issue that b l s input-output work had raised: the con­
struction o f price indexes for the output o f industries. A t­
tempting to examine the relative stability o f the economic struc­
ture o f the United States, Leontief and others had taken 1
year’s vector o f final demand and used an earlier year’s matrix
to compute predicted levels o f output for the later year.41 To
carry out this exercise, the bill o f goods for the later year
needed to be expressed in the prices o f the earlier year, which
were the basis o f the calculated coefficients. B ills o f goods
were measured as the products o f industries. To facilitate this
adjustment, in 1953 the Bureau recoded quotations from its
w holesale price program to create for the first time indexes o f
producer’s prices by detailed industry.42 The Bureau did not
publish these indexes, however, perhaps because o f prob­
lem s with their scope. Commenting on an evaluation o f fore­
casting exercises, Glaser stated, “[T]here are no very satisfac­
tory price indexes for [the] output o f many industries. Current
wholesale price data are for products, and in many industries
the weighted aggregate o f covered items is a small fraction o f
the total value o f production.”43 In 1957, the National A c­
counts R eview Committee, and in 1961, another n b e r com m it­
tee, headed by George Stigler and focused on price indexes,
voiced similar concerns and recommended the developm ent
o f a com prehensive set o f industry price indexes.44
Even in their early and imperfect forms, these indexes would
turn out to have important uses for the Bureau. In 1955, the
Bureau presented the first series on the real output and the pro­
ductivity o f production workers in manufacturing.45 A s price
indexes for other sectors became available, the Bureau was able
to publish additional measures o f sectoral productivity.
The Bureau also established links between the industrybased input-output framework and its measures o f consumer
expenditures. The consumption data in the input-output table
were based on the com m odity-flow method, which, in effect,
treats consumption as a residual. With such a treatment, it is
desirable to have some independent estimates o f the com po­
sition o f consumption spending. Thus, in the early 1950s, the
Bureau recoded the results o f its 19 3 5 -3 6 , 1941, and 1950
surveys o f consumer expenditures to be consistent with the
input-output table and adjusted the prices so that all o f the
surveys were expressed in 1947 dollars.46

A new framework for measurement
According to the accounts o f Dorfman and Koopmans cited
earlier, the Bureau was important in the development o f inputoutput analysis because it secured the resources for the de-

tailed 1947 table. The Bureau did indeed play that role; how ­
ever, the passage quoted from Leontief at the beginning o f this
article referred to the “continual cooperative relationship [he
had] with the Bureau” [my italics] as providing decisive benefits,
suggesting that, by 1953, the Bureau was playing an ongoing
role in developing input-output analysis. A reexamination o f the
historical record supports Leontief’s contention by document­
ing two additional contributions the Bureau made.47
In the first o f these contributions, the Bureau’s wartime
projections demonstrated that input-output analysis had im ­
portant applications for government policymakers. L eontief’s
first application, calculating the effects o f improvements in
productivity on relative prices and quantities, had little inter­
est outside academia. By contrast, the Bureau’s conditional
forecasts o f postwar em ployment aroused significant inter­
est. The rough accuracy o f these forecasts depended on the
assumptions about final demand, as w ell as assumptions about
labor productivity, so that the input-output technique was
not by itself sufficient. But without the 1939 table, it would
not have been possible to quantify the effects o f increased
demand for construction and consumer durables on indus­
trial output and employment.
The Bureau’s second contribution consisted o f a series o f
conceptual refinements. The m ost important o f these was
H offenberg’s decision to take capital-account transactions
out o f the interindustry portion o f the table. This m ove had
the obvious effect, suggested, but not stated, by the Battelle
study, o f facilitating the reconciliation o f the input-output
table and the national incom e accounts, which in turn led to
indisputable improvements in the accounts. The second ma-

jor conceptual refinement was treating competitive imports as
subtractions from final demand, classified according to indus­
tries that produced rival products. This way o f classifying
imports, along with the compilation o f capital requirements by
industry, made possible L eontief’s pathbreaking studies o f
the factor content o f U .S. trade.
Commenting on the m ethodological view s o f Koopmans,
w ho treated the com pilation o f data as the observation o f
independently existing facts, Leontief argued that the vari­
ables in a typical m odel could be measured only “through an
intricate system o f basic definitions, classifications, and rules
o f measurement.”48 He then held out a rosy scenario in which
“an apt set o f basic definitions” led to an “effective theoreti­
cal formulation,” which in turn permitted “sharper observa­
tions.”49 One can argue that the developm ent o f input-output
analysis illustrates that dynamic: the progressive refinement
o f classifications by L eontief and his collaborators, including
Cornfield, Evans, and Hoffenberg, along with the work o f oth­
ers, made possible more detailed m odels that spurred new
measurements.
The Bureau’s input-output work also had indirect effects
on how the A gency measured the economy. Before working
with Leontief, the Bureau had used a variety o f different clas­
sifications for its surveys o f employment, wages, prices, and
expenditures. By developing input-output tables, it acquired a
comprehensive framework that required consistency and link­
ages between the different classification system s. More spe­
cifically, the Bureau expanded the collection o f wholesale prices
and produced its first, albeit imperfect, Producer Price Indexes
by industry.
□

Notes
A cknowledgment: Solidelle Wasser sparked this project, researched much
of it, and commented on several drafts. Marvin Hoffenberg provided
insights from the invaluable perspective of a participant. Estelle
Leontief graciously permitted access to the Leontief papers in the
Pusey Library at Harvard. I owe an important reference to Karen
Polenske. Ronald Kutscher steered me away from a factual mistake.
John L. Wieting and Diane Nilsen offered me several editorial sugges­
tions, while Lillian Kohlreiser assisted with the research. A longer
version of this article, titled “Leontief and the Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, 1941-53: Developing a Framework for Measurement,” was pre­
sented at the History of Political Economy Workshop on the Age of
Measurement at Duke University in April 2000.

1 Wassily Leontief, “Preface,” in Wassily Leontief, Hollis B.
Chenery, Paul G. Clark, James S. Dusenberry, Allen R. Ferguson, Anne
P. Grosse, Robert N. Grosse, Mathilda Holzman, Walter Izard, and
Helen Kistin, Studies in the Structure o f the American Economy (White
Plains, ny , International Arts and Sciences Press, 1953), p. 5.
2 Wassily Leontief, “Input-Output Economics,” Scientific Ameri­
can, October 1951, pp. 15-21. See also Wassily Leontief, “InputOutput Analysis,” in Encyclopedia o f Materials Science and Engi­
neering (Oxford, U.K., Pergamon Press, 1985). Both articles are re­
printed in Leontief, Input-Output Economics, 2d ed. (New York, Ox­


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

ford University Press, 1986).
3 Richard Dorfman, “Wassily Leontief’s Contribution to Econom­
ics,” Swedish Journal o f Economics, December 1973, p. 437. See also
Richard Stone, “Where Are We Now? A Short Account of the Devel­
opment of Input-Output Studies and Their Present Trends,” in United
Nations Industrial Development Organization, Proceedings o f the Sev­
enth International Conference on Input-Output Techniques (New York,
United Nations, 1984).
4 Tjalling C. Koopmans, “Introduction,” in Tjalling C. Koopmans,
ed., Activity Analysis o f Production and Allocation: Proceedings o f a
Conference (New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1951), p. 3.
5 Battelle Memorial Institute, Interactions o f Science and Technol­
ogy in the Innovative Process: Some Case Studies (Columbus, oh ,
Columbus Laboratories, 1973).
6 Joseph W. Duncan and William C. Shelton, Revolution in United
States Government Statistics, 1926-1976 (U.S. Department of Com­
merce, 1978).
7 Wassily Leontief, The Structure o f American Economy, 1919-

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

35

Leontief-BLS Partnership

1939, 2d ed. (White Plains, ny, International Arts and Sciences Press,
1951), p. 5. In his History o f Economic Analysis (New York, Oxford
University Press, 1954), pp. 241-42, Joseph A. Schumpeter pointed
out the methodological affinity between Quesnay and Leontief, de­
claring that L eontief’s work, “entirely different though it is from
Quesnay’s in purpose and technique, nevertheless revived the funda­
mental principle of the tableau method.”
8 Leontief, Structure, p. 11.

Exports, 1939,” Monthly Labor Review, July 1945, pp. 37-38.
25 Wassily Leontief, “Export, Imports, Domestic Output, and Em­
ployment,” Quarterly Journal o f Economics, February 1946, pp. 171—
93. Reprinted in Leontief, Structure.
26 Jerome Cornfield, W. Duane Evans, and Marvin Hoffenberg,
“Full Employment Patterns, 1950: Part 1,” Monthly Labor Review,
February 1947, pp. 163-90; quote from p. 164.

9 Ibid., p. 12.
10 Ibid., pp. 223-44.
11 For a more detailed discussion of how Leontief’s model changed,
see Martin C. Kohli, “Leontief and the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1941-53: Developing a Framework for Measurement,” paper pre­
sented at the History of Political Economy Workshop on the Age of
Measurement at Duke University, April 2000.

27 Jerome Cornfield, W. Duane Evans, and Marvin Hoffenberg,
“Full Employment Patterns, 1950: Part 2,” Monthly Labor Review,
March 1947, pp. 420-32; quote from p. 427.
28 Battelle, Interactions, p. 8-8.
29 Leontief, “Input-Output Analysis”; also in New Palgrave.
30 Battelle, Interactions.

12 Leontief, Structure, p. 35.
31 Evans and Hoffenberg, “Study for 1947.”
13 Ibid., p. 37.
14 Dorfman, “Leontief’s Contribution.”
15 Those identifying the 1947 table as the first official table include
Stone, “Where Are We Now?” and Adam Rose and William Miemyk,
“Input-Output Analysis: The First Fifty Years,” Economic Systems
Research, June 1989, pp. 229-71. Leontief bestowed the distinction
on the 1939 table in “Input-Output Analysis,” in John Eatwell, Murray
Milgate, and Peter Newman, eds., The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of
Economics (New York, The Stockton Press, 1987). For the views of
Leontief’s former collaborators, Karen Polenske and Anne Carter, see
Karen R. Polenske and Jiri V. Skolka, “Introduction,” in Polenske and
Skolka, eds., Advances in Input-Output Analysis (Cambridge, ma ,
Ballinger, 1976), and Anne P. Carter and Peter Petri, “Leontief’s
Contribution to Economics,” Journal o f Policy Modeling, Spring 1989,
pp. 7-30. Stone may have overlooked the 1939 table because the
Bureau never published it. A 1942 letter from Davenport to Leontief
discussed a planned two-volume Government Printing Office publica­
tion of the table, with the second volume consisting of documentation
of the data for particular industries. For reasons that remain unknown,
this plan was never carried out. The 1939 table was included in the
Bureau’s unpublished study on full employment.
16 Leontief, Structure, p. 139.
17 Full Employment Patterns, 1950 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
unpublished and undated).
18 W. Duane Evans and Marvin Hoffenberg, “The Interindustry
Relations Study for 1947,” Review o f Economics and Statistics, May
1952, pp. 97-148.
19 Full Employment Patterns.
20 Joseph P. Goldberg and William T. Moye, The First Hundred
Years o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics (U.S. Department of Labor,
1985); see especially pp. 12-13.
21 bls Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2490 (Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, 1997).

32 Postwar Capacity and Characteristics o f the Construction Indus­
try, Bulletin 779 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1944).
33 Robert N. Grosse, “The Structure of Capital,” in Leontief et al.,
Studies.
34 Leontief, “Input-Output Economics.”
35 This was how international trade was treated in the detailed
tables. In the table published in Evans and Hoffenberg, “Study for
1947,” international trade was still represented by one row for imports
and one column for exports.
36 Wassily Leontief, “Domestic Production and Foreign Trade:
The American Capital Position Reconsidered,” Proceedings o f the
American Philosophical Society, September 1953, pp. 332-49.
37 Later tables, produced by the Commerce Department’s Office of
Business Economics, showed the use and the make of commodities by
industry. This solution was proposed by Richard Stone and Alan Brown,
A Programme fo r Growth, vol. 1, A Computable Model o f Economic
Growth (London, Chapman and Hall, 1962).
38 Evans and Hoffenberg, “Study for 1947.”
39 Ezra Glaser, as cited in Battelle, Interactions.
40 The National Economic Accounts o f the United States: Review,
Appraisal, and Recommendations (National Bureau of Economic Re­
search, 1958), p. 146.
41 See Leontief, “Output, Employment.”
42 For the method of constructing the indexes, see W. Duane Evans
and Marvin Hoffenberg, “The Nature and Uses of Interindustry-Rela­
tions Data and Methods,” in Conference on Research on Income and
Wealth, Input-Output Analysis: An Appraisal: Studies in Income and
Wealth, vol. 18 (Princeton, n j , Princeton University Press, 1955).
Goldberg and Moye, First Hundred Years, identify the year of the first
industry price indexes as 1953.

22 Full Employment.
23 Battelle, Studies.
24 Jerome Cornfield, “Employment Resulting from United States

36

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

43 See Ezra Glaser, “Comment,” in Conference, Input-Output Analy­
sis: An Appraisal.
44 For the

nber

committee’s recommendations, see National Bureau of

Economic Research, Review, Appraisal, p. 61. As regards the role of the
Stigler Committee, see Goldberg and Moye, First Hundred Years, p. 199.
45 Trends in Output per Manhour and Manhours per unit o f Out­
put—Manufacturing, 1939—53, Report 100 (Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, 1955).
46 Elizabeth Gilboy, “Consumption in Input-Output Analysis,” in
Tibor Barna, ed., The Structural Interdependence o f the Economy:
Proceedings o f an International Conference on Input-Output Analysis


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

(New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1957).
47 The longer version of this article also contends that the Bureau
prompted Leontief to develop a theoretical model that was more
useful for policymakers. (See Kohli, “Leontief and the Bureau.”)
48 Wassily Leontief, “The State of Economic Science,” Review o f
Economics and Statistics, May 1958, pp. 103-6.
49 Ibid.

Where are you publishing your research?
The Monthly Labor Review w ill consider for publication studies o f the labor
force, labor-m anagem ent relations, business conditions, industry productivity,
com pensation, occupational safety and health, dem ographic trends, and other
econom ic d evelopm ents. Papers should be factual and analytical, not p olem ical
in tone.
We prefer (but do not require) subm ission in the form o f an electronic file in
M icrosoft Word, either on a diskette or as an attachment to e-m ail. P lease use
separate files for the text o f the article; the tables; and charts. We also accept
hard cop ies o f manuscripts.
Potential articles should be mailed to: Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bu­
reau o f Labor Statistics, Washington, DC 20212, or by e-mail to mlr@bls.gov

Monthly Labor Review June 2001

37

Research Sum m ary

The lack of a disability
measure in to d a y ’s
Current Population
Survey
Thomas W. Hale
com m on practice is to use data
based on the Current Population
Survey ( c p s ) to demonstrate that the em ­
ployment-population ratios for people
with disabilities deteriorated over the
1990s. This finding is counter-intuitive
given the em ploym ent growth in the
general population over this period, so
various researchers have attributed the
decline to the Americans with D isabili­
ties A ct ( a d a ) requirement for reason­
able accommodations for persons with
disabilities and the failure o f the U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity Com ­
m ission to adequately enforce the a d a .
There are two flaws with the analy­
ses. The first defect, and the focus o f
this article, is that there are no questions
in the Current Population Survey that
identify persons with disabilities.1 The
second defect is attributing the decline
to a specific statute or Federal agency
when there is no data from the c p s that
would provide empirical evidence link­
ing the decline to a specific agency or
statute. Therefore, conclusions by re­
searchers about the em ploym ent rate
trend for persons with disabilities and
the underlying causes are not valid.

A

The questions
There are two sources in the c p s that
have been used to measure employment
trends among persons with disabilities.
The first is from the basic c p s . (The ba­
sic c p s contains the questions that are
asked every month to determine the em ­
p loym ent status o f household m em -

Thomas W. Hale is an economist in the Office
of Employment and Unemployment Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics,
e-mail: hale_t@bls.gov

38

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

bers.) The second is from the c p s income
supplem ent that is appended once a
year to the March basic c p s . (The in­
com e supplement provides information
about work experience, earnings, and in­
com e in the previous calendar year.)
Typically, researchers use data derived
from both sources o f the c p s to estimate
the employment-population ratio for the
population with disabilities.
The basic c p s questions are orga­
nized to first determine if the respondent
is em ployed or unemployed (that is, ac­
tively looking and available for work). If
the respondent does not m eet the crite­
ria for either category, he or she then is
classified as “not in the labor force.”
When individual respondents or their
proxies are asked if they did any work
for pay or profit (a “yes” or “no” ques­
tion), som e instead respond that they
have a disability, which is recorded. (No
list o f possible alternative responses is
read to the respondent.) Following is the
question on disability from the basic
cps:

Q20. LAST WEEK, did you do A N Y
work for (either) pay (or profit)?
□
□
□
□
□
□
□

Yes
No
Retired
Disabled
Unable to work
D on ’t know
Refused

Respondents w ho answer “y es” to
this question are asked to give details
about their employment, such as how
many hours they worked, and in which
industry and occupation they were em ­
ployed. If the respondents answer “n o,”
or give an alternative answer such as
“disabled,” the interviewer probes fur­
ther to make sure they have not forgot­
ten about some kind o f work they did, or
whether they had a job from which they
were absent because o f vacation, illness,
and so forth. If it is determined that the
respondents did no work for pay or

profit, the interviewer then m oves to
another battery o f questions to try to
determine if respondents m eet the crite­
ria for being classified as unemployed.
Failing that, respondents are classified
by default as “not in the labor force.”
If the respondent m eets the criteria
for either em ployed or unemployed, the
response o f “disabled” is erased from
the file because it is inconsistent with
the labor force categories o f em ployed
and unemployed. B ecause o f this, re­
searchers have no information on the
disability status o f em ployed and unem­
ployed persons from the basic c p s .
Moreover, the alternative answers to
the question are not mutually exclusive.
The fact that a person said he or she was
retired did not mean they did not have a
disability. Hence, not only is the basic c p s
unable to identify employed and unem­
ployed persons with disabilities, it cannot
fully measure the extent o f disability
among the “not in labor force” group. Per­
haps most important is that most retired
people and people with disabilities simply
say “no” to the work question because
the interviewer had not asked about their
retirement or disability status.
M ost researchers w ho use the c p s to
develop data on the em ployment status
o f persons with disabilities realize that
the basic c p s does not provide them with
the information they need. Thus, they
turn to the seco n d so u rce— in co m e
supplement data from the March c p s . As
the name suggests, a primary purpose
o f the incom e supplement is to deter­
mine sources and amounts o f income.
The incom e supplement is the source of
Federal data on poverty and the work­
ing poor.
From the incom e supplem ent, re­
searchers typically use the questions on
work limitation and incom e to inquire
about the receipt o f Supplemental Secu­
rity Income (ssi) or Social Security D is­
ability Income ( s s d i ) payments to define
the population with disabilities.
Following is the work limitation ques­
tion from the March 1999 Current Popu­
lation Survey incom e supplement:

Q59a. (D o you/D oes anyone in this
household) have a health problem or
disability which prevents (you/them)
from working or which limits the kind or
amount o f work (you/they) can do?
□ Yes
□ No
If individuals respond “y es” to the
work limitation question, they are as­
sumed to have a disability. The ques­
tioning then m oves to identify sources
o f incom e related to the disability, such
as workers’ compensation, disability in­
surance, State or local government dis­
ability, and State temporary sickness.
Persons collecting such benefits might
be assumed to have a disability. (As
noted earlier, they w ould have been
asked this question only if they re­
sponded positively to the work limita­
tion question.) Researchers then cross
tabulate the responses from the ques­
tion on work lim itation with the re­
sponses from questions on labor force
status in the basic (March) c p s to deter­
mine the em ployment and unemploy­
m ent rates o f those w ho responded
positively to the work limitation and dis­
ability incom e questions.
At first glance, these questions seem
to provide a reasonable means o f identi­
fying the population with disabilities.
However, a closer examination leads to
the conclusion that the questions lack
validity as identifiers of persons with dis­
abilities. In the case o f disability, a valid
question would be written in a way such
that the people w ho were envisioned to
have a disability would identify them­
selves w hen asked the question. U n­
derstanding the validity characteristics
o f survey questions is key to under­
standing what the data mean. For ex­
ample, suppose one defines a person
with a disability as som eone with an
impairment or condition that limits him
or her in a major life activity. This is the
first prong o f the a d a definition o f dis­
ability. Question 59a in the March c p s
supplement certainly identifies som e


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

such p eop le, but also m ay identify
people with the flu, colds, broken legs,
and other temporary illnesses or condi­
tions. In this case, the survey question
is not valid. Because a “y es” response
to the work limitation question does not
differentiate between a person with an
impairment that lim its the ability to
work, and a person with a temporary
health problem, this question could not
be used to positively identify the popu­
lation with disabilities (as defined in the
a d a in our example).
The procedure for designing valid
disability questions starts with the defi­
nition o f disability. Then questions
should be constructed in a way that w ill
evoke positive responses from those
who fit that definition. Tests, such as
cognitive tests and field tests, should
be undertaken to determine if a ques­
tion does the job for which it was de­
signed.
The current c p s questions on work
limitation and disability income did not
begin with any definition o f disability.
In fact, the purpose o f the work limita­
tion question is to serve as a screen for
the income questions. It was specifi­
cally designed to direct respondents to
questions on sources o f income. N ei­
ther the work limitation nor the income
questions were designed to identify the
population with disabilities, nor were
they tested to determine if they do so.
In the March c p s incom e supple­
ment, disability is defined as a health
condition or other disability that makes
a person unable to work or limits the
ability to work. This is an extremely nar­
row (and circular) definition o f disabil­
ity. In the a d a definition (which b l s has
adopted in its efforts to design proper
disability questions for the c p s ) , there
is no reason to believe a person with a
disability is limited or unable to work.
Indeed, the purpose o f the a d a is to
enhance the employment prospects o f
people with disabilities and, therefore,
the default assumption o f the a d a is that
such individuals can work. The work limi­
tation and in com e questions in the

March incom e supplement m ight iden­
tify a subset o f the disability popula­
tion (an untested empirical question),
but they are not likely to capture the
larger population with disabilities.

Elements of uncertainty
In addition to issues o f validity, the c p s
questions (both in the basic and the
March incom e supplement) have sev­
eral elem ents that add uncertainty to
their utility as identifiers o f the popula­
tion with disabilities. There is a tempo­
ral elem ent— how long must a health
problem or impairment last before it
q u a lifies as a d isab lin g con d ition?
D oes the health dimension to this ques­
tion mean we are identifying as disabled
those with temporary conditions such
as the flu or a broken leg? A health con­
dition can be coincident with a disabil­
ity and it could cause the disability, but
blindness, deafness, spinal cord injury,
or m issing limbs generally are not con­
sidered to be health conditions. H ow ­
ever, depression, heart conditions, and
diabetes might be considered as pre­
requisite health conditions for disabil­
ity status. Other health co n d itio n s
clearly would not present a qualifying
precondition for disability status, be­
cause the ongoing pathology is not long
lasting (for example, a cold), and if it is, it
might not present a substantial lim ita­
tion (for example, a case o f mild hyper­
tension). O f course, if respondents re­
port that this condition substantially
limits their ability to work, the condi­
tion would qualify as a disability.
Another elem ent that adds uncer­
tainty to the c p s questions utility as
identifiers o f the population with d is­
abilities is the fact that work is only
one o f many major life activities in
w hich one m ight h ave d iffic u ltie s.
There are long lists o f activities that
m ight apply in the a d a d efinition , in­
cluding parenting, learning, p laying,
getting around inside the hom e, shop­
ping, counting m oney, lifting, m aking
and m aintaining relationships, read-

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

39

Research Summary

ing, and conversing.
Indeed, work goes beyond an activ­
ity o f daily living in terms o f difficulty;
it m ay be one o f the m ost com plex
things w e do because it requires the co ­
ordination o f multiple activities, such
as learning, eating, dressing, bathing,
and the ability to use public or private
transportation, among others. Even if a
person can do all o f these things but
with great difficulty and they hold a job,
that person m ight not respond that he
or she is limited in the type or amount
o f work performed and so would not be
identified by work limitation questions
or by the source o f incom e questions.
Thus, it is plausible that many people
who work and also have a disability (un­
der the a d a definition) would not con­
sider them selves limited in the type or
amount o f work they can do. The c p s
question asks them to identify some
failing about them selves. Why should
they— after all, they are working.
Another elem ent o f uncertainty can
be seen in the data from the U .S. Bu­
reau o f the Census Survey o f Income
and Program Participation ( s i p p ) . These
data show that certain people with spe­
cific types o f disabilities do not selfidentify unless asked about the d is­
ab ilities directly— those with blind­
ness, deafness, and learning disabili­
ties, for example. Some o f the individu­
als surveyed in s i p p responded that
they had these conditions, but did not
get identified by questions on particu­
lar activity limitations.2 These individu­
als also are not likely to be identified by
the work limitation question in the s i p p .
There are likely to be wide crosscultural variations in how “health con­
dition” and “disability” are defined.
There also are likely to be major gender
differences and gender crossed by cul­

40

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

tural differences in the definition. Given
the mind-body split assumption o f most
western populations, a mental condition
is not likely to be considered a “health
condition” or “disability” for many.
“Work” is another definitional issue
that adds to the uncertainty. Individu­
als working in a job that they believe to
be significantly below their capabilities
(such as a data entry clerk with a back­
ground in program m ing rockets for
n a s a ) , might say they are limited in the
type o f work they can do. H ow would
the survey researcher know if the lim i­
tation was because o f a disability, or
because it was the only job that indi­
vidual could find? The question does
not tease out this difference. If som e­
one acquired a disability and was not
able or allow ed to work in the job he or
she was trained to do, and instead had
to accept a menial “substitute” job, that
person might not report that he or she
was working, out o f shame or a sense
o f failure. A lso, the work lim itation
question in the March incom e supple­
ment does not differentiate between
work as a means o f obtaining a living,
and work as a meaningful use o f time.
Hence, when the March income supple­
ment question asks about work limita­
tion, the respondent who does volun­
teer work could easily assume that vol­
unteer work is included. Volunteer work
in the basic c p s , o f course, is not in­
cluded in the em ployment concept—
the question asks “ ...d id you do any
work for pay or profit?”

Remedying the inadequacy
Are the c p s data “valid” for measuring
the employment-population trends o f
persons with disabilities? This is an
empirical question, and given that the

questions in the c p s are not designed
to measure a specific definition o f dis­
ability, the burden o f proof is on those
who use the data to infer the labor force
status o f people with disabilities. To
proceed as though the data are valid
measures o f disabilities turns a data is­
sue into a policy issue.
The Bureau o f Labor Statistics recog­
nizes that an adequate measure o f the em­
ployment status o f persons with disabili­
ties may not exist, either from the c p s in its
current form, or from other surveys.
Working under the auspices o f Executive
O d er 13078 (which calls for the develop­
ment o f an accurate and reliable employ­
ment rate for adults with disabilities),
and in conjunction with the Presiden­
tial Task Force on the Em ployment o f
Adults with D isabilities and more than
15 other Federal agencies, a set o f ques­
tions has been identified and are being
tested for possible inclusion in the c p s .
The Executive Order requires that m ea­
sures o f individuals with disabilities be
accurate and reliable. The first steps nec­
essary to produce meaningful statistics
are being undertaken.
□

Notes
1The Current Population Survey (last re­
vised in 1994) is the official source of em­
ployment and unemployment data for the
United States. It is a monthly survey of about
50,000 households, or 100,000 people. This
is the vehicle through which employment and
unemployment data on the protected classes
are gathered.
Based on responses to a series of ques­
tions on work and job-search activities, each
person 16 years and older in a sample house­
hold is classified as employed, unemployed,
or not in the labor force. A detailed explana­
tion of labor force definitions appears on
page 51 of this issue.
2 Survey of Income and Program Partici­
pation, Bureau of the Census, 1994-95.

Research summary

Information
Technology workers
in the new econom y

Margaret Hilton
lthough the dot-com bubble has
burst, demand continues to grow
for skilled information technology (IT)
professionals.1 This is because it prod­
ucts and services— and the workers who
provide them— are found throughout
the econom y. The largest group is em ­
ployed in computer services firms, but
large fractions also work in manufactur­
ing, financial industries, government,
and retail and w holesale trade.2 High
turnover, as w ell as growing demand,
con trib u tes to e m p lo y e r s’ on g o in g
scramble to fill it vacancies. At the
same time, it is increasingly clear that it
plays a significant role in increasing
national productivity and sustaining
econom ic growth.3 Therefore, it is im ­
portant to look for solutions to meeting
the N ation’s need for IT and skilled IT
professionals.
Som e observers argue that the Bu­
reau o f Labor Statistics projection that
the number o f jobs for computer sys­
tems analysts and computer engineers
and scientists w ould double between
1998 and 2008 is too low.4 (According to
BLS projections, computer programming
jobs w ill grow at a more moderate pace,
increasing by about 29 percent over the
same 20-year period.) Those projections
suggest it jobs w ill grow slightly more
than 7 percent per year over the decade,
far more quickly than the 1.4-percent
average across all jobs. Moreover, the
ratio o f annual job openings due to
growth and net replacement needs is
about twice that for all occupations. This
indicates that the number o f new domes­
tic entrants to the occupation— an ap-

A

Margaret Hilton is a program officer at the
National Academy of Sciences,
e-mail: mhilton@nas.edu


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

propriate measure o f minimum training
requirements— is low relative to the rap­
idly growing number o f available job
openings.
One response to this situation has
been an increase in the numbers o f
skilled foreign workers allowed to work
in the United States under temporary “H1B” visas.5 Although offshore talent will
help to fill some vacancies in the short
term, much can be done to develop and
deploy the IT skills o f U .S. workers.
Such initiatives would involve several
levels of effort: (1) creative management
o f it talent at the firm level; (2) an over­
all strategy for the public and private
education and training com m unities;
and (3) innovative training initiatives at
the regional or industry level.
Education strategies aim ed at in­
creasing the supply o f future it work­
ers can address em ployers’ long-term
needs for skilled workers. Many public
and private providers o f IT training are
expanding their enrollments in response
to growing demand. However, gradu­
ates o f these programs who lack sub­
stantive work experience in the field for
which they have trained w ill sometimes
have difficulty finding work in that field.
Education and training programs that
include structured internships can help
overcome this problem. Internships can
be designed to allow students or train­
ees to test and refine theories and skills
learned in the classroom or on the Web,
providing a more complete set o f tech­
nical and world-of-work skills needed to
succeed and stay in the it profession.
To keep pace with the rapid changes
in the computer industry, IT graduates,
such as those entering the workforce
today, require ongoing formal training
and informal learning opportunities, as
w ell as a supportive work organization
that encourages them to use and further
develop their skills. A training consor­
tium would enhance efforts to increase
training and reorganize work for im ­
proved productivity. In the short term,
more efficient management o f current it
staff, including greater opportunities for

formal training and informal on-the-job
learning, would reduce turnover. In ad­
d ition, w ell-d ev e lo p ed training and
staffing programs would allow em ploy­
ers to more easily fill vacancies by re­
cruiting and retraining workers currently
em ployed in other fields.

Redesigning initial
it education
In response to growing demand, more
students are enrolling in IT fields at 2and 4-year colleges. For example, the
number o f 2-year colleges offering de­
grees in computer science or informa­
tion systems grew by about 15 percent
during the first half o f the 1990s,6 and
the number o f associate degrees in these
fields grew from 7,677 to 9,152 over this
period.7 Following a drop between 1986
and 1995, enrollment in 4-year it pro­
grams began to rebound in the late
1 9 9 0 s, and the num ber o f d eg rees
awarded grew from 24,098 in 1995-96 to
26,852 in 1997-98.8 However, institutional
factors, including a lack o f faculty and
computing facilities, could restrain the
growth pace at 2- and 4-year institutions.
Private providers o f short-term, tech­
nology-specific it skills training have
also grown rapidly in response to grow­
ing demand. These training courses are
offered via the Internet; some involve
partnerships between colleges and pri­
vate it vendors to provide a m ix o f
online, classroom, and hands-on train­
ing. Full-time students, working adults,
and those who are interested in entering
it occupations often take these classes
to prepare for an examination leading to
certification o f skills. Since 1989, when
N ovell awarded the first such certificate,
the number has grow n dram atically
around the world, reaching an estimated
total o f 2.5 m illion it skills certificates
awarded to date.9
Even with this rapid growth in pri­
vate training, and even if 2- and 4-year
colleges could rapidly expand their en­
rollm ents, the increased numbers o f
graduates might not meet the N ation’s

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

41

Research summary

need for it products and services. This
is b eca u se m ost current program s,
whether offered in traditional classroom
settings or on the Internet, often oper­
ate in isolation from the realities o f the
workplace. For example, many it work­
ers begin their training by majoring in
electrical engineering. Both cognitive
theory and an examination o f actual en­
gineering design practice suggest engi­
neering is best learned through experi­
ences that integrate learning and appli­
cation. However, most current engineer­
ing education programs teach design
and analysis as abstract concepts, in
separate c la s s e s .10 M ore integrated
classroom experiences, and increased
attention to the econom ic, social, and
cultural factors influencing engineering
practice in the workplace, could reduce
this problem and enhance learning.
In addition to making it education
programs more reflective o f the work­
place, education and training provid­
ers should offer structured internships
to all students. The work assigned in
these internships should be c lo se ly
aligned with the educational curriculum,
and company supervisors should work
closely with faculty. Som e successful
U .S. IT firms actively recruit computer
science graduates from the University
o f Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, in part
based on graduates’ internship experi­
en ces.11 A lso , the Northern Virginia
R egion al Partnership supports a vari­
ety o f short-term retraining programs
aim ed at adults w ish in g to enter it
careers. A m ong these, the program
w ith the h ighest job placem ent rate is
the Technology Retraining Internship
Program, w hich includes a 3-m onth,
half-tim e internship as part o f the 6m onth program .12

Situated learning
D iscu ssio n s about w ays to increase
supply in order to meet growing demand
for information technologists typically
center on the number o f college gradu­

42

Monthly Labor Review


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

ates with 4-year degrees in computer
science or electrical engineering. Over
the past 20 years, college-level it ma­
jors have emerged and grown rapidly.
The supply o f college graduates with it
concentrations grew dramatically be­
tween 1976, when fewer than 6,000 de­
grees were awarded, and 1986, when
nearly 40,000 students graduated.13 In
2000, an estimated 42,000 bachelor’s de­
grees in computer science and engineer­
ing were awarded by U.S. and Canadian
institutions.14 Despite this rapid growth,
demand for IT professionals still out­
strips the supply o f graduates, and em ­
ployers have developed other channels
for obtaining a workforce with the nec­
essary skills.
From the earliest days o f computer
development, when no formal education
programs existed, until today, em ploy­
ers have hired individuals from a variety
o f backgrounds. Using b l s data, one
analyst examined the educational cre­
dentials among people in four important
it p rofession s— com puter scien tists,
computer engineers, system s analysts,
and computer programmers— in 1998.
T h ese p ro fessio n a ls w ere gen erally
highly educated, with two-thirds hold­
ing a bachelor’s or postgraduate degree.
However, one-third o f them (mostly pro­
grammers) had either a 2-year degree or
only a high school diploma. Perhaps
m ost surprising, less than h alf had a
bachelor’s or higher degree with a major
or minor in computer science or related
discipline.15
The reality that many individuals
without extensive formal IT education
are em ployed in it professions reflects
the importance o f an often-ignored route
to skill development— informal, or “situ­
ated,” learning on the job. Studies o f
software support personnel, and micro­
computer and network technicians re­
veal the value o f informal learning.16
These studies indicate that individuals
and groups were able to solve it prob­
le m s and d e v e lo p in n o v a tiv e a p ­
p roach es b ased on the k n o w le d g e
gained through day-to-day work experi­

June 2001

ence with others and technical systems
themselves. A more recent survey of
young it professionals reached similar
conclusions, finding that these IT work­
ers spent about half o f their work time
working with others and seeking infor­
m ation.17 These young professionals
turned frequently to their work team
members for information, and found
them to be the most valuable informa­
tion sources. Those it professionals
who were able to build communications
ties with experienced workers in their
field had the most successful job perfor­
mance. This research suggested that
work experience o f young IT workers
might have a greater impact on their
long-term job performance than formal
education.
Recruiters and em ployers recognize
the power o f learning through experi­
ence. In job advertisements and in it
workforce committee testimony, employ­
ers often stressed that dem onstrated
ability and experience were the most im­
portant hiring factors— college degrees
and ranking were secondary factors.18
When the Information Technology A s­
sociation o f Am erica recently inter­
viewed hundreds o f IT hiring managers
about their preferences, 47 percent indi­
cated that hands-on experience was an
important qualification, second only to
strong knowledge o f the relevant tech­
nical area.19
Why do IT skills learned through for­
mal education and training often fail to
transfer into improved job performance?
Experts identify social and contextual
factors as critical. For exam ple, if a
worker receives training in a new skill,
but has no opportunity to apply and re­
fine the new skills at work, the training
will have no impact on job performance.
Similarly, the degree to which the trained
worker is supported in applying the new
skills also influences the degree to which
training transfers to the job .20 Keith
R ollag’s research into the experience o f
new engineers in Silicon Valley it firms
illustrates how social and work context
affect transfer o f skills learned in formal

education.21 Rollag found that, in gen­
eral, new engineers were often reluctant
to express their opinions and lacked
confidence in their abilities, reducing
their contributions to the work at hand.
H ow ever, new en gin eers lost these
“newcom er” feelings more quickly in
start-up firms than they did in more es­
tablished com panies, even though the
start-up firms had fewer training and ori­
entation programs. He suggested that
this may happen because em ployees
with only a few months o f start-up expe­
rience were treated as newcom ers by
more senior coworkers, but as “old-tim­
ers”— w ith superior k n ow led ge and
skills— by more recent arrivals.
Although the majority o f it workers
are not em p loyed in start-up firm s,
Rollag also identified several practices
in start-up firms that helped assimilate
new engineers, motivating them to be
“highly productive and satisfied with
their careers.”22 These simple steps in­
clude givin g new workers important
projects, allowing them to open or close
the office, inviting them to join more se­
nior staff for lunch, encouraging them
to ask questions, asking them questions
and indicating that their opinions are
valued and providing frequent feedback.
By taking such steps, skills o f it work­
ers could be more fully utilized.

Integrating work and
informal learning
A s w ell as assigning jobs and organiz­
ing work in ways that encourage trans­
fer o f skills to the tasks at hand, compa­
nies can restructure their training pro­
grams to draw on the power o f informal
learning. For example, in 1995, one large
computer manufacturer reorganized its
management training based on the as­
sumption that m ost “students” already
understood the b asics.23 M oving to­
ward an experiential approach, the com ­
pany introduced shorter training ses­
sions, focusing on intact work groups
to build teamwork. The training included
classroom exercises based on partici­


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

pants’ actual challenges and problems
on the job, smaller class sizes, and pro­
viding training at the job ’s location. In
short, the goal was to see training as an
organizational intervention, rather than
a program.
A nother large tec h n o lo g y -b a se d
company has also developed a training
approach that recognizes and builds on
the power of informal learning. The com­
pany found the performance of new sales
representatives, follow ing training at a
central site, was unacceptably low. In
addition, turnover was high among new
sales representatives, many did not at­
ten d the fo rm a l tra in in g , and the
training’s travel costs were too high. To
address these problems, the company
worked with consultants to develop an
innovative training program designed to
support and leverage the learning that
already happens on the job.
The new program was based on a
corps o f mentors w ho supported the
new hires, helping them to incrementally
build their knowledge and skills and de­
velop relationships within their work
communities. The goal was to help new
em ployees put their training into prac­
tice. Following a successful pilot test,
the corporation implemented this sup­
port system nationally in 1999.24

Overcoming barriers
to training ~
D espite the potential benefits to im ­
proved management and it worker train­
ing, high turnover and time pressures
discourage em ployer investm ents in
these areas. In IT firms rushing to bring
products to market, and in manufactur­
ing and other industries that rely heavily
on IT, time pressures encourage assign­
ing it professionals to jobs or projects
that match their current skills. This re­
duces opportunities for challenging job
assignm ents that help em ployees de­
velop new skills.
To overcome these disincentives to
invest in training, employers o f IT work­
ers could share training costs. Shared

training would help overcom e the “free
rider” problem that results when some
firms (often the larger firms) invest in
education and training; other firms then
recruit the trained em ployees. Member
companies would pool their training re­
so u rces and a ch ie v e e c o n o m ie s o f
scale.25
it em ployers in several areas o f the
country already have taken steps in
this direction. For exam ple, S ilicon
V alley’s survey o f the many businessed u ca tio n partnerships w ork in g to
educate and train current and future
it workers found that existing efforts
w ere “ fra g m en ted and u n su sta in ­
able,” and called for a “com prehensive
and regional approach.”26
In another effort to share the costs
and benefits o f improving workforce
sk ills, the M a ssa ch u setts S oftw are
Council sends volunteer it workers into
schools, both to improve network con­
nections and to educate students about
IT careers. The Council also arranges
internships for college students and re­
cent graduates. For 3 years, the Council
operated a successful program that com ­
bined classroom training and intern­
ships to retrain and re-employ displaced
it career workers. Ninety percent o f the
workers, whose ages ranged from 40 to
60, were placed in new jobs at an aver­
age annual salary of $55,000, but the pro­
gram was discontinued when State and
Federal funds ran out.
To create more stable shared training
initiatives, employers o f it workers may
want to consider the m odel o f a regional
training consortium. In this model, em ­
ployers not only identify skill needs, but
also provide sustained funding and par­
ticipate in training design and delivery.
Active participation enhances member
firm s’ commitment to the consortium,
and is conducive to developing innova­
tive education and training programs that
link work experience with the classroom.
In several U .S . areas, firm s have
partnered with workers and educational
institutions to form regional training
consortia.27 The range o f industries and

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

43

Research summary

regions includes graphic arts companies
in northern California, Wisconsin metal­
working firms, San Francisco hotels,
Philadelphia hospitals, and the N ew
York City garment industry. Often, these
consortia are incorporated as nonprofit
organizations. For example, the Graphic
Arts Institute o f Northern California,
founded in 1968, provides desktop pub­
lishing and commercial computer graph­
ics training to advertising, printing, and
graphic design professionals. These
consortia provide a cost-effective way
to upgrade current em ployee skills, im ­
proving individual job performance and
organizational effectiveness.28 Building
on stable financial support from member
firms, many consortia have received ad­
ditional public funds to upgrade the
skills o f welfare recipients and disadvan­
taged workers, providing member com ­
panies with skilled workers from new and
untapped labor pools.29

could result in more realistic timelines,
in software developm ent and also in
other industries that employ it profes­
sionals. These steps would reduce the
need for long hours and weekend work,
thus increasing the job satisfaction and
retention o f skilled workers.32 Manag­
ers could also allow more flexibility in
work hours and location (including
telework) as a way o f retaining experi­
enced workers who have family respon­
sibilities.
Providing increased opportunities
for formal and informal learning at work
can be a key element in retaining skilled
IT workers. Surveys indicate that IT
workers are motivated as much by the
opportunity to develop new skills as by
compensation.33 Therefore, training, onthe-job development o f new skills, and
promotions may increase job satisfac­
tion and retention, providing some im ­
mediate relief to the problem o f filling
vacant IT positions.
□

M a n a g e m e n t’s role
Although som e observers view job va­
cancy rates as the key indicator o f an it
worker shortfall, high turnover appears
to be a bigger contributor to job vacan­
cies than actual grow th in demand.
Turnover am ong it p rofession als is
much higher than among professionals
in other occupations with similar educa­
tion levels.30 Although high turnover is
not unusual in any type o f job charac­
terized by growing demand and increas­
ing wages, employers may reduce turn­
over rates among it staff through sev­
eral strategies: improvements in plan­
ning work, and organizing, staffing, and
directing workers.
Computer work is notoriously high­
speed, high-bandwidth, and high-stress.
Because they often grow rapidly, soft­
ware development firms may rely heavily
on ad hoc approaches, resulting in many
over-budget projects that fail to meet
customer requirements or are never com ­
pleted.31 Improved planning, more care­
ful matching o f em ployee skills with job
requirements, and ongoing oversight

44

Monthly Labor Review


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

Notes
A cknow ledgment : This article draws on the

National Research Council, Building a
Workforce for the Information Economy (Wash­
ington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001).
Full copies of the report are available from the
National Academy Press, on the Internet at
http://books.nap.edu, or by phone at 888624-8343. However, the views expressed are
those of the author alone and do not necessar­
ily represent the views of the Committee on
Workforce Needs in Information Technology,
the National Research Council, or the National
Academies.

1For example, The number of people em­
ployed in computer and data processing ser­
vices alone grew steadily over a recent 5month period, from 1.96 million in October
2000 to just over 2 million people in March
2001. See The Employment Situation, USDL
01-57 (Bureau of Labor Statistics), Mar. 9,
2001, on the Internet at http://stats.bis.gov/
uew sreis.htm (visited March 2001). The
increase of nearly 50,000 new jobs is greater
than the job growth over the same 5 months
in late 1999 and early 2000, when only
32,000 new jobs were added.
2 Richard Ellis and B. Lindsay Lowell, Core
Occupations o f the U.S. Information Technol­
ogy Workforce, United Engineering Foundation,
January 1999, on the Internet at http://

June 2001

www.uefoundation.org/reportl.html (vis­
ited June 5, 2001).
3 See, for example, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Economics & Statistics Adminis­
tration, Digital Economy 2000 (Washington,
DC, June 2000).
4 See “Occupational Employment Projec­
tions to 2008” on the Internet at h ttp ://
www.bis.gov/empmlr99.htm (visited March
2000 ) .
5 On October 17, 2000, President Clinton
signed S. 2045, increasing the H-1B cap and
H.R. 5362, increasing the fees for H-1B visas
into law.
6 Peter Freeman and William Aspray, The
Supply o f Information Technology Workers in
the United States (Washington, DC: Comput­
ing Research Association, 1999), on the
Internet at w w w .era.org/reports/w its (vis­
ited June 5, 2001).
7 Digest o f Education Statistics 2000 (U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics), on the Internet at http:/
/nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/digest (visited June 5,
2001 ).
8 Ibid.
9 Clifford Adelman, “A Parallel Universe
Expanded: Certification in the Information
Technology Guild,” Change Magazine, 32 (3),
(May/June 2000), on the Internet at h ttp ://
w w w .aahe.org/change/parlleluniverse.htm
(visited June 5, 2001).
10 Charlotte Linde, M. Brereton, J. Greeno,
J. Lewis and L. Leifer, “An Exploration of
Engineering Learning.” (Palo Alto, CA, Insti­
tute for Research and Learning, IL R Project
Report #49.112,1993).
11 Based on site visits with IT firms in Aus­
tin, Texas, and Seattle, Washington.
12 According to David Huhn, Northern Vir­
ginia Regional Partnership, 92 percent of Tech­
nology Retraining Internship Program gradu­
ates are placed—personal communication, June
28, 2000.
13 Clifford Adelman, Leading, Concurrent,
or Lagging? The Knowledge Content o f Com­
puter Science in Higher Education and the
Labor Market (Washington, DC, U.S. Depart­
ment of Education, 1997).
14 Ibid.
15 Richard Ellis, “A hard look at the factors
contributing to the so-called high-tech labor
shortage,” Dr. Dobb’s Journal, April 2000.
(Ellis designed and directed the IT Workforce
Data Project, sponsored by the United Engi­
neering and Alfred P. Sloan Foundations.)
16 Brian T. Pentland, “Bleeding Edge Epis­
temology: Practical Problem Solving in Soft­
ware Support Hotlines,” in S. Barley and Julian
Orr, Between Craft and Science: Technical
Work in U.S. Settings (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 1997).
17 Denis M.S. Lee, “Information Seeking
and Knowledge Acquisition Behaviors of Young

Information Systems Workers: Preliminary
Analysis.” Paper presented at the 1999 Ameri­
cas Conference on Information Systems, Mil­
waukee, WI, Aug. 13-15, 1999.
18 Hal Salzman, “Information Technology
Labor Markets.” Preliminary Report to the
NAS Committee on Workforce Needs in Infor­
mation Technology, December 8, 1999.
19 Bridging the Gap: Information Tech­
nology Skills for a New Millennium (Alexan­
dria, VA, Information Technology Association
of America, 2000).
20 J. Kevin Ford, “Transfer of Training:
An Updated Review and Analysis,” Perfor­
mance Improvement Quarterly, 10 (2), pp. 2241.
21 Keith Rollag, “From Newcomer to Oldtimer: Organizational Assimilation as an Out­
come of Social Comparison” (unpublished pa­
per, Department of Industrial Engineering &
Engineering Management, Stanford University).
22 These practices included: giving them
important projects; handing them the keys to
the company, by placing them in charge of
opening or closing the office; inviting them to
join their colleagues for lunch; encouraging
them to ask questions; asking them questions
to show their opinion is valued; giving them
frequent feedback; sharing humor; informal


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

mentoring by high-level managers; and feed­
ing them pizza and stock options. See Keith
Rollag, “How Start-ups Motivate New Engi­
neers,” IEEE Spectrum, November 1997.
23 Linda Keegan and Betsy Jacobson,
“Training Goes Modular at Apple,” Training
and Development, July 1995.
24Melissa Cefkin, “The Integration of Work
and Learning for Xerox’s New Hire Sales Rep­
resentatives: A Project Review” (draft, The
Institute for Research on Learning, 1999).
25 See Margaret Hilton, “Shared training:
learning from Germany,” Monthly Labor Re­
view, March 1991, pp. 33-37.
26 Joint Venture: Silicon Valley, Joint
Venture’s Workforce Study: An Analysis o f the
Workforce Gap in Silicon Valley (San Jose, CA,
1999).
27 High Road Partnerships Report (Wash­
ington, D C , A FL -C IO Working For America
Institute, 2000).
28 For example, the 12 hotels participating
in the San Francisco Hotel Partnership Project
have found that involving workers in design­
ing and implementing training programs has
resulted in higher scores on guest satisfaction
surveys.
29 For example, between 1997 and 1999,
the Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership

(WRTP) placed more than 400 workers in met­
alworking firms, doubling their average in­
come. Overall, WRTP trains about 6,000 indi­
viduals annually, most of them employees of
the 56 member firms.

30 See Chapter 3, Building a Workforce for
the Information Economy.
31 Surveys conducted in 1994, 1996, and
1998 indicate that more than one-fourth of
software development projects were canceled
before completion and more than 40 percent
went over their original budgets—see Jim
Johnson, “Turning Chaos into Success,”
softwaremag.com (December 1999), on the
Internet at www.softwaremag.com/archive/

1999dec/Success.html.
32 For example, inspecting for quality at
the beginning of software projects reduces the
need for rework and debugging at the end.—
see Steve McConnell, Software Project Sur­
vival Guide (Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press,
1998), pp. 20-33.
33 See, for example, Robert A. Zawacki,
Carol A. Norman, Paul A. Zawacki, and Paul
D. Applegate, Transforming the Mature Infor­
mation Technology Organization: Reenergiz­
ing and Motivating People. (Colorado Springs,
CO, Eaglestar Publishing, 1995).

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

45

Com puter use
and older workers
Workers w ho use computers on the job
retire later than those who don’t. This
raises the follow ing question: D o work­
ers with computer skills choose to de­
lay retirement or do workers who plan
on later retirement choose to learn com ­
puter skills?
Leora Friedberg o f the University of
Virginia attempts to discern the effects
o f computer skills on retirement in “The
Impact o f Technological Change on
Older Workers: Evidence from Data on
Computer U se” (National Bureau of Eco­
nomic Research Working Paper 8297).
She examines data on computer use from
the monthly Current Population Survey
( c p s ) and from the longitudinal Health
and Retirement Study ( h r s ) .
The c p s data come from the October
surveys o f 1984, 1987, 1993, and 1997,
which asked workers: “D o you directly
use a computer at work?” Trends in the
evolution o f computer use that are ap­
parent in the c p s data suggest that im­
pending retirement plays an important role
in computer use among older workers.
With the h r s data, Friedberg estimates
the impact that computer use has on re­
tirement. Her results indicate that com ­
puter use itself leads to later retirement.
She finds that, although they are not
precise, the estimates imply that com ­
puter use has an independent effect on
retirement, increasing the likelihood of
continuing to work by up to 25-3 0 percent during a 4-year period.___________

Biology of unions
In “A Biological Model of Unions” (Na­
tional Bureau o f Econom ic Research
Working Paper 8257), Michael Kroner and
Benjamin A. Olken of Harvard University
take the principles o f evolutionary biol­
ogy and apply them to the study o f
unions. The researchers note that “bio­
logical models suggest that selection pres­
sure often works against organisms that
are too harmful to their hosts.” Kroner

46

Monthly Labor Review June 2001


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

and Olken apply this concept to the rela­
tionship between unions and firms. They
argue that unions that obtain the level of
wages that are optimal for their current
members will be displaced in competition
with unions with more moderate wage
policies; the more restrained policies of
such unions allow their firms to live
longer.
Kroner and Olken’s model also indi­
cates that industries with high turnover
rates for firms will have low unionization
rates. This may help explain the higher
unionization rates now found in the pub­
lic sector relative to the private sector.
To test their model, the authors ana­
lyze data on union membership by indus­
try from the 1983-91 Current Popula­
tion Survey and data on industry char­
acteristics from the 1992 Census o f
Manufactures. They find support for their
model— for example, they report that
“across a variety o f sp ecifica tio n s,
higher firm exit rates are associated with
lower unionization rates.”
Kremer and Olken’s model has impli­
cations for the future o f unions in the
United States. If business is becoming
more competitive and if this means higher
turnover rates for firms, then the decline
in unionization that has been seen in the
past two decades could be intensified.

Noncognitive skills
When economists have spoken about the
importance o f skills, the tendency has
been to skip straight to measures o f cog­
nitive skill, such as years o f schooling or
test scores. In fact, however, cognitive
skills can determine only part of a person’s
success in the labor market or other as­
pects o f economic life. A session o f the
2001 annual meeting of the American Eco­
nomic Association presented some of the
exploratory research addressing the is­
sue o f accounting for the benefits of
skills, both cognitive and noncognitive.
The four papers recently appeared in the
May 2001 Papers and Proceedings of

American Economic Review.
In “The Importance o f Noncognitive

Skills: Lessons from the g e d Testing
Program,” James J. Heckman and Yona
Rubenstein find that the General Edu­
cational D evelop m en t ( g e d ) testing
program provides a mixed signal. Drop­
outs w ho take the g e d do have higher
levels o f cognitive skill than those who
do not, but once ability is measured and
controlled for, g e d recipients actually
have lower earnings than other drop­
outs. They attribute this to unmeasured
differences in noncognitive skills, such
as reliability and persistence.
Rachel Dunifon, Greg J. Duncan, and
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, in “A s Ye Sweep,
So Shall Ye Reap,” examine the role o f
organization and efficiency in affecting
earnings and other outcomes over two
generations. Using a measure o f house­
hold cleanliness as a proxy for those
traits, they find that “the cleanliness rat­
ing o f on e’s home is predictive of: (1)
o n e’s own earnings 25 years later; (2)
c h ild r e n ’s su b se q u e n t c o m p le te d
schooling; and (3) children’s earnings
measured 25 years later.”
In “Incentive-Enhancing Preferences:
Personality, Behavior, and Earnings,”
Sam uel B o w les, Herbert G intis, and
M elissa Osborne looks at the impact
personality traits m ight have on earn­
ings. For example, among women, a one
standard-deviation increase in “fatal­
ism ” as measured by the “Rotter ‘locus
o f control’ scale” has the effect o f re­
ducing wages by 6.7 percent.
The final paper, “Understanding,
Speaking, Reading, Writing, and Earnings
in the Immigrant Labor Market,” by An­
thony P. Camevale, Richard A. Fry, and
B. Lindsay Lowell looks at a wider selec­
tion o f cognitive skills than earlier, Bu­
reau o f the Census-based research has
been able to do. While the Census sur­
vey asks only about speaking ability, the
data from the National Adult Literacy
Survey allows analysis of reading, writ­
ing, and understanding as well. The au­
thors find that only one o f these four as­
pects o f language acquisition skills— the
ability to understand the spoken word—
has a significant impact on wages.
□

Book Reviews

Social protection of work
World Labour Report 2000: Income
Security and Social Protection in a
Changing World. Washington, Inter­
national Labor O ffice, 2000, 321 pp.
$34.95.
This latest World Labour Report o f the
International Labor Office (ILO) presents
a powerful argument for extending and
increasing the social protection o f a
workforce that is more and more exposed
to profound structural changes in labor
markets and family structure, entailing a
loss o f fam ilies’ protective functions.
Large parts o f the workforce in more de­
v e lo p e d co u n tr ies w ere su b ject to
flexibilization and casualization o f jobs;
and, in the less developed ones, to the
informalization of work (for example, lack­
ing any, or any firm link to stable, ten­
ured employment offering adequate wage
and nonwage benefits). At the same time
the extended family is contracting, the
proportion o f female-headed single-par­
ent households is rising. Furthermore,
the provision o f social insurance is in­
creasingly constrained by global eco­
nomic integration and the greater crossborder m obility o f capital, which make
governm ent’s pursuit o f necessary fis­
cal policies more difficult.
In Decent Work, its most recent pro­
grammatic statement, il o states that its
primary goal is to promote opportuni­
ties for men and women to obtain “de­
cent and productive work.” This goal is
the focus o f four basic objectives— the
promotion o f worker rights, employment,
social protection, and the “tripartite dia­
logue,” which forms il o ’ s basic negoti­
ating arena between worker, employer,
and governm ent representatives. Yet,
the core o f its efforts has always lain the
prom otion o f em p loym en t, w ithout
which decent living standards and so­
cial development “remain illusory.”
The World Labour Report 2000,
however, documents numerous hurdles
that bar the way to reaching the objec­
tives ILO stakes out.


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

Thus, while ILO argues that “em ploy­
ment-friendly econom ic policies” are a
fundamental condition o f social protec­
tion program viability, the persistence,
and even the rising trend, in unemploy­
ment and under-em ploym ent growth
weaken such viability. Increasing casual
and short-term em ploym ent in many
countries compel workers to accept it for
lack o f better jobs. Rules of unemploy­
ment benefits— where, in fact, such ben­
efits are paid— more broadly define
“suitable employment,” refusing which
may lead to denial o f benefits. Under­
employment manifests itself in the in­
creasing informalization o f work in many
less developed countries. Income o f “in­
formal” workers is usually low and ir­
regular, and generally runs w ell below
that of formal employment workers, who
have tenure and permanent attachment
to their employer (including state agen­
cies and enterprises). The informal sec­
tor in Argentina, for example, is estimated
at 46 percent of total urban employment,
48 percent in Brazil, 27 percent in Mexico,
and 44 percent in India. Formal-sector
em ploym ent has been declining in a
number o f countries, partly due to the
structural adjustment policies o f inter­
national financial organizations.
“The family is under strain in many
w ays,” writes ILO. An indication has
been the steep rise in divorce rates over
the past 30-40 years in industrial coun­
tries (for which it provides the data).
Large proportions o f household heads
are now women in both developed and
less developed econom ies, whose earn­
ings capacities remain low. Poverty, of­
ten very sparsely defined, among female­
headed households with children runs
w ell above 20 percent in nearly all coun­
tries for which ilo publishes the data.
Child poverty rates rose in many selected
industrial cou n tries throughout the
1980s and 1990s. “Huge numbers o f
children...growing up in poverty (has)
serious implications.. .for their future in­
com e security in adult life.” In some de­
veloping countries, the extended family,
“traditionally the main source o f income

security,” has becom e gravely at risk,
due to rural outmigration and urbaniza­
tion, making the extension o f social pro­
tection more urgently necessary.
The ilo broadly defines social pro­
tection as old-age, survivor, and disabil­
ity benefits, as w ell as unemployment
compensation, financed by social insur­
ance; tax-financed and m eans-tested
social assistance; and universal benefits
(such as health care and child support),
also tax-financed but not means-tested.
The affordability o f social protection is
a political rather than econom ic policy
matter. It is dependent upon a society’s
w illingness to accept a measure o f re­
distribution from taxpayers and other
contributors to beneficiaries, as w ell as
upon the public’s support o f good gov­
ernance and com pliance enforcem ent
across countries, ILO avers, and the re­
lation between GDP and social protec­
tion outlays is inconclusive.
Increasing prosperity over the past
half century has made the OECD more
w illing to enhance social protection.
Poverty among the aged has nearly dis­
appeared, and in m ost developed coun­
tries social protection averaged 18 per­
cent in 1990 (pensions accounted for 40
percent at the time, health care for 25
percent). By contrast, prosperity in less
developed countries has been very low
relative to their GDP and restrictive in
terms o f coverage. These countries usu­
ally lack the necessary tax base, the abil­
ity to c o llec t contributions, and the
means o f enforcing compliance. Social
expenditures in many o f these countries,
moreover, have been reduced at the be­
hest o f international lending agencies in
line with their structural adjustment rec­
ommendations.
But the inadequacy, if not absence,
o f public pensions in a larger number o f
less developed regions is indicated by
the high labor force participation rates
o f persons 64 years and older (27 per­
cent in 1995), versus 9 percent in the
more developed ones. High rates among
children 10-15 years old are likew ise
linked to the absence, or near absence,

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

47

Book Reviews

o f schooling and public support o f their
parents. In the less and least developed
regions, the rate was 13 percent and 32
percent in 1995, but zero in the more de­
veloped ones. The first-mentioned rates
represent slight declines since 1980, pos­
sibly reflecting improved school atten­
dance in urban areas.
Som e econom ists have stressed the
disincentive effects o f social insurance
on beneficiary w illingness to work and
save. The il o rejects such contentions.
Unemploym ent benefits, for example,
have always been conditioned on job
search and have been limited in dura­
tion. They also facilitate labor mobility
and spur retraining efforts. Similarly, the
social security provision has been held
to reduce personal savings. But less­
ened saving, thanks to the assurance of
social security benefits, is likely to im ­
prove consumption standards or allow
potential recipients to pay for their
children’s education— relieving them
from having to support their parents later
in life, while also increasing the quantity
and quality o f human capital.
The ILO is very m uch concerned
about the constraints that globilization
imposes on governments’ fiscal policies
and the expenditures needed to sustain
social protection. “National econom ies
have becom e more and more vulnerable
to the changing perceptions and inter­
ests o f international investors,” it writes,
and “individual governments now face
a much more limited range o f options in
macro-economic policy than prior to the
1980s when there were still significant
controls on international capital m obil­
ity.” The competition between countries
reduces the fiscal autonomy o f govern­

48

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

m ents and their spending capacity.
Moreover, business and public officials
worry about the cost o f social protec­
tion and its impact on competitiveness.
Global capital mobility also can sub­
stitute lower-cost for higher-cost labor
across borders, resulting in a tax burden
shift to the relatively immobile factor of
labor. Taxes on capital have declined
since the early 1980s, while labor taxes
have continued to rise. Therefore, tax
resistance is likely to stiffen, and insofar
as social protection is financed from gen­
eral revenue, such resistance w ill likely
weaken it.
Nevertheless, il o staunchly defends
social security— it “remains the instru­
ment best suited as the main source of
retirement income for workers in the vast
majority o f countries.” It tends to op­
pose (its opposition is not as thoroughly
argued as would be desirable) the adop­
tion o f privately managed, mandatory
retirement savings accounts, often pro­
posed to help resolve the financing prob­
lems o f social protection. Such accounts
are also favored by international finan­
c ia l in stitu tio n s. T h ese p ro p o sed
schemes in effect involve defined con­
tributions. The return on the accounts
is not predictable, hence neither are the
pensions which draw on them. Admin­
istrative costs also are high— as much
as 5-10 times as those o f established so­
cial insurance systems.
The il o is lik ew ise averse to the
growing emphasis on employer-based
and other private provisions o f pen­
sions. Such “bifurcated restructuring o f
social protection is tending to cement
divisions in society— between the poor
and the non-poor— which decades o f

solidaristic social security have helped
to break down.” Social assistance, ev­
erywhere a means-tested program, and
one which is increasingly relied on to
support one-parent fam ilies and unem­
ployed persons w ho have exhausted
their benefits (where such an entitlement
exists), also deepen the division between
society’s poor and less needy members.
The goal o f universal access to free pri­
mary healthcare is also becom ing more
remote, due to “(successive) structural
adjustment programs (having) led to se­
vere cuts in public social budgets.” The
economic efficiency that those programs
presumably seek is clearly in conflict
with social equity. The balance said to
be sought between one and the other is
not on the political agenda.
In recent years, adherence to certain
core labor standards has been widely de­
manded, their inclusion in trade and in­
v estm en t agreem en ts p ressed . The
equally urgent matter o f extended social
insurance coverage and the amelioration
o f poverty by publicly financed social
protection, unemployment elimination,
and the creation o f “D ecent Work” has
not been so w idely addressed. The ILO
Report reviewed here represents a major
contribution to broadening the discus­
sion and highlighting the employment
and poverty problems that beset much
o f the globe. But to help remedy these
problems, large-scale international aid is
undoubtedly required, yet ILO has de­
sisted from discussing this.
— Horst Brand
Economist,
formerly with the
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Current Labor Statistics

Notes on labor statistics ................... so
Comparative indicators
1. Labor market indicators......................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in
compensation, prices, andproductivity.........................
3. Alternative measures of wages and
compensation changes.....................................................

60

61

62
63
64
65
65
66
67
67

Price data
28. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average, by expenditure
category and commodity and service groups................
29. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and
local data, all item s...........................................................
30. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items
and major groups..............................................................
31. Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing.................
32. Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major
industry groups....... ......
33. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes
by stage of processing......................................................
34. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International
Trade Classification.........................................................
35. U.S. import price indexes by Standard International
Trade Classification.........................................................
36. U.S. export price indexes by end-use category................
37. U.S. import price indexes by end-use category................
38. U.S.international price indexes for selected
categories of services........................................................

85
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
96

68
70
71
72
73
74
75
75
76

Labor compensation and collective
bargaining data
21. Employment Cost Index, compensation,
by occupation and industry group................................. 77
22. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries,
by occupation and industry group................................. 79
23. Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry
- workers, by occupation and industry group................. 80
24. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers,
by bargaining status, region, and area s iz e .................... 81
25. Participants in benefit plans, medium and large firm s..... 82


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

26. Participants in benefits plans, small firms
and government................................................................ 83
27. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or m o re ........... 84

61

Labor force data
4. Employment status of the population,
seasonally adjusted...................................
5. Selected employment indicators,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
6. Selected unemployment indicators,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
7. Duration of unemployment,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
8. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
9. Unemployment rates by sex and age,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
10. Unemployment rates by States,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
11. Employment of workers by States,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
12. Employment of workers by industry,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
13. Average weekly hours by industry,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
14. Average hourly earnings by industry,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
15. Average hourly earnings by industry.................................
16. Average weekly earnings by industry................................
17. Diffusion indexes of employment change,
seasonally adjusted..........................................................
18. Annual data: Employment status of the population........
19. Annual data: Employment levels by industry..................
20. Annual data: Average hours
and earnings levels by industry.......................................

Labor compensation and collective
bargaining data—continued

Productivity data
39. Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted........................ 97
40. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity....................... 98
41. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
unit costs, and p rice s....................................................... 99
42. Annual indexes of output per hour for selected
industries........................................................................... 100

International comparisons data
43. Unemployment rates in nine countries,
data seasonally adjusted................................................... 103
44. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian
working-age population, 10 countries............................ 104
45. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures,
12 countries....................................................................... 105

Injury and illness data
46. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness
incidence rates.................................................................. 106
47. Fatal occupational injuries by event or
exposure............................................................................ 108

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

49

Notes on Current Labor Statistics

This section of the R eview presents the prin­
cipal statistical series collected and calcu­
lated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
series on labor force; employment; unem­
ployment; labor compensation; consumer,
producer, and international prices; produc­
tivity; 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 addi­
tional information are cited.

G eneral notes
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 cli­
matic conditions, industry production sched­
ules, opening and closing of schools, holi­
day 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 es­
timated 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
1-14,16-17,39, and 43. Seasonally adjusted
labor force data in tables 1 and 4-9 were re­
vised in the February 2001 issue of the R e­
view . Seasonally adjusted establishment sur­
vey data shown in tables 1, 12-14 and 1617 were revised in the July 2000 R eview and
reflect the experience through March 2000.
A brief explanation of the seasonal adjust­
ment methodology appears in “Notes on the
data.”
Revisions in the productivity data in table
45 are usually introduced in the September
issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and per­
cent changes from month-to-month and
quarter-to-quarter are published for numer­
ous Consumer and Producer Price Index se­
ries. However, seasonally adjusted indexes
are not published for the U.S. average AllItems c p i . Only seasonally adjusted percent
changes are available for this series.
Adjustments for price changes. Some
data—such as the “real” earnings shown in
table 14— are adjusted to eliminate the ef­
fect of changes in price. These adjustments
are made by dividing current-dollar values
by the Consumer Price Index or the appro­
priate component of the index, then multi­
plying by 100. For example, given a current
hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price

50

Monthly Labor Review


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

index number of 150, where 1982 = 100, the
hourly rate expressed in 1982 dollars is $2
($3/150 x 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,”
“constant,” or “ 1982” dollars.

tional comparisons data, see International
C om parisons o f Unem ploym ent, BLS Bulle­
tin 1979.
Detailed data on the occupational injury
and illness series are published in O ccupa­

Sources of information

tional Injuries an d Illnesses in the U nited
States, by Industry, a BLS annual bulletin.
Finally, the M onthly L abor R eview car­

Data that supplement the tables in this sec­
tion are published by the Bureau in a variety
of sources. Definitions of each series and
notes on the data are contained in later sec­
tions of these Notes describing each set of
data. For detailed descriptions of each data
series, see BLS H andbook o f M ethods, Bul­
letin 2490. Users also may wish to consult
M ajor P rogram s o f the Bureau o f L abor Sta­
tistics, Report 919. News releases provide

the latest statistical information published by
the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule appear­
ing on the back cover of this issue.
More information about labor force, em­
ployment, and unemployment data and the
household and establishment surveys under­
lying the data are available in the Bureau’s
monthly publication, Em ploym ent and Earn­
ings. Historical unadjusted and seasonally
adjusted data from the household survey are
available on the Internet:
http ://stats.bls.gov/cpshome.htm
Historically comparable unadjusted and sea­
sonally adjusted data from the establishment
survey also are available on the Internet:
http ://sta ts.bls.gov/ceshome.htm
Additional information on labor force data
for areas below the national level are pro­
vided in the BLS annual report, G eographic
P rofile o f Em ploym ent and Unemploym ent.

For a comprehensive discussion of the
Employment Cost Index, see Em ploym ent
C ost Indexes and Levels, 1 9 7 5 -9 5 , BLS Bul­
letin 2466. The most recent data from the
Employee Benefits Survey appear in the fol­
lowing Bureau of Labor Statistics bulletins:
E m ployee B enefits in M edium a n d L arge
Firm s; E m ployee Benefits in Small P rivate
E stablishm ents; and E m ployee B enefits in
State and L ocal G overnm ents.

More detailed data on consumer and pro­
ducer prices are published in the monthly
periodicals, The c p i D e ta ile d R ep o rt and
P roducer P rice Indexes. For an overview of
the 1998 revision of the C P I , see the Decem­
ber 1996 issue of the M onthly L abor Review.
Additional data on international prices ap­
pear in monthly news releases.
Listings of industries for which produc­
tivity indexes are available may be found on
the Internet:
http ://stats.bls.gov/ipr home.htm
For additional information on interna­

June 2001

ries analytical articles on annual and longer
term developments in labor force, employ­
ment, and unemployment; employee com­
pensation and collective bargaining; prices;
productivity; international comparisons; and
injury and illness data.

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

Comparative Indicators
(Tables 1-3)
Comparative indicators tables provide an
overview and comparison of major b l s sta­
tistical 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 em­
ployment measures from two major surveys
and information on rates of change in com­
pensation provided by the Employment Cost
Index (E C i) program. The labor force partici­
pation rate, the employment-to-population
ratio, and unemployment rates for major de­
mographic groups based on the Current
Population (“household”) Survey are pre­
sented, while measures of employment and
average weekly hours by major industry sec­
tor are given using nonfarm payroll data. The
Employment Cost Index (compensation), by
major sector and by bargaining status, is cho­
sen from a variety of b l s compensation and
wage measures because it provides a com­
prehensive measure of employer costs for
hiring labor, not just outlays for wages, and
it is not affected by employment shifts among
occupations and industries.
Data on changes in compensation, prices,
and productivity are presented in table 2.

M easures of rates of change of compensa­
tion and wages from the Employment Cost
Index program are provided for all civ il­
ian nonfarm w orkers (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;
overall prices by stage of processing; and
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 com­
pensation 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.

Employment and
Unemployment Data

ceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look
for work because they were on layoff are
also counted among the unemployed. The
unemployment rate represents the num­
ber unemployed as a percent of the civilian
labor force.
The civilian labor force consists of all
employed or unemployed persons in the
civilian noninstitutional population. Persons
not in the labor force are those not classified
as employed or unemployed. This group
includes discouraged workers, defined as
persons who want and are available for a job
and who have looked for work sometime in
the past 12 months (or since the end of their
last job if they held one within the past 12
months), but are not currently looking,
because they believe there are no jobs
available or there are none for which they
would qualify. The civilian noninstitu­
tional 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. The
civilian labor force participation rate is the
proportion of the civilian noninstitutional
population that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is employ­
ment as a percent of the civilian nonin­
stitutional population.

(Tables 1; 4-20)

Notes on the data

Household survey data

From time to time, and especially after a
decennial census, adjustments are made in
the Current Population Survey figures to
correct for estimating errors during the
intercensal years. These adjustments affect
the comparability of historical data. A de­
scription of these adjustments and their ef­
fect on the various data series appears in the
Explanatory Notes o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d

Description of the series
p l o y m e n t d a t a in this section are ob­
tained 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 con­
sists of about 50,000 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.

Em

Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all those 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 regu­
lar jobs because of illness, vacation, indus­
trial dispute, or similar reasons. 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 ill­
ness and had looked for jobs within the pre­


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

Earnings.

Labor force data in tables 1 and 4-9 are
seasonally adjusted. Since January 1980,
national labor force data have been season­
ally adjusted with a procedure called X -ll
a r i m a which was developed at Statistics
Canada as an extension of the standard X11 method previously used by b l s . A de­
tailed description of the procedure appears
in the X -ll a r i m a S ea so n a l A d ju stm en t
M ethod, by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics
Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E, January
1983).
At the beginning of each calendar year,
historical seasonally adjusted data usually
are revised, and projected seasonal adjust­
ment factors are calculated for use during
the January-June period. The historical sea­
sonally adjusted data usually are revised for
only the most recent 5 years. In July, new
seasonal adjustment factors, which incorpo­
rate the experience through June, are pro­
duced for the July-December period, but no

revisions are made in the historical data.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on na­
tional household survey data, contact the
Division of Labor Force Statistics: (202)
691-6378.

Establishment survey data
Description of the series
Em

p l o y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a t a

in this section are compiled from payroll
records reported monthly on a voluntary ba­
sis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its
cooperating State agencies by about 300,000
establishments representing all industries
except agriculture. Industries are classified
in accordance with the 1987 Stan dard In­
du strial C lassification (SIC) M anual. 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 necessar­
ily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for ex­
ample, or warehouse.) Self-employed per­
sons and others not on a regular civilian
payroll are outside the scope of the sur­
vey because they are excluded from estab­
lishment records. This largely accounts for
the difference in employment figures be­
tween the household and establishm ent
surveys.

Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which
produces goods or services (such as a fac­
tory or store) at a single location and is en­
gaged 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 in­
cluding the 12th day of the month. Per­
sons 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 pro­
duction operations. Those workers men­
tioned in tables 11-16 include production
workers in manufacturing and mining; con­
struction workers in construction; and
nonsupervisory workers in the following in­
dustries: transportation and public utilities;
wholesale and retail trade; finance, insur­
ance, 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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

51

Current Labor Statistics
for overtime or late-shift work but exclud­
ing irregular bonuses and other special
paym ents. 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 U rban Wage E arners and C lerical
Workers (C P i-W ).
Hours represent the average weekly
hours of production or nonsupervisory work­
ers for which pay was received, and are dif­
ferent from standard or scheduled hours.
Overtime hours represent the portion of av­
erage weekly hours which was in excess of
regular hours and for which overtime premi­
ums were paid.
The D iffusion Index represents the
percent of industries in which employment
was rising over the indicated period, plus
one-half of the industries with unchanged
employment; 50 percent indicates an equal
balance between industries with increasing
and decreasing employment. In line with Bu­
reau practice, data for the 1-, 3-, and 6-month
spans are seasonally adjusted, while those
for the 12-month span are unadjusted. Data
are centered within the span. Table 17 pro­
vides an index on private nonfarm employ­
ment based on 356 industries, and a manu­
facturing index based on 139 industries.
These indexes are useful for measuring the
dispersion of economic gains or losses and
are also economic indicators.

Notes on the data
Establishment survey data are annually ad­
justed to comprehensive counts of employ­
ment (called “benchmarks”). The latest ad­
justment, which incorporated March 1999
benchmarks, was made with the release of
May 2000 data, published in the July 2000
issue of the R eview . Coincident with the
benchmark adjustment, historical seasonally
adjusted data were revised to reflect updated
seasonal factors. Unadjusted data from April
1999 forward and seasonally adjusted data
from January 1996 forward are subject to
revision in future benchmarks.
In addition to the routine benchmark revi­
sions and updated seasonal factors introduced
with the release of the May 2000 data, all esti­
mates for the wholesale trade division from
April 1998 forward were revised to incorpo­
rate a new sample design. This represented the
first major industry division to convert to a
probability-based sample under a 4-year
phase-in plan for the establishment survey
sample redesign project. For additional infor­
mation, see the the June 2000 issue of Employ­
ment and Earnings.

Revisions in State data (table 11) oc­
curred with the publication of January 2000
data.
Beginning in June 1996, the b l s uses the
X-12 a r i m a methodology to seasonally ad­
52

Monthly Labor Review


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

just establishment survey data. This proce­
dure, developed by the Bureau of the Cen­
sus, controls for the effect of varying sur­
vey intervals (also known as the 4- versus
5-week effect), thereby providing improved
measurement of over-the-month changes and
underlying economic trends. Revisions of
data, usually for the most recent 5-year pe­
riod, are made once a year coincident with
the benchmark revisions.
In the establishment survey, estimates
for the most recent 2 months are based on
incomplete returns and are published as pre­
liminary in the tables (12-17 in the R eview ).
When all returns have been received, the es­
timates are revised and published as “final”
(prior to any benchmark revisions) in the
third month of their appearance. Thus, De­
cember data are published as preliminary in
January and February and as final in March.
For the same reasons, quarterly establish­
ment data (table 1) are preliminary for the
first 2 months of publication and final in the
third month. Thus, fourth-quarter data are
published as preliminary in January and
February and as final in March.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on estab­
lishment survey data, contact the Division
of Monthly Industry Employment Statis­
tics: (202)691-6555.

Unemployment data by
State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained
from the Local Area Unemployment Statis­
tics (L A U S ) program, which is conducted in
cooperation with State employment secu­
rity agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment for States
and sub-State areas are a key indicator of lo­
cal 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 Partner­
ship Act. Seasonally adjusted unemployment
rates are presented in table 10. Insofar as
possible, the concepts and definitions under­
lying 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 all States and the District of Columbia are
derived using standardized procedures
established by b l s . Once a year, estimates are
revised to new population controls, usually
with publication of January estimates, and
benchmarked to annual average CPS levels.
For

a d d it io n a l in f o r m a t io n

th is s e rie s , c a ll

June 2001

(202) 691-6392

o n d a ta in

( ta b le

10) o r

(202) 691-6559 (table 11).

Compensation and
Wage Data
(Tables 1-3; 21-27)
C o m p e n s a t io 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 file with
the Bureau, and secondary sources.

Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index (EC l) is a quar­
terly measure of the rate of change in com­
pensation per hour worked and includes
wages, salaries, and employer costs of em­
ployee benefits. It uses a fixed m arket
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.
Statistical series on total compensation
costs, on wages and salaries, and on benefit
costs are available for private nonfarm work­
ers excluding proprietors, the self-employed,
and household workers. The total compensa­
tion 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. Fed­
eral workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability
sample consists of about 4,400 private non­
farm establishments providing about 23,000
occupational observations and 1,000 State
and local government establishments provid­
ing 6,000 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 col­
lected each quarter for the pay period includ­
ing 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 civilian and private indexes
and the index for State and local govern­
ments. (Prior to June 1986, the employment
weights are from the 1970 Census of Popu­
lation.) 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 compensa­
tion, not employment shifts among indus­
tries or occupations with different levels of

wages and compensation. For the bargaining
status, region, and metropolitan/non-metropolitan 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 cur­
rent sample. Therefore, these indexes are not
strictly comparable to those for the aggre­
gate, industry, and occupation series.

Definitions
Total compensation costs include wages,
salaries, and the employer’s costs for em­
ployee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings
before payroll deductions, including produc­
tion bonuses, incentive earnings, commis­
sions, and cost-of-living adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers
for paid leave, supplemental pay (includ­
ing nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retire­
ment and savings plans, and legally required
benefits (such as Social Security, workers’
compensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and em­
ployee benefits are such items as payment-inkind, free room and board, and tips.

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 cost—wages
and salaries and benefits combined— were
published beginning in 1980. The series of
changes in wages and salaries and for total
compensation in the State and local govern­
ment sector and in the civilian nonfarm
economy (excluding Federal employees)
were published beginning in 1981. Histori­
cal indexes (June 1981=100) are available on
the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/ecthome.htm
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Employment Cost Index, contact the Office
of Compensation Levels and Trends: (202)
691-6199.

Employee Benefits Survey
Description of the series
Employee benefits data are obtained from
the Employee Benefits Survey, an annual
survey of the incidence and provisions of
selected benefits provided by employers.
The survey collects data from a sample of
approxim ately 9,000 private sector and
State and local government establishments.
The data are presented as a percentage of em­
ployees who participate in a certain benefit, or


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

as an average benefit provision (for example,
the average number of paid holidays provided
to employees per year). Selected data from the
survey are presented in table 25 for medium
and large private establishments and in table
26 for small private establishments and State
and local government.
The survey covers paid leave benefits
such as holidays and vacations, and personal,
funeral, jury duty, military, family, and sick
leave; short-term disability, long-term dis­
ability, and life insurance; medical, dental,
and vision care plans; defined benefit and
defined contribution plans; flexible benefits
plans; reimbursement accounts; and unpaid
family leave.
Also, data are tabulated on the inci­
dence of several other benefits, such as
severance pay, child-care assistance, well­
ness programs, and employee assistance
programs.

Definitions
Employer-provided benefits are benefits
that are financed either wholly or partly by
the employer. They may be sponsored by a
union or other third party, as long as there is
some employer financing. However, some
benefits that are fully paid for by the em­
ployee also are included. For example, long­
term care insurance and postretirement life
insurance paid entirely by the employee are
included because the guarantee of insurabil­
ity and availability at group premium rates
are considered a benefit.
Participants are workers who are covered
by a benefit, whether or not they use that benefit
If the benefit plan is financed wholly by
employers and requires employees to complete
a minimum length of service for eligibility, the
workers are considered participants whether or
not they have met the requirement. If workers
are required to contribute towards the cost of
a plan, they are considered participants only
if they elect the plan and agree to make the
required contributions.
Defined benefit pension plans use prede­
termined formulas to calculate a retirement
benefit (if any), and obligate the employer to
provide those benefits. Benefits are generally
based on salary, years of service, or both.
Defined contribution plans generally
specify the level of employer and employee
contributions to a plan, but not the formula
for determining eventual benefits. Instead,
individual accounts are set up for partici­
pants, and benefits are based on amounts
credited to these accounts.
Tax-deferred savings plans are a type of
defined contribution plan that allow par­
ticipants to contribute a portion of their sal­
ary to an employer-sponsored plan and defer
income taxes until withdrawal.
Flexible benefit plans allow employees

to choose among several benefits, such as life
insurance, medical care, and vacation days, and
among several levels of coverage within a given
benefit.

Notes on the data
Surveys of employees in medium and large
establishments conducted over the 1979-86
p eriod included estab lish m en ts that
employed at least 50, 100, or 250 workers,
depending on the industry (most service
industries were excluded). The survey
conducted in 1987 covered only State and
local g overnm ents w ith 50 or m ore
employees. The surveys conducted in 1988
and 1989 included m edium and large
establishments with 100 workers or more in
private industries. All surveys conducted over
the 1979-89 period excluded establishments
in Alaska and Hawaii, as well as part-time
employees.
Beginning in 1990, surveys of State and
local governm ents and small private
establishments were conducted in evennumbered years, and surveys of medium and
large establishments were conducted in oddnumbered years. The small establishment
survey includes all private nonfarm
establishments with fewer than 100 workers,
while the State and local government survey
includes all governments, regardless of the
number of workers. All three surveys include
full- and part-time workers, and workers in all
50 States and the District of Columbia.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Employee Benefits Survey, contact the Of­
fice of Compensation Levels and Trends on
the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/ebshome.htm

Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the num­
ber 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 work
time lost because of stoppage. These data are
presented in table 27.
Data are largely from a variety of pub­
lished sources 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 o f stoppages: The number of
strikes and lockouts involving 1,000 work­
ers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
W orkers involved: The num ber of

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

53

Current Labor Statistics
workers directly involved in the stoppage.
Number of days idle: The aggregate
number of workdays lost by workers in­
volved 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 in­
volving six workers or more.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on work
stoppages data, contact the Office of Com­
pensation and Working Conditions: (202)
691-6282, or the Internet:
http ://sta ts.bls.gov/cbahome.htm

Price Data

Notes on the data

(Tables 2; 28-38)
are gathered by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics from retail and pri­
mary markets in the United States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base pe­
riod— 1982 = 100 for many Producer Price
Indexes, 1982-84 = 100 for many Con­
sum er Price Indexes (unless otherw ise
noted), and 1990 = 100 for International
Price Indexes.

P r ic e

data

Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a mea­
sure of the average change in the prices paid
by urban consumers for a fixed market bas­
ket of goods and services. The CPI is calcu­
lated 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 ur­
ban households. The wage earner index (CPiW ) 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 representa­
tive index became apparent. The all-urban
consumer index (C P i-U ), introduced in 1978,
is representative of the 1993-95 buying hab­
its of about 87 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 cleri­
cal workers, the C Pi-U covers professional,
managerial, and technical workers, the selfemployed, short-term workers, the unem­
ployed, retirees, and others not in the labor
force.
54

Monthly Labor Review


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

The c p i is based on prices of food, cloth­
ing, 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 associ­
ated with the purchase and use of items are
included in the index.
Data collected from more than 23,000 re­
tail establishments and 5,800 housing units
in 87 urban areas across the country are used
to develop the “U.S. city average.” Separate
estimates for 14 major urban centers are pre­
sented in table 29. The areas listed are as in­
dicated 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.

In January 1983, the Bureau changed the
way in which homeownership costs are
meaured 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 PI-W . The central purpose of the
change was to separate shelter costs from
the investment component of home-owner­
ship so that the index would reflect only the
cost of shelter services provided by owneroccupied homes. An updated CPI-U and CPIw were introduced with release of the Janu­
ary 1987 and January 1998 data.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on con­
sumer prices, contact the Division of Con­
sumer Prices and Price Indexes: (202)
691-7000.

Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes (PPI) measure av­
erage changes in prices received by domes­
tic producers of commodities in all stages
of processing. The sample used for calcu­
lating these indexes currently contains about
3,200 commodities and about 80,000 quo­
tations per month, selected to represent the
movement of prices of all commodities pro­
duced in the manufacturing; agriculture, for­
estry, and fishing; mining; and gas and elec­
tricity and public utilities sectors. The stageof-processing structure of p p i organizes
products by class of buyer and degree of
fabrication (that is, finished goods, interme­
diate goods, and crude materials). The tradi­
tional commodity structure of p p i organizes
products by similarity of end use or mate­
rial composition. The industry and product
stru ctu re of p p i org an izes data in

June 2001

accordance with the Standard Industrial Clas­
sification (SIC) and the product code exten­
sion of the SIC developed by the U.S. Bu­
reau of the Census.
To the extent possible, prices used in
calculating Producer Price Indexes apply
to the first significant commercial transac­
tion in the United States from the produc­
tion or central marketing point. Price data
are generally collected monthly, primarily
by mail questionnaire. M ost 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 1992, price changes for the
various commodities have been averaged
together with im plicit quantity weights
representing their importance in the total net
selling value of all commodities as of 1987.
The detailed data are aggregated to obtain
indexes for stage-of-processing groupings,
commodity groupings, durability-of-product
groupings, and a number of special composite
groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original
publication.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on pro­
ducer prices, contact the Division of In­
dustrial Prices and Price Indexes: (202)
691-7705.

International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The International Price Program produces
monthly and 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. (“Resi­
dents” is defined as in the national income
accounts; it includes corporations, busi­
nesses, 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.
The product universe for both the import
and export indexes includes raw materials,
agricultural products, semifinished manufac­
tures, and finished manufactures, including
both capital and consumer goods. Price data
for these items are collected primarily 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 dur­
ing the first week of the month. Survey re­
spondents are asked to indicate all discounts,
allowances, and rebates applicable to the re­
ported 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 according to the five-digit level of
detail for the Bureau of Economic Analysis
End-use Classification (SITC), and the four­
digit level of detail for the Harmonized
System. Aggregate import indexes by coun­
try or region of origin are also available.
bls

p u b lis h e s in d e x e s f o r s e le c te d c a te g o ­

r ie s o f in t e r n a t io n a lly tra d e d s e rv ic e s , c a lc u ­
la te d o n a n in t e r n a tio n a l b a s is a n d o n a b a la n c e - o f- p a y m e n ts b a s is .

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 harmonized group and are then
aggregated to the higher level. The values as­
signed 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 1995.
Because a price index depends on the same
items being priced from period to period, it is
necessary to recognize when a product’s speci­
fications or terms of transaction have been
modified. For this reason, the Bureau’s ques­
tionnaire requests detailed descriptions of the
physical and functional characteristics of the
products being priced, as well as information
on the number of units bought or sold, dis­
counts, credit terms, packaging, class of buyer
or seller, and so forth. When there are changes
in either the specifications or terms of trans­
action 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 em­
ployed which allows for the continued repric­
ing of the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred
pricing 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 valua­
tion of imports in the national accounts. The
second is the import price c.i.f.(costs, insur­
ance, and freight) at the U.S. port of importa­
tion, which also includes the other costs as­


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

sociated 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.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on inter­
national prices, contact the Division of Inter­
national Prices: (202)691-7155.

Productivity Data
(Tables 2; 39-42)

Business sector and major
sectors
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real output
to real input. As such, they encompass a fam­
ily of measures which include single-factor
input measures, such as output per hour, out­
put per unit of labor input, or output per unit
of capital input, as well as measures of mul­
tifactor productivity (output per unit of com­
bined labor and capital inputs). The Bureau
indexes show the change in output relative
to changes in the various inputs. The mea­
sures cover the business, nonfarm business,
manufacturing, and nonfinancial corporate
sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly com­
pensation, unit labor costs, unit nonlabor
payments, and prices are also provided.

Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor pro­
ductivity) is the quantity of goods and ser­
vices produced per hour of labor input. Out­
put per unit of capital services (capital pro­
ductivity) is the quantity of goods and ser­
vices produced per unit of capital services
input. Multifactor productivity is the quan­
tity of goods and services produced per com­
bined inputs. For private business and pri­
vate nonfarm business, inputs include labor
and capital units. For manufacturing, in­
puts include labor, capital, energy, non-en­
ergy materials, and purchased business ser­
vices.
Compensation per hour is total compen­
sation divided by hours at work. Total com­
pensation equals the wages and salaries of
employees plus employers’ contributions for
social insurance and private benefit plans,
plus an estimate of these payments for the
self-employed (except for nonfinancial cor­
porations in which there are no self-em­
ployed). Real compensation per hour is
com pensation per hour deflated by the
change in the Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compen­
sation costs expended in the production of a

unit of output and are derived by dividing
compensation by output. Unit nonlabor
payments include profits, depreciation,
interest, and indirect taxes per unit of out­
put. They are computed by subtracting
compensation of all persons from currentdollar value of output and dividing by out­
put.
Unit nonlabor costs contain all the
components of unit nonlabor payments ex­
cept unit profits.
Unit profits include corporate profits
with inventory valuation and capital con­
sumption adjustments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours
at work of payroll workers, self-employed
persons, and unpaid family workers.
Labor inputs are hours of all persons ad­
justed for the effects of changes in the edu­
cation and experience of the labor force.
Capital services are 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.
Combined units of labor and capital
inputs are derived by combining changes in
labor and capital input with weights which
represent each component’s share of total
cost. Combined units of labor, capital, energy,
materials, and purchased business services are
similarly derived by combining changes in
each input with weights that represent each
input’s share of total costs. The indexes for
each input and for combined units are based
on changing weights which are averages of the
shares in the current and preceding year (the
Tomquist index-number formula).

Notes on the data
Business sector output is an annually-weighted
index constructed by excluding from real gross
domestic product (gdp ) the following outputs:
general government, nonprofit institutions,
paid employees of private households, and the
rental value of owner-occupied dwellings.
Nonfarm business also excludes farming. Pri­
vate business and private nonfarm business
further exclude government enterprises. The
measures are supplied by the U.S. Department
of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analy­
sis. Annual estimates of manufacturing sectoral
output are produced by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. Quarterly manufacturing output in­
dexes from the Federal Reserve Board are ad­
justed to these annual output measures by the
b l s . Compensation data are developed from
data of the Bureau of Economic Analysis and
the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Hours data are
developed from data of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
The productivity and associated cost mea­
sures in tables 39-42 describe the relation-

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

55

Current Labor Statistics
ship between output in real terms and the
labor and capital inputs involved in its pro­
duction. They show the changes from period
to period in the amount of goods and ser­
vices produced per unit of input.
Although these measures relate output to
hours and capital services, they do not mea­
sure 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; shifts in the
composition of the labor force; capital invest­
ment; level of output; changes in the utiliza­
tion of capacity, energy, material, and research
and development; the organization of produc­
tion; managerial skill; and characteristics and
efforts of the work force.
FOR A D D IT IO N A L IN F O R M A T IO N On this
productivity series, contact the Division of
Productivity Research: (202) 691-5606.

Industry productivity
measures
Description of the series
The b l s industry productivity data
supplement the measures for the business
economy and major sectors with annual
measures of labor productivity for selected
industries at the three- and four-digit levels
of the Standard Industrial Classification
system. In addition to labor productivity,
the industry data also include annual
measures of compensation and unit labor
costs for three-digit industries and measures
of multifactor productivity for three-digit
m anufacturing industries and railroad
transportation. The industry measures differ
in methodology and data sources from the
productivity measures for the major sectors
because the industry m easures are
developed independently of the National
Income and Product Accounts framework
used for the major sector measures.

Definitions
Output per hour is derived by dividing an index
of industry output by an index of labor input.
For most industries, output indexes are de­
rived from data on the value of industry out­
put adjusted for price change. For the remain­
ing industries, output indexes are derived from
data on the physical quantity of production.
The labor input series consist of the hours
of all employees (production workers and non­
production workers), the hours of all persons
(paid employees, partners, proprietors, and
unpaid family workers), or the number of em­
ployees, depending upon the industry.
Unit labor costs represent the labor
compensation costs per unit of output pro­
duced, and are derived by dividing an index
of labor compensation by an index of out­

56

Monthly Labor Review


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

put. Labor compensation includes pay­
roll as well as supplemental payments, in­
cluding both legally required expenditures
and payments for voluntary programs.
Multifactor productivity is derived by
dividing an index of industry output by an
index of the combined inputs consumed in
producing that output. Combined inputs
include capital, labor, and intermediate pur­
chases. The measure of capital input used
represents the flow of services from the
capital stock used in production. It is devel­
oped from measures of the net stock of
physical assets— equipment, structures,
land, and inventories. The measure of in­
termediate purchases is a combination of
purchased materials, services, fuels, and
electricity.

Notes on the data
The industry measures are compiled from
data produced by the Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics and the Bureau of the Census,with addi­
tional data supplied by other government
agencies, trade associations, and other
sources.
For most industries, the productivity
indexes refer to the output per hour of all
employees. For some trade and services in­
dustries, indexes of output per hour of all
persons (including self-employed) are con­
structed. For some transportation indus­
tries, only indexes of output per employee
are prepared.
FOR A D D IT IO N A L IN FO RM ATIO N on this se­
ries, contact the Division of Industry Produc­
tivity Studies: (202) 691-5618.

International Comparisons
(Tables 43-45)

Labor force and
unemployment
Description of the series
Tables 43 and 44 present comparative meas­
ures of the labor force, employment, and un­
em ployment— approxim ating U.S. con­
cepts—for the United States, Canada, Aus­
tralia, Japan, and several 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 neces­
sary, for all known major definitional differ­
ences. Although precise comparability may
not be achieved, these adjusted figures pro­
vide a better basis for international compari­

June 2001

sons than the figures regularly published by
each country. For further information on ad­
justm ents and com parability issues, see
Constance Sorrentino, “International unem­
ployment rates: how comparable are they?”
M onthly L abor R eview , June 2000, pp. 3-20.

Definitions
For the principal U.S. definitions of the labor
force, employment, and unemployment, see
the Notes section on Employment and Unem­
ployment 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. stan­
dard of 16 years of age and older. Therefore,
the adjusted statistics relate to the popula­
tion aged 16 and older in France, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom; 15 and older in
Australia, Japan, Germany, Italy from 1993
onward, and the Netherlands; and 14 and older
in Italy prior to 1993. An exception to this
rule is that the Canadian statistics for 1976
onward are adjusted to cover ages 16 and
older, whereas the age at which compulsory
schooling ends remains at 15. The institu­
tional population is included in the denomi­
nator 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 jobs
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. defi­
nition has not been made on this point. For
further information, see M onthly L abor R e­
view , 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 sur­
veys for earlier years and are considered pre­
liminary. The recent-year measures for these
countries, therefore, are subject to revision
whenever data from more current labor force
surveys become available.
There are breaks in the data series for the
United States (1990,1994,1997,1998,1999,
2000), Canada (1976) France (1992), Ger­
many (1991), Italy (1991, 1993), the Neth­
erlands (1988), and Sweden (1987).
For the United States, the break in series
reflects a major redesign of the labor force
survey questionnaire and collection method­
ology introduced in January 1994. Revised
population estimates based on the 1990 cen­
sus, adjusted for the estimated undercount,
also were incorporated. In 1996, previously

published data for the 1990-93 period were
revised to reflect the 1990 census-based
population controls, adjusted for the un­
dercount. In 1997, revised population con­
trols were introduced into the household sur­
vey. Therefore, the data are not strictly
conparable with prior years. In 1998, new
composite estimation procedures and minor
revisions in population controls were intro­
duced into the household survey. Therefore,
the data are not strictly comparable with data
for 1997 and earlier years. See the Notes sec­
tion on Employment and Unemployment
Data of this R eview .
b l s recently introduced a new adjusted
series for Canada. Beginning with the data
for 1976, Canadian data are adjusted to more
closely approximate U.S. concepts. Adjust­
ments are made to the unemployed and labor
force to exclude: (1) 15-year-olds; (2) pas­
sive jobseekers (persons only reading news­
paper ads as their method of job search); (3)
persons waiting to start a new job who did
not seek work in the past 4 weeks; and (4)
persons unavailable for work due to personal
or family responsibilities. An adjustment is
made to include full-tine students looking for
full-time work. The impact of the adjust­
ments was to lower the annual average unem­
ployment rate by 0.1-0.4 percentage point
in the 1980s and 0.4-1.0 percentage point in
the 1990s.
For France, the 1992 break reflects the
substitution of standardized European Union
Statistical Office ( e u r o s t a t ) unemployment
statistics for the unemployment data esti­
mated according to the International Labor
Office ( i l o ) definition and published in the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development ( o e c d ) annual yearbook and
quarterly update. This change was made be­
cause the EUROSTAT data are more up-to-date
than the OECD figures. Also, since 1992, the
EUROSTAT definitions are closer to the U.S.
definitions than they were in prior years. The
impact of this revision was to lower the un­
employment rate by 0.1 percentage point in
1992 and 1993, by 0.4 percentage point in
1994, and 0.5 percentage point in 1995.
For Germany, the data for 1991 onward
refer to unified Germany. Data prior to 1991
relate to the former West Germany. The im­
pact of including the former East Germany
was to increase the unemployment rate from
4.3 to 5.6 percent in 1991.
For Italy, the 1991 break reflects a revi­
sion in the method of weighting sample data.
The impact was to increase the unemploy­
ment-rate by approximately 0.3 percentage
point, from 6.6 to 6.9 percent in 1991.
In October 1992, the survey methodol­
ogy was revised and the definition of unem­
ployment was changed to include only those
who were actively looking for a job within
the 30 days preceding the survey and who


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

were available for work. In addition, the
lower age limit for the labor force was raised
from 14 to 15 years. (Prior to these changes,
b l s adjusted Italy’s published unemploy­
ment rate downward by excluding from the
unemployed those persons who had not
actively sought work in the past 30 days.)
The break in the series also reflects the incor­
poration of the 1991 population census re­
sults. The impact of these changes was to
raise Italy’s adjusted unemployment rate by
approximately 1.2 percentage points, from
8.3 to 9.5 percent in fourth-quarter 1992.
These changes did not affect employment
significantly, except in 1993. Estimates by
the Italian Statistical Office indicate that em­
ployment declined by about 3 percent in
1993, rather than the nearly 4 percent indi­
cated by the data shown in table 44. This
difference is attributable mainly to the incor­
poration of the 1991 population benchmarks
in the 1993 data. Data for earlier years have
not been adjusted to incorporate the 1991
census results.
For the Netherlands, a new survey ques­
tionnaire was introduced in 1992 that allowed
for a closer application of i l o guidelines.
e u r o s t a t has revised the Dutch series back
to 1988 based on the 1992 changes. The 1988
revised unemployment rate is 7.6 percent;
the previous estimate for the same year was
9.3 percent.
There have been two breaks in series in
the Swedish labor force survey, in 1987 and
1993. Adjustments have been made for the
1993 break back to 1987. In 1987, a new
questionnaire was introduced. Questions re­
garding current availability were added and
the period of active workseeking was re­
duced from 60 days to 4 weeks. These
changes lowered Sweden’s 1987 unemploy­
ment rate by 0.4 percentage point, from 2.3
to 1.9 percent. In 1993, the measurement
period for the labor force survey was
changed to represent all 52 weeks of the year
rather than one week each month and a new
adjustment for population totals was intro­
duced. The impact was to raise the unem­
ployment rate by approximately 0.5 per­
centage point, from 7.6 to 8.1 percent. Sta­
tistics Sweden revised its labor force survey
data for 1987-92 to take into account the
break in 1993. The adjustment raised the
Swedish unemployment rate by 0.2 percent­
age point in 1987 and gradually rose to 0.5
percentage point in 1992.
Beginning with 1987, BLS has adjusted the
Swedish data to classify students who also
sought work as unemployed. The impact of
this change was to increase the adjusted un­
employment rate by 0.1 percentage point in
1987 and by 1.8 percentage points in 1994,
when unemployment was higher. In 1998,
the adjusted unemployment rate had risen
from 6.5 to 8.4 percent due to the adjustment

to include students.
The net effect of the 1987 and 1993
changes and the BLS adjustment for students
seeking work lowered Sweden’s 1987 unem­
ployment rate from 2.3 to 2.2 percent.
FOR a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on this se­
ries, contact the Division of Foreign Labor
Statistics: (202) 691-5654.

Manufacturing productivity
and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 45 presents comparative indexes of
manufacturing labor productivity (output per
hour), output, total hours, compensation per
hour, and unit labor costs for the United
States, Canada, Japan, and nine European
countries. These measures are trend compari­
sons— that is, series that measure changes
over time— rather than level comparisons.
There are greater technical problems in com­
paring the levels of manufacturing output
among countries.
b l s constructs the comparative indexes
from three basic aggregate measures— output,
total labor hours, and total compensation.
The hours and compensation measures refer
to all employed persons (wage and salary
earners plus self-employed persons and un­
paid family workers) in the United States,
Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Norway,
and Sweden, and to all employees (wage and
salary earners) in the other countries.

Definitions
Output, in general, refers to value added in
manufacturing from the national accounts of
each country. However, the output series
for Japan prior to 1970 is an index of indus­
trial production, and the national accounts
measures for the United Kingdom are essen­
tially identical to their indexes of industrial
production.
The 1977-97 output data for the United
States are the gross product originating (value
added) measures prepared by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department
of Commerce. Comparable manufacturing
output data currently are not available prior
to 1977.
U.S. gross product originating is a chaintype annual-weighted series. (For more in­
formation on the U.S. measure, see Robert E.
Yuskavage, “Improved Estimates of Gross
Product by Industry, 1959-94,” Survey o f
C urrent B usiness, August 1996, pp. 133—
55.) The Japanese value added series is based
upon one set of fixed price weights for the
years 1970 through 1997. Output series for
the other foreign economies also employ fixed
price weights, but the weights are updated
periodically (for example, every 5 or 10 years).

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

57

Current Labor Statistics
To preserve the comparability of the U.S.
measures with those for other economies, b l s
uses gross product originating in manufac­
turing for the United States for these com­
parative measures. The gross product origi­
nating series differs from the manufacturing
output series that b l s publishes in its news
releases on quarterly measures of U.S. pro­
ductivity and costs (and that underlies the
measures that appear in tables 39 and 41 in
this section). The quarterly measures are on
a “sectoral output” basis, rather than a valueadded basis. Sectoral output is gross output
less intrasector transactions.
Total labor hours refers to hours worked
in all countries. The measures are developed
from statistics of manufacturing employment
and average hours. The series used for France
(from 1970 forward), Norway, and Sweden
are official series published with the national
accounts. Where official total hours series are
not available, the measures are developed by
b l s using employment figures published with
the national accounts, or other comprehen­
sive employment series, and estimates of
annual hours worked. For Germany, b l s uses
estimates of average hours worked developed
by a research institute connected to the Min­
istry of Labor for use with the national ac­
counts employment figures. For the other
countries, b l s constructs its own estimates
of average hours.
Denmark has not published estimates of
average hours for 1994-97; therefore, the b l s
measure of labor input for Denmark ends in
1993.
Total compensation (labor cost) includes
all payments in cash or in-kind made directly
to employees plus employer expenditures for
legally required insurance programs and con­
tractual and private benefit plans. The mea­
sures are from the national accounts of each
country, except those for Belgium, which are
developed by b l s using statistics on employ­
ment, average hours, and hourly compensa­
tion. For Canada, France, and Sweden, com­
pensation is increased to account for other sig­
nificant taxes on payroll or employment. For
the United Kingdom, compensation is reduced
between 1967 and 1991 to account for em­
ployment-related subsidies. Self-employed
workers are included in the all-employed-persons measures by assuming that their hourly
compensation is equal to the average for wage
and salary employees.

Notes on the data
In general, the measures relate to total manu­
facturing as defined by the International Stan­
dard Industrial Classification. However, the
measures for France (for all years) and Italy
(beginning 1970) refer to mining and manu­
facturing less energy-related products, and
the measures for Denmark include mining

58

Monthly Labor Review


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

and exclude manufacturing handicrafts from
1960 to 1966.
The measures for recent years may be
based on current indicators of manufactur­
ing output (such as industrial production in­
dexes), employment, average hours, and
hourly compensation until national accounts
and other statistics used for the long-term
measures become available.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on this se­
ries, contact the Division of Foreign Labor
Statistics: (202) 691-5654.

Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses

cludes acute and chronic illnesses or disease
which may be, caused by inhalation, absorp­
tion, ingestion, or direct contact.
Lost workday injuries and illnesses are
cases that involve days away from work, or
days of restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workdays include the number of
workdays (consecutive or not) on which
the employee was either away from work
or at work in some restricted capacity, or
both, because of an occupational injury or
illness, b l s measures of the number and
incidence rate of lost workdays were dis­
continued beginning with the 1993 survey.
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, such as a Federal holiday,
even though able to work.
Incidence rates are computed as the
number of injuries and/or illnesses or lost
work days per 100 full-time workers.

Description of the series

Notes on the data

Occupational Injury
and Illness Data
(Tables 46-47)

The Survey of Occupational Injuries and Ill­
nesses collects data from employers about thenworkers ’ job-related nonfatal injuries and ill­
nesses. The information that employers provide
is based on records that they maintain under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970. Self-employed individuals, farms with
fewer than 11 employees, employers regulated
by other Federal safety and health laws, and
Federal, State, and local government agencies
are excluded from the survey.
The survey is a Federal-State coopera­
tive program with an independent sample
selected for each participating State. A strati­
fied random sample with a Neyman alloca­
tion is selected to represent all private in­
dustries in the State. The survey is stratified
by Standard Industrial Classification and
size of employment.

Definitions
Under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act, employers maintain records of nonfatal
work-related injuries and illnesses that in­
volve one or more of the following: loss of
consciousness, restriction of work or motion,
transfer to another job, or medical treatment
other than first aid.
Occupational injury is any injury such as
a cut, fracture, sprain, or amputation that re­
sults from a work-related event or a single, in­
stantaneous exposure in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal con­
dition or disorder, other than one resulting from
an occupational injury, caused by exposure to
factors associated with employment. It in­

June 2001

The definitions of occupational injuries and
illnesses are from Recordkeeping G uidelines
fo r O ccupational Injuries and Illnesses (U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics, September 1986).
Estimates are made for industries and em­
ployment size classes for total recordable cases,
lost workday cases, days away from work
cases, and nonfatal cases without lost work­
days. These data also are shown separately for
injuries. Illness data are available for seven cat­
egories: occupational skin diseases or disorders,
dust diseases of the lungs, respiratory condi­
tions due to toxic agents, poisoning (systemic
effects of toxic agents), disorders due to physi­
cal agents (other than toxic materials), disor­
ders associated with repeated trauma, and all
other occupational illnesses.
The survey continues to measure the num­
ber of new work-related illness cases which
are recognized, diagnosed, and reported dur­
ing the year. Some conditions, for example,
long-term latent illnesses caused by exposure
to carcinogens, often are difficult to relate to
the workplace and are not adequately recog­
nized and reported. These long-term latent ill­
nesses are believed to be understated in the
survey’s illness measure. In contrast, the over­
whelming majority of the reported new ill­
nesses are those which are easier to directly
relate to workplace activity (for example, con­
tact dermatitis and carpal tunnel syndrome).
Most of the estimates are in the form of
incidence rates, defined as the number of in­
juries and illnesses per 100 equivalent full­
time workers. For this purpose, 200,000 em­
ployee hours represent 100 employee years
(2,000 hours per employee). Full detail on the

available measures is presented in the annual
bulletin, O ccupational Injuries and Illnesses:
Counts, Rates, an d Characteristics.

Comparable data for more than 40 States
and territories are available from the BLS Of­
fice of Safety, Health and Working Condi­
tions. Many of these States publish data on
State and local government employees in ad­
dition to private industry data.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to
b l s by the Mine Safety and Health Adminis­
tration and the Federal Railroad Administra­
tion. Data from these organizations are in­
cluded in both the national and State data
published annually.
With the 1992 survey, b l s began publish­
ing details on serious, nonfatal incidents re­
sulting in days away from work. Included are
some major characteristics of the injured and
ill workers, such as occupation, age, gender,
race, and length of service, as well as the cir­
cumstances of their injuries and illnesses (na­
ture of the disabling condition, part of body
affected, event and exposure, and the source
directly producing the condition). In general,
these data are available nationwide for de­
tailed industries and for individual States at
more aggregated industry levels.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on occu­
pational injuries and illnesses, contact the
Office of Occupational Safety, Health and
Working Conditions at (202) 691-6180, or
access the Internet at:
http i/Avww.bls.gov/oshhome.htm

Census of Fatal
O ccupational Injuries
The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries
compiles a complete roster of fatal job-re­
lated injuries, including detailed data about
the fatally injured workers and the fatal
events. The program collects and cross
checks fatality information from multiple
sources, including death certificates, State
and Federal workers’ compensation reports,
Occupational Safety and Health Administra­
tion and Mine Safety and Health Administra­
tion records, medical examiner and autopsy
reports, media accounts, State motor vehicle
fatality records, and follow-up questionnaires
to employers.
In addition to private wage and salary
workers, the self-employed, family mem­
bers, and Federal, State, and local govern­
ment workers are covered by the program.
To be included in the fatality census, the
decedent must have been employed (that
is w orking for pay, com p en satio n , or
profit) at the time of the event, engaged in
a legal work activity, or present at the site
of the incident as a requirem ent of his or
her job.

Definition
A fatal work injury is any intentional or unin­
tentional wound or damage to the body result­

ing in death from acute exposure to energy,
such as heat or electricity, or kinetic energy
from a crash, or from the absence of such es­
sentials as heat or oxygen caused by a specific
event or incident or series of events within a
single workday or shift. Fatalities that occur
during a person’s commute to or from work
are excluded from the census, as well as workrelated illnesses, which can be difficult
to identify due to long latency periods.

Notes on the data
Twenty-eight data elements are collected,
coded, and tabulated in the fatality program,
including information about the fatally in­
jured worker, the fatal incident, and the ma­
chinery or equipment involved. Summary
worker demographic data and event charac­
teristics are included in a national news re­
lease that is available about 8 months after
the end of the reference year. The Census of
Fatal Occupational Injuries was initiated in
1992 as a joint Federal-State effort. Most
States issue summary information at the time
of the national news release.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries con­
tact the BLS Office of Safety, Health, and
Working Conditions at (202) 691-6175, or
the Internet at:
http ://ww w.bIs.gov/oshhome.htm

Bureau of Labor Statistics Internet
The Bureau o f Labor Statistics World Wide Web site on the Internet contains a range o f
data on consumer and producer prices, employment and unemployment, occupational com ­
pensation, em ployee benefits, workplace injuries and illnesses, and productivity. The
homepage can be accessed using any Web browser:

http://stats.bls.gov
Also, some data can be accessed through anonymous


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

FTP

or Gopher at

stats.bls.gov

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

59

Current Labor Statistics:

Comparative Indicators

1. Labor m arket indicators
Selected indicators

1999

1999

2000
II

2000

III

IV

I

II

2001
III

IV

I

Employment data

Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized
population (household survey):1
Labor force participation rate............................................................

67.1

67 2

67 1

67 1

67 1

67 4

67 3

67 0

Employment-population ratio............................................................

64.3

64.5

64.2

64.2

64.3

64.6

64.6

64.3

64.4

Unemployment rate.............................................................................

4.2

4.0

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.1

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.2

Men......................................................................................................

4.1

3.9

4.2

4.1

4.0

3.9

3.9

4.0

4.3

2.9

3.1

3.0

3.3

16 to 24 years.................................................................................

10.3

9.7

10 5

10 1

10 3

97

98

3.9
Q ft

25 years and over...........................................................................

3.0

2.8

3.0

2.8

2.8

4.3

4.1

43

2.9
4.2

2.8

W omen...............................................................................................

3.0
44

4*2

4 1

4*2

16 to 24 years.................................................................................

9.5

8.9

92

96

94

96

90

86

3.3

3.2

3.5

3.3

3.1

3.2

3.2

3.3

64.4

96

Employment, nonfarm (payroll data), in thousands:1
Total........................................................................................................

128,916

131,759
111 079

128,430

129,073

129,783

130,626

108 709

108 319

108 874

109 607

110 196

Goods-producing.............................................................................

25,507

25,709

25,454

25,459

25,524

Manufacturing...............................................................................

18,552

18,469

18,543

18,516

18,482

Service-producing...........................................................................

103,409

106,050

102,976

103,614

104,259

131,552

131,619

131,836

132,232

25,680

25,703

25,680

25,623

25,561

18,481

18,488

18,453

18,350

18,128

104,946

105,849

105,940

106,213

106,671

Average hours:
Private sector.....................................................................................

34.5

34.5

34.5

34.5

41.6

41.7

41.8

34.5
41.7

34.5
41.7

34.3

41.7

34.5
41.7

34.4

Manufacturing..................................................................................

41.5

41.0

34.3
40.8

Overtime........................................................................................

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.7

4.6

4.7

4.5

4.2

3.9

All workers (excluding farm, household and Federal workers).....

3.4

4.1

.9

1.3

.7

1.3

4.4

.9

.9

1.5

.9

.7

1.4

Goods-producing3........................................................................

3.4

4.4

.7

.9

1.6

.9

.6

1.3

Service-producing3.......................................................................

3.4
3.4

4.4
3.0

1.3

.9
1.5

1.0
.8
1.0

1.4

1.0
1.2
1.2
1.2

1.0

3.4

1.0
1.1

1.1

Private industry workers...................................................................

1.0

.6

.3

1.3

.7
.7

1.4
.9

Union.......................................................................................................

2.7

4.0

.7

.9

.7

1.3

4.4

1.2

.9

1.0

1.5

1.2
1.0

.7

3.6

1.0
1.2

.5

Nonunion................................................................................................

.7

1.5

Employment Cost Index2

Percent change in the ECI, compensation:

State and local government workers.............................................

.4

Workers by bargaining status (private industry):

1 Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Annual changes are December-to-December changes. Quarterly changes are calculated using the last month of each quarter.
3 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-producing industries include all other private sector industries.

60

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
2001

2000

1999
2000

1999

III

II

I

IV

III

II

1

IV

I

Compensation data1,2
Employment Cost Index—compensation (wages,
salaries, benefits):

1.0
1.1

1.1

0.9

1.3

0.7

1.3

.9

1.5

1.0
1.2

1.0

.9

.9

.7

1.4

1.0
1.2

1.1

.8

.5

.9

.9

1.1
1.2

1.0
1.0

1.1
1.0

.6
.6

1.1
1,2

1.0

.7

.7

1.0

.2

1.7

.7

.8

-.1

1.0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.2

.0
.0
-.1
-.2
-.1

1.2
1.8

1.5

1.3

.6

1.9

1.9

.0
1.0

9.4

10.2

-3 .5

9.1

1.8
.0
1.6
11.2

1.0
1.0

- .4

1.8
.1

.7

- .4

.1
-.2
1.2
.1

1.4

2.2

.3

-.1
1.1

1.0
1.0
-.1
1.0
-.1

2.8
2.6

4.3

2.7

.5

4.7

7.6

1.7

7.0

2.4

2..9

-1 .4

4.3

2.0

.2

5.0

8.0

2.1

6.3

3.0

2,0

-1 .2 ,

3.5

4.2

3.0

2.7

4.4

5.8

3.1

5.6

4.4

.3

-.1

Civilian nonfarm.........................................................................

3.4

4.1

0.4

Private nonfarm....................................................................

3.4

4.4

.4

Employment Cost In d ex -w ag es and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm.......................................................................

3.5

3.8

.5

Private nonfarm....................................................................

3.5

3.9

2.7

Finished goods...........................................................................

2.9

Finished consum er goods.....................................................

3.8

Price data1
Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers): All Items.....
Producer Price Index:

Capital equipment...................................................................

.3

Intermediate materials, supplies, and com ponents...............

3.7

Crude materials...........................................................................

15.3

1.9

I.O

Productivity data3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business sector...........................................................................
Nonfarm business sector..........................................................

1

Annual changes are December-to-December changes. 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. Quarterly per­

cent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly indexes. The data are
seasonally adjusted.

4

Output per hour of all employees.

NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.

3. Alternative measures of w ag e and compensation changes
Q uarterly average
C om ponents

Four quarters ending
2001

2000

1999
IV

IV

III

II

I

IV

I

2001

2000

1999

III

II

I

IV

I

Average hourly com pensation:1
All persons, business sector...............................................................
All persons, nonfarm business sector..............................................

3.8
4.2

3.7
4.1

7.1

5.7

7.5

6.6

4.5
4.4

4.3
4.5

4.9
4.9

5.0
5.1

6.3

6.2

5.2
5.1

6.0

6.0

5.7

6.0

.9
.9
.7

1.3
1.5
1.3
1.5

1.0
1.2
1.0
1.2

1.0

.6

.3

1.3

.7
.7
.5
.7
.7

1.3
1.4
.7
1.5
.9

3.4
3.4
2.7
3.6
3.4

4.3
4.6
3.6
4.7
3.6

4.4
4.6
3.9
4.6
3.5

4.3
4.6
4.2
4.7
3.3

4.1
4.4
4.0
4.4
3.0

4.1
4.2
3.4
4.3
3.3

1.1
1.2

1.0
1.0

.6
.6
.6

.6

.3

1.7

.7

.7

4.0
4.2
2.7
4.4
3.8

4.0
4.1

1.1

1.1
1.2
.6
1.2

3.5
3.5

.5
1.3

1.1
1.0
1.1
1.0

4.0
4.1
3.2
4.3
3.5

3.8
3.9
3.4
4.0
3.3

3.8
3.8
3.6
3.9
3.5

Employment Cost Index—compensation:
Civilian nonfarm2..................................................................................
Private nonfarm.................................................................................
Union.................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................

1.0
1.0

.9

1.2
1.0

Employment Cost Index—w ages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2.............................................................................. .
Private nonfarm..................................................... ...........................
Union................................................................................................
Nonunion..........................................................................................
State and local governm ents...........................................................

.8
.9

.6
.9
.9

.9

.9

2.6
3.6
3.6

2.8
4.3
3.7

1 Seasonally adjusted. "Quarterly average" Is percent change from a quarter ago, at an annual rate.

2 Excludes Federal and


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

household workers.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

61

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

4. Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status

Annual average

2000

2001

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

209,699
140,863
67.2
135,208

209,216
141,114
67.4
135,517

209,371
140,573
67.1
134,843

209,543
140,757
67.2
135,183

209,727
140,546
67.0
134,898

209,935
140,724
67.0
134,939

210,161
140,847
67.0
135,310

210,378
141,000
67.0
135,464

210,577
141,136
67.0
135,478

210,743
141,489
67.1
135,836

210,889
141,955
67.3
135,999

211,026
141,751
67.2
135,815

211,171
141,868
67.2
135,780

211,348
141,757
67.1
135,354

64.5
5,655
4.0
68,836

64.8
5,597
4.0

68,102

64.4
5,730
4.1
68,798

64.5
5,5744.0
68,786

64.3
5,648
4.0
69,181

64.3
5,785
4.1
69,211

64.4
5,537
3.9
69,314

64.4
5,536
3.9
69,378

64.3
5,658
4.0
69,441

64.5
5,653
4.0
69,254

64.5
5,956
4.2
68,934

64 4
5,936
4.2
69,275

64.3
6,088
4.3
69,304

64.0
6,402
4.5
69,592

91,555
79,104
76.7
67,761

92,580
70,930
76.6
68,580

92,303
70,776
76.7
68,473

92,408
70,666
76.5
68,315

92,546
70,785
76.5
68,489

92,642
70,782
76.4
68,495

92,754
71,029
76.6
68,710

92,863
71,053
76.5
68,728

92,969
71,155
76.5
68,774

93,061
71,135
76.4
68,683

93,117
71,289
76.6
68,848

93,184
71,492
76.7
68,916

93,227
71,288
76.5
68,761

93,285
71,261
76.4
68,534

93,410
71,575
76.6
68,706

74.0
2,028

74.1
2,252

74.2
2,248

73.9
2,228

74.0
2,262

73.9
2,280

74.1
2,276

74.0
2,350

74.0
2,219

73.8

73.9
2,232

74.0

2,122

2,122

73.8
2,154

73.5
2,150

73.6
2,117

65,517
2,433
3.5

66,328
2,350
3.3

66,225
2,303
3.3

66,087
2,347
3.3

66,227
2,296
3.2

66,215
2,287
3.2

66,434
2,319
3.3

66,378
2,325
3.3

66,555
2,381
3.3

66,561
2,452
3.4

66,616
2,441
3.4

66,795
2,576
3.6

66,607
2,527
3.5

66,383
2,728
3.8

66,589
2,869
4.0

population1......................... 100,158
Civilian labor force............
60,840
Participation rate........
60.7
Employed....................... 58,555
Employment-pop58.5
ulation ratio2............
Agriculture...................
803
Nonagricultural
industries.................. 57,752
Unemployed...................
2,285
Unemployment rate....
3.8
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

101,078
61,565
60.9
59,352

100,809
61,856
61.4
59,651

100,929
61,582
61.0
59,264

101,007
61,561
60.9
59,282

101,111

101,209
61,265
60.5
58,992

101,321
61,486
60.7
59,344

101,448
61,528
60.6
59,425

101,533
61,625
60.7
59,506

101,612
61,819
60.8
59,708

101,643
62,126
61.1
59,894

101,686
62,220
61.2
59,932

101,779
62,412
61.3
60,178

101,870

61,535
60.9
59,273

58.7
818

59.2
871

58.7
846

58.7
829

58.6
797

58.3
808

58.6
764

58.6
748

58.6
797

58.8
822

58.9
852

58.9
839

59.1
819

58.6
847

58,535

58,418
2,318
3.8

58,453
2,279
3.7

58,476
2,262
3.7

58,184
2,273
3.7

58,580
2,142
3.5

58,677
2,103
3.4

58,709
2,119
3.4

58,886

3.6

58,780
2,205
3.6

3.4

59,042
2,232
3.6

59,093
2,288
3.7

59,359
2,233
3.6

58,895
2,390
3.8

16,040
8,333
52.0
7,172

16,042
8,369
52.2
7,216

16,104
8,482
52.7
7,393

16,034
8,329
51.9
7,264

15,991
8,411
52.6
7,412

15,974
8,229
51.5
7,130

15,972
8,430
52.8
7,237

15,977
8,308
52.0
7,238

15,960
8,317
52.1
7,265

15,983
8,376
52.4
7,289

16,014
8,381
52.3
7,280

16,063
8,337
51.9
7,188

16,113
8,243
51.2
7,122

16,108
8,195
50.9
7,067

16,068
8,050
50.1
6,907

44.7
234

45.4
235

45.9
241

45.3

46.4

222

44.6
218

45.3
233

45.3
242

45.5
274

45.6
257

45.5

220

44.7
205

44.2
143

43.9
191

43.0
229

6,938
1,162
13.9

7,041
1,093
13.1

7,152
1,089

7,044
1,065

7,004
1,193
14.2

6,996
1,070
12.9

13.1

6,983
1,149
13.8

6,980

12.6

7,032
1,087
13.0

7,060

12.8

6,912
1,099
13.4

6,991
1,052

12.8

7,190
999
11.9

13.6

6,876
1,127
13.8

6,678
1,143
14.2

population1......................... 173,085
Civilian labor force............. 116,509
Participation rate........
67.3
Employed....................... 112,235
Employment-pop64.8
Unemployed..................
4,273
Unemployment rate....
3.7
Black

174,428
117,574
67.4
113,475

174,092
117,800
67.7
113,710

174,197
117,329
67.4
113,240

174,316
117,477
67.4
113,493

174,443
117,298
67.2
113,201

174,587
117,554
67.3
113,378

174,745
117,553
67.3
113,464

174,899
117,603
67.2
113,584

175,034
117,640
67.2
113,509

175,145
117,945
67.3
113,811

175,246
118,276
67.5
114,015

175,362
118,287
67.5
113,902

175,416
118,243
67.4
113,853

175,533
118,145
67.3
113,434

65.1
4,099
3.5

65.3
4,090
3.5

65.0
4,089
3.5

65.1
3,984
3.4

64.9
4,097
3.5

64.9
4,176
3.6

64.9
4,089
3.5

64.9
4,019
3.4

64.8
4,131
3.5

65.0
4,134
3.5

65 1
4,261
3.6

65.0
4,385
3.7

64.9
4,389
3.7

64.6
4,711
4.0

24,855
16,365
65.8
15,056

25,218
16,603
65.8
15,334

25,135
16,586

25,161
16,577
65.9
15,264

25,191
16,573
65.8
15,277

25,221
16,501
65.4
15,232

25,258
16,540
65.5
15,239

25,299
16,489
65.2
15,304

25,339
16,627
65.6
15,401

25,376
16,732
65.9
15,485

25,408
16,742
65.9
15,470

25,382
16,773

25,441
16,789

15,372

25,412
16,691
65.7
15,440

15,348

25,472
16,666
65.4
15,299

60.6
1,309

60.8
1,269
7.6

60.7
1,313
7.9

60.6
1,296
7.8

60.4
1,269
7.7

60.3
1,301
7.9

60.5
1,185
7.2

60.8
1,226
7.4

61.0
1,247
7.5

60.9
1,272
7.6

60.6
1,401
8.4

60.8
1,251
7.5

60.3
1,441

60.1
1,367

8.6

8.2

1999
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
207,753
Civilian labor force............ 139,368
Participation rate........
67.1
Employed....................... 133,488
Employment-pop64.3
Unemployed...................
5,880
Unemployment rate...
4.2
Not in the labor force......
68,385
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor force............
Participation rate........
Employed.......................
Employment-popAgriculture...................
Nonagricultural
industries..................
Unemployed...................
Unemployment rate....
Women, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional

2,212

2,111

-

61.0
59,741

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

220
1,101

1,121

Civilian noninstitutional

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

8.0

66.0
16,376
61.2

1,210
7.3

See footnotes at end of table.

62

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

66.1

66.0

4. Continued— Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
2001

2000

Annual average
Employment status
1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

21,650

22,393
15,368

22,292
15,294

22,488
15,312

22,555
15,513

22,830
15,653

22,889

68.0

68.1

68.8

68.2

68.6

14,439

14,647

22,749
15,671
68.9
14,772

22,769
15,540

14,384

22,618
15,491
68.5
14,711

22,687

14,411

22,355
15,320
68.5
14,456

22,422

14,492

22,231
15,327
68.9
14,463

14,612

14,673

15,770
68.9
14,782

25,957
15,775
68.7
14,747

64.7
876
5.7

65.1
864
5.6

64.6
883
5.8

64.7
864
5.6

64.2
859
5.6

64.2
873
5.7

64.9

65.0
780
5.0

64.7
940

64.9
899
5.7

64.2
927

64.3
980
6.3

64.6
988
6.3

64.2
1,028
6.5

Hispanic origin

Civilian noninstitutional

Participation rate.........

14,665
67.7
13,720

68.6

68.6

15,243

15,626
68.9
14,686

Employment-pop-

Unemployment rate....

63.4
945
6.4

1The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstltutional population.

866
5.6

6.0

6.0

NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
becausedata for the "other races" groups are not presented and Hispanics are included in
both the white and black population groups.

ERRATUM: Due to a production error, table 46, Instead of the first page of table 4, appeared on
page 45 of the April M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w . The mistake has been corrected in the online
version of the R e v ie w and a correct version appears on page 117 in this issue.

5.

Selected em ploym ent indicators, monthly d ata seasonally adjusted

[In thousands]
Selected categories

2001

2000

A nnual

average

1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

135,208
72,293
62,915

135,517
72,257
63,260

134,843
72,049
62,794

135,183
72,240
62,943

134,898
72,141
62,757

134,939
72,379
62,560

135,310
72,398
62,912

135,464
72,427
63,037

135,478
72,354
63,124

135,836
72,534
63,302

135,999
72,589
63,410

135,815
72,359
63,456

135,780
72,201
63,578

135,354
72,245
63,109

Characteristic
Employed, 16 years and over... 133,488
Men.......................................... 771,446
62,042
W omen....................................
Married men, spouse
present..................................

43,254

43,368

43,321

43,306

43,364

43,308

43,375

43,321

43,345

43,251

43,293

43,134

43,340

43,385

43,516

Married women, spouse
present..................................

33,450

33,708

33,795

33,723

33,745

33,621

33,507

33,491

33,622

33,633

33,635

34,249

34,059

34,080

33,662

Women who maintain
families..................................

8,229

8,387

8,330

8,335

8,340

8,460

8,492

8,516

8,449

8,495

8,501

8,426

8,373

8,049

8,160

1,944
1,297
40

2,034
1,233
38

2,042
1,257
43

2,013
1,246
38

2,051
1,187
44

2,065
1,189
39

2,048
1,241
36

2,018
1,274
38

2,041
1,182
32

2,005
1,180
25

2,019
1,198
34

1,983
1,182
25

1,839
1,291
29

1,910
1,231
36

1,902
1,223
47

121,323
18,903
102,420
933
101,487
8,790
95

123,128
19,053
104,076
890
103,186
8,674

122,871
19,084
103,787
934
102,853
8,708
89

123,020
18,836
104,184
926
103,258
8,660
74

122,744
18,592
104,152
821
103,331
8,619

123,117
19,003
104,114
824
103,290
8,786
108

123,461
19,073
104,388
812
103,576
8,561
136

123,632
19,146
104,486
827
103,659
8,533
128

124,035
18,843
105,192
859
104,333
8,698

86

122,931
18,644
104,287
781
103,506
8,618
114

123,813
19,352
104,461
879
103,582
8,600

101

123,209
19,168
104,041
977
103,064
8,727
96

121

110

124,069
19,103
104,966
823
104,143
8,617
142

123,814
19,134
104,680
881
103,800
8,784
138

123,395
18,854
104,541
812
103,729
8,608
93

3,357

3,190

3,135

3,240

3,125

3,110

3,170

33,188

3,222

3,416

3,234

3,327

3,273

3,164

3,201

1,968

1,927

1,862

1,935

1,858

1,871

1,980

2,051

1,909

2,183

1,964

2,035

2,043

1,914

2,097

1,079

944

1,002

972

981

918

880

831

947

886

896

954

933

907

873

18,758

18,722

18,606

18,513

18,444

18,579

18,704

18,595

18,758

18,896

18,993

18,568

19,021

18,647

18,713

3,189

3,045

3,021

3,077

2,981

2,972

3,038

3,030

3,044

3,285

3,088

3,227

3,143

3,007

3,061

1,861

1,835

1,791

1,831

1,760

1,773

1,901

1,940

1,808

2,082

1,882

1,971

1,970

1,828

1,985

1,056

924

975

952

982

896

861

817

923

871

877

945

910

877

864

18,197

18,165

18,043

17,957

17,897

18,052

18,142

18,024

18,206

18,323

18,437

18,040

18,509

18,132

18,176

Class of worker
Mgricunure.
W age and salary workers.....
Self-employed workers.........
Unpaid family workers..........
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary workers.....
Private industries...................
Private households........
Other.................................
Self-employed workers.......
Unpaid family workers.........
Persons at work part time1
All industries:
Part time for economic
reaso n s................................
Slack work or business
Could only find part-time
work.................................
Part time for noneconomic
reaso n s...............................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic
re a s o n s ..............................
Slack work or business
conditions........................
Could only find part-time
work.................................
Part time for noneconomic
reaso n s...............................

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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

63

Current Labor Statistics:

6.

Labor Force Data

Selected unemployment indicators, monthly d ata seasonally adjusted

[Unemployment rates]
A nnual average

2000

2001

Selected categories
1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

4.0
13.4
3.2
3.7

4.1
14.2
3.3
3.7

3.9
12.9
3.3
3.5

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

3.9
3.3
3.4

4.0
13 0
3.4
3.4

4.0
13 1
3.4
3.4

4.2
13 8
3.6
3.6

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

Characteristic
Total, 16 years and over..............................
Men, 20 years and over...........................
Women, 20 years and over.....................
White, total................................................
Men, 16 to 19 years.........................
Women, 16 to 19 years...................
Men, 20 years and over.....................
Women, 20 years and over................

4.2
13.9
3.5
3.8

4.0
13.1
3.3
3.6

3.7

3.5
11.4
12.3
10.4

12.0
12.6

4.0

4.1

12.8

12.8

3.3
3.6

3.3
3.8

4.0
11.9
3.2
3.7

3.5

3.5
10.7
10.9
10.5

3.4
9.9
11.7
7.9

3.5
11 5
12.5
10.4

2.8

2.8

11.6
12.9

11.5

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.7

4.0

11 7

11 5

11 7

10 9

11 fi

11 8

13.1

12.2
10.6

11.8

12.4
10.9
3.0
3.0

12.2

13.3
9.8
3.2
3.0

12.6

10.7
2.9
3.1

11.8
11.2

12.8
10.8

3.3
3.1

3.5
3.5

8.4
27.9
26.9
28.9
6.9
7.3

7.5
28.8
31.7
25.7

6.2

7.6
26.7
30.1
23.4
7.3
5.7

2.8

3.2

3.2

3.3

7.3
23.3
23.7
6.7
5.9

7.9
24.4
27.4
21.5
7.1
6.7

7.8
25.6
31.5
19.3
6.9
6.5

7.7
26.4
25.7
27.1

6.8

7.9
26.8
31.7
22.3
7.2

6.8

7.6
24.7
26.4
23.0
7.0
6.3

6.3

Hispanic origin, total.............................

6.4

5.7

5.6

5.8

5.6

Married men, spouse present.............
Married women, spouse present........

2.2

2.0

1.8

1.9

2.7
6.4
4.1
5.0

2.7
5.9
3.9
4.8

2.7

2.8

6.2

6.3
3.9
5.1

4.3
5.7
7.0
3.6
3.5
3.9
3.0
5.2
2.3
4.1

4.1
3.9
6.4
3.6
3.4
4.0
3.1
5.0
2.3
3.8

2.2

2.1

8.9

7.5

6.7
3.5

2.8
1.8

Part-time workers...................................

4.0
3.8

3.4

3.3

3.8
4.7

3.8
3.6

11 2

3.1

22.8

3.5
3.7

3.5

3.1

8.0

4.5
14 2

11 4

2.8

27.9
30.9
25.1
6.7

4.3
13 8

3.6

10.8
2.8

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

4.2
13 6

12 0

10.1
2.8

11.3
3.0
3.3

12.6

2.9
3.1

10.5
2.9
3.0
7.4
23.9
27.0

6.2

7.2
24.1
26.7
21.7
6.5
5.8

5.6

5.7

5.Ô

5.0

6.0

5.7

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.7
5.4
3.8
4.6

2.5
5.4
3.8
4.5

2.5
5.2
3.9
4.5

2.2
2.6

3.8
4.9

2.7
7.7
3.8
5.1

2.0
2.8
6.0

2.1

2.6
6.0

4.0
3.9

4.1
4.5

4.0

6.0

6.0
3.6
3.3
4.0
3.1
5.0

6.5
4.0
3.8
4.3

4.0
35
6.9
3.6
3.5
39

2.8

2.6

4.8
2.3
3.6

2.0
8.8

4.7
1.9
3.7
2.3
9.4

3.9
5.0

21.2
7.0
5.8

7.5
21.9
22.5
21.3
6.9

5.1
3.9
4.6

9.2
3.2
3.3

8.6

8.2
31.6
34.9
28.6

5.8

28.9
27.7
30.2
8.5
6.3

6.0

6.3

6.3

6.5

2.3
2.5
64

2.3

2.5
2.9
fi 3

4.1

40
4.8

2.5
2.7
fi 2
4.2
4.8

43
5.5

45
35

5 1

4.9

6.6

2.6
6 1

8.2
5.5

Industry

Nonagricultural w age and salary

Construction..............................................
Manufacturing..........................................
Durable goods......................................
Transportation and public utilities.........
W holesale and retail trade.....................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.....
Services.....................................................
Government w orkers...................................
Agricultural w age and salary w orkers.......

4.1
3.0
5.4
4.0
3.9
4.1
3.0
5.0
2.5
3.8
1.7
8.3

4.1
4.1
5.9
3.7
3.6
3.8
3.2
5.1
2.4
3.9
7.4

3.4
3.4
3.2
2.9
5.1
2.3
3.8
2.5
7.2

6.4
3.5

6.1
3.4

6.9
3.5

2.7
1.7

2.6
1.6

2.6
1.6

2.0

4.1

43
6.4
3.5
3.1
4.1

4.0
5.0
6.4
3.6
3.2
4.3
3.2
4.8

7 1

2.1

3.1
5.1
2.4
3.8
2.3

2.1

7.2

8.0

7.9

6.4
3.4

6.4
3.4

6.3
3.7

6.2
3.4

6.4
3.5

2.8
1.6

2.7
1.7

2.7
1.7

2.6
1.9

2.2
3.9

2.1
3.7

4.0
36
6.5
3.6
3.4
4.0
3.2
4.8

4.3

22
6.8
4.2
4.2
4.3

2.8

4.5
46
7.0
4.5
4.2
50
2.9
5.1
2.5
4.2
1.5
9.2

11.3

4.1
5.3
2.7
4.1
2.3
9.2

6.9
3.9

3.8

6.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.1
5.3

3.6

5.0
2.3
4.0

2.2

2.2

8.9

9.0

6.3
3.4

6.8

3.5

3.8

7.7
3.8

2.4

2.7

2.7

3.0

2.7

2.7

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.6

2.0

2.1

2.6
4.1

2.1

46
7.1
4.6
4.3
5.1

Educational attainm ent'

Less than a high school diploma................
High school graduates, no college.............
Som e college, less than a bachelor's
d eg ree...........................................................
College graduates.........................................

1 Data refer to persons 25 years and over.

64

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

6.6

6.6
3.0
2.3

7.

Duration of unemployment, monthly d ata seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
W eeks of
unem ploym ent

Median duration, In w eeks...............

8.

2000

1999

2001

2000

Annual average
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

2,568
1,832
1,480
755
725

2,543
1,803
1,309
665
644

2,500
1,835
1,274
660
614

2,536
1,901
1,325
670
655

2,572
1,776
1,260
609
651

2,493
1,811
1,319
650
669

2,567
1,832
1,373
673
700

2,498
1,750
1,247
618
629

2,510
1,755
1,311
702
609

2,531
1,796
1,317
713
604

2,440
1,852
1,326
675
651

2,613
1,977
1,371
731
640

2,797
1,669
1,490
793
697

2,674
1,992
1,517
814
703

2,958
1,977
1,499
759
740

13.4
6.4

12.6

12.5

12.6

12.4

12.4

12.9

5.3

6.1

6.1

5.9

6.0

13.0
6.5

12.6

6.1

12.6
6.1

12.6

5.9

13.2
5.9

12.1

6.0

12.5
5.9

13.0

5.9

5.8

Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly d ata seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
Reason for
unem ploym ent
Job losers1..........................................
On temporary layoff.......................
Not on temporary layoff.................
Job leavers.........................................
New entrants......................................

2000

1999
2,622
848
1,774
783
2,005
469

2,492
842
1,650
775
1,957
431

2001

2000

Annual average
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

2,402
723
1,679
812
1,967
411

2,460
875
1,585
776
2,052
477

2,439
917
1,522
692
2,042
416

2,450
857
1,593
788
1,960
412

2,585
907
1,678
780
1,930
503

Sept.
2,502
837
1,665
756
1,798
429

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

2,446
825
1,621
815

2,501
877
1,624
768
1,936
429

2,514
937
1,577
746
1,899
466

2,742
1,032
1,711
838
1,956
446

2,853
991
1,908
820
1,927
372

2,963
945
1,972
814
1,908
382

3,199
991
2,146
749
2,005
462

1,868
398

Percent of unemployed

Job losers1.........................................
On temporary layoff......................
Not on temporary layoff.................
Job leavers..........................................
R eentrants..........................................
New entrants......................................

44.1

43.0

42.7

43.6

43.7

44.6

45.6

44.3

44.4

44.7

45.8

47.8

48.8

49.9

14.9
29.2
13.7
34.6
7.6

12.9
30.0
14.5
35.2
7.3

15.2
27.5
13.5
35.6
8.3

16.4
27.2
12.4
36.5
7.4

15.3
28.4
14.0
34.9
7.3

15.6
28.9
13.5
33.3
8.7

15.3
30.4
13.8
32.8
7.8

14.9
29.3
14.7
33.8
7.2

15.6
28.8
13.6
34.4
7.6

16.7
28.0
13.3
33.8
8.3

17.2
28.6
14.0
32.7
7.4

15.8
32.0
13.7
32.3

6.2

16.3
32.5
13.4
31.4
6.4

16.4
33.5
11.7
31.3
7.2

1.8
.6

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.8

1.8

1.9

.6

.6

1.5
.3

1.4
.3

1.4
.4

.5
1.3
.3

2.1
.6

1.4
.3

.5
1.4
.3

.6

1.4
.3

.5
1.3
.3

.6

1.4
.3

.5
1.5
.3

2.0
.6

2.3

.6

1.8
.6

1.8

.6

1.4
.3

1.4
.3

1.3
.3

44.6
14.4
30.2
13.3
34.1

8.0

Percent of civilian
labor force

Job losers1.........................................
Job leavers..........................................
New entrants......................................

1.9

1.3
.3

.5
1.4
.3

1 Includes persons who completed temporary jobs.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

65

Current Labor Statistics:

9.

Labor Force Data

Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted

[Civilian workers]
S ex and age

1999
Total, 16 years and over...................
16 to 24 y ears................................
16 to 19 years.............................
16 to 17 years..........................
18 to 19 years..........................
20 to 24 years.............................
25 years and over..........................
25 to 54 years..........................
55 years and over...................
Men, 16 years and over..................

25 to 54 years........................
55 years and over.................
Women, 16 years and over............
16 to 24 years..............................
16 to 19 years...........................
16 to 17 years........................

66

2000

4.2
9.9
13.9
16.3
12.4
7.5
3.1
3.2

4.0
9.3
13.1
15.4
11.5
7.1
3.0
3.1

2.8

2.6

4.1
10.3
14.7
17.0
13.1
7.7
3.0
3.0

2.8
4.3
9.5
13.2
15.5

4.0
9.4

May
4.1
9.7

12.8

12.8

14.9
11.5
7.3
2.9
3.0
2.4

15.8

12.2

3.9
9.7
13.8
16.0
12.4
7.4

10.8
7.9
3.0
3.1
2.5
3.9

10.0
13.5
16.8
11.4

2.7

8.1
2.8
2.8
2.6

4.1
8.9

4.1
8.9

4.3
9.4

12.1

11.8

12.1

14.0

13.7
10.5
7.2

14.8

7.3

2.8
2.9
2.7

11.6

10.8

20 to 24 years...........................

7.2
3.3
3.4

7.0
3.2
3.3

55 years and over.................

2.8

2.6

Monthly Labor Review

Apr.

3.9
9.7
14.0
16.8

25 years and over........................


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

2000

Annual average

June 2001

2.8
2.8

10.2

3.1
3.2

7.8
3.2
3.4

2.0

2.4

June
4.0
9.1
11.9
13.4
10.7
7.5
3.0
3.1
2.4
3.9
9.6
14.2
15.9
13.0
7.0

2.8
2.9
2.3
4.1
8.5
9.4
10.7

July
4.0
9.2
13.4
16.3
11.5
6.9
3.0
3.1
2.4
3.8
9.6
14.1
17.5

Aug.

2001
Sept.

Oct.

4.1
9.4
14.2
16.9

3.9
8.9
12.9
15.7

15.2

12.6
6.6

11.1
6.6

11.1
6.8

3.1
3.2
2.7

3.0
3.0
2.7

2.9
3.0

2.8

2.8

2.8

2.9
2.7

2.9

2.4

2.6

2.8

4.2
8.9

4.2

4.0

8.6

8.2
12.0

3.9
8.4
11.9

7.1

2.8
2.8

12.6

10.2
15.8
17.1
15.2
6.9

8.2
8.0

15.0
10.9
6.7

3.2
3.3

3.3
3.4

12.4
16.8
9.8
6.3
3.4
3.5

2.4

2.4

2.6

3.9
9.5
13.7
17.5

12.6

3.9
9.4
13.4
17.6
10.7
7.3
2.9
2.9

12.0

4.0

3.9
8.9

11.2
7.1

Nov.

Dec.

4.0
9.1
13.0
15.4
11.4

4.0
9.2
13.1
15.8

6.8

7.0
3.0
3.0

3.0
3.0
2.9

11.6

2.6

4.0
9.5
13.6
17.5
11.3
7.3
3.0
2.9
2.9

4.0
9.7
14.1
18.4
11.7
7.2
3.0
2.9

4.0

Jan.

Feb.

4.2
9.6
13.8
17.4
11.5
7.2
3.2
3.2
2.7

4.2
9.5
13.6
17.2

4.3
10.3
15.0
20.5

11.8

4.3

10.0

Apr.
4.5
10.4
14.2
16.7

7.2
3.2
3.2

13.8
16.0
12.3
7.8
3.2
3.4

2.8

2.6

2.8

4.2

4.4
10.9
13.8
15.6
12.7
9.3
3.2
3.3
2.9

4.6
10.9
15.1
18.7

12.8

4.4
9.8
13.3
14.5
12.4
7.8

11.0

10.8
15.5
18.5
13.1

8.2

7.6
3.1
3.1
3.0

3.0
3.0
2.9

4.0
8.7

4.1

4.2

8.8

12.1

8.1
11.6
15.7
8.7

2.8

Mar.

12.6
8.3
3.4
3.5

8.7
3.5
3.5
2.9

6.3

12.3
13.4
11.5
6.3

6.7

12.4
14.1
11.3
6.7

6.1

4.2
8.9
13.7
16.4
11.9
6.3

3.2
3.2

3.0
3.1

3.1
3.2

3.0
3.1

3.2
3.4

3.4
3.5

3.2
3.5

3.3
3.4

2.8

2.8

2.7

2.4

2.5

2.7

2.2

2.6

13.8

11.0
6.0

12.8
11.6

8.6

13.2

11.6

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

10.

Unemployment rates by State, seasonally adjusted
State

Mar.

Feb.

Mar.

2000

2001

2001p

State

Mar.

Feb.

Mar.

2000

2001

2001p

5.4
5.8
4.4
4.1
4.7

3.5
5.0
3.0
4.0
2.9

3.9
4.4
2.9
4.4

3.7
4.5
3.0
4.6

2.1

2.6

2.7
1.9
3.6
5.8
3.8

2.9
1.9
3.3

3.8
4.6
4.6
3.4
3.1

3.6
5.5
4.3
4.4

3.8
5.4
4.0
4.5
2.4

3.9
4.5
4.8
4.3
3.6

3.6
4.4
4.5
4.9
3.0

3.7
4.3
4.6
5.3
3.2

2.6

2.6

2.8

4.1

3.7

4.4

3.6
4.1
5.4
3.9

3.8
4.0
5.6
2.7

3.7
4.2
5.6
2.4

2.2

2.2

2.2

3.7
4.5
3.3

4.1
3.8
3.4

4.1
4.2
3.5

3.7

3.7
2.7
4.7
3.2
5.1

3.6
3.1
4.7
3.4
5.4

2.8
2.2

2.8

2.9
2.5
5.7
5.1
4.1
3.4

4.6
6.9
4.0
4.6
5.0

5.0
5.8
4.1
4.4
4.5

2.8
2.4
3.9
5.6
3.6

2.6
3.3
3.3
5.8

-

6.0
3.8

Oklahoma......................................................

Utah...............................................................

Wyoming........................................................

2.6

4.1
3.1
5.1
4.0
4.2

3.8

3.5
3.0
4.7
4.5
4.0

2.8
4.9
4.6
3.6

5.2
5.3
3.6
3.7

2.3
5.6
5.4
4.3
3.3

p = preliminary

11.

Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by State, seasonally adjusted

[In thousands]
State

Mar.

Feb.

Mar.

2000

2001

2001p

State

Mar.

Feb.

Mar.

2000

2001

2001p

2,764.5
393.7
913.9
1,059.1
625.5

2,761.0
394.3
913.5
1,063.3
625.8

Alabama...................
Alaska......................
Arizona.....................
Arkansas..................
California..................

1,933.7
282.2
2,225.9
1,162.3
14,359.5

1,936.9
288.0
2,278.7
1,167.8
14,741.2

1,933.5
288.2
2,276.7
1,170.0
14,798.1

New Hampshire.............................

2,753.4
389.8
909.6
1,013.4
618.2

Colorado..................
Connecticut..............
Delaware..................
District of Columbia.
Florida......................

2,189.0
1,688.1
420.6
642.6
7,002.7

2,256.1
1,700.7
424.0
648.0
7,223.6

2,260.5
1,699.2
425.8
647.5
7,247.2

New Jersey .....................................
New Mexico...................................
New York........................................
North Carolina...............................
North Dakota..................................

3,978.3
741.4
8,589.7
3,926.2
327.9

4,033.8
749.0
8,721.7
3,974.7
330.3

4,032.8
752.2
8,720.9
3,975.8
330.3

Georgia....................
Hawaii......................
Idaho.........................
Illinois........................
Indiana.....................

3,976.8
546.4
553.5
6,034.6
3,013.0

4,045.3
560.3
563.2
6,072.0
2,996.6

4,043.7
560.7
563.1
6,084.7
3,001.0

Ohio.................................................
Oregon............................................
Rhode Island..................................

5,634.9
1,478.0
1,596.3
5,677.4
475.4

5,659.2
1,490.3
1,609.6
5,737.1
479.0

5,658.6
1 495.8
1,606.8
5,744.8
479.9

Iowa..........................
K ansas.......... ...........
Kentucky..................
Louisiana..................
Maine........................

1,481.7
1,339.0
1,830.4
1,922.4
601.7

1,487.9
1,352.8
1,843.3
1,957.2
612.8

1,489.6
1,358.5
1,841.6
1,953.3
613.4

South Carolina...............................
South Dakota..................................
T en n essee......................................
Texas...............................................
Utah.................................................

1,866.7
380.5
2,736.3
9,374.4
1,068.6

1,892.7
379.3
2,754.0
9,610.7
1,091.2

1,893.6
380.5
2,748.9
9,632.4
1,091.4

Maryland..................
M assachusetts........
Michigan...................
Minnesota................
Mississippi...............

2,441.0
3,294.1
4,664.7
2,665.2
1,159.5

2,477.7
3,355.9
4,702.1
2,686.4
1,145.4

2,476.6
3,362.3
4,696.5
2,691.1
1,144.8

Virginia............................................
W ashington.....................................
W est Virginia.................................
Wisconsin.......................................
Wyoming.........................................

298.4
3,492.3
2,706.5
737.5
2,834.3
240.5

301.2
3,560.6
2,745.3
741.1
2,852.1
244.4

300.7
3,560.2
2,748.4
742.2
2,850.5
245.4

Missouri...........................................
Montana..........................................
Nebraska.........................................

p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the data base.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

67

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

12. Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Industry
TOTAL....................................
PRIVATE SECTOR...................
GOODS-PRODUCING....................
M in in g ..........................................

Metal mining.............................
Oil and gas extraction...............
Nonmetallic minerals,
except fuels............................
Construction.................................

General building contractors.....
Heavy construction, except
building..................................
Special trades contractors........
Manufacturing..............................

Production workers.............
Durable goods............................

Production workers.............
Lumber and wood products....
Furniture and fixtures..............
Stone, clay, and glass
products...............................
Primary metal Industries.........
Fabricated metal products......
Industrial machinery and
equipment............................
Computer and office
equipment..........................
Electronic and other electrical
equipment:...........................
Electronic components and
Transportation equipment......
Motor vehicles and
equipment...........................
Aircraft and parts..................
Instruments and related
products..............................
Miscellaneous manufacturing
Industries..............................
Nondurable goods....................

Production workers.............
Food and kindred products.....
Tobacco products...................
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..

Railroad transportation...........
Local and Interurban
passenger transit.................
Trucking and warehousing.....
Water transportation..............
Pipelines, except natural gas..
Transportation services.........
Communications and public
Communications....................
Electric, gas, and sanitary

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

68

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Mar.p

Apr.p

131,418
110,846

131,683
110,928

131,909
110,795

131,969
111,029

131,899
111,180

131,837
111,237

132,046
111,463

132,145
111,564

132,279
111,689

132,367
111,753

132,428
111,799

132,595
111,915

132,654
111,943

132,472
111,726

25,482
535
45
293

25,662
538
44
304'

25,722
539
41
307

25,683
542
41
310

25,727
453
41
312

25,774
542
40
313

25,727
543
40
313

25,696
547
40
316

25,713
551
40
320

25,711
548
40
319

25,688
548
41
320

25,633
550
39
325

25,627
555
39
328

25,602
557
38
331

25,414
560
37
336

113

113

114

115

115

114

112

111

113

113

112

6,663
1,520

6,678
1,520

6,699
1,525

6,728
1,538

6,758
1,549

6,781
1,548

6,791
1,543

6,826
1,538

6,880
1,555

6,929
1,552

6,851
1,548

897
4,256
18,554

900
4,274

900
4,290
18,421
12,559
11,129
7,568

904
4,305

909
4,324

913
4,335

921
4,367

930
4,395

938
4,439

913
4,390

18,404
12,545

18,382
12,511

18,349
12,466

18,257
12,394

18,116
12,254

18,006
12,162

11,126
7,560

11,120

11,102

7,544

7,517

11,031
7,462

18,192
12,323
10,997
7,415

10,941
7,358

10,870
7,308

112

110

113

6,404
1,450

6,687
1,505

6,666
1,516

113
6,648
1,520

886

896
4,254

894
4,234

896
4,247

18,543
12,739

4,296
18,437
12,642

18,517
12,696

18,493
12,678

18,521
12,675

11,103
7,590

11,085
7,569

11,138
7,608

11,136
7,606

11,168
7,617

11,207
7,635

18,485
12,631
11,172
7,608

828
548

821
555

840
559

838
558

837
559

836
565

831
559

826
560

821
559

817
557

811
555

806
552

799
549

799
548

801
543

563
700
1,517

566
695
1,532

579
702
1,539

579
699
1,537

579
700
1,543

581
700
1,546

580
700
1,541

579
695
1,540

577
695
1,536

577
691
1,537

577

578
679
1,514

578
671
1,509

577

1,536

579
681
1,526

1,502

2,141

2,128

2,114

2,113

2,120

2,137

2,133

2,121

2,123

2,122

2,119

2,117

2,105

2,084

2,072

370

363

356

355

354

362

365

364

365

365

366

369

370

369

367

1,670

1,704

1,704

1,707

1,719

1,735

1,740

1,736

1,738

1,737

1,738

1,735

1,726

1,715

1,684

636
1,884

667
1,841

665

669

678

1,866

1,866

1,868

689
1,855

695
1,836

698
1,822

704
1,822

708
1,822

710
1,817

714
1,772

711
1,786

702
1,775

1,769

1,019
495

1,011
459

1,025
466

1,025
467

1,025
466

1,027
465

1,015
464

1,005
464

994
463

995
462

990
464

952
462

967
464

956
465

951
464

856

847

844

847

849

856

856

858

861

865

867

870

871

871

867

395
7,440
5,149

396
7,353
5,073

391
7,379
5,088

392
7,357
5,072

394

396
7,347
5,053

396

392

394
7,278
4,985

393
7,226
4,932

389

7,292
4,991

396
7,647
4,949

391

7,313
5,023

395
7,262
4,967

390

7,353
5,058

7,195
4,908

7,175
4,896

7,133
4,854

1,677
39
560

1,672
36
541

1,695
35
536

1,688

1,685
35
531

1,686

1,674
33
523

1,678
32
518

1,679
33
514

1,682
32
510

1,684
32
505

31
496

1,687
32
494

1,686

34
530

1,679
33
528

1,686

35
534

692

650
661
1,556
1,027
131

646
659
1,551
1,039
129

641
658
1,546
1,038
128

639
657
1,552
1,037
129

637
656
1,553
1,036
128

625
655
1,549
1,036
128

620
655
1,547
1,037
127

616
655
1,544
1,038
126

611
654
1,540
1,038
127

604
652
1,539
1,039
127

599
651
1,534
1,039
127

595
645
1,529
1,039
127

590
642
1,524
1,039
126

581
640
1,512
1,036
127

1,005
74

1,017
72

1,017
72

1,016
72

1,013
74

1,009
71

1,006
70

1,002

997
69

993
69

987

979

973

966

69

68

68

68

66

105,756

105,961

106,226

106,242

106,125

106,110

106,350

106,432

106,568

106,679

106,795

106,968

107,052

107,058

6,826
4,409
230

6,993
4,524

6,996
4,513
237

6,997
4,511
235

7,015
4,520
233

7,034
4,536
235

6,963
4,548
236

7,062
4,553
235

7,076
4,559
234

7,093
4,573
235

7,108
4,583
232

7,106
4,580
229

7,123
4,591
231

7,127
4,591
230

7,119
4,577
230

485
1,805
187
1,227
13
463

498
1,839

476
1,852
195
1,270
14
469

472
1,854
197
1,278
14
472

477
1,860
195
1,282
14
473

478
1,860
198
1,288
14
474

478
1,861
199
1,291
14
475

477
1,861

478
1,864

480
1,870

480
1,872

477
1,864

200

1,282
13
472

477
1,853
194
1,269
14
469

1,298
14
475

2,416
1,552

2,469
1,612

2,483
1,631

2,486
1,635

2,495
1,644

2,498
1,647

2,415
1,565

2,509
1,660

2,517

865
6,924

857

852

851

851

851

850

849

849

848

847

847

847

846

847

7,054

7,000

7,006

7,019

7,030

7,037

7,042

7,059

7,070

7,068

7,067

7,064

7,066

7,054

22,788

23,136

23,334

23,247

23,280

23,311

23,348

23,371

23,380

23,395

23,406

23,415

23,472

23,457

23,518

989
2,771
2,431

1,022

1,025
2,883
2,536

1,019
2,837
2,488

1,016
2,831
2,482

1,014
2,820
2,470

1,015
2,830
2,483

1,012

1,012

1,011

1,010

2,753
2,403

2,834
2,487

2,829
2,481

2,835
2,492

2,822
2,480

1,007
2,789
2,448

1,007
2,807
2,462

1,006
2,797
2,451

2,800
2,455

869
4,084

668
1,553
1,034
134

220

201

See footnotes at end of table.

Monthly Labor Review


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

Nov

128,786
108,616

12,688

Building materials and garden
General merchandise stores....
Department stores.................

Oct.

Sept.

1,006
78
SERVICE-PRODUCING................. 103,304
Transportation and public
utilities......................................

2001

2000

Annual average

June 2001

1,668

686

666

686

32
487

478

479

200

1,866
200

1,868
201

200

201

202

1,306
14
476

1,316
14
477

1,312
14
477

1,318
14
478

1,316
13
479

1,312
14
477

2,520
1,672

2,525
1,678

2,526
1,679

2,532
1,685

2,536
1,690

2,542
1,695

1,000

12. Continued—Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]

Industry

Annual average
1999

Food stores...............................
Automotive dealers and
service stations.....................
New and used car dealers.....
Apparel and accessory stores...
Furniture and home furnishings
stores....................................
Eating and drinking places.......
Miscellaneous retail
establishments.......................
Finance, insurance, and
real estate..............................

Finance.....................................
Depository institutions............
Commercial banks................
Savings Institutions...............
Nondepository institutions......
Security and commodity
brokers.................................
Holding and other investment
offices...................................
Insurance..................................
Insurance carriers...................
Insurance agents, brokers,
and service...........................
Real estate...............................
Services '..................................

Hotels and other lodging places
Business services.....................
Services to buildings...............
Personnel supply services......
Help supply services.............
Computer and data
processing services..............
Auto repair services
and parking............................
Miscellaneous repair services....
Motion pictures.........................
Amusement and recreation
services.................................

2000

2000
Apr.

May.

June

July

Aug.

2001
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.p

3,496

3,521

3,525

3,521

3,522

3,523

3,526

3,520

3,528

3,527

3,532

3,538

3,548

3,550

3,555

2,368
1,081
1,171

2,412
1,114
1,193

2,406
1,109
1,186

2,407
1,111
1,187

2,410
1,114
1,190

2,412
1,116
1,196

2,418
1,118
1,195

2,420
1,120
1,202

2,426
1,122
1,202

2,426
1,123
1,208

2,425
1,123
1,214

2,424
1,124
1,221

2,424
1,124
1,227

2,420
1,124
1,228

2,419
1,121
1,226

1,086
7,960

1,133
8,113

1,129
8,114

1,130
8,080

1,136
8,098

1,135
8,123

1,138
8,132

1,138
8,138

1,142
8,137

1,144
8,142

1,148
8,149

1,147
8,157

1,146
8,171

1,147
8,158

1,141
8,214

2,977

3,079

3,066

3,066

3,077

3,088

3,094

3,098

3,105

3,103

3,106

3,132

3,142

3,151

3,163

7,555
3,688
2,055
1,467
254
709

7,560
3,710
2,029
1,430
253
681

7,558
3,701
2,034
1,436
253
682

7,550
3,697
2,029
1,432
253
679

7,541
3,699
2,028
1,430
253
676

7,546
3,701
2,024
1,425
252
675

7,549
3,707
2,024
1,425
253
674

7,556
3,718
2,024
1,524
253
677

7,569
3,725
2,023
1,421
253
678

7,575
3,729
2,023
1,420
253
678

7,582
3,735
2,025
1,420
253
677

7,594
3,738
2,024
1,418
253
678

7,609
3,748
2,025
1,417
254
683

7,618
3,755
2,028
1,418
254
686

7,626
3,760
2,032
1,421
254
690

688

748

737

740

745

751

756

762

767

770

774

777

781

781

780

234
2,368
1,610

251
2,346
1,589

248
2,351
1,594

249
2,348
1,592

250
2,345
1,590

251
2,340
1,585

253
2,341
1,585

255
2,335
1,580

257
2,337
1,580

248
2,340
1,583

259
2,339
1,582

259
2,346
1,588

259
2,351
1,592

260
2,353
1,593

258
2,357
1,597

757
1,500

756
1,504

757
1,506

756
1,505

755
1,497

755
1,495

756
1,501

755
1,503

757
1,507

757
1,506

757
1,508

758
1,510

759
1,510

760
1,510

760
1,509

39,055
766
1,848
1,225
9,299
983
3,615
3,247

40,460
801
1,911
1,250
9,858
994
3,887
3,487

40,318
797
1,900
1,246
9,882
994
3,947
3,544

40,312
795
1,905
1,240
9,830
991
3,902
3,514

14,447
795
1,917
1,247
9,876
992
3,916
3,517

40,495
798
1,923
1,250
9,884
994
3,909
3,505

40,613
801
1,923
1 256
9,921
994
3,917
3,506

40,736
804
1,924
1,257
9,965
995
3,947
3,547

40,767
808
1,927
1,259
9,939
994
3,890
3,465

40,845
811
1,939
1,261
9,933
998
3,869
3,461

40,901
813
1,946
1,265
9,893
1,002
3,816
3,404

40,984
818
1,952
1,261
9,888
1,007
3,779
3,372

41,020
821
1,957
1,261
9,851
1,007
3,731
3,339

41,073
828
1,960
1,265
9,822
1,007
3,694
3,201

40,995
824
1,946
1,265
9,732
1,008
3,600
3,202

1,875

2,094

2,071

2,080

2,091

2,106

2,114

2,124

2,135

2,152

2,164

2,176

2,186

2,195

2,202

1,196
371
598

1,248
365
593

1,236
365
595

1,238
365
595

1,240
365
597

1,248
365
596

1,254
366
596

1,260
366
590

1,266
366
588

1,270
366
593

1,278
365
597

1,291
365
600

1,291
365
600

1,298
364
605

1,298
365
614

1,651

1,728

1,715

1,720

1,726

1,735

1,741

1,738

1,747

1,755

1,759

1,769

1,772

1,775

1,755

Health services.........................
Offices and clinics of medical
doctors..................................
Nursing and personal care
facilities.................................
Hospitals.................................
Home health care services.....
Legal services..........................
Educational services.................
Social services..........................
Child day care services...........
Residential care......................
Museums and botanical and
zoological gardens.................
Membership organizations.......
Engineering and management
services..................................
Engineering and architectural
services.................................
Management and public
relations...............................

10,035

10,197

10,054

10,063

10,078

10,097

10,114

10,131

10,146

10,164

10,184

10,211

10,236

10,259

10,278

1,875

1,924

1,916

1,919

1,921

1,923

1,926

1,933

1,938

1,941

1,948

1,953

1,958

1,962

1,967

1,786
3,973
636
996
2,266
2,783
680
771

1,795
3,990
643
1,009
2,325
2,902
711
805

1,793
3,971
642
1,003
2,304
2,882
703
98

1,793
3,977
642
1,005
2,322
2,888
707
800

1,793
3,982
643
1,010
2,335
2,887
712
804

1,793
3,988
645
1,010
2,337
2,883
715
807

1,798
3,993
645
1,011
2,352
2,889
719
809

1,797
4,001
645
1,013
2,344
2,928
719
813

1,799
4,005
646
1,014
2,329
2,950
724
817

1,800
4,016
644
1,013
2,338
2,958
727
820

1,803
4,025
642
1,015
2,357
2,977
729
823

1,806
4,035
646
1,017
2,363
2,985
732
827

1,806
4,045
645
1,020
2,375
2,997
734
829

1,811
4,055
648
1,022
2,384
3,009
739
831

1,816
4,061
646
1,022
2,389
3,023
742
835

99
2,436

106
2,474

106
2,472

105
2,473

106
2,474

107
2,466

107
2,470

107
2,482

107
2,482

108
2,486

108
2,487

109
2,487

110
2,487

110
2,489

109
2,488

3,255

3,418

3,388

3,395

3,421

3,423

3,440

3,455

3,467

3,478

3,490

3,496

3,504

510

3,514

956

1,017

1,003

1,010

1,018

1,022

1,026

1,030

1,034

1,035

1,040

1,046

1,050

1,052

1,057

1,031

1,089

31,048

1,081

1,089

1,090

1,098

1,102

1,108

1,113

1,116

1,119

1,123

1,125

1,123

Government..............................

20,206
2,669

20,681
2,777

20,755
2,886

21,114
3,240

20,940
3,101

20,719
2,820

20,600
2,653

20,583
2,623

20,581
2,622

20,590
2,620

20,614
2,613

20,629
2,613

20,680
2,615

20,711
2,613

20,746
2,614

1,796
4,709
1,983
2,725
12,829
7,288
5,540

1,917
4,785
2,032
2,752
13,119
7,439
5,678

2,023
4,784
2,036
2,748
13,085
7,435
5,650

2,377
4,775
2,026
2,749
13,099
7,436
5,663

2,238
4,776
2,029
2,747
13,063
7,396
5,667

1,957
4,782
2,033
2,749
13,117
7,438
5,679

1,790
4,794
2,037
2,757
13,153
7,456
5,697

1,762
4,813
2,051
2,762
13,147
7,439
5,708

1,762
4,798
2,035
2,763
13,161
7,445
5,716

1,761
4,798
2,033
2,765
13,172
7,449
5,723

1,754
4,809
2,037
2,772
13,192
7,457
5,735

1,755
4,800
2,028
2,772
13,216
7,468
5,748

1,756
4,825
2,048
2,777
13,240
7,479
5,761

1,754
4,836
2,055
2,781
13,262
7,492
5,770

1,754
4,846
2,064
2,782
13,286
7,495
5,791

Federal.....................................
Federal, except Postal
Service.................................
State.........................................
Education................................
Other State government.........
Local.........................................
Education................................
Other local government..........

1 Includes other industries not shown separately.
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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

69

Current Labor Statistics:

13.

Labor Force Data

A verage w eekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry, monthly
d ata seasonally adjusted
A nnual average

2000

2001

industry
1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.p A pr.p

PRIVATE SECTOR....................................

34.5

34.5

34.5

34.4

34.5

34.4

34.3

34.4

34.4

34.3

34.2

34.4

34.3

34.3

34.2

GOODS-PRODUCING....................................

41.0

41.0

41.4

41.0

41.0

41.1

40.8

40.7

40.8

40.6

40.1

40.5

40.3

40.5

40.6

MINING........................................................... .

43.2

43.1

43 2

42 8

43 0

43 2

43 1

43 0

43 1

43 0

42 5

43 1

43 2

43 8

44 0

MANUFACTURING.......................................

41.7
4.6

41.6
4.6

42.1
4.8

41.6
4.6

41.7
4.6

41.8
4.7

41.4
4.5

41.4
4.4

41.4
4.5

41.2
4.3

40.6
4.1

41.0
4.2

40.9
3.9

41.0
4.1

41.0
3.9

42.2
4.8
41.1
40.3
43.4
44.5

42.1
4.7
41.0
40.0
43.1
44.9

42.6
5.0
41.1
40.7
43.3
45.6

42.1
4.8
41.0
40.4
3.1
44.7

42.2
4.8
41.0
40.2
42.8
45.1

42.4
4.8
41.0
40.1
43.2
45.2

41.9
4.6
40.7
39.6
43.0
44.7

41.8
4.5
40.8
39.7
42.9
44.7

41.9
4.6
40.9
39.7
43.2
44.4

41.6
4.4
40.8
39.4
43.0
44.4

41.0
4.1
40.2
38.8
42.3
43.5

41.3
4.1
39.8
39.2
43.0
43.8

41.1
3.9
40.1
39.1
42 8
43.2

41.3
4.0
40.3
39.1
43.7
43.4

41.3
3.9
40.0
39.1
43.2
44.3

45.2
42.4

46.0
42.6

46.6
43.2

46.4
42.7

46.5
42.7

46.2
43.0

45.9
42.3

45.8
42.2

45.1
42.2

45.2
42.1

44.7
41.3

44.7
41.7

44.4
41.7

44.4
41.9

45.4
42.1

42.1

42.2

42.6

42.1

42.3

42.5

42.1

41.9

42.0

41.7

41.1

41.5

41.0

41.2

41.3

Instruments and related products........
Miscellaneous manufacturing................

41.2
43.8
45.0
41.3
39.8

41.1
43.4
44.4
41.3
39.0

41.8
43.9
44.9
41.7
39.6

41.2
43.1
44.3
41.5
39.1

41.2
43.6
44.7
41.5
39.0

41.5
43.7
44.5
41.6
39.3

40.5
43.2
44.3
40.9
38.7

40.7
42.9
43.8
41.1
38.5

40.7
43.0
43.9
41.2
38.6

40.5
42.5
43.2
41.2
38.4

40.3
41.5
41.5
40.7
38.1

40.3
42.0
42.1
41.0
38.3

40.3
42.0
42.0
41.1
38.2

40.1
42.0
42.3
41.0
38.2

39.8
42.3
43.2
41.0
38.2

Apparel and other textile products.......
Paper and allied products.....................

40.9
4.4
41.8
40.9
37.5
43.4

40.8
4.4
41.7
41.2
37.8
42.5

41.3
4.6
42.3
42.0
38.2
42.8

40.8
4.4
41.7
41.3
37.8
42.6

40.8
4.4
41.9
41.1
37.9
42.6

41.0
4.5
41.8
41.6
38.1
42.6

40.7
4.4
41.8
40.8
37.7
42.5

40.7
4.3
41.6
40.8
37.6
42.4

40.6
4.3
41.5
40.6
37.5
42.3

40.5
4.2
41.4
40.5
37.6
42.2

40.1
4.1
40.9
40.5
37.2
41.7

40.6
4.3
41.3
40.7
37.6
41.9

40.4
4.0
41.1
40.4
37.6
41.7

40.5
4.1
41.2
40.5
37.5
41.8

40.6
3.9
41.4
40.3
38.0
42.1

38.1
43.0

38.3
42.5

38.6
43.0

38.3
42.5

38.4
42.4

38.4
42.7

38.1
42.3

38.2
42.4

38.2
42.3

38.2
42.1

3 7 .0
42.1

38.4
42.6

38.4
42.3

38.6
42.3

38.1
42.6

Leather and leather products................

41.7
37.4

41.4
37.5

41.9
38.3

41.5
37.6

41.3
37.4

41.5
37.6

41.3
37.4

41.3
37.3

41.2
37.4

41.0
37.3

40.4
36.8

41.0
36.9

40.9
36.4

41.0
36.1

40.7
36.7

SERVICE-PRODUCING.................................

32.8

32.8
1

32.8

32.8

32.8

32.8

32.7

32.8

32.8

32.8

32.7

32.9

32.8

32.8

32.7

Overtime hours.......................................
Durable goods........................................
Overtime hours......................................
Lumber and wood products..................
Furniture and fixtures.............................
Primary metal industries.........................
Blast furnaces and basic steel

Industrial machinery and equipment....
Electronic and other electrical
Transportation equipment.....................

Printing and publishing...........................
Rubber and miscellaneous

TRANSPORTATION AND

j

PUBLIC UTILITIES..................................

38.7

38.6

38.5

38 5

38 5

38 5

38.4

38 5

38 6

38 6

38 7

38 7

38.5

38.3

38.2

WHOLESALE TRADE..................................

38.3

38.5

38 6

38.3

38.5

38.5

38 3

38 4

38.4

38.4

38.3

38.3

38 1

38 3

38 2

RETAIL TRADE.............................................

29.0

28.9

28.9

28.9

28.9

28.9

28.9

28.8

28.9

28.9

28.7

29.1

28.9

28.8

28.8

p = preliminary.
NOTE: S ee "Notes on the data" tor a description of the most recent benchmark revision.

70

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

14.

A verage hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry,
seasonally adjusted
Annual average

2000

2001

Industry
1999
PRIVATE SECTOR (in current dollars).. $ 13.24

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.p

A pr.p

$13.75

$13.63

$13.67

$13.72

$13.75

$13.80

$13.84

$13.90

$13.97

$14.03

$14.03

$14.11

$14.17

$14.22

Goods-producing....................................

14.83

15.40

15.29

15.29

15.35

15.38

15.45

15.47

15.57

15.63

15.65

15.67

15.74

15.79

15.79

Mining......................................................

17.05

17.24

17.24

17.27

17.29

17.29

17.25

17.24

17.30

17.38

17.43

17.49

17.52

17.55

17.55

Construction............................................

17.19

17.88

17.78

17.76

17.80

17.86

17.93

17.97

18.02

18.16

18.17

18.28

18.30

18.33

18.16

Manufacturing........................................

13.90

14.38

14.27

14.28

14.35

14.37

14.43

14.44

14.54

14.57

14.58

14.54

14.63

14.66

14.73

Excluding overtime.............................

13.17

13.62

13.49

13.53

13.60

13.62

13.69

13.73

13.80

13.84

13.88

13.83

13.94

13.96

14.05

Service-producing...................................

12.73

13.24

13.11

13.16

13.22

13.24

13.29

13.34

13.39

13.46

13.53

13.54

13.62

13.68

13.74

Transportation and public utilities.......

15.69

16.22

16.13

16.20

16.26

16.18

16.27

16.31

16.39

16.42

16.50

16.51

16.64

16.68

16.77

W holesale trade.....................................

14.59

15.20

15.06

15.08

15.21

15.24

15.25

15.33

15.37

15.44

15.55

15.53

15.60

15.68

15.76

9.09

9.46

9.39

9.41

9 44

9 47

9 50

9 54

9.57

9.61

9.65

15.07

14.95

15.00

15.04

15.07

15.19

15.20

15.28

15.35

15.61

15.64

Services..................................................

13.37

13.91

13.76

13.82

13.87

13.92

15.13
13.97

9.69
15.55

9.74

14.62

9.64
15.44

9.72

Finance, insurance, and real estate....

14.01

14.07

14.16

14.23

14.25

14.35

14.40

14.48

7.86

7.89

7.86

7.89

7.87

7.87

7.90

7.88

7.90

7.92

7.94

7.90

7.92

7.95

7.94

PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant (1982)
dollars)........................................................

p = preliminary.
NOTE: S ee "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

71

Current Labor Statistics:

15.

Labor Force Data

A verage hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
A nnual average

2000

2001

Industry
1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.p

A pr.p

PRIVATE SECTOR.....................................

$13.24

$13.75

$13.69

$13.64

$13.62

$13.68

$13.67

$13.88

$13.96

$13.98

$14.03

$14.09

$14.15

$14.18

$14.18

MINING..........................................................

17.05

17.24

17.29

17.19

17.09

17.13

16.94

17.05

17.02

17.06

17.17

17.22

17.27

17.31

17.31

CONSTRUCTION.........................................

17.19

17.88

17.66

17.71

17.74

17.95

18.04

18.16

18.21

18.16

18.21

18.21

18.26

18.30

18.30

MANUFACTURING.....................................

13.90

14.38

14 28

14 27

14 34

14 37

14 37

14 SO

14 S3

14 62

14 68

14 6P

14 65

14 ßQ

14 69

14 82
11.93
11.73
14.53
16.42

14 82
11.73
11.64
14.23
16.51

14 80
11.74
11.69
14.28
16.40

14 00
11.82
11.73
14.36
16.52

14 88
11.87
11.80
14.42
16.68

14 03

1S 07

1S 13

1S PP

1S P6

11.83
11.82
14.41
16.57

11 88
11.88
14.53
16.65

11 91
11.92
14.56
16.55

11 89
11.94
14.51
16.64

11 96
12.01
14.50
16.64

11 93
11.99
14.48
16.63

11 92

11 94

11 94

Furniture and fixtures...............................

14 36
11.51
11.29
13.97
15.80

12.03
14.54
16.56

12.05
14.56
16.65

12.05
14.56
16.65

Fabricated metal products.....................

18.84
13.50

19.82
13.87

19.72
13.75

19.46
13.75

19.62
13.82

19.78
13.82

19.56
13.90

19.58
14.02

19.28
14.03

19.27
14.08

19.22
14.12

19.48
14.09

19.25
14.11

19.29
14.14

19.29
14.14

Industrial machinery and equipment...

15.03

15.55

15.42

15.45

15.51

15.61

15.66

15.84

15.88

15.93

16.04

16.03

16.04

16.07

16.07

13.43
17.79
18.10
14.08
11.26

13.80
18.45
18.79
14.43
11.63

13.70
18.82
19.36
14.40
11.58

13.65
18.79
19.35
14.44
11.59

13.72
19.01
19.62
14.49
11.60

13.79
18.66
19.07
14.65
11.65

13.81
19.02
19.58
14.65
11.60

13.84
19.30
19.87
14.80
11.70

13.88
19.52
20.19
14.85
11.77

13.93
19.82
20.57
14.91
11.78

14.05
19.70
20.36
15.06
11.91

14.00
19.30
19.81
14.95
11.90

14.02
19.44
20.02
14.95
11.91

14.09
19.58
20.19
15.06
11.91

14.09
19.58
20.19
15.06
11.91

13.21
12.11
19.87
10.81
8.92
15.88

13.69
12.50
21.57
11.16
9.30
16.25

13.45
12.36
19.71
10.94
9.05
16.15

13.43
12.36
20.40
10.91
9.05
16.12

13.48
12.39
20.87
10.91
9.07
16.18

13.61
12.46
21.08
10.97
9.06
16.29

13.52
12.40
20.95
10.97
9.09
16.18

13.63
12.50
18.51
11.05
9.16
16.31

13.63
12.44
17 98
11.01
9.16
16.36

13.71
12.57
18 40
11.04
9.16
16.36

13.80
12.66
18 54
11.02
9.21
16.54

11.92
13.79
12 63
11.05
9.23
16.43

11.98
13.80
12 57
11.03
9.22
16.41

12.03
13.81
12 61
11.01
9.31
16.46

12.03
13.81
12 61
11.01
9.31
16.46

13.96
17.42
21.43

14.40
18.15
22.00

14.20
17.77
21.77

14.15
17.80
21.34

14.15
17.91
21.19

14.29
18.17
21.24

14.29
17.94
21.01

14.48
18.07
21.14

14.47
18.09
21.11

14.52
18.17
21.31

14.58
18.33
21.68

14.55
18.24
21.65

14.58
18.32
21.98

14.58
18.25
21.78

14.58
18.25
21.78

12.40
9.71

12.85
10.18

12.67
10.13

12.65
10.05

12.72
10.08

12.84
10.08

12.81
10.15

12.87
10.25

12.89
10.21

12.95
10.18

13.03
10.22

13.05
10.28

13.07
10.18

12.97
10.34

12.97
10.34

PUBLIC UTILITIES..................................

15.69

16.22

16.15

16.13

16.17

16.19

16.22

16.31

16.38

16.43

16.53

16.56

16.65

16.63

16.63

WHOLESALE TRADE................................

14.59

15.20

15.14

14.99

15.04

15.25

15.17

15.32

15.45

15.46

15.59

15.57

15.65

15.61

15.61

RETAIL TRADE...........................................

9.09

9.46

9.42

9.39

9.38

9.38

9.40

9.57

9.58

9.60

9.65

9.68

9.71

9.72

9.72

AND REAL ESTATE................................

14.62

15.07

15.12

15.02

14.93

15.01

14.99

15.12

15.24

15.25

15.32

15.45

15.63

15.67

15.67

SERVICES.....................................................

13.30

13.91

13.83

13.76

13.68

13.74

13.70

13.96

14.07

14.17

14.29

14.35

14.42

14.43

14.43

Stone, clay, and glass products...........
Primary metal industries.........................
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products...................................................

Electronic and other electrical
equipm ent.................................................
Transportation equipm ent......................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent...........
Instruments and related products........
Miscellaneous manufacturing...............

Nondurable goods...................................
Food and kindred products....................
Tobacco products.....................................
Textile mill products..................................
Apparel and other textile products......
Paper and allied products......................
Printing and publishing............................
Chem icals and allied products..............
Petroleum and coal products................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products.....................................
Leather and leather products................

TRANSPORTATION AND

FINANCE, INSURANCE,

p = preliminary.
NOTE: S ee "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchm ark revision.

72

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

16. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
Industry

1999

2000

2001

2000

Annual average

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.p

Apr.p

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

$468.20
470.25
269.70

$471.60
473.34
270.10

$477.78
473.00
273.33

$474.70
473.34
271.72

$479.10
476.10
272.43

$484.76
478.16
275.28

$479.86
479.17
272.03

$480.17
479.83
272.51

$477.99
482.63
269.74

$481.44
483.97
270.62

$482.46
486.03
270.89

$486.61
486.32
271.70

PRIVATE SECTOR

Current dollars............................. $456.78
Seasonally adjusted................
Constant (1982) dollars............ 271.25

$474.38
272.16

$474.02
470.24
273.37

MINING...........................................

736.56

743.04

744.33

738.74

742.60

748.64

746.87

751.61

756.86

743.03

747.20

750.98

751.95

757.27

766.47

CONSTRUCTION...........................

672.13

702.68

691.68

700.92

700.34

716.80

725.61

728.62

732.44

704.34

694.56

692.28

682.82

702.52

696.08

579.63
344.20

598.21
343.21

597.32
344.48

593.22
341.72

598.99
343.06

592.66
339.05

594.50
340.30

606.52
344.81

604.45
343.24

607.36
344.31

607.34
344.69

596.73
336.76

591.71
332.61

597.72
335.61

588.53
338.60

-

MANUFACTURING

Current dollars...........................
Constant (1982) dollars.............

605.99

623.92

624.13

619.92

625.82

614.66

620.54

495.10
472.68

489.19
466.87

494.02
473.20

630.09
486.01
476.01

607.11

489.41
464.44

633.61
494.87
474.81

620.20

488.99
463.60

631.08
499.32
474.40

613.22

489.13
469.20

632.81
496.08
481.14

615.68

473.06
454.99

477.92
464.88

473.54
461.95

483.20
467.15

482.77
455.04

606.30
703.10

626.24
737.26

624.24
744.28

626.40
728.61

623.66
742.35

634.23
741.82

641.67
733.81

647.53
731.71

637.63

742.65

624.13
735.93

613.84
731.37

610.69
716.26

631.53
718.42

639.65
731.38

851.57
572.40

911.72
590.86

929.39
590.21

911.06
588.41

930.00
594.26

944.24
583.63

916.62
585.86

908.21
598.77

890.82
596.83

902.72
597.68

890.62
596.01

901.15
581.98

882.20
580.84

884.00
585.73

923.44
568.23

632.76

656.21

653.54

651.99

655.23

653.94

652.50

658.98

656.15

658.14

662.44

655.94

648.49

651.30

628.43

553.32
779.20

567.18
800.73

566.77
800.30

559.24
789.36

562.79
807.76

561.82
758.64

558.66
789.91

573.09
822.13

575.00
819.39

575.64
821.06

585.22
807.50

567.02
772.51

566.40
775.22

568.97
789.80

553.63
763.94

814.50

834.28

840.72

828.59

852.09

772.53

823.79

860.40

857.07

852.98

826.47

778.96

786.66

808.35

790.48

581.50
488.15

595.96
453.57

595.53
455.46

589.95
451.19

592.02
450.45

595.75
446.60

587.71
448.53

597.78
455.91

602.34
457.08

607.56
457.43

621.72
460.88

603.17
454.04

605.90
454.04

605.40
461.52

594.96
451.04

Nondurable goods......................

540.29

558.55

556.24

553.11

556.92

559.63

556.78

567.18

564.83

569.49

569.98

565.79

560.20

561.59

559.55

Food and kindred products......

506.20
763.01
442.13

521.25
877.90
459.79

515.02
846.30
465.93

514.19
892.80
456.91

522.92
939.08
459.67

524.17
964.09
458.38

525.83
942.42
458.49

535.08
927.25
465.56

528.78
878.12
457.06

534.25
895.85
460.94

528.74
892.16
462.07

520.70
832.26
459.59

509.80
831.66
449.67

513.54
893.89
458.06

512.40
882.00
444.48

334.50
689.19

351.54
690.63

353.02
684.76

350.95
683.57

356.41
687.30

349.30
693.66

351.16
688.22

352.87
699.00

352.31
699.92

352.67
706.20

353.25
705.93

349.31
697.57

352.87
683.10

355.70
687.24

346.45
690.51

531.88
749.06
908.63

551.52
771.38
932.80

549.12
769.54
963.56

543.40
762.78
913.00

547.41
767.44
910.31

550.46
775.36
925.45

549.70
766.64
886.45

562.02
776.77
930.93

558.25
772.82
952.02

564.93
778.04
955.89

564.41
788.67
952.64

555.88
781.28
987.87

557.78
778.74
957.25

565.57
773.53
936.51

553.50
788.64
975.02

Leather and leather products....

517.08
363.15

531.99
381.75

529.98
386.20

529.13
379.13

530.79
383.17

525.50
375.82

528.96
389.12

540.43
390.75

537.37
389.44

539.72
390.10

543.84
382.65

544.16
384.67

543.05
373.64

538.15
375.51

528.26
369.85

TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC UTILITIES.....................

607.20

626.09

627.01

617.78

622.93

634.65

627.71

631.20

638.82

632.56

638.06

632.59

637.18

362.70

643.82

WHOLESALE TRADE...................

558.80

585.20

590.50

576.42

582.12

592.48

581.78

588.67

597.92

593.28

596.71

589.72

590.44

592.04

608.20

274.85

278.89

273.26

276.05

276.62

281.66

Durable goods Durable goods

Lumber and wood products.....
Furniture and fixtures................
Stone, clay, and glass
products.................................
Blast furnaces and basic
steel products.......................
Fabricated metal products.......
Industrial machinery and
equipment.............................
Electronic and other electrical
equipment..............................
Transportation equipment........
Motor vehicles and
equipment............................
Instruments and related
products.................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing...

Apparel and other textile
products.................................

Printing and publishing............
Chemicals and allied products..
Petroleum and coal products....
Rubber and miscellaneous

RETAIL TRADE..............................

263.61

273.39

272.53

270.72

275.13

280.12

277.60

275.90

277.15

FINANCE, INSURANCE,
AND REAL ESTATE...................

529.24

547.04

554.54

539.22

540.47

550.87

539.64

545.47

557.78

549.00

553.05

556.20

567.37

564.12

580.23

464.22

462.92

467.16

464.80

471.72

472.05

476.77

SERVICES......................................

435.86

454.86

455.99

448.18

448.64

456.12

452.05

455.00

p = preliminary.
Note : See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. Dash indicates data not available


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

73

Current Labor Statistics:
17.

Labor Force Data

Diffusion indexes of em ploym ent change, seasonally adjusted

[In percent]
Tim espan and year

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Nov

Oct.

Dec.

Private nonfarm payrolls, 356 industries
Over 1-month span:
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
2001..............................................................

63.2
55.1
55.7
53.7

56.2
59.6
59.3
50.4

59.3
52.8
61.0
55.8

60.2
57.2
54.2
44.6

58.9
58.2
47.7
46.0

57.1
54.2
60.5

55.4
57.1
57.8

58.4
54.4
55.1

54.8
55.2
52.0

55.0
57.9
54.8

58.2
59.9
55.1

56.4
56.8
54.2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Over 3-month span:
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
2001..............................................................

65.3
60.8
61.6
51.7

66.1
57.8
63.3
54.1

64.6
58.5
61.9
48.6

65.7
55.8
56.2
47.9

62.2
58.1
55.1

57.9
57.9
57.9

58.4
59.2
56.4

59.1
59.8
54.1

59.2
59.1
53.3

59.3
61.0
55.7

59.2
60.6
53.3

-

-

57.5
57.2
61.5
-

-

-

-

-

-

Over 6-month span:
1998.............................................................
1999.............................................................
2000.............................................................
2001.............................................................

70.4
59.8
63.5
51.7

67.4
59.8
60.6
49.9

65.0
58.2
62.6

62.5
60.3
63.7

63.6
56.7
61.5

60.5
59.2
55.5

59.2
61.8
56.1

58.6
60.8
58.6

57.9
62.2
54.2

59.6
61.2
54.8

60.6
62.3
51.8

59.9
64.9
54.2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

69.7
61.2
62.5

67.6
60.2
63.0

67.4
58.2
61.8

66.0
60.8
59.5

62.7
61.6
56.8

61.9
62.2
55.7

62.0
61.3
56.5

60.9
63.9
54.2

59.3
63.0
53.1

60.8
61.3
52.2

-

-

-

64.0
60.8
58.4
-

-

-

-

-

-

-

58.8
60.9
-

Over 12-month span:
1998.............................................................
1999.............................................................
2000.............................................................
2001..............................................................

-

Manufacturing payrolls, 139 industries
Over 1-month span:
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
2001..............................................................

57.4
46.9
44.9
37.9

51.5
44.5
56.6
32.4

53.7
43.0
55.5
41.5

53.3
42.3
46.7
30.9

43.8
50.4
41.2
29.4

48.2
39.3
54.8

38.2
51.5
53.7

51.5
39.3
38.6

41.9
45.2
34.6

41.5
46.3
41.5

41.2
53.3
43.8

43.4
46.7
44.1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Over 3-month span:
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
2001.............................................................

59.6
41.2
50.0
28.3

59.6
39.0
54.0
29.4

55.9
38.2
52.9
25.7

50.4
41.8
42.3
25.7

46.7
40.8
43.0

37.9
45.2
48.5

41.5
39.0
48.2

41.5
45.2
33.6

41.9
40.8
28.7

38.2
44.9
30.5

36.8
46.3
39.0

40.8
46.0
35.7

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Over 6-month span:
1998.............................................................
1999.............................................................
2000.............................................................
2001.............................................................

63.2
36.0
51.5
27.6

54.4
38.2
44.5
22.4

50.4
37.5
48.5

40.4
41.2
55.1

44.5
36.8
43.8

40.1
39.7
34.9

37.5
43.0
33.5

36.4
41.5
34.6

34.9
46.0
30.1

40.1
40.4
29.4

37.1
46.3
25.0

34.2
51.5
27.9

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

54.8
38.6
46.3

52.2
34.6
45.2
-

51.8
32.4
41.2

46.7
36.0
37.9

40.4
37.9
33.8

40.1
39.0
31.3

38.2
40.1
31.3

37.5
40.4
31.3

36.4
44.5
27.6

34.6
46.0
23.9

34.2
44.5
-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

35.7
44.9
23.9
-

Over 12-month span:
1998.............................................................
1999.............................................................
2000.............................................................
2001.............................................................

-

-

Dash indicates data not available.

decreasing employment. Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each

NO TE : Figures are the percent of industries with em ploym ent increasing

span are preliminary. S ee the "Definitions" in this section. S ee "Notes on

plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, w here 50
percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and

74

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision,

18.

Annual data: Employment status of the population

[Numbers in thousands]
E m ploym ent status

1995

1994

1993

1992

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2 0 5 ,22 0

2 0 7 ,7 5 3

2 0 9 ,6 9 9

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

192,805

194,838

196,814

198,584

200,591

2 0 3 ,1 3 3

Civilian labor force.......................................

128,105

129,200

131,056

132 ,30 4

133,943

136,297

137,673

139,368

140,863

Labor force participation rate................

6 6.4

66.3

66.6

66.6

66.8

67.1

67.1

67.1

67.2

Em ployed..................................................

118,492

120,259

123,060

124,900

126,708

129,558

131,463

1 33,488

135,208

Employment-population ratio...........

61.5

61.7

62.5

62.9

63.2

63.8

64.1

6 4.3

6 4.5

3,247

3 ,115

3,409

3 ,440

3 ,443

3 ,3 9 9

3 ,378

3,281

3,3 0 5

115,245

117,144

119,651

121,460

123 ,26 4

126,159

128,085

130 ,20 7

131,903
5,6 5 5

9 ,6 1 3

8,940

7,996

7,4 0 4

7,2 3 6

6,739

6,2 1 0

5 ,880

Unem ploym ent rate.............................

7.5

6.9

6.1

5.6

5 .4

4 .9

4 .5

4 .2

4 .0

Not in the labor force...................................

6 4,700

65,6 38

65,7 58

66,280

66,6 47

66,8 37

67,5 47

6 8,3 85

6 8,8 36

19.

Annual data: Employment levels by industry

Industry

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Total em ploym ent................ .................................

108,601

110 ,71 3

114,163

117,191

119,608

122,690

1 25,865

128 ,78 6

1 31,418

Private sector......................................................

89,9 56

91,8 72

95,0 36

97,8 85

100,189

103,133

106,042

108,616

110 ,84 6

Goods-producing...........................................

23,231

23,3 52

23,9 08

24,2 65

2 4 ,4 93

24,9 62

2 5,4 14

25,4 82

2 5 ,6 62

Mining............................................................

635

610

601

581

580

5 96

590

535

538

Construction................................................

4 ,492

4 ,6 6 8

4,9 8 6

5 ,160

5,4 1 8

5,691

6 ,020

6 ,4 0 4

6 ,6 8 7

Manufacturing.............................................

18,104

18,075

18,321

18,524

18,495

18,675

18,805

18,543

18,437

Service-producing.........................................

8 5,370

87,361

90,2 56

92,9 25

95,1 15

9 7,7 27

100,451

103 ,30 4

105 ,75 6

Transportation and public utilities.........

5,718

5,811

5,9 8 4

6 ,132

6,2 5 3

6 ,408

6,611

6,8 2 6

6 ,993

W holesale trade.........................................

5 ,997

5,981

6,162

6 ,3 7 8

6,482

6,6 4 8

6 ,800

6,9 2 4

7 ,0 5 4

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

19,356

19,773

20,5 07

21,1 87

2 1,5 97

2 1 ,9 66

2 2 ,2 9 5

2 2 ,7 88

2 3,1 36

Finance, insurance, and real estate....

6 ,602

6,7 5 7

6 ,8 9 6

6,8 0 6

6,911

7,1 0 9

7,3 8 9

7 ,5 6 9

7,6 1 8

29,0 52

30,1 97

31,5 79

33,1 17

3 4,4 54

36,0 40

3 7,5 33

39,0 27

4 0 ,3 8 4

18,645

18,841

19,128

19,305

19,419

19,557

19,823

20,1 70

2 0,5 72

2 ,969

2,9 1 5

2,870

2 ,822

2,7 5 7

2,6 9 9

2,6 8 6

2 ,6 6 9

2,7 7 7

4 ,4 0 8

4,4 8 8

4,5 7 6

4,6 3 5

4 ,6 0 6

4,5 8 2

4 ,6 1 2

4,6 9 5

4,7 4 6

11,267

11,438

11,682

11,849

12,056

12,276

1 2,525

12,806

13,049

Federal......................................................

Local...........................................................
NOTE:


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

S ee "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchm ark revision.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

75

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

20. Annual data: A verage hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonfarm
payrolls, by industry
In d u s try

199 2

19 9 3

1 99 4

19 9 5

19 9 6

1997

1 99 8

19 9 9

2000

Private sector:

Average weekly hours..............................
Average hourly earnings (In dollars)..........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)........................

34.4
10.57
363 61

34.5
10.83
373.64

34.7
11.12
385.86

11.43
394.34

43.9
14.54
638.31

44.3
14.60
646.78

44.8
14.88
666.62

AA 7
15.30
683.91

38.0
14.15
537.70

38.5
14.38
553.63

38.9
14.73
573.00

oo.y
15.09
587.00

41.0
11.46
469.86

41.4
11.74
486.04

42.0
12.07
506.94

12.37
514.59

38.3
13.43
514.37

39.3
13.55
532.52

39.7
13.78
547.07

14.13
556.72

38.2
11.39
435.10

38.2
11.74
448.47

38.4
12.06
463.10

12.43
476.07

28.8
7.12
205.06

28.8
7.29
209.95

28.9
7.49
216.46

28.8
7.69
221.47

35.8
10.82
387.36

35.8
11.35
406.33

35.8
11.83
423.51

12.32
442.29

32.5
10.54
342.55

32.5
10.78
350.35

32.5
11.04
358.80

32.4
11.39
369.04

34.6
12.28
424.89

34.6
12.78
442.19

34.5
13.24
456.78

34.5
13.74
474.03

45.4
16.15
733.21

43.9
16.91
742.35

43.8
17.09
748.54

44.9
17.14
769.59

39.0
16.04
625.56

38.9
16.61
646.13

39.1
17.18
671.74

39.3
17.86
701.90

41.6
12.77
531.23

42.0
13.17

41.7
13.49
562.53

41.7
13.91
580.05

41.5
14.38
596.77

39.6
14.45

39.7
14.92
592.32

39.5
15.31
604.75

38.7
15.69
607.20

38.5
16.22
624.47

38.3

38.4
13.45
516.48

38.3
14.07
538.88

38.3
14.58
558.41

38.5
15.18
584.43

7.99
230.11

28.9
8.33
240.74

29.0
8.74
253.46

29.0
9.08
263.32

28.9
9.45
273.11

uo.y
12.80
459.52

36.1
13.34
481.57

36.4
14.07
512.15

36.2
14.62
529.24

36.3
15.07
547.04

382.00

32.6
12.28
400.33

32.6
12.84
418.58

32.6
13.36
435.54

32.7
13.88
453.88

Mining:

Average weekly hours..............................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars).....................

45.3
15.62
»u #>v)y

Construction:

Average weekly hours...................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
Manufacturing:

Average weekly hours...............................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
Transportation and public utilities:

Average weekly hours............................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)......................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
Wholesale trade:

Average weekly hours.....................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars).......................
Retail trade:

Average weekly hours............................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars).......................
Finance, insurance, and real estate:

Average weekly hours....................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)...................... .

'

Services:

Average weekly hours..............................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................

76

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

21.

Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group

[June 1989 - 100]

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Percent change

2001

2000

1999

Sept.

Dec.

3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar.

Mar. >001
140.4

141.8

143.3

144.6

146.5

148.0

149.5

150.6

152.5

1.3

4.1

141.9
141.3
143.5
142.5
137.1
141.3

143.3
142.2
145.4
143.4
138.3
142.4

145.0
143.9
147.3
144.7
139.5
143.1

146.3
145.3
148.6
146.1
140.6
144.8

148.4
146.7
150.5
148.6
142.7
146.0

149.9
148.3
151.9
150.1
144.1
147.1

151.5
150.0
153.7
151.8
145.6
148.5

152.5
151.3
154.6
152.8
146.5
150.0

154.4
153.2
156.6
155.3
148.2
152.0

1.3
1.3
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.3

4.0
4.4
4.1
4.5
3.9
4.1

Educational services............................................................

139.0
139.9
140.9
142.3
140.5
141.3
141.3

140.0
140.9
142.4
143.2
141.4
142.2
141.7

142.5
143.6
145.3
146.5
144.3
145.0
145.8

144.9
146.0
147.1
148.0
145.9
146.3
146.5

146.6
147.5
148.4
149.3
147.5
147.7
146.8

148.0
148.7
150.1
151.2
149.0
149.5
149.7

148.8
149.3
151.1
152.4
150.7
151.3
150.6

150.7
151.3
153.0
154.3
152.5
153.2
151.7

1.3
1.2
1.2
1.3
.7
1.6
.6

Public administration3.............................................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................................

140.8
140.5

141.5
141.9

141.2
142.1
144.0
145.1
142.7
143.4
144.6
142.4
143.4

144.4
144.7

145.7
146.6

146.1
148.0

146.9
149.6

148.3
150.7

150.6
152.6

1.3
1.4

4.0
3.6
4.0
4.3
4.5
4.7
3.5
3.4
4.1

Private industry workers.........................................................

140.4
140.5

142.0
141.9

143.3
143.2

144.6
144.5

146.8
146.5

148.5
148.2

149.9
149.8

150.9
150.9

153.0
153.0

1.4
1.4

4.2
4.4

Precision production, craft, and repair occupations........
Machine operators, assem blers, and inspectors............
Transportation and material moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....

142.4
143.0
142.9
143.7
139.6
142.6
136.9
137.2
137.3
131.6
141.0

144.1
144.5
144.1
145.8
142.6
143.7
138.2
138.4
138.4
133.6
142.3

145.6
146.0
145.2
147.7
144.1
145.0
139.4
139.6
139.9
134.4
143.2

146.9
147.3
146.7
149.1
145.3
146.2
140.5
140.6
141.4
135.2
144.4

149.3
149.4
148.4
151.1
148.9
149.0
142.6
142.3
144.0
137.5
146.4

151.1
151.3
150.7
152.7
150.3
150.6
144.1
144.1
145.0
138.6
148.1

152.6
152.9
152.2
154.4
151.2
152.3
145.5
145.8
146.0
139.9
149.4

153.6
154.1
153./
155.3
151.4
153.4
146.4
146.7
146.8
141.1
150.4

155.7
156.5
156.3
157.3
152.3
156.1
148.2
148.3
142.6
152.2
150.0

1.4
1.6
1.7
1.3
.6
1.8
1.2
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.2

4.3
4.8
5.3
4.1
2.3
4.8
3.9
4.5
3.0
3.7
4.0

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

139.5

140.6

141.0

142.6

143.9

145.4

146.6

148.1

151.4

1.3

4.2

149.5

150.7

1.3

4.1

Civilian workers2..........................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w orkers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial...........................
Administrative support, including clerical............................
Blue-collar workers...................................................................
Service occupations..................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.........................................................................
Service-producing.....................................................................
Health services.....................................................................

Excluding sales occupations..............................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w orkers..............................................................
Excluding sales occupations............................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations...........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations................................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...

4

Production and nonsupervisory o ccu p atio n s..................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing...................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................

Manufacturing......................................................................

D urables................................................................................
N ondurables.........................................................................

Excluding sales occupations.......................................

Transportation and public utilities....................................

.

Excluding sales occupations.......................................
Excluding sales occupations.......................................
.
Food stores..................................................................... .

139.3

140.8

141.9

143.1

145.3

146.9

148.4

138.9
138.3
141.7
140.4
137.1
135.6
139.9
141.8
140.1
138.5
139.9
139.6

139.9
139.3
142.7
141.3
138.3
136.9
140.9
143.0
141.3
139.4
141.0
140.4

141.1
140.5
143.9
142.5
139.4
137.9
142.1
144.3
142.5
140.5
142.3
141.5

142.5
141.8
145.5
143.9
140.7
138.7
143.6
145.6
143.8
142.1
144.0
142.8

144.8
144.2
148.1
146.5
142.8
140.8
146.0
148.2
146.2
144.4
146.5
144.9

146.6
145.9
150.1
148.4
144.4
143.2
147.5
150.2
148.2
145.6
148.3
146.0

147.9
147.2
151.3
149.6
145.8
145.1
148.7
151.4
149.3
146.7
149.4
147.5

148.8
148.2
151.9
150.5
146.8
146.7
149.3
151.5
149.7
147.8
150.1
147.7

150.1
154.5
153.0
148.2
148.2
151.3
154.2
152.2
149.1
151.8
150.4
153.8

1.3
1.3
1.7
1.7
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.8
1.7
.9
1.1
1.8

4.1
4.1
4.3
4.4
3.8
5.3
3.6
4.0
4.1
3.3
3.6
3.8

140.9
141.7
142.3
143.8
136.2
139.3
139.7
136.8
143.4
143.3
143.4
138.8
139.8
142.7
142.4
136.6
135.C
134.5

142.8
143.3
144.3
145.5
137.8
140.5
140.8
138.1
144.6
144.8
144.2
141.1
141.8
144.6
144.C
139.1
135.6
135.'

144.1
144.6
145.8
147.0
139.1
140.8
141.8
138.7
145.7
146.1
145.1
142.2
142.6
146.C
145.6
140.C
137.2
137.C

145.3
145.9
147.0
148.3
139.6
142.4
142.3
139.5
146.1
146.C
146.1
143.5
144.2
148.6
147.'!
140."
138.6
138.

147.4
147:7
149.3
150.3
141.8
143.6
143.9
140.4
148.6
148.4
148.2
145.6
146.4
150.C
149.6
143.2
139."
140.1

149.1
149.4
151.0
152.1
143.1
145.1
145.7
141.6
150.9
150.2
151 -C
147.2
148.1
151.6
151.1
144.6
141 .C
142.6

150.6
151.1
152.6
153.9
144.5
146.3
147.4
142.8
153.6
153.2
152.2
148.2
149.6
152.1
152."
146.2
142.2
143.'

151.7
152.2
153.7
155.1
145.3
147.9
148.3
143.2
154.1
154.7
153.4
149.4
150.6
154.'
154.2
146.6
144.'
144.6

154.6
155.8
157.5
147.7
149.6
150.5
145.4
157..
158.2
156.C
151.6
151 .C
152.6
155.
155.
148.
147.,
146.

1.4
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.1
1.5
1.0
2.1
2.3
1.7
1.1
1.3
1.5
.5
1.2
1.4
2.C

4.3
4.7
4.4
4.8
4.2
4.6
4.6
3.6
5.9
6.7
4.8
3.7
4.2
3.4
4.9
3.8
5.4
4.3

S ee footnotes at end of table.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

77

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation & Industrial Relation

21. Continued— Employment Cost Index, com pensation,1by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1999

2000

2001

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar. 2001
Finance, insurance, and real e sta te ...........................

141.5

145.8

147.6

148.3

152.0

153.1

155.2

155.7

157.9

1.4

3.9

Excluding sales occupations................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance......................................
Services............................................
Business services...............................
Health services.........................................
Hospitals............................................
Educational services..............................
Colleges and universities............................

145.6
148.8
141.7
143.5
147.5
140.5
141.2
148.3
149.2

148.8
155.4
144.0
144.6
148.7
141.4
142.1
148.7
149.6

151.0
159.3
144.5
146.1
150.7
142.6
143.0
152.2
152.6

151.6
159.8
145.8
147.6
151.9
144.2
144.6
153.0
153.3

154.2
162.7
149.9
149.4
154.2
145.8
145.8
154.0
154.6

155.5
164.2
151.3
151.2
156.3
147.5
147.5
154.9
155.5

157.4
165.8
154.8
152.9
157.5
149.0
149.2
158.8
158.6

158.4
166.5
155.2
154.1
158.4
150.6
151.1
159.9
159.2

161.0
170.8
157.6
156.5
160.5
152.7
153.5
162.3
162.3

1.8
2.6
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.9

4.5
5.0
5.1
4.8
4.1
4.7
5.3
5.4
4.9

Nonmanufacturing.............................................

140.3

142.0

143.4

144.5

146.7

148.4

150.0

151.1

162.2

1.3

4.4

142.3
143.7
135.2
139.2

144.1
145.3
136.8
140.4

145.6
146.8
138.0
140.7

146.9
148.1
138.7
142.3

149.2
150.2
140.6
143.5

151.0
152.0
142.3
145.1

152.6
153.8
143.9
146.3

153.7
155.1
144.8
147.8

153.1
155.8
157.5
146.9

1.4
1.5
1.5
1.2

4.4
4.9
4.5
4.2

140.5

141.0

143.1

144.6

145.5

145.9

147.8

148.9

150.3

.9

3.3

139.8
138.8
142.6
141.4
138.8

140.2
139.3
142.8
141.3
139.5

142.6
142.0
144.5
143.0
140.9

144.0
143.2
146.1
145.0
142.5

144.9
144.1
147.0
145.9
143.7

145.3
144.5
147.2
146.5
144.2

147.3
146.6
149.2
148.3
145.9

148.3
147.4
150.7
149.4
147.2

149.5
148.4
152.4
150.7
148.6

.8
.7
1.1
.9
1.0

3.2
3.0
3.7
3.3
3.4

Services........................................

140.0

140.5

143.2

144.5

145.2

145.5

148.0

148.9

148.9

.7

3.2

Services excluding schools5......................
Health services..........................................
Hospitals............................................
Educational services...................................
Schools...............................................
Elementary and secondary.......................
Colleges and universities..............................

139.6

140.3

142.6

143.8

145.2

145.8

147.6

148.8

150.1

.9

3.4

141.2
141.7
139.9
140.2
139.6
141.7

142.0
142.7
140.3
140.6
140.0
142.1

144.2
144.8
143.1
143.5
142.9
144.8

145.8
146.3
144.4
144.7
144.1
146.5

147.3
147.9
145.0
145.3
144.5
147.4

147.9
148.4
145.2
145.5
144.7
147.6

150.0
150.7
147.9
148.2
147.3
150.5

151.6
152.0
148.7
149.0
148.1
151.7

152.1
152.2
149.6
149.9
148.5
153.7

.3
.1
.6
.6
.3
1.3

3.3
2.9
3.2
3.2
2.8
4.3

140.8

141.5

142.4

144.4

145.7

146.11

146.9

148.3

150.6

1.6

3.4

White-collar workers...............................
Excluding sales occupations.............................
Blue-collar occupations....................................
Service occupations..........................................
täte and local government w orkers.............................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers................................
Professional specialty and technical..........................
Executive, administrative, and managerial.........
Administrative support, including clerical................
Blue-collar workers.............................................
Workers, by industry division:

Public administration3........................

Cost (cents per hour worked) m easured in the Employment Cost Index consists of
w ages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
S tate and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.

78

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

3 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 This series has the sam e industry and occupational coverage as the Hourly
Earnings index, which w as discontinued in January 1989.
5 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.

22.

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group

Series
Mar.

June

2001

2000

1999

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar. >001
138.4

139.8

141.3

142.5

144.0

145.4

147.0

147.9

149.5

1.1

3.8

140.1
140.1
141.6
140.0
134.5
138.3

141.6
141.0
143.8
140.9
135.8
139.4

143.3
142.6
145.9
142.3
137.0
140.1

144.6
144.0
147.2
143.5
137.9
141.7

146.2
144.9
148.6
145.5
139.2
143.0

147.6
146.4
149.9
146.9
140.6
144.0

149.2
148.3
151.6
148.5
142.0
145.7

150.2
149.6
152.4
149.6
142.9
147.1

151.7
151.1
154.0
151.6
144.7
148.6

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.3
1.0

3.8
4.3
3.6
4.2
4.0
3.9

Health services.....................................................................
Hospitals..............................................................................
Educational services............................................................

136.3
137.9
139.2
141.5
138.8
138.1
140.2

137.4
139.0
140.7
142.3
139.7
138.8
140.6

138.6
140.2
142.3
144.1
140.9
140.1
143.7

139.7
141.5
143.5
145.5
142.5
141.6
144.7

141.3
142.9
145.0
146.6
143.8
142.6
145.3

143.0
144.4
146.3
147.9
145.3
143.8
145.6

144.3
145.7
148.0
149.9
146.7
145.6
148.9

145.3
146.5
148.9
151.0
148.3
147.3
149.6

147.0
148.5
150.5
152.6
149.8
148.8
150.5

1.2
1.4
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
.6

4.0
3.9
3.8
4.1
4.2
4.3
3.6

Public administration2.............................................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................................

136.9
138.4

137.8
139.9

139.5
141.5

141.5
142.6

142.5
144.2

142.9
145.5

144.6
147.2

146.1
148.1

147.6
149.7

1.0
1.1

3.6
3.8

Private industry w orkers.........................................................

138.1
138.2

139.7
139.6

141.0
140.8

142.2
142.0

143.9
143.5

145.4
145.1

146.8
146.5

147.7
147.6

149.4
149.5

1.2
1.3

3.8
4.2

White-collar workers..............................................................
Excluding sales occupations............................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations...........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations................................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...
Blue-collar workers.................................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations.......
Machine operators, assem blers, and inspectors............
Transportation and material moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....

140.3
141.0
140.7
141.9
137.3
140.4
134.3
134.3
135.7
129.1
137.3

142.1
142.5
141.8
144.3
140.5
141.4
135.6
135.6
136.7
131.0
138.3

143.5
143.9
142.6
146.4
142.1
142.7
136.8
136.7
138.3
131.9
139.4

144.8
145.2
144.1
147.6
143.3
143.8
137.7
137.5
139.5
132.7
140.4

146.6
146.7
145.1
149.2
146.7
146.0
139.1
138.9
140.7
134.1
141.8

148.3
148.5
147.3
150.7
147.9
147.5
140.5
140.6
141.6
135.2
143.6

149.7
149.9
148.6
152.3
149.0
149.1
141.9
142.0
142.9
136.5
145.0

150.6
151.1
150.2
153.0
148.7
150.1
142.8
142.8
143.7
137.6
146.2

152.3
153.0
152.1
154.7
149.2
152.3
144.6
144.6
145.6
139.5
148.0

1.1
1.3
1.3
1.1
.3
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
.5

3.9
4.3
4.8
3.7
1.7
4.3
4.0
4.1
3.5
4.0
4.4

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

136.7

137.8

138.0

139.6

141.0

142.5

143.5

144.9

146.4

1.0

3.8

136.8

138.2

139.3

140.4

142.1

143.7

145.0

146.0

147.7

1.2

3.9

136.3
135.5
139.4
137.8
134.3
130.7
137.9
140.1
138.3
136.3
137.9
138.0

137.3
136.6
140.5
138.8
135.4
131.9
139.0
141.4
139.6
137.2
139.1
138.7

138.5
137.8
141.7
140.1
136.6
133.0
140.2
142.7
140.8
138.4
140.4
139.7

139.7
138.9
143.0
141.3
137.6
133.6
141.5
144.C
142.0
139.7
141.8
140.9

141.3
140.5
145.0
143.2
139.0
136.0
142.9
145.8
143.7
140.8
143.0
142.7

143.0
142.1
146.8
144.9
140.5
138.0
144.4
147.7
145.6
142.0
144.7
143.9

144.3
143.4
147.9
146.0
142.0
139.4
145.7
148.7
146.6
143.4
146.1
145.0

145.2
144.6
148.7
147.2
143.1
140.7
146.5
149.2
147.5
144.6
147.3
145.4

147.0
146.3
150.5
148.9
144.7
142.1
148.5
151.1
149.9
146.4
149.0
147.5

1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.4

4.0
4.1
3.8
4.0
4.1
4.5
3.9
3.6
3.8
4.0
4.2
3.4

138.9
139.8
140.3
142.0
134.4
136.7
135.4
132.3
139.2
139.4
138.S
137.7
139.5
140.7
141 .S
136.2
133.7
131.5

140.8
141.4
142.3
143.7
135.9
137.8
136.8
133.7
140.8
141.1
140.C
139.8
141.1
142.C
143.C
138.:
134.:
132.8

142.1
142.6
143.8
145.1
137.0
138.0
137.5
134.-:
141.5
141.9
140.9
140.7
141.8
144.:
144.8
138.9
135.8
133.9

143.3
143.8
145.0
146.4
137.8
139.6
137.9
134.9
141.6
142.2
141.:
142.C
143.:
146.8
146.^
139.6
136.'
134.9

145.0
145.3
146.9
147.8
139.1
141.1
138.5
134.9
143.2
143.4
143.C
143.8
145.2
147.4
147.9
142.1
137.8
136."

146.5
146.9
148.5
149.6
140.3
142.5
140.0
136.2
144.9
145.C
144.7
145.5
146.8
149.4
149.7
143.5
138.5
139.5

147.9
148.3
150.0
151.2
141.6
143.5
141.3
137.4
146.4
146.7
145.9
146.4
148.2
149.8
151.:
144.8
139.'
140.2

148.9
149.4
150.9
152.3
142.2
144.8
142.3
138.8
147.1
147.4
146.8
147.4
149.C
151.8
153.2
145.2
142.2
141.8

150.5
151.3
152.5
154.3
144.3
146.1
143.7
139.8
148.7
149.2
148.1
148.4
150.7
151.8
154.9
146.S
143.8
143.:

1.1
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.5
.9
1.0
.9
1.1
1.2
1.C
.7
1.1
.C
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.2

3.8
4.1
3.8
4.4
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.6
3.8
4.0
3.6
3.2
3.8
2.8
4.7
3.4
4.4
4.8

Civilian workers1..........................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w orkers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial...........................
Administrative support, including clerical............................
Blue-collar workers...................................................................
Service occupations..................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.........................................................................
Service-producing.....................................................................

Excluding sales occupations..............................................
Workers, by occupational group:

Production and nonsupervisory occupations3..................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing...................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................

Manufacturing......................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
D urables................................................................................
N ondurables.........................................................................
Service-producing...................................................................
Excluding sales occupations.......................................

Transportation and public utilities....................................

Excluding sales occupations.......................................

Food sto res.....................................................................
S ee footnotes at end of table.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

79

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation & Industrial Relations

22. Continued— Employment Cost Index, w ages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1999

2000

2001

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

P ercent change
3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar. 2001
Finance, insurance, and real esta te .................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance..........................................................
Services....................................................................
Business services.....................................................
Health services..........................................................
Hospitals.......................................................................
Educational services.........................................................
Colleges and universities...............................................

137.2
141.0
146.1
137.4
142.2
145.4
138.7
137.6
143.9
144.1

142.4
144.8
154.5
139.8
143.2
146.3
139.6
138.3
144.2
144.4

144.5
147.5
159.2
140.2
144.5
148.5
140.6
139.3
147.5
147.2

145.2
148.0
159.6
141.5
146.0
149.8
142.2
140.9
148.2
147.9

148.7
150.2
162.0
145.5
147.4
152.0
143.5
141.8
148.9
148.9

149.5
151.5
163.3
146.6
149.1
154.1
145.3
143.3
149.6
149.4

151.7
153.3
165.0
150.7
150.6
155.3
146.6
144.9
153.4
152.5

151.7
154.1
165.7
150.8
151.8
156.0
148.1
146.8
154.3
152.9

153.9
156.6
169.4
152.4
153.8
158.2
149.8
148.5
155.4
154.1

1.5
1.6
2.2
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.1
1.2
.7
.8

3.5
4.3
4.6
4.7
4.3
4.1
4.4
4.7
4.4
3.5

Nonmanufacturing................................................................
White-collar workers..........................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Blue-collar occupations.....................................................
Service occupations..........................................................

137.9
140.1
141.6
132.4
136.5

139.7
142.0
143.2
134.0
137.7

141.0
143.5
144.6
135.1
137.9

142.1
144.7
145.9
135.8
139.5

143.9
146.5
147.4
137.4
140.9

145.5
148.2
149.1
138.9
142.4

146.9
149.6
150.7
140.3
143.4

147.9
150.6
151.9
140.9
144.7

149.5
152.3
153.9
142.8
146.0

1.1
1.1
1.3
1.2
.9

3.9
4.0
4.4
3.9
3.6

State and local government workers..................................

139.0

139.6

142.2

143.5

144.3

144.7

147.2

148.3

150.2

.7

3.5

138.9
138.9
140.1
137.4
136.9

139.3
139.4
140.5
137.5
137.6

142.1
142.5
142.7
139.6
139.4

143.4
143.6
144.3
141.7
140.7

144.1
144.3
144.9
142.4
141.5

144.5
144.7
145.1
143.0
142.1

147.1
147.4
147.3
145.0
143.9

148.0
148.2
148.8
146.2
145.1

149.0
149.1
150.1
147.0
146.0

.7
.6
.9
.5
.6

3.4
3.3
3.6
3.2
3.2

139.5

139.9

142.9

144.0

144.6

144.9

147.9

148.7

149.5

.5

3.4

139.0
139.7
139.7
139.5
139.6
139.5
139.6

139.6
140.4
140.6
139.8
140.0
139.9
139.8

142.1
142.8
142.8
142.9
143.1
143.1
142.6

143.2
144.2
144.1
144.0
144.2
144.1
144.4

144.3
145.3
145.3
144.5
144.7
144.5
144.9

144.8
145.7
145.6
144.8
144.9
144.6
145.6

146.7
147.7
147.7
148.0
148.1
147.9
148.3

147.9
149.3
149.2
148.7
148.9
148.5
149.5

149.1
149.9
149.5
149.5
149.7
149.0
151.4

.8
.4
.2
.5
.5
.3
1.3

3.3
3.2
2.9
3.5
3.5
3.1
4.5

136.9

137.8

139.5

141.5

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers...............................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, administrative, and managerial.........................
Administrative support, including clerical...........................
Blue-collar workers..................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Services..............................................................................
Services excluding schools4...........................................
Health services.............................................................
Hospitals...........................................................................
Educational services..........................................................
Schools.....................................................................
Elementary and secondary.........................................
Colleges and universities............................................
Public administration2.......................................................

Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.

23.

142.5
142.9
144.6
146.1
147.6
1.0
3.6
This series has the sam e industry and occupational coverage as the Hourly
Earnings index, which w as discontinued in January 1989.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.

Employment Cost Index, beneiits, private industry workers by occupation and industry group

[June 1989 = 100]
1999

2000

2001

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

Percent change
3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar. 2001
Private industry workers.....................................................

145.8

147.3

148.6

150.2

153.8

155.7

157.5

158.6

161.5

1.8

5.0

White-collar workers.......................................................
Blue-collar workers.............................................

147.9
142.2

149.4
143.6

151.0
144.8

152.5
146.2

156.3
150.0

158.5
151.6

160.4
153.1

161.5
154.1

165.2
155.7

2.3
1.0

5.7
3.8

Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing.......................................................
Service-producing.......................................................
Manufacturing................................................................
Nonmanufacturing..........................................................

144.3
146.1
143.6
146.3

145.2
147.9
144.5
148.0

146.3
149.4
145.7
149.4

148.2
150.7
147.8
150.7

152.3
154.0
152.3
154.0

154.2
156.0
153.9
156.1

155.7
157.9
154.9
158.1

156.2
159.4
154.8
159.7

158.5
162.6
157.1
162.9

1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0

4.1
5.6
3.2
5.8

Workers, by occupational group:

80

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

24.

Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers by bargaining status, region, and area size

[June 1989 = 100]
2000

1999

2001

Series
Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

P ercent change
3

12

m onths

m onths

ended

ended

Mar. 2001
C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o rk e rs , by b a rg ain in g s ta tu s 1

Union................................................................................................
Goods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................

Nonunion.........................................................................................
Goods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................

138.0

139.0

140.2

141.2

143.0

144.4

146.1

146.9

147.9

0 .7

136.8

138.2

139.2

140.8

143.3

144.8

146.8

147.3

147.9

.4

3 .4
3.2

139.2

139.7

141.0

141.4

142.5

143.9

145.2

146.4

147.6

.8

3.6

137.0

138.1

139.1

141.0

144.5

145.4

147.1

147.4

1,479.0

.3

2 .4

138.1

139.2

140.3

140.8

141.7

143.4

145.0

146.2

147.3

.8

4 .0

140.8

142.5

143.8

145.2

147.4

149.1

150.6

151.6

153.8

1.5

4 .3

139.7

140.5

141.8

143.1

145.4

147.2

148.4

149.3

151.6

1.5

4 .3

141.1

143.0

144.4

145.7

148.0

149.6

151.2

152.3

154.4

1.4

4 .3

140.7

141.7

143.0

144.4

146.5

148.2

149.2

149.9

152.4

1.7

4 .0

140.6

142.4

143.8

145.1

147.4

149.1

150.7

151.8

153.9

1.4

4 .4

W o rk e rs, by re g io n 1

Northeast........................................................................................
South...............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)...............................................
W est................................................................................................

140.5

141.5

143.2

144.3

146.3

147.6

149.3

150.3

151.6

.9

4.2

139.1

140.7

141.8

143.0

145.0

146.7

147.6

148.6

151.1

1.7

4 .2

141.7

143.6

145.0

146.3

148.9

150.7

152.2

153.3

154.8

1.0

3 .9

140.3

142.1

143.3

144.7

147.0

148.8

150.8

151.8

154.3

1.6

4 .6

140.4

142.0

143.3

144.7

146.9

148.6

150.1

151.0

153.1

1.4

4 .2

140.5

141.8

143.1

143.6

146.0

147.7

148.8

150.3

152.1

1.2

4.2

W o rk e rs, by area s iz e 1

Metropolitan are a s.........................................................................
Other are a s....................................................................................
W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o rk e rs , by b a rg ain in g s ta tu s 1

Union................................................................................................
Goods-producing........................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................

Nonunion.........................................................................................
Goods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Nonmanufacturing.....................................................................

133.6

134.7

135.7

136.5

137.2

138.5

140.0

141.2

142.1

.6

3 .6

132.3

133.8

134.9

136.1

137.2

138.4

140.2

141.3

142.4

.8

3.8

135.4

135.8

136.8

137.2

137.6

138.9

140.1

141.5

142.2

.5

3.3

133.6

134.7

135.8

137.5

138.8

139.7

141.4

142.6

143.9

.9

3 .7

133.7

134.6

135.6

135.9

136.4

137.8

139.2

140.4

141.1

.5

3 .4

139.0

140.7

142.0

143.3

145.1

146.7

148.1

149.0

150.8

1.2

3 .9

137.8

138.8

140.0

141.1

142.9

144.7

145.8

146.8

146.8

1.4

4.1
3 .8

139.3

141.3

142.6

143.9

145.8

147.3

148.7

149.6

151.4

1.2

139.4

140.5

141.7

142.9

144.4

146.1

147.2

148.0

150.1

1.4

3.9

138.6

140.5

141.8

143.0

145.0

146.6

148.0

148.9

150.7

1.2

3 .9

3 .5

W o rk e rs, by re g io n 1

Northeast........................................................................................
South...............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)...............................................

137.1

138.2

139.9

140.9

142.3

143.7

145.3

146.0

147.3

.9

137.9

139.4

140.2

141.5

143.0

144.6

145.3

146.3

148.3

1.4

3.7

138.9

141.0

142.4

143.6

145.3

147.1

148.6

149.6

150.9

.9

3 .9

138.2

140.2

141.3

142.6

144.7

146.3

148.2

149.2

151.3

1.4

4 .6

W o rk e rs, by a rea s ize 1

Metropolitan are a s........................................................................
Other a re a s ....................................................................................

138.3

139.9

141.2

142.5

144.1

145.7

147.1

148.0

149.8

1.2

4 .0

137.1

138.4

139.8

140.2

142.2

143.7

144.7

146.0

147.4

1.0

3.7

1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the

M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w

Technical Note, "Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost Index," May 1982.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

81

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation & Industrial Relations

25. Percent of full-time employees participating in employer-provided benefit plans, and in selected features within plans,
medium and large private establishments, selected years, 1980-97
Item
Scope of survey (in 000's)..........
Number of employees (in 000's):
With medical care.....................
With life insurance....................
With defined benefit plan.........

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

21,352

21,043

21,013

21,303

31,059

32,428

31,163

28,728

33,374

38,409

20,711

20,412

20,383

20,238

27,953

29,834

25,865

23,519

25,546

29,340

20,496

20,201

20,172

20,451

28,574

30,482

29,293

26,175

29,078

33,495

17,936

17,676

17,231

16,190

19,567

20,430

18,386

16,015

17,417

19,202

Time-off plans

Participants with:
Paid lunch time..........................................
Average minutes per day........................
Paid rest time..............................................
Average minutes per day........................
Paid funeral leave......................................
Average days per occurrence.................
Paid holidays..............................................
average oays per year............................
Paid personal leave....................................
Average days per year............................
Paid vacations............................................

10

9

9

10

11

10

8

9

-

25

26

27

29

26

30

29

75

76

73

72

72

71

67

68

-

25

26

26

26

26

28

26

-

-

88

85

84

80

83

80

81

3.2

3.2

3.3

3.3

3.0

3.3

3.7

99

99

99

99

96

97

92

91

89

89

10.1

10.0

9.8

10.0

9.4

9.2

10.2

9.4

9.1

9.3

20

24

23

25

24

22

21

21

22

20

-

3.8

3.6

3.7

3.3

3.1

3.3

3.1

3.3

3.5

100

99

99

100

98

97

96

97

96

95

62

67

67

70

69

68

67

65

58

56

-

-

-

-

33

37

37

60

16

18

26

53

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

84

93

Participants in medical care plans..............
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care.....................................

97

97

97

95

90

92

83

82

77

76

-

46

66

76

75

81

86

78

85

Extended care facilities............................
Physical exam..........................................

58

62

62

70

79

80

80

82

73

78

8

18

28

28

30

42

56

63

Paid sick leave 1....................... .................
Unpaid maternity leave.............................
Unpaid paternity leave...............................
Unpaid family le a v e ...................................
Insurance plans

Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage........................................
Average monthly contribution............
Family coverage....................................
average mommy coniriuuuon............

26

27

36

43

44

47

51

61

67

69

-

-

$11.93

$12.80

$19.29

$25.31

$26.60

$31.55

$33.92

$39.14

46

51

58

63

64

66

69

76

78

80

-

-

$35.93

$41.40

$60.07

$72.10

$96.97

$107.42

$118.33

$130.07

96

96

96

96

92

94

94

91

87

87

69

72

74

72

78

71

71

76

77

74

-

-

-

10

8

7

6

5

7

6

64

64

59

49

42

44

41

37

33

40

43

47

48

42

45

40

41

42

43

54

51

51

49

46

43

45

44

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

53

55

Participants in defined Denetit pension plans...

84

84

82

76

63

63

59

56

52

50

Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement prior to age 65................. .
Early retirement available...............................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years........
Terminal earnings formula.............................

55
98
-

58

63

64

59

62

55

52

52

52

97

97

98

98

97

98

95

96

95

-

47

35

26

22

7

6

4

10

53

52

54

57

55

64

56

61

58

56

Benefit coordinated with Social Security......

45

45

56

62

62

63

54

48

51

49

Participants in defined contribution plans..........
Participants in plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements....................................................

-

-

-

60

45

48

48

49

55

57

-

-

-

33

36

41

44

43

54

55

_

_

_

2

5

9

10

12

12

13

-

-

-

5

12

23

36

52

38

32

-

-

-

_

_

5

7

Participants in life insurance plans.....................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance........................................................
Survivor income benefits.................................
Retiree protection available.............................
Participants in long-term disability
insurance plans.................................................
Participants in sickness and accident
insurance plans..................................................
Participants in short-term disability plans ' ........
Retirement plans

Other benefits

Employees eligible for:
Flexible benefits plans...................
Reimbursement accounts2..........
Premium conversion plans............

accident insurance) were changed for the 1995 survey. Paid sick leave now includes only
plans that specify either a maximum number of days per year or unlimited days. Shortterms disability now includes all insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans available
on a per-disabllity basis, as well as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as
sick leave. Sickness and accident insurance, reported in years prior to this survey, included
only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans providing per-disability bene-

82

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

_

-

_

2 Prior to 1995, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans, which
specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan premiums with pretax
dollars. Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of flexible benefit plans were
tabulated separately.
Note : Dash Indicates data not available.

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

26. P e rc e n t o f fu ll-tim e e m p lo y e e s p a rtic ip a tin g in e m p lo y e r -p ro v id e d b e n e fit plans, a n d in s e le c te d fe a tu re s
within plans, sm all p riv a te estab lish m en ts a n d S tate a n d lo c a l g o v e rn m e n ts , 1987, 1990, 1992, 1994, a n d 1996
State and local governments

Small private establishments

Item

1994

1992

1990

1987

1996

1994

1992

1990

32,466

34,360

35,910

39,816

10,321

12,972

12,466

12,907

22,402
20,778
6,493

24,396
21,990
7,559

23,536
21,955
5,480

25,599
24,635
5,883

9,599
8,773
9,599

12,064
11,415
11,675

11,219
11,095
10,845

11,192
11,194
11,708

8
37
48
27
47
2.9
84

9
37
49
26
50
3.0
82

-

-

50
3.1
82

51
3.0
80

17
34
58
29
56
3.7
81

11
36
56
29
63
3.7
74

10
34
53
29
65
3.7
75

62
3.7
73

9.2
12
2.6
88

7.5
13
2.6
88

11.5
38
3.0
66

50

10.9
38
2.7
72
97

14.2
38
2.9
67

53

7.6
14
3.0
86
50

13.6
39
2.9
67

Paid sick leave2.............................................

9.5
11
2.8
88
47

95

95

94

Unpaid leave...................................................
Unpaid paternity leave....................................
Unpaid family leave.........................................

17
8
-

18

-

-

7

-

-

-

47

48

57
30
-

51
33
-

59
44
-

93

69

71

66

64

93

93

90

87

79
83
26

80
84
28

_

-

-

-

76
78
36

82
79
36

87
84
47

84
81
55

Scope of survey (in 000's).................................
Number of employees (in 000's):
With medical care..........................................
With life Insurance..........................................
With defined benefit plan................................
Time-off plans
Participants with:
Paid lunch time................................................
Average minutes per day..............................
Paid rest time..................................................
Average minutes per day..............................
Paid funeral leave...........................................
Average days per occurrence.......................
Paid holidays...................................................
Average days per year1................................
Paid personal leave........................................
Average days per year.................................
Paid vacations.................................................

Insurance plans
Participants In medical care plans....................
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care.........................................
Extended care facilities................................
Physical exam..............................................

-

-

”

-

-

"

Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage...............................................
Average monthly contribution....................
Family coverage...........................................
Average monthly contribution.....................
Participants in life insurance plans...................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance....................................................
Survivor income benefits...............................
Retiree protection available..........................
Participants in long-term disability
insurance plans.............................................
Participants in sickness and accident
insurance plans..............................................

42
$25.13
67
$109.34

47
$36.51
73
$150.54

52
$40.97
76
$159.63

52
$42.63
75
$181.53

35
$15.74
71
$71.89

38
$25.53
65

43
$28.97
72

$117.59

$139.23

47
$30.20
71
$149.70

64

64

61

62

85

88

89

87

78
1
19

76
1
25

79
2
20

77
1
13

67
1
55

67
1
45

74
1
46

64
2
46

19

23

20

22

31

27

28

30

6

26

26

14

21

22

21

29

Participants in short-term disability plans2.......
Retirement plans
participants in aetineo Denent pension pians..
Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement prior to age 65................
Early retirement available............................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years......
Terminal earnings formula...........................
Benefit coordinated with Social Security......
Participants in defined contriDution plans........
Participants In plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements................................................
Other benefits
Employees eligible for:
Flexible benefits plans...................................
Reimbursement accounts 3...........................
Premium conversion plans ..........................

22

15

15

93

90

87

91

50
95
4
54
46

-

47
92

-

-

-

53
44

92
90
33
100
18

89
88
16
100
8

92
89
10
100
10

92
87
13
99
49

31

33

34

38

9

9

9

9

17

24

23

28

28

45

45

24

1

2
14

3
19

4
12
7

5
5

5
31

5
50

5
64

20
54
95
7
58
49

8

1 Methods used to calculate the average number of paid holidays were revised
in 1994 to count partial days more precisely. Average holidays for 1994 are
not comparable with those reported in 1990 and 1992.
2 The definitions for paid sick leave and short-term disability (previously
sickness and accident insurance) were changed for the 1996 survey. Paid sick
leave now includes only plans that specify either a maximum number of days
per year or unlimited days. Short-term disability now includes all insured, selfinsured, and State-mandated plans available on a per-disability basis, as well
as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as

-

I

-

sick leave. Sickness and accident insurance, reported in years prior to this
survey, included only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans
providing per-disability benefits at less than full pay.
3 Prior to 1996, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans,
which specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan
premiums with pretax dollars. Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of
flexible benefit plans were tabulated separately.

Note: Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

83

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation & Industrial Relations

27. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
Annual totals

1999

1999

Dec.

Measure
2000

2000
Jan.p

Feb.p

Mar.p

Apr.p

Mayp

Junep

Julyp

Aug.p

1

2

6

2

5

3

6

5

2

4

7

4

8

6

8

10

Sept.p

Oct.p

Nov.p

Dec.p

7

0

2

12

3

3

Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period...............................

17

39

In effect during period..........................

21

40

0
1

0
1

Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in thousands)....

73

394

.0

.0

17.0

5.7

26.7

136.9

11.4

7.2

99.2

17.8

60.3

.0

8.7

In effect during period (in thousands).

80

397

3.0

3.0

20.0

25.7

29.7

141.3

150.8

146.9

237.2

167.8

211.6

4.5

10.3

Days idle:
Number (in thousands)........................

1,995

20,419

63.0

60.0

298.0

327.6

272.2

3,095.3

3,134.0

2,804.4

4,186.6

3,029.3

3,088.6

64.5

58.9

Percent of estimated working time1....

.01

.06

Ô

(2)

.01

.01

.01

.10

.10

.10

.13

.11

.11

<2)

<2)

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' m easures of strike idleness," M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1968, pp. 54-56.
2 Less than 0.005.
p = preliminary.

84

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

28.

C onsum er Price In dexes for All Urban Consum ers a n d for Urban W a g e Earners a n d C lerica l Workers: U.S. city a v e ra g e ,
b y e x p en d itu re c a te g o ry a n d c o m m o d ity or service group

[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
2001

2001

Annual average
Series
1999

2000

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Oct.

Sept.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X
FOR A LL URBAN CO NSUM ERS

All items.....................................................
All Items (1967- 100)...................................
Food and beverages....................................
Food........................................................
Food at home..........................................
Cereals and bakery products.....................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs.....................
Fruits and vegetables...............................
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage
materials.............................................
Other foods at home................................
Sugar and sweets..................................
Fats and oils........................................
Other foods..........................................
Other miscellaneous foods1,2.................
Food away from home’...............................
Other food away from home1,2...................
Alcoholic beverages...................................
Housing.....................................................
Shelter...................................................
Rent of primary residence.........................
Lodging away from home.........................
Owners' equivalent rent of primary residence3
Tenants' and household Insurance1,2...........
Fuels and utilities....................................
Fuels...................................................
Fuel oil and other fuels..........................
Gas (piped) and electricity......................
Household furnishings and operations.........
Apparel....................................................
Men's and boys' apparel...........................
Infants’and toddlers' apparel1...................
Transportation............................................
New and used motor vehicles2...................
Used cars and trucks1............................
Gasoline (all types)................................
Motor vehicle maintenance and repair.........
Public transportation..................................
Medical care..............................................
Medical care commodities...........................
Medical care services................................
Professional services...............................
.12
Education and communication2.....................
Educational books and supplies................
Tuition, other school fees, and child care....
Information and information processing1,2....
Telephone services1,2.........................
Information and information processing
other than telephone services1,4...........
Personal computers and peripheral
equipment1,2................................
Other goods and services.............................

Personal care services1...........................

166.6
499.0
164.6
164.1
164.2
185.0
147.9
159.6
203.1

172.2
515.8
168.4
167.8
167.9
188.3
154.5
160.7
204.6

171.3
513.2
167.2
166.6
166.5
187.2
152.9
160.6
201.6

171.5
513.6
167.8
167.3
167.5
188.6
153.9
159.6
204.3

172.4
516.5
167.9
167.3
167.3
187.7
154.9
159.5
199.9

172.8
517.5
168.7
168.1
168.3
189.6
155.8
160.5
201.0

172.8
517.6
169.2
168.7
168.9
189.9
156.8
161.0
202.5

173.7
520.3
169.4
168.9
169.0
188.6
156.9
161.6
204.6

174.0
521.2
169.6
169.1
169.1
190.1
156.8
161.9
206.2

174.1
521.5
169.5
168.9
168.8
189.0
155.5
161.4
207.3

174.0
521.1
170.5
170.0
170.2
190.7
156.6
161.5
215.1

175.1
524.5
171.4
170.9
171.3
191.1
158.0
163.6
212.6

175.8
526.7
171.8
171.3
171.8
191.9
159.5
163.6
211.5

176.2
528.0
172.2
171.7
172.0
191.9
160.1
163.2
211.5

176.9
529.9
172.4
171.9
172.2
192.5
160.7
163.4
213.3

134.3
153.5
152.3
148.3
168.9
104.9
165.1
105.2
169.7
163.9
187.3
177.5
112.3
192.9
101.3
128.8
113.5
91.4
120.9
126.7
131.3
131.1
123.3
129.0
125.7
144.4
140.5
100.1
142.9
152.0
100.7
100.1
100.5
171.9
197.7
250.6
230.7
255.1
229.2
299.5
102.1
100.7
101.2
107.0
261.7
308.4
96.0
95.5
100.1

137.8
155.6
154.0
147.4
172.2
107.5
169.0
109.0
174.7
169.6
193.4
183.9
117.5
198.7
103.7
137.9
122.8
129.7
128.0
128.2
129.6
129.7
121.5
130.6
123.8
153.3
149.1
100.8
142.8
155.8
129.3
128.6
101.5
177.3
209.6
260.8
238.1
266.0
137.7
317.3
103.3
101.0
102.5
112.5
279.9
324.0
93.6
92.8
98.5

137.6
154.0
152.4
144.8
170.7
105.2
168.1
108.0
173.6
167.9
192.3
182.3
119.4
197.2
103.1
131.7
116.1
123.7
121.0
128.2
133.3
131.6
126.7
132.3
126.7
152.9
148.7
100.8
143.5
154.0
128.7
127.9
101.0
175.9
209.2
258.8
237.0
263.9
236.6
312.7
102.9
100.3
101.8
110.7
276.7
318.7
93.8
93.1
98.6

137.3
155.4
153.7
147.0
172.1
106.4
168.3
108.1
173.8
168.1
192.4
182.7
117.5
197.6
103.8
132.4
116.8
121.6
122.0
128.1
132.2
132.6
124.4
131.7
126.1
153.1
148.8
101.0
143.3
155.4
128.3
127.6
101.1
176.3
210.4
259.4
237.5
264.4
237.1
313.5
103.1
101.3
101.8
110.9
276.8
319.2
93.7
93.0
98.5

137.5
156.2
154.0
146.6
173.4
108.4
168.6
108.1
174.4
169.6
193.3
183.2
120.5
198.2
103.9
138.9
124.0
120.9
130.2
128.1
128.3
129.4
119.2
130.5
123.9
155.7
151.4
100.8
142.9
155.7
139.0
138.3
101.2
176.8
212.6
260.5
238.2
265.6
237.9
315.6
103.4
101.5
101.5
111.5
277.5
320.9
92.6
91.8
97.2

138.5
156.6
154.1
148.1
173.5
108.8
169.1
108.7
175.2
170.6
194.1
183.9
122.8
198.6
104.2
141.3
126.5
120.8
133.0
128.6
124.5
126.4
113.9
128.1
120.3
155.0
150.6
100.6
142.5
155.3
136.1
135.4
101.5
177.2
213.7
261.4
238.6
266.7
238.3
318.1
103.7
101.3
102.0
111.8
278.1
321.7
93.3
92.5
98.2

138.2
156.9
154.6
148.9
173.7
109.5
169.5
109.3
175.6
170.9
194.7
184.6
123.0
199.2
104.0
140.9
125.9
120.8
132.4
128.6
125.3
126.8
115.6
126.7
120.7
153.2
148.6
100.4
141.9
155.2
128.4
127.7
101.5
178.2
215.7
262.6
239.2
268.0
238.9
321.3
103.9
101.6
102.8
113.0
280.2
325.4
93.7
93.0
98.9

138.0
156.7
154.6
148.7
173.4
107.7
170.0
110.0
175.5
171.4
194.6
185.3
118.1
199.9
104.2
143.8
129.1
133.7
134.8
129.0
130.4
129.1
124.2
127.4
124.9
154.7
150.4
100.4
141.4
156.2
135.2
134.3
101.7
178.7
213.0
263.1
239.4
268.7
239.3
322.5
103.8
101.5
102.9
114.9
284.8
330.8
92.1
91.3
97.0

137.4
155.8
153.9
149.7
172.0
106.8
170.3
110.5
175.9
171.7
195.2
186.1
118.5
200.5
104.2
143.1
128.3
137.6
133.6
128.7
132.8
130.4
127.9
130.8
125.3
154.4
150.4
100.8
141.6
157.9
133.1
132.3
101.7
179.4
208.0
263.7
239.6
269.4
239.7
323.6
103.8
101.0
103.6
115.3
285.2
332.1
93.1
92.3
98.3

137.9
156.0
153.0
146.5
173.3
110.0
170.4
111.0
176.4
171.6
195.2
186.8
113.9
201.2
104.5
142.7
127.7
140.3
132.7
128.9
131.8
131.3
124.8
130.7
125.4
155.2
151.1
101.5
142.7
159.3
133.0
132.2
102.5
179.9
209.1
264.1
240.0
269.8
239.8
324.7
103.7
100.9
103.2
115.4
284.8
332.5
92.3
91.5
97.5

136.7
156.3
153.5
150.2
172.7
108.9
170.8
111.1
176.5
171.9
195.1
187.6
108.8
201.8
104.7
145.3
130.6
144.9
135.6
128.6
127.8
128.0
119.7
128.2
123.8
154.4
150.3
102.1
143.6
160.2
127.8
127.0
103.1
179.9
209.5
264.8
241.1
270.4
240.3
325.3
103.7
100.7
103.6
115.5
285.4
332.7
93.0
92.2
98.4

139.4
157.8
155.7
153.0
173.8
109.0
171.4
111.3
177.2
174.1
196.4
188.2
114.1
202.4
105.0
153.8
139.8
149.1
145.7
128.8
125.4
125.5
115.5
127.4
121.4
154.4
150.3
102.3
143.7
160.4
126.6
125.8
103.6
180.6
210.2
267.1
242.3
273.0
242.6
328.5
104.1
101.2
103.9
115.8
289.2
333.3
93.3
92.4
98.8

139.9 139.5
157.9 158.6
155.8 155.7
152.6 153.1
174.0 175.1
108.7 108.4
171.8 172.3
111.4 111.6
177.7 177.8
174.7 175.4
197.6 198.9
188.9 189.6
119.1 124.2
105.4 203.6
105.1 105.4
152.3 150.8
138.0 136.3
144.6 138.1
144.0 142.6
129.1 129.1
128.4 132.2
126.6 127.5
121.0 127.8
129.3 1316.0
122.6 125.2
154.9 153.9
150.7 149.7
102.2 101.9
143.3 142.8
160.4 159.9
127.5 124.1
126.8 123.3
104.0 104.7
181.5 181.7
212.1 210.0
268.9 270.0
243.8 244.9
274.9 275.9
244.1 244.8
331.0 332.8
104.3 104.3
101.6 101.6
104.0 104.3
116.0 116.1
290.4 290.8
333.7 334.0
93.7
93.2
92.2
92.7
99.4
98.7

138.9
157.6
154.0
151.5
174.4
108.5
172.7
111.8
178.1
175.4
199.2
190.2
121.8
204.2
105.5
149.7
135.1
134.4
141.6
129.1
131.9
128.2
127.0
131.4
124.9
156.1
152.1
101.8
142.7
159.7
133.6
132.8
104.2
181.9
208.3
270.8
245.7
276.8
245.6
333.6
105.0
101.7
104.1
116.1
290.8
334.1
93.3
92.3
99.0

30.5

25.9

26.7

26.6

26.0

25.7

25.2

25.0

24.7

24.2

23.8

23.2

22.9

22.1
31.7

53.5
258.3
355.8
161.1
151.8
171.4

41.1
271.1
394.9
165.6
153.7
178.1

42.7
271.9
404.4
164.8
153.4
176.2

42.4
270.2
393.5
165.1
153.0
177.3

41.2
269.6
388.5
165.4
153.6
177.9

40.3
272.2
400.7
165.7
153.7
178.2

39.5
271.6
394.1
166.2
154.3
179.3

38.9
274.7
408.0
166.6
154.3
179.9

38.3
273.0
396.7
167.0
153.4
180.3

37.3
276.2
411.0
167.4
153.9
180.6

36.5
274.0
396.6
167.8
155.5
181.3

35.0
275.9
404.3
168.2
155.3
181.6

33.9
277.2
408.5
168.6
155.3
181.9

22.5
32.4
33.9
277.7
407.7
169.1
155.7
182.2

277.7
424.2
169.6
155.8
183.4

See footnotes at end of table.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

85

Current Labor Statistics:

28.

Price Data

C o n tin u e d — C o n su m er Price In d e x e s for All U rban C onsum ers a n d for
a v e ra g e , b y e x p e n d itu re c a te g o r y a n d c o m m o d ity or service grou p

Urban W a g e Earners a n d C le ric a l W orkers: U.S. city

[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]

1999

Miscellaneous personal services................
Commodity and service group:
Commodities...............................................
Food and beverages...................................
Commodities less food and beverages...........
Nondurables less food and beverages..........
Apparel................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages,
and apparel.........................................
Durables................................................
Services....................................................
Rent of shelter3........................................
Transporatation services............................
Other services.........................................
Special indexes:
All items less food.....................................
All Items less shelter..................................
All items less medical care..........................
Commodities less food...............................
Nondurables less food...............................
Nondurables less food and apparel...............
Nondurables............................................
Services less rent of shelter3......................
Services less medical care services..............
Energy....................................................
All items less energy.................................
All items less food and energy...................
Commodities less food and energy...........

2000

2001

2000

Annual average
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

243.0

252.3

250.9

251.7

252.0

252.9

253.6

254.0

255.1

255.7

255.7

257.3

258.6

259.5

260.0

144.4
164.6
132.5
137.5
131.3

149.2
168.4
137.7
147.4
129.6

149.3
167.2
138.4
148.5
133.3

149.2
167.8
138.0
147.6
132.2

149.7
167.9
138.6
149.1
128.3

149.3
169.4
137.7
147.5
124.5

148.6
169.2
136.4
145.6
125.3

150.3
169.4
138.8
149.9
130.4

150.4
169.6
138.9
149.9
132.8

150.6
169.5
139.3
150.2
131.8

150.0
170.5
137.8
147.2
127.8

150.0
171.4
137.4
146.4
125.4

150.6
171.8
138.1
147.7
128.4

150.7
172.2
138.0
147.9
132.2

151.9
172.4
139.7
151.0
131.9

146.0
126.0
188.8
195.0
190.7
223.1

162.5
125.4
195.3
201.3
196.1
229.9

162.3
125.6
193.5
200.2
195.2
228.0

161.5
125.8
193.8
200.3
195.7
228.4

165.8
125.4
195.3
201.2
196.1
228.7

165.4
125.2
196.3
202.1
196.5
229.9

162.0
124.7
197.0
202.7
197.4
231.3

165.9
124.8
197.2
202.6
197.2
231.5

164.7
125.0
197.6
203.3
197.0
232.6

165.7
125.5
197.6
203.2
198.0
232.4

163.1
125.9
198.0
203.1
198.3
233.0

163.2
125.9
200.2
204.5
199.1
234.1

163.7
125.9
201.0
205.7
200.3
234.8

161.9
125.5
201.8
207.2
200.2
235.4

167.0
125.4
201.9
207.4
200.1
236.2

167.0
160.2
162.0
134.0
139.4
147.5
151.2
195.8
182.7
106.6
174.4
177.0
144.1
100.0
195.7

173.0
165.7
167.3
139.2
149.1
162.9
158.2
202.9
188.9
124.6
178.6
181.3
144.9
129.5
202.1

172.2
164.9
166.5
139.9
150.1
162.7
158.2
200.2
187.1
120.7
178.1
180.9
145.9
128.4
200.9

172.2
165.1
166.6
139.4
149.3
161.9
158.0
200.9
187.4
121.0
178.2
180.9
145.5
127.9
201.2

173.3
166.0
167.6
140.1
150.7
166.0
158.8
202.9
188.9
129.6
178.3
181.0
144.5
137.6
201.9

173.6
166.2
167.9
139.2
149.3
165.7
158.4
204.2
189.9
129.7
178.7
181.3
143.8
135.0
202.7

173.5
166.0
167.9
138.0
147.5
162.6
157.6
205.0
190.5
125.9
179.1
181.7
143.7
127.9
203.5

174.6
167.4
168.8
140.3
151.5
166.2
160.0
205.7
190.7
130.6
179.6
182.3
145.1
135.2
203.5

174.9
167.5
169.1
140.4
151.6
165.1
160.1
205.8
191.1
129.3
180.1
182.8
145.6
133.6
204.1

175.0
167.7
169.2
140.8
151.8
166.0
160.2
205.9
191.1
129.0
180.3
183.0
146.0
133.8
204.2

174.7
167.5
169.0
139.3
149.0
163.6
159.1
206.9
191.5
128.1
180.2
182.8
145.1
129.3
204.4

175.9
168.6
170.1
139.0
148.3
163.9
159.1
210.0
193.6
132.5
181.0
183.5
144.8
128.6
205.7

176.6
169.1
170.8
139.7
149.6
164.3
160..0
210.5
194.3
132.0
181.8
184.4
145.9
129.1
206.8

177.1
169.2
171.2
139.6
149.8
162.7
160.3
210.6
195.1
129.5
182.6
185.3
146.2
125.4
207.7

177.8
170.1
171.8
141.2
152.8
167.4
162.0
210.6
195.2
133.1
182.9
186.6
146.6
133.8
208.0

163.2
486.2
163.8
163.4
163.0
184.7
147.6
159.4
201.8

168.9
503.1
167.7
167.2
166.8
188.0
154.1
160.5
203.4

168.0
500.4
166.5
166.0
165.4
186.9
152.5
160.2
200.5

168.2
501.1
167.2
166.7
166.4
188.4
153.5
159.3
203.1

169.2
504.1
167.3
166.8
166.3
187.3
154.6
159.4
198.9

169.4
504.7
168.0
167.6
167.3
189.2
155.4
160.5
200.0

169.3
504.2
168.6
189.9
156.8
161.0
202.5
138.2
201.5

170.4
507.6
168.8
168.3
168.1
188.4
156.6
161.6
203.6

170.6
508.2
169.0
168.5
168.1
189.9
156.4
161.9
204.7

170.9
509.0
168.8
168.3
167.8
188.6
155.3
161.4
205.8

170.7
508.5
169.8
169.3
169.1
190.4
156.3
161.5
213.3

171.7
511.6
170.8
170.3
170.3
190.9
157.9
163.8
210.9

172.4
513.4
171.2
170.8
170.8
191.7
159.2
163.5
210.1

172.6
514.2
171.6
171.1
171.1
191.7
160.0
163.1
209.8

173.5
516.7
171.9
171.4
171.3
192.2
160.7
163.5
211.7

133.2
152.8
152.2
147.9
168.8
104.6
165.0
105.1
168.8
160.0
181.6
177.1
122.2
175.7
101.6
128.7
113.0
91.7
120.4
124.7
130.1
131.2
121.3
130.3
126.2
143.4
140.7
100.4

136.9
155.1
153.9
147.2
172.3
107.1
169.0
109.2
173.8
165.4
187.4
183.4
117.3
180.8
103.9
137.4
121.8
128.8
127.5
125.5
128.3
129.7
119.3
132.3
124.2
152.8
150.1
101.4

136.7
153.4
152.3
144.5
170.7
104.7
168.1
108.3
172.9
163.6
186.2
181.8
118.7
179.6
103.3
131.1
115.2
123.0
120.5
125.6
131.8
131.5
124.3
134.1
127.1
152.2
149.5
101.2

136.4
154.9
153.6
146.9
172.2
106.1
168.3
108.5
172.9
163.9
186.5
182.2
117.8
179.9
104.0
131.9
116.0
120.9
121.6
125.5
130.9
132.7
122.1
133.4
126.6
152.5
149.7
101.5

136.7
155.6
153.9
146.4
173.4
108.0
168.6
108.4
173.6
165.5
187.2
182.7
120.9
180.4
104.1
138.7
123.3
120.2
129.9
125.3
127.3
129.5
117.4
132.0
124.6
155.5
152.8
101.4

137.5
156.0
154.2
147.9
173.5
108.4
169.1
108.8
174.4
166.4
187.9
183.4
123.1
180.8
104.4
141.0
125.7
120.1
132.5
125.7
123.6
126.6
112.2
129.8
120.9
154.4
151.6
101.1

137.4
156.2
154.4
148.6
173.6
109.0
169.5
109.6
174.7
166.6
188.4
184.1
122.5
181.3
104.2
140.4
125.0
120.1
131.8
125.7
124.0
126.8
113.2
128.4
121.5
152.3
149.3
100.9

137.1
156.1
154.4
148.5
173.5
107.5
170.0
110.4
174.4
167.3
188.7
184.8
118.3
181.9
104.4
143.4
128.2
133.1
134.4
126.1
128.7
128.8
121.5
129.0
124.8
154.2
151.4
101.0

136.6
155.3
153.8
149.4
172.0
106.3
170.3
110.9
174.8
167.5
189.3
185.6
118.6
182.4
104.4
142.5
127.2
136.7
133.0
125.8
131.3
130.3
125.5
132.6
125.5
154.0
151.3
101.4

137.1
155.4
152.7
146.3
173.4
109.6
170.5
111.2
175.6
167.6
189.5
186.2
113.9
183.0
104.7
142.0
126.5
139.3
132.1
126.0
130.5
131.3
122.6
132.7
125.7
154.9
152.2
102.2

135.8
155.8
153.3
149.9
173.0
108.6
170.8
111.4
175.8
168.1
189.6
187.0
108.7
183.5
104.9
144.6
129.3
144.1
134.8
125.6
126.6
128.0
117.5
130.0
124.0
153.9
151.2
102.8

138.7
157.3
155.4
152.8
174.0
108.5
171.4
111.5
176.5
170.2
190.6
187.7
113.8
184.1
105.2
153.2
138.6
150.1
144.8
125.7
124.1
125.8
113.2
129.0
121.5
154.0
151.2
102.9

139.3
157.3
155.6
152.4
174.1
108.5
171.8
111.6
177.0
170.5
191.5
188.3
118.5
184.5
105.3
151.5
136.6
145.0
143/0
125.9
127.0
126.9
118.4
131.0
122.4
154.5
151.7
102.8

138.8
158.2
155.6
153.0
175.4
108.5
172.3
111.8
177.2
171.0
192.6
189.0
123.8
185.2
105.6
149.9
134.8
138.0
141.5
125.9
130.6
127.6
125.2
133.3
125.2
153.3
150.5
102.5

138.2
157.1
153.7
151.4
174.6
108.4
172.7
112.0
177.6
171.0
192.9
189.6
121.2
185.7
105.8
148.8
133.6
133.9
140.4
126.0
130.5
128.3
124.7
133.2
125.2
155.8
153.2
102.4

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

All items (1967 = 100)....................................
Food and beverages.....................................

Fruits and vegetables...............................
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage
materials.............................................
Sugar and sweets..................................
Fats and oils..........................................
Other miscellaneous foods1,2................
Food away from home1...............................
Other food away from home1,2..................
Housing.....................................................
Shelter....................................................

Owners' equivalent rent of primary residence3
Tenants' and household Insurance1,2...........
Fuel oil and other fuels..........................
Household furnishings and operations.........

New and used motor vehicles2..................
See footnotes at end of table.

86

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

28.

C o n tin u e d — C o n s u m e r P ric e In d e x e s for All U rban C on sum ers a n d for U rb an W a g e Earners a n d C le ric a l W orkers: U.S. c ity
a v e r a g e , b y e x p e n d itu re c a te g o r y a n d c o m m o d ity or s e rv ic e g ro u p

[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
Series

Annual average
1999

144.0
Used cars and trucks1.............................
Gasoline (all types).................................
Motor vehicle parts and equipment..............
Motor vehicle maintenance and repair..........
Medical care................................................
Medical care commodities...........................
Medical care services..................................
Professional services................................
Hospital and related services......................
Recreation2.................................................
Video and audio1,2.....................................
Education and communication2......................
Education2...............................................
Educational books and supplies.................
Tuition, other school fees, and child care.....
Communication1,2......................................
Information and information processing1,2...
Telephone services1,2...........................
Information and information processing
other than telephone services1,4............
Personal computers and peripheral
equipment1,2.................................
Other goods and services...............................
Tobacco and smoking products....................
Personal care1...........................................
Personal care products1...........................
Personal care services1............................
Miscellaneous personal services................
Commodity and service group:

Commodities less food and beverages...........
Nondurables less food and beverages..........
Apparel.................................................
Nonaurabies less tood, beverages,
and apparel..........................................
Durables..................................................
Services......................................................
Rent of shelter3.........................................
Transporatation services.............................
Other services...........................................
Special indexes:
All items less food......................................
All items less shelter...................................
All Items less medical care..........................
Commodities less food...............................
Nondurables less food................................
Nondurables less food and apparel...............
Nondurables.............................................
Services less rent of shelter3........................
Services less medical care services..............
Energy.....................................................
Ali items less energy...................................
All items less food and energy....................
Commodities less food and energy............
Energy commodities..............................
Services less energy..............................
1 Not seasonally adjusted.
2 Indexes on a December 1997 = 100 base.
3 Indexes on a December 1982 = 100 base.


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

2000

2000
Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

2001
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

144.7

144.5

144 1

143 7

143 1

142 5

153.3
100.8
100.2
100.0
173.3
193.1
249.7
226.8
254.9
230.8
295.5
101.3
100.5
101.5
107.2
264.1
302.8
96.9
96.5
100.2

143.9
157.1
129.5
128.8
100.9
178.8
203.4
259.9
233.6
265.9
239.6
313.2
102.4
100.7
102.7
112.8
283.3
318.2
94.6
94.1
98.7

155.4
128.5
127.8
100.6
177.4
202 9
258.0
232.4
263.8
238.6
308.7
102.0
100.0
102.1
111.1
279.9
313.4
94.8
94.4
98.8

156.8
128.5
127.9
100.5
177.8
203 9
258.5
232.9
264.4
239.0
309.5
102.3
101.0
102.1
111.3
280.0
313.8
94.7
94.3
98.7

157.1
140 1
139.4
100.5
178.3
205 5
259.7
233.7
265.6
239.9
311.7
102.5
101.2
101.7
111.8
280.9
315.4
93.6
93.0
97.4

156.6
136 2
135.5
100.8
178.7
206 9
260.6
234.2
266.6
240.3
314.2
102.7
100.9
102.2
112.1
281.5
316.2
94.3
93.9
98.4

156.5
128 0
127.3
100.7
179.6
208 7
261.7
234.6
267.9
240.9
317.1
102.9
101.3
103.0
113.2
283.6
319.2
94.8
94.4
99.1

157.5
135 3
134.6
100.9
180.2

159.3
133 1
132.3
101.0
180.9

160.7
133 ?
132.4
101.8
181.4

161.6

161.7

161.7

161.1

160.9

126.9
102.3
181.5

126.2
103.0
182.1

127.1
103.4
183.1

123.4
104.0
183.3

133.3
103.5
183.4

262.2
235.0
268.5
241.3
318.2
102.8
101.1
102.9
115.1
288.6
324.7
93.1
92.6
97.1

262.8
235.2
269.2
241.8
319.2
102.8
100.7
103.7
115.4
289.0
325.7
94.2
93.8
98.6

263.1
235.5
269.4
241.7
320.3
102.7
100.6
103.2
115.6
288.6
326.3
93.3
92.8
97.6

263.8
236.5
270.1
242.3
320.9
102.6
100.3
103.7
115.7
289.2
326.5
94.1
93.6
98.6

266.3
237.8
272.8
244.9
323.9
103.0
100.8
104.0
116.0
292.9
327.0
94.4
93.8
99.0

268.1
239.1
274.7
246.4
326.6
103.1
101.2
104.1
116.2
294.1
327.4
94.4
93.7
98.9

269.1
240.2
275.7
247.0
328.3
103.0
101.0
104.4
116.3
294.7
327.9
94.8
94.1
99.5

269.9
241.0
276.5
247.8
329.1
103.7
101.2
104.2
116.4
294.7
328.2
94.4
93.8
99.2

31.6

26.8

27.6

27.5

27.0

26.6

26.1

25.9

25.5

25.1

24.6

24.0

23.8

23.3

22.8

53.1
261.9
356.2
161.3
152.5
171.7
243.1

40.5
276.5
395.2
165.5
154.2
178.6
251.9

42.0
278.0
404.9
164.6
153.9
176.6
250.4

41.8
275.4
393.7
164.9
153.4
177.7
251.2

40.7
274.5
388.7
165.3
154.0
178.3
251.4

39.8
277.9
400.9
165.5
154.1
178.6
252.2

39.1
276.8
394.2
166.1
155.0
179.7
253.0

38.5
280.9
408.2
166.5
155.1
180.3
253.4

37.8
278.2
397.0
166.8
153.9
180.8
254.5

36.7
282.3
411.3
167.1
154.2
181.1
255.1

35.9
279.2
396.9
167.7
155.8
181.7
255.3

34.3
281.5
404.6
168.1
155.7
182.1
257.0

33.4
283.2
409.2
168.5
155.7
182.4
258.4

31.8
283.5
408.5
169.0
155.9
182.8
258,3

31.1
288.2
424.8
169.4
156.0
183.9
260.0

144.7
163.8
133.2
138.1
130.1

149.8
167.7
139.0
149.1
128.3

149.9
166.5
139.6
150.2
131.8

149 9
167 2
139.3
149.4
130.9

150 6
167 3
140.3
151.5
127.3

150 1
168 0
139.2
149.7
123.6

140 3
168 6
137.7
147.2
124.0

140.2
151.8
128.7

140.2
151.6
131.3

140.8
152.1
130.5

139.1
148.6
126.6

138.8
148.1
124.1

139.5
149.4
127.0

139.3
149.3
130.6

141.2
153.1
130.5

147.2
126.0
185.3
174.9
187.9
219.6

165.3
125.8
191.6
180.5
192.9
225.9

165.2
126.0
189.4
179.3
192.0
224.2

164.4
126.2
189.8
179.6
192.4
224.6

169.6
125.9
191.2
180.3
192.6
224.7

168.7
125.6
192.2
181.0
193.0
225.9

164.6
125.2
193.0
181.5
193.8
227.3

169.3
125.3
193.4
181.7
193.7
227.3

167.6
125.6
193.9
182.3
193.9
228.4

168.8
126.2
194.0
182.5
195.0
228.1

165.5
126.6
194.5
182.6
195.2
228.9

166.0
126.6
196.6
183.6
196.0
229.9

166.5
126.6
197.2
184.4
197.2
230.6

164.4
126.2
197.8
185.5
197.2
231.2

170.5
126.0
198.0
185.8
197.2
231.9

163.1
158.1
159.2
134.6
140.0
148.4
151.3
174.1
179.5
106.1
171.1
173.1
144.3
100.3
192.6

169.1
163.8
164.7
140.4
150.7
165.4
158.9
180.1
185.4
124.8
175.1
177.1
145.4
129.7
198.7

168.2
163.0
163.8
141.0
151.7
165.3
158.9
177.7
183.3
121.0
174.5
176.7
146.4
128.3
197.1

168.3
163.1
164.0
140.7
150.9
164.5
158.8
178.2
183.7
121.5
174.6
176.7
146.0
128.3
197.5

169.5
164.3
165.0
141.7
152.9
169.4
159.9
180.2
185.1
130.9
174.6
176.6
145.0
139.1
198.0

169.6
164.3
165.1
140.6
151.2
168.7
159.4
181.3
186.0
130.1
174.9
176.8
144.5
135.4
198.8

169.4
163.9
165.0
139.1
148.9
164.9
158.3
181.9
186.6
125.7
175.3
177.2
144.2
127.7
199.5

170.7
165.4
166.2
141.6
153.3
169.2
160.8
182.5
187.2
130.9
176.0
178.0
145.7
135.4
200.0

170.9
165.5
166.4
141.6
153.1
167.7
160.8
182.7
187.6
129.3
176.5
178.6
146.1
133.5
200.6

171.3
165.7
166.6
142.2
153.6
168.8
161.0
182.8
187.7
129.0
176.8
179.0
146.7
133.8
200.8

170.9
165.5
166.4
140.6
150.3
165.8
159.7
183.7
188.3
127.6
176.8
178.7
145.8
128.9
201.1

171.9
166.5
167.4
140.3
149.9
166.3
159.9
186.6
190.3
131.8
177.4
179.3
145.5
128.5
202.2

172.5
167.0
168.0
141.0
151.1
166.8
160.8
186.9
190.8
131.3
178.2
180.1
146.2
129.1
203.1

172.8
167.0
168.2
140.8
151.1
164.9
160.9
187.0
191.4
128.6
178.8
180.9
146.8
125.1
204.0

173.8
168.0
169.1
142.7
154.7
170.5
163.0
187.0
191.6
132.9
179.2
181.3
147.3
134.2
204.4

4 Indexes on a December 1988 = 100 base.
Dash Indicates data not available.
NoTE: lndex aPP|ied to a month as a whole, not to any specific date.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

87

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

2 9 . C o n s u m e r P ric e In d e x : U.S. c ity a v e r a g e a n d a v a ila b le lo c a l a r e a d a t a : a ll ite m s

[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
All Urban Consumers

Pricing
sched-

Area

ule1
M

2000
Nov.

Oct.
174.0

174.1

Urban W age Earners

2001
Dec.
174.0

Jan.

Mar.

Feb.

175.1

2000

175.8

Apr.

176.2

176.9

2001

Nov.

Oct.
170.6

Dec.

170.9

Jan.

170.7

Mar.

Feb.

171.7

172.4

Apr.

172.6

173.5

Region and area size2

Northeast urban......................................................................

M

181.2

181.5

181.3

182.2

182.8

183.7

184.2

178.0

178.4

178.3

179.0

179.5

180.3

180.9

Size A—More than 1,500,000............................................

M

182.1

182.4

182.3

183.0

183.7

184.6

185.0

178.0

178.3

178.2

179.4

180.2

180.7

Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,0003.......................................

M

108.8

108.9

108.8

109.6

109.8

110.4

110.7

108.4

108.6

108.6

178.8
109.2

109.4

109.8

110.2

Midwest urban4.......................................................................
Size A—More than 1,500,000............................................

M

170.1

170.3

170.2

171.9

172.1

171.7

172.8

166.4

166.8

166.5

168.2

168.4

167.8

169.0

M

171.5

171.7

171.6

173.5

173.8

173.3

174.4

166.9

167.2

167.0

168.8

169.1

168.5

169.6

Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,000s.......................................
Size D—Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)...................

M

108.8

108.9

108.7

109.6

109.8

109.7

110.4

108.7

109.1

108.8

109.7

109.9

109.6

110.6

M

164.9

165.0

164.9

167.2

166.3

165.9

166.7

163.4

163.7

163.5

165.8

165.0

164.3

165.1

South urban............................................................................

M

168.5

168.6

168.4

169.3

170.2

170.6

171.4

166.8

166.9

166.7

167.5

168.3

168.7

169.6

Size A—More than 1,500,000............................................

M

168.6

168.5

168.4

169.3

170.4

170.9

171.6

166.3

166.2

166.2

166.9

167.9

168.4

169.3

Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,0003.......................................
Size D—Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)...................

M

108.1

108.2

108.1

108.6

109.2

109.4

109.9

107.9

108.1

108.0

108.4

109.0

109.1

109.7

M

167.6

167.3

167.1

168.2

169.1

169.5

170.6

168.8

168.6

168.4

169.4

170.0

170.4

171.8

West urban.............................................................................

M

177.2

177.2

177.1

178.3

179.3

180.1

180.4

172.7

172.8

172.8

173.7

174.6

175.3

175.8

Size A—More than 1,500,000............................................

M

179.0

178.8

179.0

180.1

181.3

182.0

182.5

172.7

172.7

172.9

173.8

174.8

175.4

176.0

Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,000s.......................................

M

109.0

109.2

108.9

109.8

110.1

110.7

110.6

108.9

109.1

108.7

109.5

109.8

110.4

110.4

M
M
M

158.1
108.5
168.7

158.2
108.7
168.6

158.1
108.5
168.5

159.2
109.2
169.8

159.9
109.6
170.1

160.3
109.8
170.3

161.6
110.2
171.2

156.6
108.3
168.1

156.8
108.6
168.1

156.8
108.4
167.9

157.7
109.0
169.2

158.3
109.4
169.4

158.6
109.5
169.5

159.3
110.1
170.5

Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA........................

M
M

175.4
173.8

176.0
173.5

175.8
173.5

178.1
174.2

178.5
175.4

177.1
176.2

178.4
176.6

169.8
166.9

170.4
166.6

170.3
166.7

172.6
167.3

172.9
168.3

171.4
169.1

172.6
169.6
181.9

Size classes:
A5..........................................................................................
B/Cs......................................................................................
D...........................................................................................
Selected local areas6

New York, NY-Northern NJ-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA..

M

184.6

184.6

184.2

184.9

185.3

186.4

186.6

180.2

180.1

180.0

180.6

180.8

181.8

Boston-Brockton-Nashua, MA-NH-ME-CT.......................
Cleveland-Akron, OH.............................................................

1

-

187.4

-

189.0

-

190.9

-

-

186.2

-

187.4

-

189.3

-

1

-

169.4

-

171.3

-

172.3

-

-

161.6

-

163.3

-

163.9

Dallas-Ft Worth, TX...............................................................

1

-

166.8

-

167.3

-

168.9

-

-

166.6

-

166.8

-

168.5

-

Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV7..........................
Atlanta, GA..............................................................................
Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, Ml....................................................

1

-

108.5

-

108.9

-

109.7

-

-

108.4

-

108.6

-

109.4

-

2

171.9

171.9

175.3
173.2

-

169.6

-

173.8
169.1

2
2
2
2
2

157.1

156.2

158.6

159.5

166.5
155.4

-

172.7

174.5

-

169.7

171.9

-

176.0

2

-

169.6

169.5

171.9

172.8

167.1
177.2
179.3
177.5

Philadelphia-Wilmlngton-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD....
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA................................
Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.........................................

177.9
183.4
182.1

-

171.7

-

177.5
184.1

-

181.5

' 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.

-

-

179.0
187.9

-

181.2
189.1

-

184.0

-

184.2

-

166.2

167.7

154.9

156.7

167.2

169.3

157.8

_

178.2

-

-

177.0
180.2

-

183.5

-

170 4
180.7
184.9

-

177.0

-

179.2

-

179.4

-

MO-KS; Milwaukee-Racine, Wl; Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI; Pittsburgh, PA; Portland-Salem, OR-WA; St Louis, MO-IL; San Diego, CA; Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater,
FL.
7 Indexes on a November 1996 = 100 base.
Dash indicates data not available.

2 Regions defined as the four Census regions.
3 Indexes on a December 1996 = 100 base.
4 The "North Central" region has been renamed the "Midwest" region by the Census Bureau.
It is composed of the same geographic entities.
5 Indexes on a December 1986 = 100 base.
6 In addition, the following metropolitan areas are published semiannually and appear in
tables 34 and 39 of the January and July issues of the cpi D e ta ile d R e p o rt: Anchorage, AK;
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN; Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO; Honolulu, HI; Kansas City,

88

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local
index has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling and
other measurement error. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the
national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI for use in their
escalator clauses. Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date.

30.

Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups

[ 1982- 8 4 = 100]
Series

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
140.3
3.0

144.5
3.0

148.2
2.6

152.4
2.8

156.9
3.0

160.5
2.3

163.0
1.6

166.6
2.2

172.2
3.4

138.7
1.4

141.6
2.1

144.9
2.3

148.9
2.8

153.7
3.2

157.7
2.6

161.1
2.2

164.6
2.2

168.4
2.3

137.5
2.9

141.2
2.7

144.8
2.5

148.5
2.6

152.8
2.9

156.8
2.6

160.4
2.3

163.9
2.2

169.6
3.5

131.9
2.5

133.7
1.4

133.4
-.2

132.0
-1 .0

131.7
-.2

132.9
.9

133.0
.1

131.3
-1 .3

129.6
-1 .3

126.5
2.2

130.4
3.1

134.3
3.0

139.1
3.6

143.0
2.8

144.3
0.9

141.6
-1 .9

144.4
2.0

153.3
6.2

190.1
7.4

201.4
5.9

211.0
4.8

220.5
4.5

228.2
3.5

234.6
2.8

242.1
3.2

250.6
3.5

260.8
4.1

183.3
6.8

192.9
5.2

198.5
2.9

206.9
4.2

215.4
4.1

224.8
4.4

237.7
5.7

258.3
8.7

271.1
5.0

138.2
2.9

142.1
2.8

145.6
2.5

149.8
2.9

154.1
2.9

157.6
2.3

159.7
1.3

163.2
2.2

168.9
3.5

Food and beverages:

Housing:

Apparel:

Transportation:

Medical care:

Other goods and services:

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners
and Clerical Workers:
All items:


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

89

Current Labor Statistics:

31.

Price Data

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

[1982 = 100]
Annual average

2000

2001

Grouping
1999

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

133.0
132.0
135.1

138.0
138.1
137.1

136.7
136.5
137.3

137.3
137.4
138.2

138.6
139.1
137.6

138.6
139.0
137.5

138.2
138.6
137.2

139.4
140.1
137.4

140.1
140.7
138.0

140.0
140.5
138.2

139.7
140.1
137.9

141.2
141.9
138.4

141.5
142.5
139.5

141.0
141.9
140.9

141.7
142.7
141.6

130.5
127.9
133.0
137.6

138.4
138.6
133.9
138.8

136.0
135.3
133.9
138.5

136.9
136.5
133.8
138.6

139.6
140.5
133.4
138.5

139.5
140.5
133.1
138.6

139.0
140.0
132.7
138.5

141.1
143.0
132.5
138.6

141.6
142 6
135.3
139.8

141.3
142.1
135.4
139.9

140.8
141.5
135.3
139.9

143.3
144.9
135.2
140.2

143.6
145 9
134.2
139.7

142.1
143.8
134.1
139.7

142.9
144.9
134.2
140.0

supplies, and components....................

123.2

129.1

128.0

128.3

129.8

130.3

129.9

131.1

130.8

130.5

130.6

131.5

131.3

130.8

130.6

Materials and components
for manufacturing.......................................
Materials for food manufacturing.............
Materials for nondurable manufacturing..
Materials for durable manufacturing........
Components for manufacturing................

124.6
120.8
124.9
125.1
125.7

128.1
119.2
132.7
129.1
126.2

128.2
119.6
132.3
130.0
126.1

128.5
120.5
133.3
129.6
126.0

128.6
120.6
133.7
129.4
126.2

128.9
120.5
134.5
129.4
126.3

128.6
119.4
133.9
129.0
126.3

128.5
119.0
133.6
129.3
126.4

128.4
119.1
133.7
128.8
126.4

128.0
118.9
133.3
127.5
126.5

128.1
119.8
133.5
128.0
126.1

128.6
120.4
135.0
127.2
126.4

128.8
120.3
136.1
127.0
126.2

128.9
122.3
135.8
126.7
126.4

128.7
122.3
135.2
126.0
126.6

148.9
84.6
142.5
134.2

150.7
102.0
151.6
136.8

151.6
95.7
151.6
136.4

151.0
96.5
152.7
136.7

151.2
103.3
153.3
137.1

150.8
105.0
153.3
137.3

150.4
104.5
153.0
137.0

150.3
110.5
153.3
137.4

150.2
109.2
153.4
137.7

150.1
108.8
153.0
138.0

149.9
108.3
153.0
138.1

149.6
111.4
153.0
138.9

150.0
109 9
153.0
138.5

150.2
106 9
152.8
138.7

150.4
105 9
153.2
139.0

98.2
98.7
94.3

119.8
100.2
129.0

111.3
103.4
112.7

115.9
104.9
119.3

125.6
101.9
137.3

122.7
99.3
134.4

118.3
95.5
129.7

126.0
97.6
141.0

130.3
99.5
146.7

128.4
100.4
143.0

136.2
103.9
153.5

155.0
105.3
183.5

133.2
104.5
148.2

131.5
108.9
142.2

132.9
109.1
144.5

Finished consumer goods less energy......
Finished goods less food and energy........

132.3
78.8
143.0
145.2
146.1

138.1
94.2
144.8
147.3
147.9

136.4
89.2
144.6
147.2
147.5

137.0
90.9
145.0
147.6
147.7

138.8
97.7
144.7
147.3
147.5

138.8
97.3
144.7
147.3
147.6

138.4
95.9
144.7
147.3
147.7

139.9
100.6
144.8
147.5
147.8

140.6
99.6
146.0
148.6
149.2

140.4
98.9
146.1
148.7
149.2

140.1
97.9
145.9
148.5
149.1

141.9
101.9
146.7
149.4
150.0

142.0
103.6
146.6
149.5
149.4

140.9
99.7
147.1
150.2
149.5

141.6
101.2
147.5
150.6
149.8

Finished consumer goods less food
and energy..................................................

151.7

153.9

153.5

153.7

153.6

153.5

153.8

154.0

155.5

155.4

155.3

156.5

155.9

156.1

156.4

166.3

169.7

168.9

169.3

169.4

169.6

170.4

170.9

171.3

171.2

171.0

173.2

173.2

173.5

174.0

Intermediate goods less energy.................

123.9
111.1
84.3
131.7

130.1
111.7
101.7
135.0

128.9
111.9
95.4
135.1

129.2
113.4
96.3
135.3

130.7
113.4
103.0
135.5

131.2
112.7
104.6
135.7

131.0
110.6
104.2
135.3

132.2
111.1
110.1
135.4

131.9
111.5
108.8
135.4

131.5
111.7
107.6
135.2

131.5
113.5
107.9
135.3

132.4
115.1
110.9
135.8

132.3
113.6
109.5
135.8

131.7
114.1
106.4
136.0

131.6
114.0
105.5
136.0

Intermediate materials less foods
and energy.................................................

133.1

136.5

136.6

136.7

137.0

137.2

137.0

137.0

137.0

136.8

136.8

137.1

137.3

137.4

137.4

78.5
107.9
135.2

120.3
111.7
145.2

97.9
115.1
149.2

106.5
116.1
148.8

130.6
113.4
146.7

127.6
110.8
144.3

122.4
107.4
141.9

136.7
109.2
142.9

144.8
110.1
141.0

140.9
109.9
137.8

154.7
112.4
137.5

193.4
113.7
138.7

148.3
112.4
136.1

141.0
115.2
134.6

145.2
114 3
130.8

Finished goods........................................
Finished consumer goods..... ...................
Finished consumer foods........................
Finshed consumer goods
excluding foods......................................
Durable goods........................................

2000p

Intermediate materials,

Materials and components
for construction..........................................
Containers.....................................................
Supplies........................................................
Crude m aterials fo r further

processing.............................................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs............................
Crude nonfood materials.............................
Special groupings:
Finished goods, excluding foods................
Finished energy goods................................

Consumer nondurable goods less food
and energy...............................................
Intermediate materials less foods
Intermediate foods and feeds.....................

Crude energy materials...............................
Crude nonfood materials less energy........

90

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

i

32.

Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major industry groups

[December 1984 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
Industry

SIC

Annual average
1999

-

10
12
13
14
-

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Total mining industries........................................

Coal mining (12/85 = 100).........................
Oil and gas extraction (12/85 - 100)...........
Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic
minerals, except fuels..............................
Total manufacturing industries....................... .

Food and kindred products.........................
Tobacco manufactures..............................
Textile mill products..................................
Apparel and other finished products
made from fabrics and similar materials.....
Lumber and wood products,
except furniture.......................................
Furniture and fixtures................................
Paper and allied products..........................

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

Printing, publishing, and allied industries.....
Chemicals and allied products....................
Petroleum refining and related products.......
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products.
Leather and leather products......................
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products....
Primary metal industries............................
Fabricated metal products,
except machinery and transportation
transportation equipment.........................

35
36

Machinery, except electrical.......................
Electrical and electronic machinery,
equipment, and supplies..........................

37
38
39

Measuring and controlling instruments;
photographic, medical, and optical
goods; watches and clocks.......................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries
industries (12/85 - 100)...........................

2000p

2000

2001

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

95.7
71.8
85.9
102.7

100.6
72.6
86.1
109.1

118.4
73.7
85.1
133.1

118.1
73.9
85.6
132.8

113.8
73 4
83.3
127.4

124.7
75.2
83.5
141.9

131.8
75.1
83.6
151.5

128.9
73 3
84.1
147.7

139.6
73 5
84.8
162.0

170.8
73,5
83.6
204.4

138.2
72.4
90.8
159.4

130.7
73 1
90.3
149.3

132.2

78.0
70.3
87.3
78.5

112.2
73.5
84.7
125.0

134.0

137.1

136.7

137.2

137.2

137.6

137.8

138.0

138.0

138.0

138.2

139.3

140.1

140.8

140.8

128.3
126.3
325.7
116.3

133.5
128.5
345.8
116.7

132.6
128.1
341.8
116.5

133.1
129.3
341.7
116.5

134.2
129.4
342.2
116.6

133.9
129.4
342.3
116.7

133.5
128.7
350.4
116.9

134.7
128.5
351.1
116.6

1349
128.7
351.6
116.8

134.9
128.8
351.6
117.0

134.4
129.6
351.8
117.5

134.7
130.1
372.4
117.4

134.7
130.4
372.4
117.9

134.6
131.7
372.3
117.0

634.6
132.5
372.1
117.0

125.3

125.7

125.7

125.6

125.6

125.9

125.9

125.9

126.0

125.7

125.9

125.7

125.7

125.7

125.9

161.8
141.3
136.4

158.1
143.3
145.8

161.7
143.2
145.4

159.1
143.4
146.9

158.7
143.5
147.3

157.6
143.5
147.3

155.7
143.6
147.3

155.3
143.5
147.7

155.0
143.7
147.6

154.5
143.8
147.5

154.2
143.8
147.0

153.2
144.2
147.4

153.8
144.3
147.0

154.5
144.8
147.0

154.7
144.7
147.0

177.6
149.7
76.8
122.2
136.5
132.6
115.8

182.8
156.8
112.9
124.3
137.8
134.6
119.9

182.0
155.5
105.6
123.7
137.6
135.0
120.3

182.0
156.4
109.0
123.6
137.4
135.1
120.5

183.1
156.5
119.9
124.4
137.2
135.1
120.2

183.2
157.4
115.7
125.0
137.5
134.8
120.3

183.6
157.5
112.6
124.7
137.8
134.5
120.4

183.6
158.3
125.1
125.4
138.4
134.8
120.5

184.9
158.6
121.8
125.3
138.4
134.5
120.2

185.0
158.3
121.9
126.5
138.8
134.3
119.0

185.1
159.0
114.4
124.8
138.9
134.1
119.2

186.8
160.4
112.5
126.0
139.1
134.4
118.5

187.2
161.6
112.0
126.1
140.6
135.0
118.0

187.6
161.9
107.3
126.8
140.9
135.4
117.4

188.4
161.4
114.1
127.4
142.8
135.6
116.8

70n
90.6
151.5

129.1

130.3

130.4

130.2

130.3

130.3

130.4

130.5

130.6

130.5

130.5

130.6

130.7

130.8

131.2

117.3

117.5

117.4

117.4

117.5

117.6

117.6

117.6

117.6

117.7

117.7

117.7

117.8

117.8

109.5
134.5

108.3
136.7

108.6
136.5

108.4
136.5

108.5
136.0

108.5
136 1

108.1
135 7

108.1
135.7

108.0
138.4

107.9
138.6

107.7
138.4

107.7
138.7

107.6
137.6

107.5
137.9

118.0
107.5
138.1
127.3

125.7

126.2

126.0

126.3

126.2

126.2

126.2

126.3

126.4

121.8

126.4

126.9

127.1

126.9

132.2

130.3

130.9

130.9

130.5

130.7

130.9

131.0

131.0

131.0

131.2

131.3

131.7

131.9

132.3

122.7

114.8
135.3
113.0
130.8
98.3

119.3
135.2
123.0
147.6
102.3

118.2
135.2
118.6
145.4
101.9

118.6
135.2
123.8
146.0
102.0

119.0
135.2
124.1
147.2
102.1

118.9
135.2
125.2
147.6
102.5

120.1
135.2
126.1
147.9
102.5

121.2
135.2
127.0
151.5
102.4

121.4
135.2
126.5
152.5
102.7

121.8
135.2
124.2
152.7
102.7

121.5
135.2
126.1
154.2
102.7

121.9
141.3
125.8
154.7
109.1

122.5
141.3
127.8
154.0
109.1

122.6
141.3
126.8
155.4
108.9

141.3
125.9
125.9
155.4
108.9

June 2001

91

Service industries:

42
43
44
45
46

Motor freight transportation
and warehousing (06/93- 100).................
U.S. Postal Service (06/89 - 100)................
Water transportation (12/92 = 100)...............
Transportation by air (12/92 - 100)..............
Pipelines, except natural aas (12/92 = 100)....


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

Monthly Labor Review

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

33. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
[ 1982 =

100]
Index

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Finished goods
Total......................................................................................
Foods..................................................................................
Energy.................................................................................
O ther....................................................................................

123.2
123.3
77.8
134.2

124.7
125.7
78.0
135.8

125.5
126.8
77.0
137.1

127.9
129.0
78.1
140.0

131.3
133.6
83.2
142.0

131.8
134.5
83.4
142.4

130.7
134.3
75.1
143.7

133.0
135.1
78.8
146.1

138.0
137.1
94.2
147.9

Total.......................................................................................
Foods..................................................................................
Energy.................................................................................
O ther...................................................................................

114.7
113.9
84.3
122.0

116.2
115.6
84.6
123.8

118.5
118.5
83.0
127.1

124.9
119.5
84.1
135.2

125.7
125.3
89.8
134.0

125.6
123.2
89.0
134.2

123.0
123.2
80.8
133.5

123.2
120.8
84.3
133.1

129.1
119.2
101.7
136.5

Crude materials for further processing
Total.......................................................................................
Foods..................................................................................
Energy.................................................................................
O ther....................................................................................

100.4
105.1
78.8
94.2

102.4
108.4
76.7
94.1

101.8
106.5
72.1
97.0

102.7
105.8
69.4
105.8

113.8
121.5
85.0
105.7

111.1
112.2
87.3
103.5

96.8
103.9
68.6
84.5

98.2
98.7
78.5
91.1

119.8
100.2
120.3
118.2

Intermediate materials, supplies, and
co m p o n em s

92

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

34.

U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

[1995= 100]
SITC

2000

Industry

Rev. 3

Apr.

May

87 5
102.2
74.0
90.6

88 3
105.1
75.0
90.1

87 4
109.3
71.6
87.8

85 8
108.2
66.9
91.3

88 fi
103.7
64.0
88.6

Crude fertilizers and crude minerals................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap..................................

84.2
85.5
88.3
87.4
93.8
68.9
93.0
80.4

85 2
86.5
89.1
86.7
99.0
69.0
93.0
79.6

84 4
86.7
86.3
86.7
97.6
69 6
93.3
78.2

8? 9
89.7
80.3
86.5
95.9
67 7
93.3
78.0

3 Mineral fuels, lubricants, and related products.............
32
Coal, coke, and briquettes................................................
33
Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials...

137.2
94.7
152.0

142.3
94.5
163.0

144.9
93.8
168.2

151.2
93.8
178.3

4 Animal and vegetable oils, fats, and waxes...................

71.6

70.1

67.1

5 Chemicals and related products, n.e.s............................
54
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products...........................
55
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations.........
57
Plastics in primary form s..................................................
58
Plastics in nonprimary forms.............................................
59
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s...........................

95.8
99.9
103.2
97.7
100.2
99.4

95.8
100.0
103.1
98.4
99.8
99.3

95.5
99.7
102.8
98.1
99.3
99.1

0
01
04
05
2
21
22
24
25
26
27
28

Meat and meat preparations.............................................
Cereals and cereal preparations.......................................
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry..........

Oilseeds and oleaginous fruits..........................................
Cork and wood....................................................................

6 Manufactured goods classified chiefly by materials....
62
64
66
68

Rubber manufactures, n.e.s..............................................
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,
and paperboard................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s.........................
Nonferrous metals..............................................................

7 Machinery and transport equipment................................
71
72
74
75
76
77
78

Power generating machinery and equipment..................
Machinery specialized for particular industries...............
General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,
and machine parts............................................................
Computer equipment and office machines......................
Telecommunications and sound recording and
reproducing apparatus and equipment..........................
Electrical machinery and equipment................................
Road vehicles......................................................................

June

July

Aug.

2001
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

85 9
105.2
67.8
91.9

87 1
107.4
70.8
88.7

88 5
107.6
74.0
89.8

8? 9
95 4
78.0
88.4
91.7
70 7
93.1
78.7

88 7
100 5
83.8
86.9
90.7
72 2
91.5
78.7

88 5
104 7
81.3
87.2
89 8
72 0
90:7
79.5

147.6
93.1
172.3

166.3
93.1
203.3

157.2
93.3
189.0

64.6

63.2

61.7

60.0

59.0

58.7

61.0

60.8

60.6

61.6

94.7
100.5
103.3
97.0
99.4
99.3

94.9
100.3
103.3
95.4
99.4
99.2

94.4
100.2
103.4
92.8
99.3
99.2

94.9
100.4
103.4
92.3
98.9
99.2

94.0
100.2
103.3
91.2
98.3
99.1

93.0
100.1
103.2
90.0
98.3
99.9

93.1
99.7
103.4
90.5
96.6
98.4

92.9
99.6
103.2
91.5
96.5
98.5

93.4
99.4
103.4
92.7
96.7
98.5

92.8
99.7
102.6
91.4
96.8
98.6

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

105.9
75.8
88.9

105.4
78.8
86.9

107.1
76.4
86.2

107.2
77.2
87.8

108.5
74.7
89.5

8? 2
102 1
79.3
86.5
88 6
72 2
90.6
76.2

82 fi
103 3
85.0
85.9
85 9
73 2
90.6
74.7

82 0
105 6
83.9
85.2
85 8
70 4
90.9
74.1

106 5
78.1
84.3
83 6
70 fi
90.9
74.7

107 5
79.0
83.5
82 3
67 fi
89.9
72.5

119 4
75.0
81.6
80 4
64 4
89.4
72.9

162.1
93.1
193.4

157.4
93.0
183.6

157.5
93.1
181.1

159.5
93.1
185.2

152.4
93.6
172.4

155.9
100.0
178.4

88 7

99.9

100.1

100.3

100.7

100.9

101.1

100.8

100.5

100.4

101.0

100.6

100.4

99.9

103.7

104.6

104.4

104.8

104.7

104.7

104.6

104.1

103.8

104.4

104.3

104.7

104.0

89.1
106.4
100.3

90.5
106.4
98.1

89.8
106.5
100.1

90.4
106.3
103.0

90.3
106.3
105.1

90.0
106.1
105.0

89.9
105.8
104.9

89.6
105.9
103.4

89.1
105.6
104.9

88.6
106.2
109.1

88.4
106.2
108.1

87.8
106.0
106.5

87.7
106.5
103.1

97.3

97.4

97.3

97.3

97.3

97.4

97.3

97.4

97.4

97.5

97.6

97.9

97.8

111.9
106.2

112.0
106.2

112.0
106.5

112.4
106.4

112.3
106.5

112.4
106.3

112.4
106.3

113.7
106.5

113.7
106.6

115.2
106.8

115.2
107.1

14.7
106.8

115.0
106.9

108.2
68.5

108.2
68.5

108.2
68.2

108.3
68.3

108.1
67.8

108.2
67.8

108.3
67.7

108.4
67.8

108.5
67.6

108.6
67.1

108.8
67.1

109.2
66.8

109.5
66.7

96.4
86.4
103.9

97.0
86.3
103.9

96.9
85.7
103.9

96.7
85.7
103.9

96.8
85.8
103.9

96.8
85.8
104.1

96.6
85.4
104.0

96.5
85.3
103.9

96.3
85.4
104.0

96.5
85.2
104.1

96.4
85.2
104.1

96.4
85.2
104.1

96.5
84.8
104.1

105.7

105.7

105.8

106.4

106.4

106.5

106.9

106.9

106.6

107.0

107.0

107.0

107.1

87 Professional, scientific, and controlling
instruments and apparatus.............................................


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

93

Current Labor Statistics:

35.

Price Data

U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

[1995

=

100]

SITC

2000

Industry

Rev. 3

Apr.

0 Food and live animals.........................................................
01
03
05
07

Meat and meat preparations.............................................
Fish and crustaceans, mollusks, and other
aquatic invertebrates.......................................................
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry...........
Coffee, tea, cocoa, spices, and manufactures
thereof................................................................................

1 Beverages and tobacco......................................................
11

Beverages...........................................................................

2 Crude materials, inedible, except fuels...........................

June

July

Aug.

2001
Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

94.0

92.3

91.3

91.5

91.7

91.2

91.5

90.2

92.4

92.8

91.3

92.9

91.0

100.2

100.2

99.1

98.1

98.9

99.0

95.5

95.7

97.3

95.5

96.,1

99.3

101.5

111.0
100.7

109.6
96.8

109.1
95.7

110.7
97.2

113.5
97.6

112.6
97.8

110.7
100.9

109.3
96.8

109.1
104.5

107.4
106.1

105.6
101.7

102.2
109.4

100.1
103.3

61.1

59.8

59.5

56.8

55.8

54.5

54.1

51.9

50.8

50.5

51.1

51.1

52.1

111 9

112 4

113 0

112 5

112 9

113 6

108.7

109.4

110.1

109.4

109.9

110.7

110.6

110.7

110.6

110.5

110.8

111.0

111.3

88 9

89 8

87 7

88 5
97.6

97.5

102.9

100.9
115.3

98.1
97.7

98.0
91.8

113 3

93 8

91 9

90 7

90 7

89 6

117.6
75 1
101.7
110.1

112.9
77 0
99.6
106.7

110.1
80 1
100.7
92.7

107.0
80 7
101.2
101.8

102.2
81 4
102.1
101.3

99.7
82 0
101.6
103.0

101.6
83 4
102.3
104.3

97.7
83 4
100.1
99.1

101.7
83 4
98.8
97.1

95.6
84 3
100.8
102.0

Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials...

148.5
147.1
171.5

154.3
154.2
167.5

172 0
171.0
195.4

170 6
168.5
202.9

172 1
169.9
205.4

189 0
187.6
218 1

186 3
181.8
242 6

183.3
249 3

163.9
331 8

151.7
401 2

154.1

144.6

142.7

5 Chemicals and related products, n.e.s............................
52
Inorganic chemicals............................................................
53
Dying, tanning, and coloring materials.............................
54
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products...........................
55
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations.........
57
Plastics in primary forms...................................................
58
Plastics in nonprimary forms.............................................
59
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s...........................

93.4
89.8
88.0
97.3
89.4
93.9
80.3
100.0

94.3
90.7
87.4
97.3
89.9
94.0
80.8
100.9

94.1
91.5
86.1
96.8
89.6
94.3
80.8
99.7

95.5
92.5
87.6
97.5
89.9
95.5
81.5
100.2

95.9
92.6
88.6
97.3
89.4
95.4
80.9
100.0

95.4
92.5
87.9
96.7
88.8
95.3
80.8
101.1

95.1
93.1
87.0
96.0
87.6
96.0
80.0
100.4

94.7
93.7
86.9
95.7
87.2
95.9
79.5
100.4

95.0
94.2
86.9
95.7
86.9
95.8
78.6
100.6

95.8
98.5
88.8
95.1
87.1
95.5
80.3
101.8

96.3
98.9
89.6
94.9
88.2
95.5
84.5
101.6

96.6
97.9
89.1
94.6
88.6
95.8
84.4
101.9

96.3
95.0
88.4
94.0
88.1
95.8
83.2
101.4

6 Manufactured goods classified chiefly by materials....

97.5

97.1

97.6

98.0

98.8

97.9

97.6

97.2

97.3

98.2

98.8

97.2

96.4

92.4

92.5

91.8

92.1

91.9

91.7

91.6

91.5

91.8

91.8

91.9

91.8

91.6

88.8
100.9
110.3
95.9

89.6
100.7
106.9
95.9

89.1
100.5
110.7
95.7

89 5
100.9
112.5
95.8

89 4
100.9
118.7
95.4

91 4
100.8
114.4
95.4

91 6
100.2
115.7
95.2

91 9
100.2
114.3
94.9

92 2
100.2
114.4
95.0

92 1
100.7
121.0
95.3

92 6
100.5
124.0
95.0

92 8
100.5
116.4
94.9

93 7
100.3
111.0
95.7

24
25
28
29
3
33
34

62
64
66
68
69

Cork and wood....................................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap..................................
Crude animal and vegetable materials, n.e.s..................

Rubber manufactures, n.e.s..............................................
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,
and paperboard................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s.........................
Nonferrous metals..............................................................
Manufactures of metals, n.e.s...........................................

7 Machinery and transport equipment................................

94

May

89.7

89.8

89.6

89.6

89.5

89.3

89.2

89.1

89.0

88.9

88.8

88.8

88.4

97.1

97.0

96.1

96 7

96.5

95.9

95.7

95.4

95.3

95.9

96.6

96.3

96.0

96 9
60.5

96.7
60.2

96 2
60.0

96 7
59.9

96 4
59.9

96 1
59.8

95 5
58.8

95 3
58.8

58.7

58.3

57.8

57.5

56.5

Road vehicles.....................................................................

84.5
83.0
102.7

84.7
83.5
102 7

84 6
83.3
102 8

84 3
82 8
102 8

84 2
82 7
102 7

84 1
82 6
102 6

83 9
82 7
102 9

83 7
82 5
102 9

83 6
82 2
102 9

83 0
82 1
102 9

85

Footwear.............................................................................

100.5

100.7

100.3

100.9

101.0

100.9

100.8

100.7

100.6

101.0

101.2

101.5

101.1

88

Photographic apparatus, equipment, and supplies,
and optical goods, n.e.s..................................................

91.8

91.9

91.6

92.5

92.1

91.4

91.4

91.0

90.7

91.2

91.3

91.4

90.6

72
74

General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,

75
76

Computer equipment and office machines.....................
Telecommunications and sound recording and

77
78

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

36.

U.S. export price indexes by end-use category

[1995 = 100]
2001

2000
C ategory
Apr.
ALL COMMODITIES..........................................................

96.2

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

96.4

96.3

96.2

96.0

96.6

96.5

96.5

96.3

96.5

96.5

96.2

96.1

87.1
86.2
98.1

85.1
84.0
97.9

82.8
81.3
99.7

85.3
84.3
97.9

85.8
84.6
99.5

86.7
85.7
98.2

87.4
86.7
96.3

88.2
87.3
98.6

86.6
85.7
97.0

87.3
86.5
97.6

86.4
85.7
95.3
93.8

Foods, feeds, and beverages........................................
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages.................
Nonagricultural (fish, beverages) food products.....

87.8
87.1
97.0

88.3
87.7
96.6

Industrial supplies and materials...................................

94.6

95.2

95.2

95.5

95.4

96.6

96.2

95.8

95.0

95.0

94.9

93.9

Agricultural Industrial supplies and materials...........

78.2

78.2

78.2

77.9

80.3

81.9

82.3

82.0

82.9

82.4

82.6

80.7

80.7

145.2

147.1

139.8

144.7

Fuels and lubricants.....................................................
Nonagricultural supplies and materials,
excluding fuel and building materials......................
Selected building materials........................................

127.8

132.9

135.6

141.1

137.9

155.0

146.9

150.7

146.2

91.9
90.4

92.1
90.0

91.9
89.9

91.7
89.6

91.7
90.5

91.4
89.4

91.6
89.8

90.7
89.0

90.1
89.0

90.4
88.8

90.1
88.2

89.8
86.7

89.2
86.7

Capital goods...................................................................
Electric and electrical generating equipment...........

96.1
98.7
91.9

96.1
98.9
91.9

96.1
99.2
91.7

96.1
99.1
91.6

96.1
99.7
91.6

96.2
99.9
91.5

96.1
99.5
91.5

96.2
99.6
91.5

96.3
99.7
91.5

96.4
100.0
91.5

96.5
100.5
91.5

96.7
100.1
915.0

96.6
100.5
91.3

104.2

104.2

104.1

104.4

104.4

104.5

104.5

104.4

104.4

104.6

104.5

104.6

104.7

102.4
102.3
101.3

102.4
102.4
101.3

102.3
102.1
101.3

102.5
102.4
101.5

102.4
102.4
101.4

102.2
102.2
101.3

102.3
102.4
101.2

102.2
102.2
101.2

102.0
102.0
101.1

102.1
102.0
101.3

102.0
101.5
101.5

101.9
101.4
101.5

101.8
101.3
101.2

85.1
97.4

85.6
97.7

84.4
97.6

82.6
97.8

80.9
97.7

83.5
98.0

83.9
97.9

84.7
97.8

85.7
97.5

86.1
97.7

84.9
97.7

85.1
97.5

84.5
97.4

Agricultural commodities...............................................
Nonagricultural commodities....................... ....... .........


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

95

Current Labor Statistics:

37.

Price Data

U.S. import price indexes by end-use category

[1995 = 100]
2000

Category
Apr.
ALL COMMODITIES........................................................

Foods, feeds, and beverages......................................
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages................
Nonagrlcultural (fish, beverages) food products.....

May

June

July

2001

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Apr.

98.3

99.6

99.7

99.9

101.0

100.6

100.6

100.0

100.0

99.3

97.8

97.2

93.3
86.7
110.8

91.9
85.2
109.8

91.1
84.1
109.7

91.1
83.7
110.5

91.3
83.2
112.9

90.7
82.5
112.5

90.7
83.0
111.2

89.4
81.9
109.5

91.0
84.2
109.1

90.8
84.3
107.9

89.8
83.4
106.7

90.6
85.6
103.9

89.1
84.1
102.4

Industrial supplies and materials..................................

114.3

115.9

121.8

121.8

122.8

127.6

126.6

126.9

124.5

124.4

122.3

116.1

115.1

Fuels and lubricants............................................
Petroleum and petroleum products.......................

147.7
147.4

153.3
154.0

170.6
170.4

169.2
168.0

170.9
169.5

187.4
187.1

184.5
181.9

186.8
183.6

178.7
165.6

176.7
155.7

169.3
156.1

153.3
145.9

151.5
143.4

Paper and paper base stocks....................................
Materials associated with nondurable
supplies and materials...............................................
Selected building materials................................
Unfinished metals associated with durable goods..
Nonmetals associated with durable goods...............

85.6

86.8

87.0

87.5

87.6

89.8

90.4

90.6

91.0

91.0

91.2

90.8

91.0

91.2
111.9
104.3
87.8

92.1
109.1
102.0
87.8

91.7
105.0
105.0
87.0

92.7
103.4
106.5
87.7

93.4
100.2
109.5
87.6

92.8
98.7
105.9
87.2

92.8
99.3
105.6
87.3

92.6
97.2
104.1
87.1

93.3
99.1
103.7
87.2

94.1
95.3
107.2
87.8

94.3
96.0
108.7
88.7

94.4
96.2
103.8
88.8

93.9
98.3
101.0
88.5

Capital goods.......................................................
Electric and electrical generating equipment...........
Nonelectrical machinery.........................................

81.4
93.9
77.7

81.2
94.2
77.5

80.9
94.3
77.1

80.9
94.1
77.1

80.7
93.7
77.0

80.6
93.5
76.8

80.2
93.4
76.4

80.1
93.1
76.3

80.0
93.1
76.1

79.9
93.1
76.0

79.7
92.9
75.8

79.3
95.1
75.6

79.3
94.5
75.0

Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines.....................

102.3

102.6

102.7

102.8

102.7

102.5

102.6

102.7

102.7

102.7

102.6

102.6

102.5

Consumer goods, excluding automotive......................
Nondurables, manufactured.......................................
Durables, manufactured..........................................
Nonmanufactured consumer goods..........................

97.1
100.3
93.4
100.3

97.0
100.1
93.4
99.7

96.5
99.5
93.2
98.0

96.8
99.8
93.4
99.5

96.8
100.0
93.2
99.2

96.6
99.8
93.0
99.6

96.6
99.8
92.8
99.8

96.5
99.8
92.8
99.1

96.4
99.6
92.8
98.8

96.6
92.9
92.9
99.5

96.6
99.8
92.8
101.5

96.6
100.1
92.8
99.1

96.4
100.0
92.5
98.0

38.

U.S. international price Indexes for selected categories of services

[1995 = 100]
1999

C ategory
Mar.
Air freight (inbound)........................................
Air freight (outbound).......................................
Air passenger fares (U.S. carriers)...................................
Air passenger fares (foreign carriers)......................
O cean liner freight (inbound)................................

96

Mar.

97.9

Monthly Labor Review


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

June

2000
Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

2001
Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

88.0
92.7

86.2
92.8

87.9
92.7

90.7
91.7

88.9
91.7

88.4
92.8

88.5
92.6

87.4
92.6

86.5
92.6

104.5
98.9
102.6

112.3
106.3
133.7

114.2
108.6
148.0

106.8
102.2
139.4

107.3
102.6
136.3

113.3
107.9
143.0

115.5
109.1
142.8

111.9
103.2
142.8

114.2
106.4
145.1

June 2001

39.

Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly d ata seasonally adjusted

[1992 = 100]____________________________________
Q uarterly indexes

III

IV

I

II

2001

2000

1999

1998

Item

III

IV

I

II

IV

III

I

I

II

110.0
117.4
103.2
106.7
116.3
110.3

110.3
118.9
104.1
107.8
115.1
110.5

110.8
120.3
105.0
108.6
114.5
110.7

111.8
121.6
105.7
108.8
114.6
110.9

112.5
123.0
106.4
109.3
115.1
111.4

112.7
124.3
106.8
110.4
114.2
111.8

114.0
125.9
107.4
110.5
114.4
111.9

116.1
127.1
107.6
109.5
116.9
112.2

116.6
128.2
107.5
110.0
118.2
113.0

118.6
130.4
108.6
110.0
120.0
113.7

119.3
132.2
109.1
110.8
119.5
114.0

120.2
134.6
110.3
112.0
118.7
114.5

119.7
136.3
110.5
113.9
117.7
115.3

109.6
116.8
102.6
106.5
117.4
110.5

110.1
118.3
103.6
107.5
116.2
110.7

110.5
119.8
104.5
108.4
115.7
111.0

111.4
120.9
105.1
108.6
115.8
111.2

111.9
122.1
105.6
109.0
116.7
111.8

112.0
123.4
106.0
110.2
115.8
112.2

113.4
125.0
106.6
110.2
116.1
112.4

115.6
126.3
107.0
109.3
118.6
112.7

116.2
127.6
107.0
109.8
120.1
113.6

118.0
129.4
107.8
109.7
121.8
114.1

118.8
131.4
108.5
110.6
121.4
114.5

119.5
133.5
109.4
111.8
120.6
115.0

119.1
135.2
109.6
113.5
119.6
115.7

110.6
113.7
99.9
102.3
102.8
100.7
150.8
113.5
106.4

111.7
115.2
100.9
102.6
103.1
101.2
147.7
113.0
106.4

113.1
116.7
101.8
102.5
103.2
100.7
152.0
113.8
106.7

113.7
117.8
102.4
103.2
103.6
102.1
145.3
113.1
106.8

114.6
119.0
103.0
103.2
103.9
101.3
150.6
113.9
107.2

115.3
120.3
103.3
103.7
104.3
102.2
148.6
114.0
107.5

116.6
121.8
103.9
104.0
104.5
102.9
144.4
113.5
107.5

118.3
123.0
104.2
103.9
104.0
103.4
147.0
114.5
107.5

119.2
123.9
103.9
104.0
104.0
104.2
152.2
116.4
108.1

120.8
125.8
104.8
104.3
104.2
104.9
156.3
118.0
108.8

122.1
127.7
105.4
104.8
104.5
105.5
153.0
117.6
108.9

122.2
130.0
106.4
106.8
106.3
107.9
135.5
115.0
109.2

122.2
131.8
106.9
107.9
107.9
107.8
129.7
113.4
109.7

121.7
115.4
101.4
94.9

123.2
116.8
102.2
94.8

125.7
118.0
103.0
93.9

126.8
119.0
103.4
93.9

128.9
119.9
103.7
93.0

130.2
121.2
104.1
93.1

131.9
122.8
104.7
93.1

135.0
124.1
105.2
91.9

137.7
125.7
105.4
91.2

139.8
127.0
105.7
90.8

142.1
129.1
106.6
90.9

144.0
131.8
108.0
91.5

140.8
133.3
108.0
94.7

B u sin ess

N onfarm b u s in e s s

N onfinancial co rp o ratio n s

M anufacturing

Unit labor costs....................................................................


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

97

Current Labor Statistics:

40.

Productivity Data

Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years

[1996 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
Item

196 0

19 7 0

19 8 0

199 0

1991

199 2

1 99 3

19 9 4

199 5

199 6

19 9 7

1998

Private business

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................................
Output per unit of capital services.................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output.......................................................
Inputs:
Labor input....................................................................
Capital services.....................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input....................
Capital per hour of all persons..........................................

45.6
110.4
65.2
27.5

63.0
111.1
80.0
42.0

75.8
101.5
88.3
59.4

90.2
99.3
95.3
83.6

91.3
96.1
94.4
82.6

94.8
97.7
96.6
85.7

95.4
98.5
97.1
88.5

96.6
100.3
98.1
92.8

97.3
99.7
98.4
95.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.0
100.5
101.1
105.2

104.8
100.1
102.6
110.6

54.0
24.9
42.3
41.3

61.0
37.8
52.4
56.7

71.9
58.6
67.3
74.7

89.4
84.2
87.7
90.8

88.3
86.0
87.5
95.0

89.3
87.7
88.8
97.0

91.8
89.8
91.1
96.8

95.6
92.6
94.6
96.3

98.0
96.0
97.3
97.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

103.7
104.7
104.0
101.5

106.4
110.4
107.7
104.7

48.7
120.1
69.1
27.2

64.9
118.3
82.6
41.9

77.3
105.7
90.5
59.6

90.3
100.0
95.6
83.5

91.4
96.6
94.7
82.5

94.8
97.9
96.6
85.5

95.3
98.8
97.1
88.4

96.5
100.3
98.1
92.6

97.5
99.9
98.6
95.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.7
100.2
100.9
105.1

104.5
99.8
102.4
110.6

50.1
22.6
39.3
40.5

59.3
35.5
50.7
54.8

70.7
56.4
65.9
73.1

89.2
83.5
87.3
90.3

88.0
85.4
87.1
94.7

89.0
87.3
88.4
96.8

91.8
89.5
91.0
96.5

95.4
92.3
94.4
96.3

97.8
95.9
97.2
97.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

103.8
104.9
104.2
101.5

106.6
110.8
108.0
104.7

41.8
124.3
72.7
38.5

54.2
116.5
84.4
56.5

70.1
100.9
86.6
75.3

92.8
101.6
99.3
97.3

95.0
97.5
98.3
95.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.9
101.1
100.4
103.3

105.0
104.0
102.6
108.7

109.0
105.0
105.0
113.4

112.8
104.5
106.1
116.9

117.1
105.6
109.8
123.5

124.3
106.5
113.2
130.7

92.0
30.9
51.3
38.2
28.2
52.9

104.2
48.5
85.4
44.8
48.8
67.0

107.5
74.7
92.5
75.0
73.7
87.0

104.8
95.8
99.9
92.5
92.5
98.0

100.4
97.9
100.1
93.6
92.1
97.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.4
102.2
103.7
105.7
103.0
102.9

103.6
104.5
107.3
111.3
105.1
106.0

104.0
108.0
109.5
112.8
110.0
107.9

103.7
111.9
107.0
120.4
108.9
110.2

105.5
116.9
103.9
120.4
114.2
112.5

105.2
122.8
109.2
127.2
116.8
115.5

Private nonfarm business

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................................
Output per unit of capital services.................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output.......................................................................
Inputs:
Labor input.........................................................................
Capital services.................................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input....................
Capital per hour of all persons..........................................
Manufacturing (1992 = 100)

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons.........................................
Output per unit of capital services.................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output.................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons......................................................
Capital services.......................................................
Energy.......................................................................
Nonenergy materials.........................................................
Purchased business services.........................................
Combined units of all factor inputs.................................

98

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

41.

Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years

[1992 = 100]
Ite m

1 96 0

197 0

198 0

19 9 0

1991

19 9 3

19 9 4

1 99 5

19 9 6

1997

1998

19 9 9

2000

Business

Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor paym ents.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................

48.8
13.7
60.0
28.0
25.2
27.0

67.0
23.5
78.9
35.1
31.6
33.9

80.4
54.2
89.4
67.4
61.5
65.2

95.2
90.7
96.5
95.3
93.9
94.8

96.3
95.0
97.5
98.7
97.0
98.1

100.5
102.5
99.9
101.9
102.5
102.2

101.9
104.5
99.7
102.6
106.4
104.0

102.6
106.7
99.3
104.1
109.4
106.0

105.4
110.1
99.7
104.5
113.3
107.7

107.8
113.5
100.6
105.3
117.1
109.7

110.8
119.6
104.6
108.0
115.1
110.6

113.8
125.1
107.1
109.9
115.1
111.8

118.6
131.4
109.0
110.7
119.1
113.8

51.9
14.3
62.8
27.5
24.6
26.5

68.9
23.7
79.5
34.4
31.3
33.3

82.0
54.6
90.0
66.5
60.5
64.3

95.3
90.5
96.3
95.0
93.6
94.5

96.4
95.0
97.5
98.5
97.1
98.0

100.5
102.2
99.6
101.7
103.0
102.2

101.8
104.3
99.5
102.5
106.9
104.1

102.8
106.6
99.2
103.7
110.4
106.1

105.4
109.8
99.4
104.2
113.5
107.6

107.5
113.1
100.2
105.2
118.0
109.8

110.4
119.0
104.0
107.7
116.3
110.8

113.2
124.2
106.4
109.7
116.8
112.3

118.1
130.5
108.2
110.5
121.0
114.3

55.4
15.6
68.3
26.8
28.1
23.3
50.2
30.2
28.8

70.4
25.3
84.7
34.8
35.9
31.9
44.4
35.1
35.6

81.1
56.4
93.1
68.4
69.6
65.1
68.8
66.0
68.4

95.4
90.8
96.7
95.9
95.2
98.0
94.3
97.1
95.8

97.7
95.3
97.8
98.8
97.5
102.1
93.0
99.7
98.3

100.7
102.0
99.5
101.0
101.3
100.2
113.2
103.5
102.1

103.1
104.2
99.4
101.1
101.0
101.3
131.7
109.0
103.7

104.2
106.2
98.8
102.0
101.9
102.2
139.0
111.6
105.1

107.5
109.0
98.7
101.2
101.4
100.6
152.2
113.8
105.5

108.4
110.3
97.8
101.5
101.8
100.9
156.9
115.2
106.2

112.3
115.9
101.3
102.6
103.2
101.2
148.9
113.4
106.6

116.2
121.1
103.7
103.7
104.2
102.5
147.6
114.0
107.4

-

41.8
14.9
65.2
35.6
26.8
30.2

54.2
23.7
79.5
43.8
29.3
34.9

70.1
55.6
91.7
79.3
80.2
79.8

92.8
90.8
96.6
97.8
99.7
99.0

95.0
95.6
98.1
100.6
99.0
99.6

101.9
102.7
100.2
100.8
100.9
100.9

105.0
105.6
100.8
100.7
102.8
102.0

109.0
107.9
100.4
99.0
106.9
103.9

112.8
109.3
99.0
96.9
109.9
104.9

117.1
111.4
98.8
95.1
109.6
104.0

124.3
117.3
102.6
94.4
104.4
100.5

131.5
122.0
104.5
92.8

140.9
128.4
106.5
91.1

Nonfarm business

Output per hour of all persons...........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real com pensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor paym ents.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................
Nonfinancial corporations

Output per hour of all em ployees.....................................
Real com pensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs..................................................................
Unit nonlabor costs...........................................................
Unit nonlabor paym ents.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................

-

Manufacturing

Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real com pensation per hour............................................
Unit labor costs...................................................................
Unit nonlabor paym ents....................................................
Implicit price deflator.................................................... .

“

Dash indicates data not available.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

99

Current Labor Statistics:
42.

Productivity Data

Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit

SIC

industries

[1987= 100]
Industry

SIC

1989

1990

Mining
Copper ores............................................

102

106.6

102.7

100.5

Gold and silver ores................................
Bituminous coal and lignite mining..................
Crude petroleum and natural g a s.................
Crushed and broken stone.................................

104
122
131
142

113.3
117.3
98.0
98.7

122.3
118.7
97.0
102.2

127.4
122.4
97.9
99.8

Manufacturing
Meat products..............................................
Dairy products.......................................
Preserved fruits and vegetables......................
Grain mill products.............................
Bakery products...........................................

201
202
203
204
205

99.2
107.7
97.8
107.6
96.1

97.1
107.3
95.6
105.4
92.7

99.6
108.3
99.2
104.9
90.6

Sugar and confectionery products..................
Fats and oils...................................................
Beverages..................................................
Miscellaneous food and kindred products.............
Cigarettes.....................................

206
207
208
209
211

101.8
116.4
112.2
99.1
109.0

103.2
118.1
117.0
99.2
113.2

Broadwoven fabric mills, cotton..............................
Broadwoven fabric mills, m anm ade.............
Narrow fabric mills....................................
Knitting mills.........................................
Textile finishing, except wool..................

221
222
224
225
226

99.8
106.3
92.7
108.0
88.7

Carpets and rugs.......................................
Yarn and thread mills............................................
Miscellaneous textile goods.........................
Men's and boys' furnishings...............................
Women's and misses' outerwear......................

227
228
229
232
233

Women's and children's undergarments.................
Hats, caps, and millinery..............................
Miscellaneous apparel and accessories..................
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products.........
Sawmills and planing mills...........................

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

115.2

118.1

126.0

141.6
133.0
102.1
105.0

159.8
141.2
105.9
103.6

160.8
148.1
112.4
108.7

104.6
111.4
100.5
107.8
93.8

104.3
109.6
106.8
109.2
94.4

102.0
120.1
120.0
101.7
107.6

99.8
114.1
127.1
101.5
111.6

103.1
111.3
96.5
107.5
83.4

111.2
116.2
99.6
114.0
79.9

97.8
104.2
109.1
100.1
96.8

93.2
110.2
109.2
102.1
104.1

234
235
238
239
242

94.6
96.4
88.4
95.7
99.6

Mlllwork, plywood, and structural members............
Wood containers.....................................
Wood buildings and mobile hom es.....................
Miscellaneous wood products..............
Household furniture...................................

243
244
245
249
251

Office furniture.....................................
Public building and related furniture.................
Partitions and fixtures...........................
Miscellaneous furniture and fixtures.........
Pulp mills..........................................

1996

1997

1998

117.2

116.5

118.9

118.3

105.5

144.2
155 9
119.4
105.4

138 3
168 0
123 9
107.2

158.5
176.6
125.2
112.6

187.6
188.0
127.4
110.2

200.0
192.2
132.3
104.8

101.2
111.8
107.6
108.4
96.4

102.3
116 4
109.1
115.4
97.3

97.4
116 0
109 2
108.0
95.6

102.5
119.3
110.7
118.2
99.1

102.3
119.3
117.8
126.2
100.8

102.2
114.1
120.0
130.4
107.5

104.5
112.6
126.4
105.2
106.5

106.2
111.8
130.1
100.9
126.6

108.3
120.3
133.5
102.9
142.9

113.8
110.1
135.0
109.1
147.2

116.7
120.2
135.5
104.1
147.2

123.0
137.3
136.4
112.7
152.2

130.0
156.1
132.4
116.3
135.8

110.3
126.2
112.9
119.3
78.6

117.8
131.7
111.4
127.9
79.3

122.1
142.5
120.1
134.1
81.2

134.0
145.3
118.9
138.3
78.5

137.3
147.6
126.3
150.3
79.2

131.2
162.2
110.8
138.0
94.3

136.2
168.6
117.7
135.9
99.1

138.7
171.9
122.4
144.8
101.0

89.2
111.4
104.6
108.4
104.3

96.1
119.6
106.5
109.1
109.4

97.1
126.6
110.4
108.4
121.8

93.3
130.7
118.5
111.7
127.4

95.8
137.4
123.7
123.4
135.5

100.2
147.4
123.1
134.7
141.6

100.3
150.4
118.7
162.1
149.9

102.3
153.0
120.1
174.7
151.9

97.8
169.5
127.0
187.0
174.5

102.1
89.2
90.6
99.9
99.8

113.7
91.1
91.8
100.7
102.6

117.4
93.6
91.3
107.5
108.1

124.5
87.2
94.0
108.5
101.9

138.0
77.7
105.5
107.8
103.3

161.3
84.3
116.8
109.2
110.2

174.5
82.2
120.1
105.6
115.6

208.9
87.1
101.4
119.2
116.9

216.4
99.5
107.7
117.2
118.7

293.0
108.7
105.8
129.2
125.4

97.1
108.8
98.8
102.4
102.0

98.0
111.2
103.1
107.7
104.5

98.0
113.1
103.0
110.5
107.1

99.9
109.4
103.1
114.2
110.5

97.0
100.1
103.8
115.3
110.6

94.5
100.9
98.3
111.8
112.5

92.7
106.1
97.0
115.4
116.9

92.4
106.7
96.7
114.4
121.6

89.1
106.2
100.3
123.4
121.3

91.3
106.6
99.2
131.2
125.8

90.7
105.0
96.8
141.3
128.7

252
253
254
259
261

97.5
113.7
92.4
101.9
107.4

95.0
119.8
95.6
103.5
116.7

94.1
120.2
93.0
102.1
128.3

102.5
140.6
102.7
99.5
137.3

103.2
161.0
107.4
103.6
122.5

100.5
157.4
98.9
104.7
128.9

101.1
173.3
101.2
110.0
131.9

106.4
181.5
97.5
113.2
132.6

118.3
214.9
121.1
110.7
82.3

113.1
207.6
125.6
121.9
86.6

109.8
210.9
127.0
122.7
88.4

Paper mills..........................................
Paperboard mills...............................
Paperboard containers and boxes.................
Miscellaneous converted paper products..
Newspapers...................................

262
263
265
267
271

103.6
101.9
101.5
101.6
95.2

102.3
100.6
101.3
101.4
90.6

99.2
101.4
103.4
105.3
85.8

103.3
104.4
105.2
105.5
81.5

102.4
108.4
107.9
107.9
79.4

110.2
114.9
108.4
110.6
79.9

118.6
119.5
105.1
113.3
79.0

111.6
118.0
106.3
113.6
77.4

112.0
126.7
109.7
119.5
79.0

114.9
127.8
113.5
122.9
83.6

122.7
131.0
113.5
127.3
86.3

Periodicals.....................................
Books.........................................
Miscellaneous publishing............................
Commercial printing........................
Manifold business forms..........................

272
273
274
275
276

98.3
94.1
89.0
101.1
89.7

93.9
96.6
92.2
102.5
93.0

89.5
100.8
95.9
102.0
89.1

92.9
97.7
105.8
108.0
94.5

89.5
103.5
104.5
106.9
91.1

81.9
103.0
97.5
106.5
82.0

87.8
101.6
94.8
107.2
76.9

89.1
99.3
93.6
108.3
75.2

100.1
102.6
114.5
108.8
77.9

115.0
101.0
119.5
109.9
76.7

115.1
105.4
128.3
115.2
73.6

Greeting cards.....................................
Bankbooks and bookbinding.....................
Printing trade services.........................
Industrial Inorganic chemicals................
Plastics materials and synthetics................

277
278
279
281
282

109.1
94.2
94.3
104.3
99.7

100.6
99.4
99.3
106.8
100.9

92.7
96.1
100.6
109.7
100.0

96.7
103.6
112.0
109.7
107.5

91.4
98.7
115.3
105.6
112.0

89.0
105.4
111.0
102.3
125.3

92.5
108.7
116.7
109.3
128.3

90.8
114.5
126.2
110.1
125.3

92.2
114.2
123.3
116.8
135.4

104.2
116.4
126.7
145.8
142.2

103.9
123.3
120.5
170.7
145.7

Drugs...................................................
Soaps, cleaners, and toilet goods............
Paints and allied products.................
Industrial organic chemicals.....................
Agricultural chemicals..................
S ee footnotes at end of table.

283
284
285
286
287

102.8
100.6
103.3
110.4
104.3

103.8
103.8
106.3
101.4
104.7

104.5
105.3
104.3
95.8
99.5

99.5
104.4
102.9
94.6
99.5

99.7
108.7
108.8
92.2
103.8

104.6
111.2
116.7
99.9
105.0

108.7
118.6
118.0
98.6
108.5

112.5
120.9
125.6
99.0
110.0

112.4
126.4
126.4
111.2
119.8

104.3
122.7
126.8
105.7
117.5

104.8
116.8
125.6
111.3
106.9

100

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

1999

42. Continued-Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit SIC industries
[1987 = 1 0 0 ] __________________
Industry

SIC

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

123.1
96.5
149.1

155.7
124.7
98.5
144.2

128.1
169.5
115.7
90.7
145.5

107.4
121.0
124.7
126.1
101.5

113.5
125.3
129.9
121.4
107.6

112.7
132.3
133.8
110.9
114.0

114.0
140.8
141.2
131.6
127.7

115.7
106.1
124.3
112.6
109.3

121.4

128.3
125.1
133.1
111.9
123.2

135.2

143.6
134.0
139.6
124.0
120.8

101.5
106.3
142.4
113.0
105.3

104.5
107.8
142.6
112.7

107.6
114.6
155.0
120.8

112.8

111.0

107.3
110.4
147.5
116.2
110.8

98.3
108.5
111.3
132.3
104.0

101.2
112.1
134.5
140.9
109.2

99.2
117.8
152.2
144.2
111.3

102.0
104.8
108.7
120.6
84.6

109.1
107.7
108.5
123.0
83.6

102.0

104.3

109.2
118.6
108.2
107.4

108.3
101.6
149.6
100.7
109.0

106.0
101.6
195.7
104.9
117.0

106.3
107.7
105.8
99.9
123.8

106.5
107.1
106.5
97.5
129.1

119.8
99.6
103.3
98.2
97.6

133.4
90.6
102.4
98.9
103.7

374
375
376
381
382

135.3
94.6

110.6

384
385
386
391
393

107.9
123.3
113.0
102.9
96.1

101.8
111.3
100.4
101.5
107.8

107.1
120.1
108.0
104.2
116.5

105.7
123.8
104.9
96.3
124.1

107.8
132.3
111.2
87.4
131.1

110.1
142.0

120.3
149.2

98.0
94.8
103.0

96.1
106.6
94.1
90.6
102.4

113.1
87.1
138.8

96.1
109.0
105.7
101.1
84.5

92.4
109.9
108.3
94.4
83.6

97.8
115.2
114.4
104.2
92.7

99.7
123.1
116.7
105.2
97.7

102.7
119.1
120.8
113.0
97.6

104.6
121.5
121.0
117.1
99.6

103.1
97.1

104.8
92.6
112.4
109.6
98.6

102.3
97.7
108.3
109.8
95.8

108.9
101.5
115.1
111.4
99.5

108.7
106.2
119.9
106.8
100.3

112.9
105.9
125.6
114.0
108.4

327
329
331
332
333

102.4
95.5
108.1
105.4
106.1

102.3
95.4
109.7
106.1
102.3

101.2
94.0
107.8
104.5
110.7

102.5
104.3
117.0
107.2
101.9

104.6
104.5
133.6
112.1
107.9

Nonferrous rolling and drawing.............
Nonferrous foundries (castings)............
Miscellaneous primary metal products.
Metal cans and shipping containers.....
Cutlery, handtools, and hardware.........

335
336
339
341
342

93.6
105.1
105.0
108.5
101.7

92.7
104.0
113.7
117.6
97.3

91.0
103.6
109.1
122.9
96.8

96.0
103.6
114.5
127.8
100.1

Plumbing and heating, except electric..
Fabricated structural metal products...
Metal forgings and stampingo...............
Metal services, n.e.c..............................
Ordnance and accessories, n.e.c........

343
344
346
347
348

101.5
96.9
99.8
102.4
89.8

102.6

102.0
100.0

98.4
103.9
103.7

Miscellaneous fabricated metal products..
Engines and turbines..................................
Farm and garden machinery.....................
Construction and related machinery.........
Metalworking machinery.............................

349
351
352
353
354

95.9
110.7
110.7
108.3
103.5

97.5
106.5
116.5
107.0
101.1

97.4
105.8
112.9
99.1
96.4

101.1
103.3
113.9

Special industry machinery.................
General industrial machinery..............
Computer and office equipment.........
Refrigeration and service machinery.
Industrial machinery, n.e.c..................

355
356
357
358
359

108.3
101.5
124.2
106.0
107.1

107.5
101.5
138.1
103.6
107.3

Electric distribution equipment.............
Electrical industrial apparatus
Household appliances...........................
Electric lighting and wiring equipment..
Communications equipment.................

361
362
363
364
366

105.0
107.4
104.7
100.2
108.2

Electronic components and accessories............
Miscellaneous electrical equipment & supplies..
Motor vehicles and equipment.............................
Aircraft and parts...................................................
Ship and boat building and repairing..................

367
369
371
372
373

Railroad equipment..................................
Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts............
Guided missiles, space vehicles, parts..
Search and navigation equipment.........
Measuring and controlling devices........
Medical instruments and supplies......
Ophthalmic goods.................................
Photographic equipment & supplies...
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware.
Musical instruments.............................

Miscellaneous chemical products...................
Petroleum refining.............................................
Asphalt paving and roofing materials.............
Miscellaneous petroleum and coal products..
Tires and inner tubes.......................................

289
291
295
299
301

95.2
109.6
95.3
101.9
103.8

97.3
109.2

Hose and belting and gaskets and packing.
Fabricated rubber products, n.e.c.................
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c.........
Footwear, except rubber...............................
Flat glass.........................................................

305
306
308
314
321

96.3
105.5

G lass and glassware, pressed or blown.
Products of purchased g lass....................
Cement, hydraulic......................................
Structural clay products...........................
Pottery and related products....................

322
323
324
325
326

100.2
90.1

Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products......
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral products..
Blast furnace and basic steel products...........
iron and steel foundries...................................
Primary nonferrous metals..............................

101.8

101.1
90.7

110.2

105.8
101.7

122.0
128.7
119.6
119.3

120.6

122.0
134.1
114.8
127.1

112.0

114.7
151.0
121.1
125.8

114.4
114.6
148.9
126.2
131.2

104.0
122.3
149.6
155.2
118.2

111.3
127.0
136.2
160.3
114.6

115.2
131.5
140.0
163.8
115.7

122.7
130.8
150.4
160.3
123.9

109.2
105.8
109.3
127.7
87.6

118.6
106.5
113.6
128.4
87.5

127.3
111.9
120.2
124.4
93.7

130.3
112.7
125.9
127.3
96.6

126.9
112.7
130.3
127.9
92.2

103.2
122.3
125.0
117.7
109.9

106.6
122.7
134.7
122.1
114.8

108.3
136.6
137.2
123.3
114.9

107.7
136.9
141.2
132.5
119.2

111.5
145.9
148.5
137.5
119.8

110.3
151.2
125.5
137.2
123.5

113.6
104.8
258.6
108.6
118.5

121.2
106.7
328.6
110.7
127.4

132.3
109.0
469.4
112.7
138.8

134.0
109.4
681.3
114.7
141.4

131.7
110.0
960.2
115.0
129.3

125.1
111.2
1350.6
121.4
127.5

139.3
111.4
1840.2
123.2
134.3

119.6
117.1
115.0
105.7
154.9

122.2
132.9
123.4
107.8
163.0

131.8
134.9
131.4
113.4
186.4

143.0
150.8
127.3
113.7
200.6

143.9
154.3
127.4
116.9
229.5

142.8
164.2
142.9
121.8
275.3

147.5
162.3
150.3
129.2
276.0

146.6
162.9
150.2
132.4
327.1

154.7
98.6
96.6
108.2
96.

189.3
101.3
104.2
112 .
102 .

217.9
108.2
106.2
115.2
106.2

274.1
110.5
108.8
109.6
103.8

401.5
114.
106.7
107.9
98

514.9
123.1
107.2
113.0
99.2

613.4
128.3
116.3
114
105,

768.0
135.3
125.2
140
102.0

107.0
140.7
136.5
139.6
112.6

141
93.:

146.:
99.:

147.
108.

151.1
130.'

150.1

110
118.'

110.:

122

122

106.

113.

119

129.
124J

148
125.:
129,
142.
150.:

184.:

116.
112.

152.5
125
118
132.
133

136,
149
142

189
127.
142,
149.
143

205.1
121.4
158.2
139.7
152.9

116
121 .
107.:
99.
97.

118.
125.

123.
144

126.
160.1

110.:

116,

95
96.'

96.
96

99.

131
167.:
129.
100

88

86

139
188
128.
102.1
78.:

147,
196
121.:
114.:
82

158.1
199
124
113.
81,

160.2
229.5
147.2
133.9
86.4

98.8
95.6
104.7
82.1

92.9
99.4
81.5

111.6
88.6

102.0

127.:
157.:
126
96
95J

132

120,
121
149
146,

120,

S ee footnotes at end of table.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

101

Current Labor Statistics:

Productivity Data

42. Continued-Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit sic industries
[1987 = 100]
Industry

SIC

1989

1990

Toys and sporting goods...........................................
Pens, pencils, office, and art supplies.....................

394
395

106.0
112.9

108.1
118.2

Costume jewelry and notions....................................
Miscellaneous m anufactures....................................
Transportation
Railroad transportation...............................................
Trucking, except local1 .............................................

396
399

93.8
100.9

105.3
106.5

4011

114.6

4213

109.3

431

99.7

4512,13,22 (pts.)

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

109.7
116.8
106.7
109.2

104.9
111.3

114.2
111.6

109.7
129.9

113.6
135.2

119.9
144.1

125.7
127.5

131.6
132.5

110.8
109.5

115.8
107.7

129.0
106.1

143.7
108.1

142.2
112.8

118.0
109.4

131.2
108.5

124.0
129.3
150.2
111.2

118.5

127.8

139.6

145.4

150.3

156.2

167.0

169.8

173.3

182.3

111.1

116.9

123.4

126.6

129.5

125.4

130.9

132.4

129.9

131.6

103.7

95.8

104.0
92.9

92.5

104.5
96.9

107.1
100.2

106.6
105.7

106.5
108.6

104.7
111.1

108.3
111.6

109.7
110.7

110.3
108.3

481
483
484
491,3 (pt.)
492,3 (pt.)

111.6
106.2
99.8
107.7
111.2

113.3
104.9
92.6
110.1
105.8

119.8
106.1
87.6
113.4
109.6

127.7
108.3
88.5
115.2
111.1

135.5
106.7
85.3
120.6
121.8

142.2
110.1
83.4
126.8
125.6

148.1
109.6
84.5
135.0
137.1

159.5
105.8
81.9
146.5
145.9

160.9
101.1
84.7
150.5
158.6

170.3
100.7
83.5
160.1
144.4

189.1
101.8
81.5
162.7
145.0

521
523
525
526
531

99.5
102.2
118.7
104.1
98.7

104.3
106.8
115.3
84.7
96.8

102.3
100.4
108.7
89.3
102.0

106.4
107.6
115.2
101.2
105.4

111.4
114.2
113.9
107.1
110.4

118.9
127.8
121.2
117.0
113.4

117.8
130.9
115.5
117.4
115.9

121.6
133.5
119.5
136.4
123.5

121.8
134.8
119.0
127.5
128.8

134.2
163.5
137.8
133.7
135.5

142.3
163.2
149.3
151.2
147.4

Variety stores................................................................
Miscellaneous general merchandise stores............
Grocery stores..............................................................
Meat and fish (seafood) m arkets...............................
Retail bakeries.............................................................

533
539
541
542
546

126.1
111.1
96.7
98.9
84.3

154.4
118.6
96.6
98.9
91.2

158.8
124.8
96.3
90.8
96.7

173.7
140.4
96.5
99.2
96.5

191.5
164.2
96.0
97.7
86.5

197.4
164.8
95.4
95.7
85.3

211.3
167.3
93.9
94.4
83.0

238.4
167.6
92.1
86.4
75.9

257.7
170.3
91.7
90.8
67.6

268.7
185.7
92.2
95.7
68.1

319.5
195.2
95.4
99.3
83.8

New and used car dealers.........................................
Auto and home supply stores....................................
Gasoline service stations............................................
Men's and boy's wear stores.....................................
Women's clothing stores.............................................

551
553
554
561
562

102.8
102.2
105.4
110.8
102.7

106.7
103.6
103.0
115.6
106.6

104.9
100.2
104.8
121.9
111.2

107.4
101.6
110.2
122.3
123.6

108.6
100.8
115.9
119.5
130.0

109.7
105.3
121.1
121.8
130.4

108.1
109.1
127.2
121.4
139.9

109.1
108.2
126.1
129.8
154.2

108.8
108.1
126.1
136.3
157.3

108.7
113.0
133.9
145.2
176.1

111.9
116.0
140.6
154.6
190.5

Family clothing sto res..................................................
Shoe stores...................................................................
Furniture and homefurnishings stores.....................
Household appliance stores.......................................
Radio, television, computer, and music stores........

565
566
571
572
573

107.1
108.4
102.5
104.7
115.9

107.8
107.9
104.6
104.3
121.1

111.5
107.8
105.4
106.7
129.8

118.6
115.5
113.9
115.5
139.9

121.5
117.3
113.3
118.0
154.5

127.7
130.7
114.7
121.5
179.1

141.8
139.2
117.4
138.4
199.3

146.9
151.9
123.6
140.7
208.1

150.2
148.4
124.2
153.5
218.4

153.1
145.0
127.2
181.4
260.3

156.5
151.1
134.1
183.9
314.6

Eating and drinking places.........................................
Drug and proprietary stores........................................
Liquor stores.................................................................
Used merchandise stores...........................................
Miscellaneous shopping goods stores.....................

581
591
592
593
594

102.5
104.4
101.5
106.6
106.1

104.5
106.3
105.9
103.0
107.2

103.8
108.0
106.9
102.3
109.0

103.4
107.6
109.6
115.7
107.5

103.8
109.5
101.8
116.8
111.5

102.1
109.9
100.1
119.5
117.1

102.0
111.1
104.7
120.6
123.1

100.6
113.9
113.8
132.7
125.3

101.6
119.7
109.9
140.3
129.1

102.0
125.6
116.5
163.6
138.8

104.3
129.8
114.6
181.9
145.2

Nonstore retailers.........................................................
Fuel dealers...................................................................
Retail stores, n.e.c.......................................................
Finance and services
Commercial banks........................................................
Hotels and motels.........................................................
Laundry, cleaning, and garm ent services................
Photographic studios, portrait....................................
Beauty shops................................................................

596
598
599

112.3
92.1
103.7

111.1
84.5
114.5

112.5
85.3
104.0

126.5
84.2
112.5

132.2
91.8
118.1

149.0
99.0
125.8

152.4
111.4
127.0

173.3
112.4
140.2

186.5
109.0
147.8

208.0
105.8
157.3

222.2
115.1
161.0

602
701
721
722
723

104.8
95.1
100.0
98.5
100.1

107.7
96.2
102.3
98.2
97.5

110.1
99.3
99.9
92.1
95.8

111.0
108.0
99.3
95.8
100.9

118.5
106.5
99.9
101.8
97.0

121.7
109.9
105.0
108.3
101.1

126.4
110.5
106.6
116.2
104.8

129.7
110.0
109.8
110.7
107.6

133.0
108.2
109.0
114.1
108.5

132.6
111.6
116.2
121.6
110.5

135.2
113.5
121.8
105.1
113.3

Barber shops................................................................
Funeral services and crem atories.............................
Automotive repair shops.............................................
Motion picture theaters................................................

724
726
753
783

112.1
98.1
108.8
115.8

100.7
91.2
107.9
118.1

94.9
89.9
100.1
118.2

113.2
103.8
105.1
114.8

121.9
98.7
105.7
113.8

118.8
104.3
114.3
110.4

115.7
100.2
121.6
105.0

128.8
97.6
116.1
104.1

150.4
101.9
117.2
103.4

157.4
104.2
124.9
106.1

138.0
99.7
127.6
110.5

U.S. postal serv ic e2 ..................................................
Air transportation ' .....................................................
Utitlities
Telephone communications.......................................
Radio and television broadcasting............................
Cable and other pay TV services.............................
Electric utilities.................................................... .........
G as utilities...................................................................
Trade
Lumber and other building materials dealers.........
Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores............................
Hardware sto res...........................................................
Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores....
Department stores.......................................................

1

Refers to output per employee

‘L Refers

102

n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified

to ouput per full-time equivalent employee year on fiscal basis.

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

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

43. Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts, in nine countries, quarterly data
seasonally adjusted

1999

2000

2000

1999

Annual average
C ountry

II

I

III

IV

I

III

II

IV

United S tates........

4.2

4.0

4.3

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.1

4.0

4.0

4.0

C anada..................
Australia................
JaDan1...................
F rance1..................

6.8
7.2
4.7
11.2

5.8
6.6
4.8
9.7

7.1
7.5
4.7
11.4

7.1
7.4
4.8
11.3

6.8
7.1
4.8
11.2

6.2
7.0
4.7
10.8

6.0
6.8
4.8
10.2

5.8
6.7
4.7
9.7

5.8
6.3
4.7
9.6

5.7
6.5
4.8
9.2

italv1,2....................
Sw eden1................
United Kingdom1...

8.7
11.5
7.1
6.1

8.3
10.7
5.9
-

8.8
11.8
7.1
6.2

8.8
11.7
7.0
6.1

8.8
11.5
7.1
5.9

8.7
11.2
7.1
5.9

8.4
11.3
6.7
5.8

8.3
10.8
6.0
5.5

8.2
10.6
5.6
5.4

8.1
10.1
5.2
-

' Preliminary for 2000 for Japan, France, Germany (unified), Italy, dicators of unemployment under U.S. concepts than the annual
and Sweden and for 1999 onward for the United Kingdom.
figures. S ee "Notes on the data" for information on breaks in
2

Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.

series.

For further qualifications and historical data, see

C o m p a r a tiv e

NOTE: Quarterly figures for France and Germany are
calculated by applying annual adjustment factors to current
published data, and therefore should be viewed as less precise in-

C iv ilia n

trie s , 1 9 5 9 - 2 0 0 0

Labor

F o rc e

S ta tis tic s ,

Ten

Coun-

(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Mar. 16, 2001).

Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

103

Current Labor Statistics:

International Comparison

4 4 . A n n u a l d a ta : E m p lo y m e n t status o f th e w o rk in g -a g e p o p u la tio n , a p p ro x im a tin g U.S. c o n c e p ts , 10 coun tries
[Numbers in thousands]
Em ploym ent status and country

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

126,346

128,105

129,200

131,056

132,304

133,943

136,297

14,299
8,619
65,470

14,387
8,776
65,780

24,640
39,140

24,780
39,210

14,500
9,001
65,990
24,830
39,100

14,650
9,127
66,450
25,090
39,180

14,936
9,221
67,200

39,130

14,168
8,562
65,040
24,570
39,040

25,210
39,480

137,673
15,216
9,347
67,240
25,540
39,520

139,368
15,513
9,470
67,090
25,860
39,630

22,910
6,940
4,520
28,410

22,570
7,050
4,443
28,310

22,450
7,200
4,418
28,280

22,460
7,230
4,460
28,480

22,570
7,440
4,459
28,620

22,680
7,510
4,418
28,760

22,960
7,670
4,402
28,870

23,130
7,750
4,430

66.4
65.9
63.9
63.4
55.8
58.3
47.5
57.7
65.7
63.1

66.3
65.5
63.6
63.3
55.6
58.0
47.9
58.2
64.5
62.8

66.6
65.2
63.9
63.1
55.5
57.6
47.3
59.0
63.7
62.5

66.6
64.9
64.6
62.9
55.3
57.3
47.1
58.9
64.1
62.7

66.8
64.7
64.6
63.0
55.5
57.4
47.1
60.3
64.0
62.7

67.1
65.0
64.3
63.2
55.3
57.7
47.2
60.6
63.3
62.8

67.1
65.4
64.4
62.8
55.7
57.7
47.6
61.4
62.8
62.7

2000

Civilian labor force

United States ....
Canada..............
Australia............
Japan.................
France...............
Germany2..........
Italy....................
Netherlands.......
Sweden..............
United Kingdom..

6,780
28,610

140,863
15,745
9,682
66,990p

29,090p

Participation rate3

66.2
66.7
64.1
63.2
55.9
58.9
47.7
56.8
67.0
63.7

I Initeri Rtatfi«

Canada..............
Australia............
Japan................ .
France...............
b a rm a n

«/2

Italy....................
Netherlands.......
Sweden..............
United Kingdom..

67.1
65.8
64.2
62.4
56.0
57.9P
47.8
61.5
63.2P
62.9P

67.2
65.9
64.7
62.0P

Employed

United States1....
Canada..............
Australia............
Japan................
France...............
fte r m a n v 2

Italy....................
Netherlands.......
Sweden..............
United Kingdom..

117,718
12,747
7,676
62,920
22,120
36,920
21,360
6,380
4,447
26,090

118,492
12,672
7,637
63,620
22,020
36,420
21,230
6,540
4,265
25,530

120,259
12,770
7,680
63,810
21,740
36,030
20,270
6,590
4,028
25,340

123,060
13,027
7,921
63,860
21,730
35,890
19,940
6,680
3,992
25,550

124,900
13,271
8,235
63,890
21,910
35,900
19,820
6,730
4,056
26,000

126,708
13,380
8,344
64,200
21,960
35,680
19,920
6,970
4,019
26,280

129,558
13,705
8,429
64,900
22,090
35,570
19,990
7,110
3,973
26,740

131,463
14,068
8,597
64,450
22,520
35,830
20,210
7,360
4,034
27,050

133,488
14,456
8,785
63,920
22,970
36,170
20,460
7,490
4,117

61.7
60.2
57.9
61.8
50.6
55.5

61.5
58.9
57.0
62.0
50.0
54.4

61.7
58.5
56.6
61.7
49.0
53.4

62.5
59.0
57.7
61.3
48.7
52.8

62.9
59.4
59.1
60.9
48.8
52.6

63.2
59.1
59.1
60.9
48.5
52.2

63.8
59.7
58.8
61.0
48.5
52.0

64.1
60.4
59.2
60.2
49.1
52.3

64.3
61.3
59.6
59.4
49.8

44.5
53.4
64.9
58.0

44.0
54.4
62.0
56.7

43.0
54.4
58.5
56.2

42.0
54.8
57.6
56.5

41.5
54.9
58.3
57.2

41.6
56.5
57.7
57.6

41.6
57.4
56.9
58.3

41.9
58.9
57.6
58.7

135,208
14,827
9,043
63,790p

27,330p

Employment-population ratio4

United States1................................................
Canada..........................................................
Australia........................................................
Japan.............................................................
France............................................................
Germany2.......................................................
Italy.................................................................
Netherlands...................................................
Sweden..........................................................
United Kingdom.............................................

64.5
62.1
60.4
59.0P

52.8P
42.3
59.4
58.7P
59.1p

Unemployed

United States1....
Canada..............
Australia............
Japan................
France...............
Germany2..........
Italy....................
Netherlands.......
Sweden..............
United Kingdom..

8,628
1,381
814
1,360
2,350
2,210

9,613
1,496
925
1,420
2,550
2,620

8,940
1,530
939
1,660
2,900
3,110

7,996
1,359
856
1,920
3,060
3,320

7,404
1,229
766
2,100
2,920
3,200

7,236
1,271
783
2,250
3,130
3,500

6,739
1,230
791
2,300
3,130
3,910

6,210
1,148
750
2,790
3,020
3,690

5,880
1,058
685
3,170
2,890
3,460

1,580
400
144
2,520

1,680
390
255
2,880

2,300
460
415
2,970

2,510
520
426
2,730

2,640
510
404
2,480

2,650
470
440
2,340

2,690
400
445
2,020

2,750
310
368
1,820

2,670
260
313

6.8
9.8
9.6
2.1
9.6
5.6

7.5
10.6
10.8
2.2
10.4
6.7

6.9
10.7
10.9
2.5
11.8
7.9

6.1
9.4
9.7
2.9
12.3
8.5

5.6
8.5
8.5
3.2
11.8
8.2

5.4
8.7
8.6
3.4
12.5
8.9

4.9
8.2
8.6
3.4
12.4
9.9

4.5
7.5
8.0
4.1
11.8
9.3

6.9
5.9
3.1
8.8

7.3
5.6
5.6
10.1

10.2
6.5
9.3
10.5

11.2
7.2
9.6
9.7

11.8
7.1
9.1
8.7

11.7
6.3
9.9
8.2

11.9
5.3
10.1
7.0

5,665
918
638
3,200p

1,760p

Unemployment rate

United States ....
Canada..............
Australia............
Japan................
France...............
Germany2..........
Italy....................
Netherlands.......
Sweden.............
United Kingdom..

additional information, see the box note under "Employment and Unemployment
Data" in the notes to this section.
2 Data from 1991 onward refer to unified Germany. See C o m p a r a t iv e C iv ilia n
Mar. 16, 2001, on the Internetat

L a b o r F o r c e S ta tis tic s , Ten C o u n trie s , 1 9 5 9 -2 0 0 0 ,

http://stats.bls.gov/flsdata.htm.

104

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

4.2
6.8
7.2
4.7
11.2
8.7

12.0
11.5
4.0
3.4
8.4
7.1
6.3 _____ s j ! _
Labor force as a oercent of the workina-aae population.
Employment as a oercent of the workina-aae population.
NOTE: See Notes on the data for Information on breaks In series for the l
States, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden.
Dash Indicates data are not available,
p = preliminary.

4.0
5.8
6.6

4.8P
9.7P
8.3P
10.7P
5.9P

45. Annual indexes of manufacturing productivity and related measures, 12 countries
[1992 = 100]
Item and country

1960

1980

1970

1988

1989

1990

1991

1993

1994

1995

1997

1996

1998

1999

O u tp u t p e r h o u r

United States..............................................
Canada.....................................................
Japan........................................................
Belgium.....................................................
Denmark....................................................
France.......................................................
Germany....................................................
Italy..........................................................
Netherlands................................................
Norway......................................................
Sweden.....................................................
United Kingdom...........................................

_

38.7
14.0
18.0
29.9
21.8
29.2
20.2
18.6
36.7
27.3
31.2

-

56.6
38.0
32.9
52.7
43.0
52.0
37.9
38.1
57.8
52.2
44.7

70.5
75.1
63.9
65.4
90.3
66.5
77.2
65.9
69.2
76.7
73.1
56.1

96.9
90.9
84.8
92.0
94.1
87.5
91.5
86.7
93.7
92.1
90.5
82.3

95.7
93.7
89.5
96.9
99.6
91.9
94.6
89.4
97.1
94.6
93.2
86.2

96.9
95.7
95.4
96.8
99.1
93.5
99.0
92.5
98.6
96.6
94.6
88.3

97.8
95.3
99.4
99.1
99.6
96.9
99.0
95.2
99.6
97.5
95.5
92.2

102.1
104.5
100.5
102.5
104.5
100.6
101.6
102.9
101.4
100.6
107.3
104.0

107.3
109.9
101.8
108.4
108.5
110.1
105.6
112.7
101.4
119.4
106.8

113.8
111.0
109.3
113.2
114.5
113.2
109.3
117.7
102.0
121.9
104.8

117.0
109.5
115.8
115.5
115.0
116.8
109.5
119.7
102.0
124.5
103.2

121.1
112.8
121.4
122.4
122.6
122.4
111.5
125.7
103.0
133.0
104.0

127.0
112.5
120.4
123.6
124.0
126.7
111.1
127.8
103.9
135.6
104.6

134.8
115.2
124.1
124.5
128.9
128.5
112.9
103.9
139.5
109.2

O u tp u t

34.2
10.7
30.7
40.8
31.0
41.5
21.9
31.7
56.5
45.9
67.7

60.6
38.8
57.6
68.0
64.1
70.9
45.8
59.5
89.1
80.7
90.3

75.8
86.0
59.9
78.2
91.3
88.7
85.3
80.4
77.4
103.6
90.7
87.2

103.2
110.1
84.6
93.3
100.8
92.2
90.9
94.5
92.8
105.3
109.8
101.4

102.4
112.6
90.2
99.1
104.3
97.2
94.0
98.1
96.9
101.3
110.9
105.4

101.6
108.6
96.3
101.0
102.7
99.1
99.1
99.6
100.1
100.2
110.1
105.3

98.3
99.0
101.4
100.7
101.7
99.8
102.3
99.2
100.6
98.3
104.1
100.0

103.5
104.6
96.0
97.0
99.0
95.7
92.5
96.4
98.2
102.7
101.9
101.4

111.1
113.2
95.4
101.4
109.3
100.3
95.2
102.2
104.2
106.7
117.1
106.1

118.4
118.1
100.6
104.2
114.7
104.9
95.3
107.2
107.8
109.0
128.4
107.8

121.3
119.8
106.7
105.1
109.7
104.6
93.5
105.6
108.4
110.1
131.1
108.2

127.7
128.1
111.1
109.9
112.6
109.7
96.3
108.3
114.1
115.7
138.6
109.6

133.5
133.1
103.6
111.8
115.3
111.5
100.9
110.3
116.6
117.6
144.6
109.9

139.3
141.3
103.9
113.8
111.5
114.2
102.2
111.4

92.1
88.3
76.3
170.7
136.5
142.3
142.3
108.7
170.6
154.0
168.3
217.3

104.4
107.1
102.3
174.7
129.0
149.0
136.3
120.9
156.2
154.3
154.7
202.1

107.5
114.6
93.8
119.7
101.1
133.3
110.5
122.0
111.8
135.0
124.0
155.3

106.6
121.2
99.8
101.5
107.2
105.4
99.3
108.9
99.0
114.3
121.4
123.2

107.1
120.2
100.8
102.3
104.7
105.8
99.3
109.7
99.8
107.1
119.0
122.3

104.8
113.5
100.9
104.3
103.7
105.9
100.1
107.7
101.5
103.7
116.4
119.2

100.4
103.9
102.0
101.5
102.1
103.0
103.3
104.2
101.0
100.8
109.0
108.5

101.4
100.1
95.6
94.7
94.8
95.1
91.0
93.6
96.9
102.1
94.9
97.5

103.6
103.0
93.7
93.6
92.4
86.5
96.7
92.4
105.2
98.1
99.4

104.0
106.4
92.0
92.0
91.6
84.2
98.0
91.6
106.9
105.3
102.9

103.7
109.4
92.2
91.0
91.0
80.1
96.5
90.5
107.9
105.3
104.8

105.5
113.5
91.5
89.8
89.5
78.7
97.1
90.8
112.3
104.2
105.4

105.2
118.3
86.1
90.5
89.9
79.6
99.3
91.2
113.2
106.6
105.0

103.3
122.7
83.8
91.5
88.6
79.5
98.6
109.8
108.0
100.5

United States..............................................
Canada.....................................................
Japan........................................................
Belgium....................................................
Denmark....................................................
France......................................................
Germany....................................................
Italy..........................................................
Netherlands................................................
Norway.....................................................
Sweden.....................................................
United Kingdom...........................................
U n it la b o r c o s ts : National currency basis

14.9
9.9
4.3
5.4
4.6
4.3
8.1
1.6
6.4
4.7
4.1
3.1

23.7
17.0
16.5
13.7
13.3
10.3
20.7
4.7
20.2
11.8
10.7
6.3

55.6
47.7
58.6
52.5
49.6
40.8
53.6
28.4
64.4
39.0
37.3
33.2

84.0
77.8
79.2
81.1
82.9
81.6
79.1
69.3
87.7
83.3
71.8
67.7

86.6
82.5
84.2
85.9
87.7
86.0
83.2
75.9
88.5
87.2
79.4
72.9

90.8
89.5
90.7
90.1
92.7
90.6
89.4
84.4
90.8
92.3
87.8
80.9

95.6
94.7
95.9
97.3
95.9
96.2
92.1
93.6
95.2
97.5
95.5
90.5

102.7
99.6
104.6
104.8
104.6
103.0
106.1
107.5
103.7
101.5
97.2
104.3

105.6
100.4
106.7
106.1
105.6
112.3
107.8
108.2
104.4
99.8
106.5

107.9
103.6
109.5
109.2
108.4
118.5
112.8
110.6
109.2
106.3
107.4

109.3
102.8
110.9
112.0
110.2
125.2
120.3
113.2
113.6
114.2
108.2

111.4
106.7
113.9
115.2
113.0
128.0
125.4
115.8
118.7
119.7
111.4

117.3
110.8
115.8
116.0
114.9
128.9
123.0
118.3
126.2
123.3
117.0

123.2
110.8
117.7
116.0

_

Canada.....................................................
Japan.......................................................
Belgium....................................................
Denmark....................................................
France......................................................

25.6
30.9
30.1
15.4
19.5
27.8
7.9
34.4
12.9
15.0
9.8

30.1
43.3
41.7
25.2
24.0
39.8
12.4
52.9
20.4
20.6
14.1

78.8
63.2
91.7
80.3
55.0
61.3
69.4
43.1
93.0
50.8
51.0
59.1

86.7
85.2
93.4
88.1
88.2
93.3
86.5
79.9
93.6
90.4
79.4
82.2

90.5
88.0
94.0
88.7
88.1
93.6
87.9
84.9
91.1
92.2
85.1
84.6

93.7
92.3
95.0
93.0
93.6
96.8
90.3
91.3
92.1
95.6
92.8
91.6

97.7
99.7
96.5
98.1
96.3
99.3
93.1
98.4
95.5
100.0
100.0
98.2

100.6
97.6
104.1
102.3
100.1
102.4
104.5
104.4
102.3
100.9
90.6
100.3

98.5
94.3
104.9
97.9
93.0
97.3
102.0
102.1
96.0
102.9
83.6
99.7

94.8
95.5
100.1
96.4
93.8
94.7
104.7
103.2
94.0
107.1
87.2
102.5

93.5
95.9
95.8
95.6
100.9
95.9
107.2
109.9
94.6
111.4
91.7
104.8

92.0
95.9
93.8
93.3
102.0
92.2
104.6
112.4
92.2
115.2
90.0
107.1

92.4
98.8
96.2
93.7
102.8
92.7
101.8
110.8
92.5
121.5
90.9
111.9

91.4
98.1
94.9
93.4
108.9
92.6
101.8
112.0

78.8
65.3
51.3
88.3
58.9
76.8
59.6
62.0
82.3
63.9
70.3
77.8

86.7
83.6
92.4
77.0
79.0
82.9
76.9
75.6
83.2
86.1
75.4
82.9

90.5
89.8
86.3
72.3
72.6
77.6
73.0
76.2
75.5
82.9
76.8
78.5

93.7
95.6
83.1
89.5
91.3
94.1
87.3
93.8
88.9
95.0
91.3
92.5

97.7
105.1
90.9
92.3
90.8
93.1
87.5
97.6
89.8
95.7
96.3
98.2

100.6
91.4
118.8
95.1
93.2
95.6
98.6
81.8
96.8
88.3
67.7
85.3

98.5
83.4
130.1
94.2
88.3
92.9
98.2
78.1
92.8
90.7
63.1
86.5

94.8
84.1
135.1
105.2
101.1
100.6
114.1
78.0
103.0
105.0
71.2
91.6

93.5
85.0
111.7
99.3
105.0
99.2
111.3
87.8
98.6
107.1
79.7
92.6

92.0
83.6
98.3
83.7
93.1
83.6
94.1
81.3
83.0
101.1
68.6
99.3

92.4
80.5
93.1
83.0
92.6
83.2
90.3
78.6
82.0
100.0
66.6
105.0

91.4
79.8
105.7
79.3
94.1
79.6
86.6
75.9

United States..............................................
Canada.....................................................
Japan........................................................
Belgium.....................................................
Denmark....................................................
France.......................................................
Germany....................................................
Italy..........................................................
Netherlands................................................
Norway......................................................
Sweden.....................................................
United Kingdom...........................................

-

-

114.0
150.7
109.7

T o ta l h o u rs

United States..............................................
Canada.....................................................
Japan........................................................
Belgium.....................................................
Denmark....................................................
France......................................................
Germany....................................................
Italy..........................................................
Netherlands................................................
Norway.....................................................
Sweden....................................................
United Kingdom...........................................
C o m p e n s a tio n p e r h o u r

Italy..........................................................
Sweden....................................................
United Kingdom..........................................
U n it la b o r c o s ts : U.S. dollar basis
United States.............................................
Canada.....................................................

Denmark...................................................
France......................................................
Germany...................................................

Sweden....................................................
United Kingdom..........................................

-

32.0
10.9
19.4
13.5
21.1
10.4
15.6
16.0
11.3
16.9
15.6

-

34.8
15.3
27.0
20.3
23.0
17.1
24.4
25.7
17.8
23.1
19.2

119.3
130.8
126.5
133.4
127.4
122.6

-

128.5
91.3
112.3

-

102.2
64.3
102.8

NOTE: Data for Germany for years before 1992 are for the former West Germany. Data for 1992 onward are for unified Germany. Dash indicates data not available.


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

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

105

Current Labor Statistics:
46.

Injury and Illness

O c c u p a tio n a l injury a n d illness rates b y in dus try,1 U nited States
Incidence rates per 100 full-tim e workers3

Industry and type of case

1988

1989 1

1990

1991

1992

1993 4 1994 4 1995 4 19964 1997 4 1998 4 1999 4

PRIVATE SECTOR5

Total cases................................................................
Lost workday cases....................................................
Lost workdays...................................................

8.6
4.0
76.1

8.6
4.0
78.7

8.8
4.1
84.0

8.4
3.9
86.5

8.9
3.9
93.8

8.5
3.8

8.4
3.8

8.1
3.6

7.4
3.4

7.1
3.3

6.7
3.1

6.3
30

10.9
5.6
101.8

10.9
5.7
100.9

11.6
5.9
112.2

10.8
5.4
108.3

11.6
5.4
126.9

11.2
5.0

10.0
4.7

9.7
4.3

-

-

8.7
3.9
-

8.4
4.1

-

7.9
39

7.3
34

8.8
5.1
152.1

8.5
4.8
137.2

8.3
5.0
119.5

7.4
4.5
129.6

7.3
4.1
204.7

6.8
3.9

6.3
3.9

6.2
3.9

5.4
3.2

5.9
3.7

-

-

-

-

_

4.9
2.9

4.4
27

14.6
6.8
142.2

14.3
6.8
143.3

14.2
6.7
147.9

13.0
6.1
148.1

13.1
5.8
161.9

12.2
5.5

11.8
5.5

10.6
4.9

9.9
4.5

9.5
4.4

8.8
4.0

8.6
4.2

14.0
6.4
132.2

13.9
6.5
137.3

13.4
6.4
137.6

12.0
5.5
132.0

12.2
5.4
142.7

11.5
5.1

10.9
5.1

9.8
4.4

9.0
4.0

8.5
3.7

-

-

-

_

_

8.4
3.9

8.0
3.7

15.1
7.0
162.3

13.8
6.5
147.1

13.8
6.3
144.6

12.8
6.0
160.1

12.1
5.4
165.8

11.1
5.1

10.2
5.0

9.9
4.8

9.0
4.3

8.7
4.3

8.2
4.1

7.8
38

14.7
7.0
141.1

14.6
6.9
144.9

14.7
6.9
153.1

13.5
6.3
151.3

13.8
6.1
168.3

12.8
5.8

11.1
5.0
-

10.4
4.8
-

10.0

-

12.5
5.8
-

9.1
4.1

8.9
4.4

13.1
5.7
107.4

13.1
5.8
113.0

13.2
5.8
120.7

12.7
5.6
121.5

12.5
5.4
124.6

12.1
5.3
-

12.2
5.5
-

11.6
5.3
—

10.6
4.9

10.3
4.8

9.7
4.7

9.2
4.6

14.2
5.9
111.1

14.1
6.0
116.5

14.2
6.0
123.3

13.6
5.7
122.9

13.4
5.5
126.7

13.1
5.4

13.5
5.7

12.8
5.6

11.6
5.1

11.3
5.1

10.7
5.0

10.1

19.5
10.0
189.1

18.4
9.4
177.5

18.1
8.8
172.5

16.8
8.3
172.0

16.3
7.6
165.8

15.9
7.6

15.7
7.7

14.9
7.0

14.2
6.8

-

-

13.5
6.5

-

-

-

13.2
6.8

13.0
67

16.6
7.3
115.7

16.1
7.2

16.9
7.8

15.9
7.2

14.6
6.5

15.0
7.0

13.9
6.4

-

-

-

_

12.0
5.8

-

-

12.2
5.4

-

14.8
6.6
128.4

11.4
5.7

11.5
59

16.0
7.5
141.0

15.5
7.4
149.8

15.4
7.3
160.5

14.8
6.8
156.0

13.6
6.1
152.2

13.8
6.3

13.2
6.5

12.3
5.7

12.4
6.0

_

_

11.8
5.7

11.8
6.0

10.7
5.4

19.4
8.2
161.3

18.7
8.1
168.3

19.0
8.1
180.2

17.7
7.4
169.1

17.5
7.1
175.5

17.0
7.3

16.5
7.2

15.0
6.8

15.0
7.2

-

_

14.0
7.0

12.9
63

18.8
8.0
138.8

18.5
7.9
147.6

18.7
7.9
155.7

17.4
7.1
146.6

16.8
6.6
144.0

16.2
6.7

14.4
6.2

14.2
6.4

13.9
6.5

12.6

12.1
4.7
82.8

12.1
4.8
86.8

12.0
4.7
88.9

11.2
4.4
86.6

11.1
4.2
87.7

11.1
4.2

9.9
4.0

10.0
4.1

-

-

_

-

9.5
4.0

85
3.7

8.0
3.3
64.6

9.1
3.9
77.5

9.1
3.8
79.4

8.6
3.7
83.0

8.4
3.6
81.2

8.3
3.5

8.3
3.6

7.6
3.3

-

6.8
3.1

-

_

6.6
3.1

-

5.9
2.8

5.7
28

17.7
6.6
134.2

17.7
6.8
138.6

17.8
6.9
153.7

18.3
7.0
166.1

18.7
7.1
186.6

18.5
7.1

19.6
7.8

18.6
7.9

16.3
7.0

15.4
6.6

14.6
6.6

13.7
6.4

6.1
2.6
51.5

5.6
2.5
55.4

5.9
2.7
57.8

6.0
2.7
64.4

5.9
2.7
65.3

5.6
2.5

5.9
2.7

5.3
2.4

5.1
2.3

-

-

4.8
2.3

-

_

_

4.0
1.9

4.0
18

11.3
5.1
91.0

11.1
5.1
97.6

11.3
5.1
113.1

11.3
5.1
104.0

10.7
5.0
108.2

10.0
4.6

9.9
4.5

9.1
4.3

9.5
4.4

8.9
4.2

8.1
3.9

8.4
4.0

-

-

-

-

-

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing5

Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.................................................
Lost workdays................................................

-

Mining

Total cases.........................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................
Lost workdays........................................................
Construction

Total cases.............................................................
Lost workday cases..............................................
Lost workdays................................................
General building contractors:
Total cases.........................................................
Lost workday cases....................................................
Lost workdays...... ,1:........................................
Heavy construction, except building:
Total cases.........................................................
Lost workday cases..................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................
Special trades contractors:
Total cases......................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................
Lost workdays...............................................................

"

4.7
-

Manufacturing

Total cases......................................................................
Lost workday cases............................................................
Lost workdays..............................................................................
Durable goods:
Total cases.............................................................
Lost workday cases..............................................
Lost workdays.........................................................
Lumber and wood products:
Total cases................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays.........................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases....................................
Lost workdays................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total cases..........................................................
Lost workday cases........................................................
Lost workdays.................................................
Primary metal industries:
Total cases........................................................
Lost workday cases..................................
Lost workdays...............................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total cases.............................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................
Lost workdays.........................................................
Industrial machinery and equipment:
Total cases......................................................
Lost workday cases....................................................
Lost workdays............................................................
Electronic and other electrical equipment:
Total cases...........................................................
Lost workday cases......................................................
Lost workdays..........................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total cases..........................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................
Lost workdays...............................................
Instruments and related products:
Total cases................................................................
Lost workday cases...............................................
Lost workdays.............................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing Industries:
Total cases............................................................
Lost workday cases....................................................
Lost workdays...................................................
See footnotes at end of table.

106

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

16.8
7.2
-

_

-

16.4
6.7

15.8
6.9

-

_

11.6
4.4

11.2
4.4

-

-

_

_

_

-

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

48

6.0

46.

C o n tin u e d — O c c u p a tio n a l injury a n d illness rates b y in dustry,1 U nited States

In d u s try a n d ty p e o f c a s e 2

Nondurable goods:
Total c a se s .................................................................................
Lost workday cases......................................................................
Lost workdays...............................................................................
Food and kindred products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................
Tobacco products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays............................................................................

1988

1 98 9

1

1 99 0

1991

1992

1993"

1994 4

1 99 5 4

1996 4

1997 4

1998 4

1999 4

11.4
5.4
101.7

11.6
5.5
107.8

11.7
5.6
116.9

11.5
5.5
119.7

11.3
5.3
121.8

10.7
5.0
-

10.5
5.1
-

9.9
4.9
-

9.2
4.6
-

8.8
4.4
~

8.2
4.3
-

7.8
4.2
-

18.5
9.2
169.7

18.5
9.3
174.7

20.0
9.9
202.6

19.5
9.9
207.2

18.8
9.5
211.9

17.6
8.9
-

17.1
9.2
-

16.3
8.7
-

15.0
8.0
-

14.5
8.0
-

13.6
7.5
-

12.7
7.3
-

9.3
2.9
53.0

8.7
3.4
64.2

7.7
3.2
62.3

6.4
2.8
52.0

6.0
2.4
42.9

5.8
2.3
-

5.3
2.4
-

5.6
2.6
-

6.7
2.8
-

5.9
2.7

6.4
3.4
-

5.5
2.2
-

9.6
4.0
78.8

10.3
4.2
81.4

9.6
4.0
85.1

10.1
4.4
88.3

9.9
4.2
87.1

9.7
4.1
-

8.7
4.0
-

8.2
4.1
-

7.8
3.6
-

6.7
3.1
-

7.4
3.4
-

6.4
3.2
-

Textile mill products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................
Apparel and other textile products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................
Paper and allied products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................

8.1
3.5
68.2

8.6
3.8
80.5

8.8
3.9
92.1

9.2
4.2
99.9

9.5
4.0
104.6

9.0
3.8
-

8.9
3.9
-

8.2
3.6
-

7.4
3.3
-

7.0
3.1
-

6.2
2.6
-

5.8
2.8
-

13.1
5.9
124.3

12.7
5.8
132.9

12.1
5.5
124.8

11.2
5.0
122.7

11.0
5.0
125.9

9.9
4.6
-

9.6
4.5
-

8.5
4.2
-

7.9
3.8
-

7.3
3.7
-

7.1
3.7
-

7.0
3.7
-

Printing and publishing:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................

6.6
3.2
59.8

6.9
3.3
63.8

6.9
3.3
69.8

6.7
3.2
74.5

7.3
3.2
74.8

6.9
3.1
-

6.7
3.0
-

6.4
3.0
-

6.0
2.8
-

5.7
2.7
-

5.4
2.8
-

5.0
2.6
-

Chemicals and allied products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................

7.0
3.3
59.0

7.0
3.2
63.4

6.5
3.1
61.6

6.4
3.1
62.4

6.0
2.8
64.2

5.9
2.7
-

5.7
2.8
-

5.5
2.7
-

4.8
2.4

4.8
2.3
-

4.2
2.1
-

4.4
2.3
-

7.0
3.2
68.4

6.6
3.3
68.1

6.6
3.1
77.3

6.2
2.9
68.2

5.9
2.8
71.2

5.2
2.5
-

4.7
2.3
-

4.8
2.4
-

4.6
2.5
-

4.3
2.2
-

3.9
1.8
-

4.1
1.8
-

16.3
8.1
142.9

16.2
8.0
147.2

16.2
7.8
151.3

15.1
7.2
150.9

14.5
6.8
153.3

13.9
6.5
-

14.0
6.7
-

12.9
6.5
-

12.3
6.3
-

11.9
5.8
-

11.2
5.8
-

10.1
5.5
-

11.4
5.6
128.2

13.6
6.5
130.4

12.1
5.9
152.3

12.5
5.9
140.8

12.1
5.4
128.5

12.1
5.5
_

12.0
5.3
—

11.4
4.8
_

10.7
4.5
_

10.6
4.3
—

9.8
4.5

10.3
5.0

8.9
5.1
118.6

9.2
5.3
121.5

9.6
5.5
134.1

9.3
5.4
140.0

9.1
5.1
144.0

9.5
5.4

9.3
5.5
-

9.1
5.2
-

8.7
5.1
-

8.2
4.8

73
4.3

73
4.4

7.8
3.5
60.9

8.0
3.6
63.5

7.9
3.5
65.6

7.6
3.4
72.0

8.4
3.5
80.1

8.1
3.4

7.9
3.4

7.5
3.2

6.8
2.9

67
30

65
28

61
2.7

7.6
3.8
69.2

7.7
4.0
71.9

7.4
3.7
71.5

7.2
3.7
79.2

7.6
3.6
82.4

7.8
3.7
-

7.7
3.8
-

7.5
3.6
-

6.6
3.4
-

65
3.2
-

65
3.3
-

6.3
3.3
-

7.9
3.4
57.6

8.1
3.4
60.0

8.1
3.4
63.2

7.7
3.3
69.1

8.7
3.4
79.2

8.2
3.3
-

7.9
3.3
-

7.5
3.0
-

6.9
2.8
-

68
2.9
-

6.5
2.7
-

6.1
2.5
-

2.0
.9
17.2

2.0
.9
17.6

2.4

2.4
1.1

2.9
1.2

1.8
.8

-

2.4
.9
-

7
.5

24.1

2.6
1.0
-

22
9

27.3

2.9
1.2
32.9

2.7

1.1

5.4
2.6
47.7

5.5
2.7
51.2

6.0
2.8
56.4

6.2
2.8
60.0

7.1
3.0
68.6

6.7
2.8

6.5
2.8
-

6.4
2.8
-

6.0
2.6
-

56
2.5

52
2.4

4.9
2.2

Petroleum and coal products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total c a se s ...............................................................................
Lost workday cases..................................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................................
Leather and leather products:
Total c a se s ..............................................................................
Lost workday cases..................................................................
Transportation and public utilities

Lost workdays..............................................................................
Wholesale and retail trade

Lost workdays..............................................................................
Wholesale trade:
Lost workday cases.....................................................................
Lost workdays..............................................................................
Retail trade:
Lost workday cases.....................................................................
Lost workdays..............................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate

Lost workdays..............................................................................

1.1

Services

Lost workdays..............................................................................

1 Data for 1989 and subsequent years are based on the S ta n da rd Ind u stria l C lass­
1987 Edition. For this reason, they are not strictly comparable with data
for the years 1985-88, which were based on the S ta n da rd Ind u stria l C lassification
M a n u a l, 1972 Edition, 1977 Supplement.
2 Beginning with the 1992 survey, the annual survey measures only nonfatal injuries and
illnesses, while past surveys covered both fatal and nonfatal incidents. To better address
fatalities, a basic element of workplace safety, BLS implemented the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries.
3 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:
ific a tio n M a n u a l,


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

N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays;
EH = total hours worked by all employees during the calendar year; and
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per week, 50
weeks per year).
4 Beginning with the 1993 survey, lost workday estimates will not be generated. As of
1992, BLS began generating percent distributions and the median number of days away
from work by industry and for groups of workers sustaining similar work disabilities.
5 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

June 2001

107

Current Labor Statistics:

Injury and Illness

47. Fatal occupational injuries by event or exposure, 1993-98
Fatalities
E vent o r e x p o su re1

1 9 9 3 -9 7

19972

A v erag e

N um ber

1998
N um ber

P e rc e n t

Total...............................................................................................

6 335

6 238

6 0?6

T ran sportation in c id e n ts.....................................................................
Highway incident...................................................................................
Collision between vehicles, mobile equipment............................
Moving in sam e direction..............................................................
Moving in opposite directions, oncoming...................................
Moving in intersection..................................................................
Vehicle struck stationary object or equipment.............................
Noncollision incident.........................................................................
Jackknifed or overturned—no collision......................................
Nonhighway (farm, industrial premises) incident............................
O verturned..........................................................................................
Aircraft.................................................................................................
Worker struck by a vehicle.................................................................
Water vehicle incident..........................................................................
Railway...................................................................................................

2,611
1,334
652
109
234
132
249
360
267
388
214
315
373
106
83

2,605
1,393
640
103
230
142
282
387
298
377
216
261
367
109
93

2,630
1,431
701
118
271
142

44
24
12

306
373
300
384
216

5
6

4

413
112
60

7
2
1

A ssau lts an d violent a c ts ....................................................................
Homicides..............................................................................................
Shooting.............................................................................................
Stabbing.............................................................................................
Other, including bombing................................................................
Self-inflicted injuries..............................................................................

1,241
995
810
75
110
215

1,111
860

960
709

16

708
73
79
216

569
61
79
223

9
1
1
4

C o n tact w ith o b je c ts and eq u ip m en t...............................................
Struck by object....................................................................................
Struck by falling object......................................................................
Struck by flying object.......................................................................
Caught in or com pressed by equipment or objects........................
Caught in running equipment or machinery..................................
Caught in or crushed in collapsing materials...................................

1,005
573
369
65
290
153
124

1,035
579
384
54
320
189
118

941
517
317
58
266
129
140

16

Falls............................................................................................................
Fall to lower level..................................................................................
Fall from ladder..................................................................................
Fall from roof......................................................................................
Fall from scaffold, staging...............................................................
Fall on sam e level.................................................................................

668
591
94
139
83
52

716
653
116
154
87
44

702
623
in
156
97
51

12

E x p osure to harm ful s u b s ta n c e s or en v iro n m en ts.....................
Contact with electric current................................................................
Contact with overhead power lines................................................
Contact with temperature extrem es...................................................
Exposure to caustic, noxious, or allergenic substances................
Inhalation of substances..................................................................
Oxygen deficiency.................................................................................
Drowning, subm ersion......................................................................

586
320
128
43
120
70
101
80

554
298
138
40
123
59
90
72

572
334
153
46
104
48
87
75

Fires an d e x p lo s io n s ...........................................................................

199

196

205

3

26

21

16

-

O ther e v e n ts or e x p o s u re s 3.............................
1 Based on the 1992 BLS Occupational Injury and Illness

3

4

6

5
1
4
2

2
2
1
6
3
1
2
1
1
1

Includes the category "Bodily reaction and exertion.'

Classification Structures.
2 The BLS news release issued August 12, 1998, reported a
total of 6,218 fatal work injuries for calendar year 1997. Since
then, an additional 20 job-related fatalities were identified,

NOTE: Totals for major categories may include sub­
categories no* s ^own separately. Percentages may not add to
because of rounding. Dash indicates less than 0.5

bringing the total job-related fatality count for 1997 to 6,238.

percent.

108

Monthly Labor Review


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

June 2001

Obtaining information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
Office or Topic
Bureau o f Labor Statistics
Information services

Internet address
http://www.bls .gov
http://www.bls.gov/opbinfo.htm

E-mail

blsdata_staff@ bls.gov

Employment and unemployment
Employment, hours, and earnings:
National
State and local
Labor force statistics:
National
Local
U l-covered employment, wages
Occupational employment
Mass layoffs
Longitudinal data

http://www.bls.gov/ceshome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/790home.htm

cesinfo@ bls.gov
data_sa@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/cpshome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/lauhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/cewhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oeshom e,htm
http://www.bls.gov/lauhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/nlshome.htm

cpsinfo@ bls.gov
lausinfo@ bls.gov
202_info@ bls.gov
oesinfo@ bls.gov
m lsinfo@ bls.gov
nls_info@ bis .gov

http: //www.bls .gov/cpihome .htm
http://www.bls.gov/ppihome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ipphome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/csxhome.htm

cps_info@ bls.gov
ppi-info@ bls.gov
ippinfo_ipp@ bis .gov
cexinfo@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/comhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ebshome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ecthome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ocshome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/oshhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/cbahome.htm

ocltinfo@ bls.gov
ocltinfo@ bls.gov
ocltinfo@ bls.gov
ocltinfo@ bls.gov
oshstaff@ bls.gov
cbainfo@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/lprhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/iprhome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/mprhome.gov

dprweb@ bls.gov
dipsw eb@ bls.gov
dprweb@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/emphome.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ocohome.htm

oohinfo@ bls.gov
oohinfo@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/flshome.htm

flshelp@ bls.gov

http:// www.bls.gov/ro4home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro 1home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro5home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro6home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro7home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro2home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro3home.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ro9home.htm

BLSinfoAtlanta@ bls.gov
BLSinfoBoston@ bls.gov
BLS infoChicago@ bis .gov
BLSinfoDallas@bls.gov
BLS infoKansasCity@ bls.gov
BLSinfoNY@bls.gov
BLSinfoPhiladelphia@bls.gov
BLSinfoSF@bls.gov

Prices and living conditions
Consumer price indexes
Producer price indexes)
Import and export price indexes
Consumer expenditures

Compensation and working conditions
National Compensation Survey:
Em ployee benefits
Employment cost trends
Occupational compensation
Occupational illnesses, injuries
Collective bargaining

Productivity
Labor
Industry
Multifactor

Projections
Employment
Occupation

International
Regional centers
Atlanta
B oston
Chicago
Dallas
Kansas City
N ew York
Philadelphia
San Francisco

Other Federal statistical agencies


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

http://www.fedstats.gov

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Postal Square Building, Rm. 2850
2 Massachusetts Ave., NE
Washington, DC 20212-0001

Periodicals
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
USPS 987-800

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
Address Service Requested


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

MLR
FEDER442F ISSDUE001R
1
F E D E R A L R E S E R V E B A N K OF S T L O U
C A R OL T H A X T 0 N L I B R A R Y U N I T
P 0 BOX 4 4 2
SAINT

LOUIS

M0

63166