The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
*™'.> U A \ ' tank ( MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW In this issue: ■ U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics The shrinking middle class? Changes in regional unemployment https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner The Monthly Labor Review is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Communications on editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief. Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Washington, D.C 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327. Subscription price per year—$24 domestic: $30 foreign. Single copy $4. domestic; $5 foreign. Subscription prices and distribution policies for the Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098 -1818) and other Government publications are set by the Government Printing Office. an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence on circulation and subscription matters (including address changes) to: Superintendent of Documents. Government Printing Office. Washington, D C. 20402 Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents The Secretary of Labor has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business reguired by law of this Department. Use of funds for printing this periodical has been approved by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget through April 30, 1987. Second-class postage paid at Washington. D.C. and at additional mailing addresses. Regional Commissioners for Bureau of Labor Statistics Region I— Boston: Anthony J Ferrara 1603 John F Kennedy Federal Building. Government Center, Boston. Mass. 02203 Phone:(617)223-6761 Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont Region II— New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt 1515 Broadway. Suite 3400. New York. N Y 10036 Phone: (212) 944 -3121 New Jersey New York Puerto Rico Virgin Islands Region III— Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis 3535 Market Street P.O. Box 13309. Philadelphia. Pa 19101 Phone: (215) 596-1154 Delaware District of Columbia Maryland Pennsylvania Virginia West Virginia i Region IV—Atlanta: Donald M. Cruse 1371 Peachtree Street, N.E.. Atlanta. Ga. 30367 Phone: (404) 881-4418 Alabama Florida Georgia Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Region V—Chicago: William E. Rice 9th Floor, Federal Office Building. 230 S Dearborn Street. Chicago, III. 60604 Phone: (312) 353-1880 Illinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota Ohio Wisconsin Region VI— Dallas: Bryan Richey Federal Building. Room 221 525 Griffin Street. Dallas. Texas 75202 Phone: (214) 767-6971 Arkansas Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas March cover: “ Voltri XIX,” a 1962 steel sculpture by David Smith (1906-1965); photograph courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. Cover design by Richard L. Mathews https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Regions VII and VIII— Kansas City: Elliott A Browar 911 Walnut Street, Kansas City. Mo. 64106 Phone: (816) 374-2481 VII Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska VIII Colorado Montana North Dakota South Dakota Utah Wyoming Regions IX and X— San Francisco: Sam M. Hirabayashi 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017, San Francisco, Calif 94102 Phone: (415) 556-4678 IX American Somoa Arizona California Guam Hawaii Nevada Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands X Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington MARCH 1985 VOLUME 108, NUMBER 3 Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor Neal H. Rosenthal 3 The shrinking middle class: myth or reality? Despite changes in our economic structure, an analysis of the factors that influence the distribution of earnings shows that middle income earners are holding their own John E. Buckley 11 Wage differences for the same job and establishment Employers commonly pay more than one wage rate to workers in a particular job; spreads between the highest and lowest rates are typically wider in a white-collar job Susan Elizabeth Shank 17 Changes in regional unemployment over the last decade From the mid-1970’s to 1984, the geographic distribution of unemployment shifted; New England posted the highest rate of joblessness in 1975 but the lowest by 1984 Horst Brand, Norman Bennett 24 Productivity trends in kitchen cabinet manufacturing After 7 years of strong gains, output per hour declined between 1979 and 1982, as recession and a slump in residential construction took their toll on the industry REPORTS Arthur S. Herman 31 Productivity increased in many industries in 1983 Donald R. Williams 35 A demographic flow analysis of cyclical employment Harvey R. Hamel 42 New data series on involuntary part-time work Philip L. Rones 43 Revisions in Hispanic population and labor force data https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEPARTMENTS 2 31 35 45 47 50 57 Labor month in review Productivity reports Technical notes Major agreements expiring next month Developments in industrial relations Book reviews Current labor statistics Labor Month In Review REPORT ON THE ELDERLY. In its annual report to the President, the Council of Economic Advisers said that the Nation’s elderly no longer are a disadvantaged group because elderly and non-elderly families have about equal income per family. Here are ex cerpts from the report. Earnings. Earnings, at one time the most important source of income for the elderly, now represent about 15 percent of the money income of the elderly. Earn ings have declined as a share of income because of reduced labor force par ticipation and because a higher fraction of elderly workers participate on a parttime basis. In 1960, 35 percent of male workers 65 and over worked on a parttime basis; now almost half work parttime. Part-time employment for female workers 65 and over increased from 48 percent to 61 percent over the same period. Most older workers who reduce their work effort below full time have left the job they held in their prime working years, and they generally work at a lower hourly wage rate. The average duration of partial retirement for those who choose to work part time is 3 years. The increase in the relative impor tance of part-time work is clearly in fluenced by the social security earnings test. Earnings above a limit reduce social security benefits by $1 for every $2 in earnings. New retirement patterns are largely a matter of choice on the part of the elder ly, a choice that reflects both an improved financial status that allows them to enjoy more leisure and the incentives in herent in retirement benefits. The view that most of the elderly have been forced to retire by poor health or by mandatory retirement laws is not supported by the evidence. Changes in health do not ex 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis plain the decline in labor force participa tion over time. To some extent, the decline in participation can be explained by the fact that the minority of workers with health problems are now able to retire early. This phenomenon is not a significant factor behind current retire ment patterns. Most workers now retire between age 60 and age 65. That pattern is explained by economic incentives, not by health. Assets. Surveys indicate that money in come from assets accounts for about 25 percent of the cash income of the elder ly. These findings should be interpreted with care because income from assets is often significantly underreported, more so for the elderly than the non-elderly. Assets become more important as a source of income as income rises, ac counting for only slightly more than 5 percent for households with income under $5,000, but more than one-third of income for households with income over $20,000. The major single asset for most of the elderly is their home. Nearly threequarters own their home; half have com plete ownership (no mortgage). Some elderly homeowners have little in the way of other resources, and they may need ways to convert home equity into money income. Social security. Social security benefits are the principal source of income for the majority of elderly Americans. Benefits account for about 40 percent of the income of the elderly, and for 59 per cent of the elderly households they make up at least 50 percent of their income. The question of whether the social security system reduces private savings for retirement is controversial. Because the system guarantees a certain level of income during retirement, individuals who plan over their entire life cycle might plan to save less during their working years if they anticipate social security benefits. On the other hand, the social security system provides an incen tive for people to retire earlier, tending to increase the number of retirement years for which savings must be done and to reduce the number of years over which it can be done. The social security system may also affect the amount of support that the elderly can expect from their own children, offsetting the reduc tion in required saving. Thus, the net ef fect on private saving is uncertain. Pensions. Pension coverage has grown dramatically over the past three decades. In 1950, about 25 percent of the work force was covered by a pension plan other than social security. Today, more than half of all workers are covered. In creased pension coverage has been linked to the tax treatment of pensions, Federal freezes on wage compensation, and a 1948 ruling by the National Labor Relations Board that employers are re quired to bargain over the terms of pen sion plans. About 30 percent of the elderly now receive pension benefits, ac counting for about 15 percent of income for all elderly persons and about 45 per cent of the income of pension recipients. Pensions will become a much more im portant source of retirement income in the future; more and more newly retired workers will have acquired pension rights because of past increases in coverage. The 1985 Economic Report o f the President is for sale ($8) by the Superintendent of Documents, Govern ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. □ The shrinking middle class: myth or reality? Some changes in our economic structure appear to contribute to a decline in the proportion o f middle income earners, but an analysis o f the factors that influence the distribution o f earnings shows the middle is holding its own N eal H. R o sen th a l Public interest and concern has been stirred by recent articles that presage a decline of middle income earners. Those who support this view contend that such earners are declining as a proportion of the U.S. work force because more of the new jobs are at the top and bottom of the earnings structure.1 They warn that this trend could lead to political and social unrest stemming from a two-tiered society, fewer advance ment opportunities for those on the lower range of the earn ings ladder, and even economic disaster as the great purchasing power engine of the middle class loses steam. Discussions of the declining proportion of middle income earners can focus on changes in the distribution of earnings of individuals or changes in the distribution of earnings of families. Changes in the distribution of earnings of indi viduals may be caused by changes in the occupational struc ture of the economy that reflect changes in industrial structure and technology. In addition, changes in the distribution of earnings within each occupation and changes in relative earnings among occupations can affect the distribution of earnings of individuals. Changes in the distribution of earn ings of families are affected not only by these same factors but also by changes in family structure. For example, in creasing numbers of dual earning families can lead to an increase in the proportion of families with high earnings Neal H. Rosenthal is chief of the Division of Occupational Outlook, Bureau o f Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and increasing numbers of single person families can lead to an increase in the proportion of families with low income. This article focuses primarily on how changes in occu pational structure affect the distribution of earnings of in dividuals. It also considers the contribution of changes to the distribution of earnings of individuals caused by changes in the distribution of earnings by occupation over the 1973— 82 period. Essential points in discussion Proponents of the declining middle thesis suggest that a variety of factors are causing a decline in the proportion of our work force in the middle income levels. These factors can be categorized as affecting either the occupational struc ture of employment or relative wages among occupations. The more significant of these concern the occupational struc ture of employment: (1) the decline of employment in the so-called smokestack industries that have a large number of production workers who, according to most proponents, exemplify workers in the middle of the earnings spec trum; (2) the rapid growth of high tech industries that some argue have a bipolar occupational structure; (3) the large number of job openings and large numerical growth in low paying occupations indicated by the b l s industry and oc cupational projections; and (4) the shifting industrial struc ture of the United States from goods-producing industries that, according to the arguments, have a large proportion of middle income workers to service-producing industries 3 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Is The Middle Class Shrinking? that are considered to have many high and low income earners with relatively few in the middle. The economic structure of the United States, however, is very complex and many factors, in addition to those cited above, affect the earnings distribution of American workers. Not all of these factors will cause bipolarization of earnings. Some will decrease the number of low income workers and increase middle income workers and work against bipolar ization. Actual changes in the earnings distribution of Amer ican workers are determined by the combined effect of many factors. The past Data from the Current Population Survey ( c p s ) on usual weekly earnings and on employment of full-time wage and salary workers by detailed occupation for 1973 and 1982 were used to examine the merits of the declining middle income earner thesis.2 The first analysis identifies the effect of changes in occupational structure on the distribution of employment of full-time workers in three income groups: low, middle, and high. The second analysis illustrates the combined effect of changes in occupational structure and changes in relative earnings among occupations on the earn ings distribution of full-time workers over the 1973-82 pe riod. A third analysis is identical to the first, but includes part-time as well as full-time workers. The 1982 c p s provided data on usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers for 416 detailed occu pations. To test the effect of changes in occupational struc ture on the distribution of workers into low, middle, and high earnings groups between 1973 and 1 9 8 2 ,1 (1) arrayed the 416 occupations in 1982 by earnings and arranged them into thirds (bottom, middle, or top), with each third con taining the same number of occupations; (2) summed the number of workers in the occupations in each third and calculated a percent distribution o f the employment; and (3) arrayed employment in 1973 for each occupation in the same order as in 1982, and calculated the 1973 percent distribution for each third. Consequently, an occupation was in the same third in 1973 as it was in 1982. If the middle income earners are declining, the proportion of total employment in the middle third would show a de cline between 1973 and 1982, and the bottom and top thirds, an increase. The following tabulation shows the distribution of employment in 1973 and 1982 by usual median weekly earnings in 1982: v Occupational earnings group Top third........................ Middle third................... Bottom third.................. Usual weekly earnings $385 to $785 273 to 384 82 to 273 I£ Percent distribution of employment 1973 1982 26.3 34.0 39.6 29.0 33.4 37.6 The top third increased, the bottom decreased, and the middle decreased modestly.3 From this analysis, we can 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis conclude that changes in occupational structure alone from 1973 to 1982, whether caused by technological change, the shift from goods- to service-producing industries, or other factors, do not support the notion of bipolarization. As indicated, changes in wage levels also effect the earn ings distribution of workers. To illustrate the combined ef fect of changes in relative wages and in occupational structure on the earnings distribution of workers over the 1973-82 period, 1 ( 1 ) ranked occupations in the 1973 c p s into thirds based on 1973 earnings; (2) summed employment in each of the thirds and calculated a percent distribution of em ployment; and (3) compared the resulting distribution with the 1982 distribution of employment in each of the three earnings groups. The following tabulation shows the dis tribution of employment by usual median weekly earnings in 1973 and 1982: Occupational earnings group Usual weekly earnings ___(current dollars)__ 1973 1982 Top third....... . $196 to $597 $385 to $785 Middle third .. . 148 to 196 273 to 384 Bottom third .. . 25 to 147 82 to 273 Percent distribution of employment 1973 1982 27.7 28.9 43.4 29.0 33.4 37.6 The data show that the proportion of total employment increased in the top and middle thirds and decreased in the bottom third. This calculation does not show a trend toward bipolarization, but instead indicates a shift of workers from the low to the middle and high earnings levels, with the middle having the largest increase. Thus, according to this tabulation, changes in occupational structure, when com bined with changes in relative wages and other factors, moved workers up the earnings distribution over the 197382 period. However, bipolarization can occur without significant shifts of employment to the top and bottom thirds of the earnings distribution if the earnings of those at the top were to in crease significantly faster than those at the bottom. For example, if the earnings distribution of the bottom third remained at the 1973 level in 1982, but the top third in creased, it could be said that bipolarization occurred even though there were no significant shifts in employment. How ever, the data do not indicate that this occurred. As shown in the following tabulation, the average of the median earn ings for the detailed occupations weighted by employment increased in each third by about the same amount from 1973 to 1982, although the increase was slightly larger in the top third and slightly lower in the bottom third than in the middle: Occupational earnings group Top third........ Middle third ... Bottom third ... Average weekly earnings (current dollars) 1973 1982 $235 173 116 $462 328 216 Percent change 1973-82 96.6 89.6 86.2 Part-time workers. Including part-time workers in an anal ysis o f how changes in occupational structure have affected the earnings distribution of workers is very complex. Parttime workers may work from 1 to 34 hours per week and, therefore, weekly earnings are probably affected more by the number of hours worked than by wage rates. In addition, most part-time workers (about two-thirds in 1982) are on part-time schedules by choice. Some are students who work only a few hours a week for spending money, some are older workers drawing retirement income who work parttime at least in part to provide diversity, and some are members of a household having a wage earner with a high income. Thus, the earnings of many part-time workers have little significance to issues related to concerns about the declining middle, such as lack of advancement opportunities and social and political unrest. Some part-time workers, however, are on part-time schedules for economic reasons such as slack work rather than by choice. The earnings of these workers would be higher if they were able to work full time, and their em ployment and earnings problems are therefore relevant to the declining middle issue. Over the 1973-82 period, the proportion of workers on part-time schedules for economic reasons increased significantly, from 3.1 percent to 6.5 per cent of total employment. A large part of this increase re sulted from the recessionary conditions prevalent in 1982, but not in 1973. Still, some structural changes in the econ omy may also have occurred between 1973 and 1982 which affected not only the distribution of occupational employ ment o f part-time workers but also the level of part-time employment. In turn, these changes could have affected the proportion o f workers in the middle income group. Because of the complexities of dealing with part-time workers in an analysis of the decline of middle income earners, only the effect of part-time workers on changes in occupational distribution from 1973 to 1982 is considered in this article. Issues concerning such factors as changes in hours worked and in the proportions of those who worked part-time voluntarily or for economic reasons are not con sidered. Therefore, part-time workers were combined with full time workers in an analysis identical to that for full-time workers. Total employment (combined part- and full-time employment) for 1973 and 1982 was distributed into the top, middle, and bottom thirds of the occupational earnings structure, based on median usual weekly earnings in 1982. Part-time workers were placed in the same third of the occupational distribution by earnings as full-time workers in the same occupation. Also, they were given an employ ment weight equal to a full-time worker.4 Part-time workers are heavily concentrated in occupations in the bottom third of the earnings structure. Therefore, the inclusion of part-time workers resulted in a larger proportion of workers in the bottom third than when only full-time workers were included. The following tabulation shows the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis distribution of total employment in 1973 and 1982 by usual weekly earnings in 1982 (part-time workers were distributed according to the 1982 usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers in the same occupation): Occupational earnings group Usual weekly earnings in 1982 Percent distribution of total employment 1973 Top third........................ Middle third................... Bottom third................... $385 to $785 273 to 384 82 to 273 22.8 31.1 46.0 1982 24.8 30.5 44.6 The data show that changes in the distribution of total employment among the top, middle, and bottom thirds of the earnings distribution between 1973 and 1982 were very similar to the changes that were shown when only full-time workers were considered. The top third increased, the bot tom third declined, and the middle third declined very slightly (but not as much as the bottom third). These results also do not support the notion of bipolari zation. Most importantly, none of the three analyses shows an increase in the bottom third, which is an important part of the bipolarization hypothesis. In fact, they all show a decline in the share of employment in the lowest group. Data limitations. The data used in the three analyses have some limitations that should be recognized. These limita tions result from sampling and response errors in the c p s as well as from differences in data definitions. The data for 1973 include workers who reported they were self-employed but who had not incorporated their business. These indi viduals are not included in the 1982 data. However, the number of these workers is relatively small and should not significantly affect the data. Also, the 1973 data reflect only one month, May, whereas the 1982 data are annual aver ages.5 The future Data on changes in occupational structure and occupa tional wage levels for the 1973-82 period do not support the declining middle income earners thesis. But what about the future? The basic tenets of the thesis could perhaps be more applicable to the future than to the recent period of back-to-back recessions. It is very difficult to forecast the future in terms of oc cupational structure and associated earnings by occupation, but some insights can be gained by looking at the b l s 1982— 95 occupational projections. The projections are based on the occupational classifi cation system used in the Occupational Employment Sta tistics ( o e s ) survey, rather than on the classification system used in the c p s . Because earnings data are not collected in the o e s survey, a similar analysis could not be conducted for detailed occupations as was done for the 1973-82 period. However, c p s and o e s data are similar enough to permit analysis of developments for the standard major occupa5 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Is The Middle Class Shrinking? tional groups of workers. The data indicate the following: • Workers who typically have a high level of earnings— professional and technical workers and managers— are projected to increase as a proportion of total employment. • Craftworkers, who also have higher than average earn ings, but with slightly more workers in the middle third than in the top third, also are projected to increase as a proportion of all workers over the 1982-95 period. (See table 1.) • Among those occupational groups with low earnings, la borers and farmworkers are projected to decline as a pro portion of the total employment, and service workers and clerical workers are expected to increase their shares. However, if the four occupational groups with lower than average earnings (operatives, laborers, service workers, and farmworkers) are combined, they are projected to decline as a proportion of total employment. The projected data are generally consistent with the find ings for the 1973-82 period. Namely, they show an in creasing proportion of employment in higher than average earnings occupations and a declining proportion in occu» pations with lower than average earnings, rather than a trend toward bipolarization. Specific issues As noted, the declining middle income earners thesis is based on a number of widely discussed developments, in cluding the decline of smokestack industries, the rapid growth of high tech industries, the large number of openings in low paying occupations, and the shift from goods- to serviceproducing industries. However, the extent to which each of these factors has contributed or can be expected to contribute to the decline of middle income earners is open to debate. The following discusses these four factors in terms of their significance to this phenomenon. Table 1. Distribution of full-time workers in major occupational groups by usual weekly earnings in 1982 and as a percent of total employment in 1982 and 1995 (In percent) Occupational group Total, all occupations . . . Distribution by usual weekly earnings Percent of total employment Top third Middle third Bottom third 1982 19951 29 33 38 100.0 100.0 Professional, technical, and related workers.......... Managers, officials, and proprietors ..................... Saiesworkers....................... Clerical workers................... 51 48 1 16.3 17.1 80 35 5 20 36 20 0 29 75 9.4 6.9 18.8 9.6 6.9 18.9 Craft and related workers . . . . Operatives ......................... Laborers, except farm .......... Service workers................... Farmworkers....................... 45 4 1 10 0 50 53 14 1 5 5 43 85 89 95 11.4 12.8 5.8 16.0 2.7 11.6 12.1 5.5 16.3 1.9 1Based on moderate trend projections presented in ‘‘Occupational Employment Pro jections through 1995,” Employment Projections for 1995, Bulletin 2197 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1984). 6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Decline o f smokestack industries. Proponents of the de clining middle income thesis argue that the long-term em ployment decline of some of the major so-called smokestack industries— automobile manufacturing, blast furnaces and basic steel products, and iron and steel foundries— is a major cause of bipolarization.6 These industries do demonstrate declining trends in employment. Employment peaked in the mid-1960’s in the blast furnaces and basic steel products industry, and in the mid-1970’s in iron and steel foundries. Automobile manufacturing employment peaked in 1978 at about 1 million workers, and most industry analysts do not expect employment to rebound to that level in the foresee able future. (Employment trends in these and other indus tries are shown in table 2.) These smokestack industries pay relatively high wages. Average hourly earnings of production workers in each of the three industries are well above the average for production or nonsupervisory workers in all private nonagricultural es tablishments. (See table 2.) These industries also have a higher than average proportion of production workers. Thus, if it is assumed that production workers in these industries exemplify middle income earners, and that those displaced from these industries end up on low wage jobs or become unemployed, the decline of employment in these three in dustries would tend to cause income polarization.7 However, the effect of the employment decline in smoke stack industries on the overall economy is not significant. Since 1973 (the high point of combined employment in automobile manufacturing, blast furnaces and basic steel products, and iron and steel foundries), there has been a notable decline in the number of workers in these industries. But, if the decline had not taken place, total employment in 1983 would have been only .5 percent higher. Even if all of these workers were in the middle third of the earnings structure, the overall distribution of workers by earnings would not be significantly different than it was in 1983 because they would be such a small part of the total. We can conclude that the decline of smokestack industries is a factor that could cause bipolarization. However, we cannot conclude that international competition and tech nological change, factors that are largely responsible for the declining employment in the smokestack industries, cause bipolarization without looking at other industries which also face the same problems and which also have experienced employment declines over the past decade— textile, apparel, and leather products manufacturing. (See table 2.) Because these latter industries pay relatively low wages, the decline in the number of workers in the bottom of the earnings scale that resulted from their employment declines (600,000 from 1973 to 1983) more than offset the decline in the higher paying smokestack industries. Growth o f high tech industries. An additional argument advanced by proponents of the declining middle income earners thesis indicates that the rapid growth of high tech Table 2. Employment and average hourly earnings in selected industries with declining employment trends, 1960-83 Year Total nonagricultural wage and salary worker employment Motor vehicle manufacturing Blast furnace and basic steel products 1960 ............... 1970................. 1971 ............... 1972 ............... 1973 ............... 1974 ............... 1975 ............... 1976 ............... 1977 ............... 1978 ............... 1979 ............... 1980 ............... 1981 ............... 1982 ............... 1983 ............... 54,189 70,880 71,214 73,675 76,790 78,265 76,945 79,382 82,471 86,697 89,823 90,406 91,156 89,566 90,138 724 799 848 875 936 908 792 881 947 1,005 990 789 789 699 758 651 627 574 564 605 609 548 549 554 561 571 511 506 396 343 $2.09 3.23 3.45 3.70 3.94 4.24 4.53 4.86 5.25 5.69 6.16 6.66 7.25 7.68 8.02 $2.81 4.21 4.72 5.12 5.46 5.86 6.42 7.08 7.84 8.49 9.06 9.83 11.02 11.61 12.10 $3.04 4.16 4.51 5.07 5.50 6.27 6.96 7.60 8.36 9.39 10.42 11.41 12.61 13.38 12.90 Iron and steel foundries Textile m ill products Apparel and other textile products Leather and leather products 924 975 955 986 1,010 965 868 919 910 899 885 848 823 749 744 1,233 1,364 1,343 1,383 1,438 1,363 1,243 1,318 1,316 1,332 1,304 1,263 1,244 1,161 1,164 363 319 299 296 284 271 248 263 255 257 246 233 238 219 208 $1.61 2.45 2.57 2.75 2.95 3.20 3.41 3.69 3.99 4.30 4.66 5.08 5.52 5.83 6.18 $1.59 2.39 2.49 2.59 2.77 2.98 3.17 3.40 3.62 3.94 4.23 4.56 4.97 5.20 5.37 $1.64 2.49 2.59 2.68 2.80 2.99 3.20 3.40 3.61 3.89 4.22 4.58 4.99 5.33 5.54 Employment (in thousands) 205 228 218 219 237 250 230 223 230 237 241 209 201 159 141 Average hourly earnings1 1960 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... .............. ............... $2.49 3.73 4.03 4.33 4.70 5.03 5.45 6.16 6.67 7.25 7.76 8.21 9.02 9.51 9.90 11ncludes produt tion workers In manufacturing and mining, construction workers in construction, and nonsupervlsory workers In other industries. Source: Empioymenl and Earnings, Bureau of Labor Statistics. industries contributes to bipolarization because these in dustries are characterized by large proportions of high and low paid workers and few in the middle.8 If this argument has merit, these industries would have relatively high pro portions o f highly paid professional and managerial work ers, and o f low paid clerical and service workers; production workers would have to be relatively low paid unless there were very few of them in these industries. In previous studies, the b l s has shown that high tech employment, under each of three groups of high technology industries, is growing faster than total employment.9 How ever, the analysis also showed that high tech industries comprise a relatively small proportion of total employment and total employment growth, b l s defines the three groups of high tech industries as: group I— industries with a pro portion of technology-oriented workers (engineers, life and physical scientists, mathematical specialists, engineering and science technicians, and computer specialists) at least 1.5 times the average for all industries; group II— industries with a ratio of r & d expenditures to net sales at least twice the average for all industries; and group III— manufac turing industries with a proportion of technology-oriented workers equal to or greater than the average for all manu facturing industries, and a ratio of r & d expenditures to sales close to or above the average for all industries (two non https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis manufacturing industries which provide technical support also are included). The following tabulation shows the per cent of total employment in each of the three groups of high tech industries in 1972, 1982, and 1995, and the percent change for 1972-82 and 1982-95: Percent of total employment 1972 1982 1995 All wage and salary workers............ 100.0 Group 1............... 13.1 Group I I .............. 2.4 Group I I I ............ 5.8 100.0 100.0 13.4 14.1 2.8 2.9 6.2 6.6 Percent change 1972-82 1982-95 20.1 22.6 39.8 27.3 28.1 34.5 34.1 35.6 In 1982, under the broadest definition (group I), high tech industries only accounted for 13.4 percent of total employ ment, up from 13.1 percent in 1972. Under a more narrow definition (group III), high tech comprised only 6.2 percent of total employment. An even narrower definition (group II), shows high tech employment accounting for only 2.8 percent of the total. Group III is probably the definition that would be used by proponents of the declining middle income earners thesis because the broadest definition includes, among other industries, automobile manufacturing. In about half of the high tech industries included in the group III definition, professional and managerial workers 7 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Is The Middle Class Shrinking? combined accounted for a higher proportion o f total em ployment than in the economy as a whole, and very few were significantly below the average. Nearly all o f the high tech industries have a higher proportion of highly paid work ers than manufacturing as a whole. However, the proportion of employment accounted for by low paid clerical and ser vice workers is below that for all industries, but slightly higher than all manufacturing. Thus, the growth in high tech industries can only contribute significantly to bipolarization if production workers, who make up the largest proportion of workers in these industries, are low paid. But nearly all of the production workers in these industries have average hourly earnings above average for production workers in all manufacturing and production or nonsupervisory workers in all private nonagricultural establishments. (See table 3.) All these factors combined would tend to work against po larization when the entire economy is considered. There fore, data on earnings and on employment growth provide little evidence that high tech industry growth is contributing to bipolarization.10 Machine operatives, miscellaneous specified .. Assemblers.............................................. Construction laborers, except carpenter helpers ................................................ Carpenters .............................................. Farm laborers, wage workers ..................... Job openings in low paying occupations. Source: Occupational Projections and Training Data, 1982 edition, Bulletin (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). Another point made by some proponents of the declining middle income Table 3. Average hourly earnings of production workers in high tech industries, 1982 Industry All private nonagricultural establishments......................... Average hourly earnings Proportion of 1982 employment accounted for b y Professional Clerical and and service managerial workers workers $ 7.68 25.7 36.1 Manufacturing, total............................... Industrial inorganic chemicals.............. Plastic materials and synthetics............ Drugs .............................................. Soaps, cleaners, and toilet preparations. . Paints and allied products ................... Industrial organic chemicals................. Agricultural chemicals......................... Miscellaneous chemical products.......... Petroleum refining ............................. Ordnance and accessories ................... 8.50 11.02 9.88 9.08 9.12 8.80 11.85 9.71 9.22 13.30 9.00 17.0 28.9 32.1 35.7 22.9 23.4 33.4 20.1 23.9 21.5 17.0 13.0 14.2 11.4 21.9 22.8 21.0 13.9 13.9 18.0 12.8 14.0 Engines and turbines........................... Special industry machinery, except metalworking ................................. Office computing and accounting machines........................................ Electric transmission and distribution equipment..................................... Electrical industrial apparatus .............. Radio and TV receiving equipment........ Communication equipment................... 11.41 23.7 4.6 8.95 21.6 16.4 7.92 46.7 19.4 8.06 8.32 7.71 9.62 15.8 18.7 19.3 40.6 10.3 12.4 16.3 17.5 Electric components and accessories . . . Miscellaneous electrical machinery........ Aircraft and parts............................... Guided missiles and space vehicles . . . . Engineering laboratories....................... Measuring and controlling instruments. . . Optical instruments and lenses ............ Surgical, medical, and dental instruments Photographic equipment and supplies .. . 7.17 8.89 11.23 10.96 8.44 8.03 8.53 7.00 10.57 25.6 16.4 33.8 57.6 36.6 28.2 41.0 20.4 34.9 12.4 10.9 15.0 15.5 18.8 16.4 15.6 15.2 18.4 Computer and data processing services . . . 8.58 47.2 45.0 Note: This table uses group III definition of high tech industries. Source: National Industry-Occupation Matrix and Employment and Earnings, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 4. in 1980 Twenty occupations with the most job openings Job openings Occupation Number (In thousands) Percent of total Sales clerks, retail trade............................. Managers and administrators, not elsewhere classified.............................................. Cashiers.................................................. Secretaries, not elsewhere classified............ Waiters and waitresses ............................. 758 4 .0 713 618 599 466 3 .8 3 .3 3.2 2 .5 Cooks, except private household ................. Stockhandleis .......................................... Janitors and sextons................................. Bookkeepers ............................................ Miscellaneous clerical workers..................... 437 358 333 305 301 2.3 1.9 Nursing aides and orderlies ....................... Child care workers, private household.......... Building interior cleaners, not elsewhere classified.............................................. Typists.................................................... Truckdrivers ............................................ 284 278 1.5 1.5 261 250 245 1.4 1.3 1.3 239 238 1.3 1.3 232 224 221 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.8 1.6 1.6 2202 earners thesis is that a majority of the occupations having the largest number of job openings and large projected em ployment growth are on the low end of the earnings spec trum.11 (See table 4.) This point is often made using the latest b l s projections of occupational growth, 1982-95. In these projections, many o f the occupations that are expected to have the largest numerical employment growth over the 1982-95 period do have low earnings.12 However, these factors do not necessarily imply that low paying jobs will increase their share of employment and cause the proportion of workers earning low wages to rise. The b l s data on job openings indicate that most openings are caused by the need to replace workers rather than by growth in the number of jobs.13 This is especially true in low paying occupations that employ large numbers of young people and women, who may periodically leave the labor force to attend school or to care for their families. In low paying jobs there also is significant movement between oc cupations. However, despite the large number of openings in these occupations, there is no indication that the number of workers having low earnings is increasing because the rate o f increase in employment in these jobs is generally not faster than that for the total economy. Similarly, in analyzing the composition of employment by occupation implied by projected growth, the growth rate must be considered in preference to numerical change. A very large occupation with a growth rate close to that for all occupations will show large numerical growth but will not increase as a proportion of total employment. For ex ample, building custodians are projected to have the largest numerical growth between 1982-95, but with only an av- erage projected rate o f growth, this occupation is not ex pected to increase as a proportion of total employment. Among the 20 occupations that are projected to grow fastest over the 1982-95 period, most are in the top third earnings category and most of the remainder are in the middle third. (See table 5.) However, looking only at the fastest growing occupations can be misleading. A compre hensive analysis should include the entire occupational spec trum (which was done in an earlier section o f this article). It is necessary to use data for all occupations because, in dividually, the fastest growing occupations are numerically small and have little effect on changing the overall distri bution o f workers by earnings level. Shiftfrom goods- to service-producing industries. Data on the changing distribution o f industry employment clearly show a shift from goods-producing to service-producing industries.14 To support the conclusion that this trend leads to bipolarization o f earnings, the data would have to show that the distribution of low and high earnings occupations is concentrated to a greater extent in service-producing in dustries than in goods-producing industries. An analysis o f this nature was conducted by Thomas Stanback, Jr. and Thierry J. Noyelle for 10 major occu pational groups in 18 industry categories.15 This analysis showed a tendency towards bipolarization that has been used by many o f the other proponents of the declining middle income earners thesis as a basis for their conclusion. Stanback and Noyelle applied 1975 earnings data for ma jor occupational groups to data on employment by major occupational group by industry for 1975 and 1960. Using Table 5. Twenty fastest growing occupations, 1982-95 Occupation Projected employment growth, 1 9 8 2 -9 5 (In percent) Computer service technicians............................. Legai assistants................................................ Computer systems analysts............................... Computer programmers ............................... Computer operators................................. Office machine repairers ................................... Physical therapy assistants ............................... 96.8 94.3 85.3 76.9 75.8 71.7 67.8 Electrical engineers ..................................... Civil engineering technicians ............................. Peripheral electronic data processing equipment operators .......................................... Insurance clerks, medical ................................. Electrical and electronic technicians..................... Occupational therapists............................... Surveyor helpers................................. 65.3 63.9 Credit clerks, banking and insurance................... Physical therapists............................................ Employment interviewers........................... Mechanical engineers............................... Mechanical engineering technicians..................... Compression and injection mold machine operators plastics ...................................................... 63.5 62.2 60.7 59.8 58.6 54.1 53.6 52.5 52.1 51.6 50.3 Note: Includes only detailed occupations with 1982 employment of 25,000 or more. Data for 1995 are based on moderate-trend projections. Source: “ Occupational Employment Projections Through 1995,” Employment Pro¡ections for 1995, Bulletin 2197 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1984). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis constant earnings data, they analyzed how changes in the occupational distribution alone would affect the distribution of employment by earnings. Their analysis was, therefore, similar to that presented in this article for the economy as a whole. However, the Stanback and Noyelle analysis was done at a major occupational group level, rather than by detailed occupation. Their analysis showed that employment of middle income earners declined between 1960 and 1975, and that employment at both the top and bottom of the earnings scale increased. Their study also showed that growth of service-producing industries was largely responsible for this trend. Their analysis does lend considerable support to views that the middle is declining. However, there are some concerns about the validity of the analysis. Data on the occupational employment distri bution of industries used by Stanback and Noyelle for 1960 were from the industry-occupation mátrix developed by b l s based on the occupational classification used in the 1960 census. Earnings data, however, were taken from the Survey of Income and Education collected as a supplement to the c p s in 1975, which used the 1970 census classification. Although similar to the 1960 census classification, some occupations shifted from one major group to another and could have affected the analysis. In addition, employment data in the industry-occupation matrices include part-time workers. Given that part-time workers are generally found in low paying occupations and that part-time workers increased significantly as a proportion of the work force between 1960 and 1975, these data would tend to show an increase in low paid workers. Also, 1975 was a recession year and thus had a larger proportion of workers on part-time schedules for economic reasons than 1960. Finally, because the calculations were done by major occupational group, the analysis would not have captured the changing structure among detailed occupations within each major group. Thus, it is possible that some structural changes are masked by the broad data used. Interestingly, a study by Peter Henle and Paul Ryscavage that measured the trend toward inequality in earnings for a similar period produced results similar to Stanback and Noy elle. This study, based on data from the c p s over the 1958— 77 period, used a Gini index to measure the equality of earnings distribution for a number of factors, including oc cupations.16 In general, the study showed greater inequality over time, but with considerable slowing of the long-term trend for the 1973-77 period. For some major occupational groups, however, there is a trend toward greater equality over time or an uncertain trend. For those showing greater inequality over time, there was less change later in the period. The Stanback and Noyelle and Henle and Ryscavage stud ies both show comparable results for a period beginning about the early 1960’s to the mid-1970’s which suggest some bipolarization of earnings. However, my analysis of oc cupational trends for the 1973-82 period shows that the 9 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Is The Middle Class Shrinking? tendency toward bipolarization, if it did exist, seems to have been reversed since the mid-1970’s. Is t h e m i d d l e d e c l i n i n g ? Some trends in the industrial and occupational structure of employment could cause a degree of earnings bipolarization. However, a multitude of factors have an effect on the occupational structure of our economy and on the earnings of workers in specific occu pations. Although not all can be quantified, an analyses of available data indicates that the combined effect of all factors apparently has not caused bipolarization over the 1973-82 period. Also, given b l s projections of employment by oc cupation, bipolarization is not likely to occur between 1982 and 1995. □ ■FO O TN O TES■ r 1See, for example, Bob Kuttner, “ The Declining M iddle,” T h e A tla n tic M o n th ly , July 1983, pp. 6 0 -72; Lucy S. Gordon, A r e M id d le L e v e l J o b s d i s a p p e a r i n g ? (Industrial Union Department, a f l - c io , 1983); Lester Thurow, “ The Disappearance of the Middle C lass,” T h e N e w Y o rk T im es, Feb. 5, 1984, p. f3; Thomas M. Stanback, Jr. and Thierry J. Noyelle, C itie s in T r a n s itio n (Conservation of Human Resources, Landmark Study Series, 1982); Barry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison, T h e D e in d u s tr ia li s a t i o n o f A m e r ic a (Basic Books, Inc., 1982); Bruce Steinberg, “ The Mass Market is Splitting Apart,” F o rtu n e , Nov. 28, 1983, pp. 76-82; and D e in d u s tr ia liz a tio n a n d th e T w o T ie r S o c ie ty (Industrial Union Department, a f l - c io , 1984). 2 Similar data collected before and after this period were tabulated using different occupational classification systems and therefore are not com parable. 3The same analysis was conducted by deciles. This analysis showed that the proportion o f total employment increased in the top five earnings deciles between 1973 and 1982 and decreased in each of the bottom five deciles. 4 Median occupational weekly earnings could have been recalculated by combining part-time and full-time workers in the earnings distribution for each occupation. However, the significant data problems that would be incurred would result in very little difference in the earnings distribution o f occupations by thirds. Most part-time workers are in occupations falling in the bottom third o f the earnings distribution of full-time workers. Be cause part-time workers generally earn less than full-time workers, these occupations would remain in the bottom third. Also, part-time workers in occupations found in the middle and top thirds based on the earnings of full-time workers generally comprise a very small percent of each occu pation and probably would not change the median earnings level for those occupations to a significant enough extent to move them into a lower group. 7This analysis focuses on the distribution of earnings of individuals rather than on the distribution by occupation. Because production workers in these industries are in many occupations and may not account for a large proportion of an occupation’s total employment, a decline of workers in these industries would not be likely to affect an occupation’s earnings distribution to the extent that it would move out of its relative earnings positions. It should also be noted that average weekly earnings o f pro duction workers in these industries from the b l s Current Employment Statistics (establishment) survey would place these workers in the low end of the top third earnings group, rather than in the middle group. 8 “ The Declining Middle” ; “ The Disapperance of the Middle Class” ; and D e in d u s tr ia liz a tio n a n d th e T w o T ie r S o c ie ty . 9Richard W. Riche and others, “ High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice o f the employment p ie,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1983, pp. 5 0 -5 8 . 10In addition, a study conducted by the Computer and Business Equip ment Manufacturers Association, which was conducted primarily in re sponse to the adverse crticism that high tech industries are creating a bipolar economic structure, shows a typical bell curve in the earnings of workers in the industry group. I n d u s tr y N e w s (Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers Association, Apr. 2, 1984). 11 “ The Declining Middle” ; A re M id d le L e v e l J o b s D isa p p ea rin g ? ', “ The Mass Market Is Splitting Apart” ; and D e in d u s tr ia liz a tio n a n d th e T w o T ie r S o c ie ty . 12 “ Occupational Employment Projections through 1995” E m p lo y m e n t P r o je c tio n s f o r 1 9 9 5 , Bulletin 2197 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1984). 13O c c u p a tio n a l P r o je c tio n a n d T ra in in g D a ta , 1 9 8 2 E d itio n , Bulletin 2202 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). 5The use o f usual weekly earnings could also cause some differences in the analyses, compared to a true wage change, given that median earnings can be affected by length o f work week, earnings distribution within an occupation, and other factors. 14Valerie A. Personick, “ The job outlook through 1995: industry output and employment projections,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1983 pp. 2 4 -3 5 . 6A r e M id d le L e v e l J o b s D is a p p e a r in g ? ; “ The Disappearance of the; Middle Class” ; T h e D e in d u s tr ia liz a tio n o f A m e r ic a ; “ The Mass Market Is Splitting Apart” ; D e in d u s tr ia liz a tio n a n d th e T w o T ie r S o c ie ty . 16Peter Henle and Paul Ryscavage, “ The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1 9 5 8 -7 7 ,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , April 1980, pp. 3 -1 0 . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 15C itie s in T r a n s itio n . Wage differences among workers in the same job and establishment Employers commonly pay more than one wage rate to workers in a particular jo b ; spreads between the highest and lowest rates in a jo b are typically wider among white- than blue-collar occupations Jo h n E . B u c k l e y Establishments employing two workers or more in an oc cupation often pay these workers at different rates. How frequent is such pay variation? How wide is the resulting spread in rates? Does the degree of pay dispersion differ by occupation? This article explores these issues using data collected in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 1983 Area Wage Survey program. Where an establishment had two workers or more in a job, the percent by which the salary of the highest paid incumbent exceeded that of the lowest paid incumbent was calculated. Percentage differences for indi vidual establishments were then averaged over all estab lishments providing such comparisons. Rate structures were clearly different for white- and bluecollar workers. More than three-fourths of the workers em ployed in the 40 white-collar occupations studied were in establishments paying more than one rate for their job. Fewer than half of the workers in the 28 blue-collar occupations studied were employed in multi-rate situations. The re mainder were either the only incumbents in the job or were paid at the same rate as the other incumbents of the job. Among workers employed in establishments paying more than one rate for a job, the pattern was again different for white- and blue-collar occupations. Average wage spreads John E. Buckley is an economist in the Division of Occupational Pay and Employee Benefit Levels, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Edward Johnson, a systems analyst in the Division of Directly Collected Periodic Surveys, assisted in the preparation of this article. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis between highest and lowest paid workers in the white-collar occupations studied ranged from 17 percent for industrial nurses to 42 percent for intermediate electronics technicians. For the 12 skilled maintenance occupations, average wage spreads for all but two were between 7 and 14 percent. Among unskilled plant occupations, ranges were as small as 13 percent for power-truck operators (other than forklift) and as large as 45 percent for lower level guards. These differing structures reflect differences in pay sys tems in U.S. industry. Employers commonly adopt formal pay systems, establishing either a single rate for a job clas sification or a range of rates in which the minimum, max imum, or both of these rates are specified. Pay of individual workers within a specified range depends on performance (merit), length of service, or both. In the absence of a formal pay system, rates in a given job are determined largely by the employer’s appraisal of individual workers. Data are not available from the Area Wage Survey program to dis tinguish between the effects of formal and informal systems. Pay spreads among workers in the same job and estab lishment cannot be determined from the pay variations typ ically published in occupational wage survey reports. Because of differences in pay levels among employers, industries, and localities, these reports show considerably wider ranges of pay rates in a job than would be expected in a single establishment. It is not unusual for b l s area wage surveys covering a variety of industries to find the highest paid worker in an occupation earning twice as much as the lowest 11 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Wage Differences for Same Job and Establishment paid. In nationwide studies, the highest paid worker may earn more than three times as much as the lowest paid. In contrast, the average pay spreads found in this study ranged from 7 to 45 percent. Information on pay spreads within establishments can be used for a variety of purposes. For example, it is important to those establishing and administering rate-range pay plans. It is also useful in analyzing wage structures in that it helps to explain overall patterns of pay differentials. In addition, it indicates the extent to which pay may be increased without promotion to another job. Computing wage differences Information for this review of pay spreads within the same job and establishment comes from data collected in more than 11,200 establishments located in 70 metropolitan areas throughout the country.1 For each of 6 8 b l s occupational classifications surveyed in 1983,2 the percent by which the highest rate paid exceeded the lowest rate was calculated where an establishment employed two workers or more at different rates. These percentage differences were averaged, after weighting the pay spread for each establishment by the number of workers it employed in the occupation.3 Es tablishments paying the same rate to all workers, as well as those with single incumbents in a job, were excluded from the calculations. A standard set of occupational descriptions was used in all establishments. In some cases, a single b l s occupation or level covered more than one company job. For example, the wide average pay spread shown in table 1 for level I accounting clerks in unionized establishments is partly ex plained by the existence in some transportation and utilities companies of two pay grades which fit the b l s description for this occupational classification. In other cases, the com pany job was barely broad enough to fit within the b l s description. This narrow span of duties could restrict any related pay range. This study of wage rate dispersion is limited to spreads between highest and lowest rates actually paid to incum bents by individual employers. It does not measure the full spread o f formal rate ranges.4 This topic, however, was covered in a recent study by Martin Personick. In a review of formal pay systems for white-collar workers in medium and large firms, Personick noted that “ . . . differences be tween the highest and lowest rates actually paid are generally much smaller than differences between the maximum and minimum rates specified for a range. ” 5 Personick also found that workers tended to be clustered in the lower half of the rate range. Single and multiple pay rates In establishments with two workers or more in a job, the relative importance of single and multiple pay rates varied by occupational group. (See table 1.) The generally lower incidence of blue-collar employment in multiple-rate estab 12 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis lishments partly mirrors the greater extent of collective bar gaining among these workers than among white-collar workers. Negotiated pay structures are more likely to con tain single rates than are non-negotiated structures. As ex plained by David Belcher: “ Unions often favor the single rate principle because it eliminates judgment-based differ entials in individual pay.” 6 Among plant jobs, guards and janitorial workers were most likely to be in multiple-rate establishments, partly be cause many of the survey’s guards and janitors worked in protective or janitorial service firms. In these firms, almost all workers are employed in the same occupation. While most may be paid at or near the minimum wage, at least some receive higher pay in recognition of length of service or proficiency in the job. Often, higher rates are also re quired because of a customer’s special needs. About 10 percent of the workers whose wages were sur veyed in the 1983 Area Wage Survey program were the only incumbents in their job. This percentage, however, varied considerably by job classification— from 1 percent for millwrights to 83 percent for switchboard operatorreceptionists. Differences in pay Among establishments paying multiple rates to workers in the same job, average spreads between highest and lowest rates varied by occupation, industry, and establishment size category. These factors and their relationship to union status are considered in turn.7 Occupation. White-collar jobs, which commonly include a broad range of duties, provide an opportunity to dem onstrate superior performance. Where promotion to a higher grade is inappropriate, a range of pay rates can be used to reward superior performance within a job or pay grade. Conversely, it has been argued that the working environment of employees in certain blue-collar jobs— for example, those in assembly line operations— offers limited opportunity to deviate from established performance standards;8 under such conditions, a single rate or narrow rate-range system may be more appropriate. Furthermore, single rates or narrow rate ranges are generally favored by labor unions, whose current strength is in the blue-collar area. These differences between white- and blue-collar jobs are reflected in the results of this study. In establishments with more than one rate for a job, the percent by which the highest rate exceeded the lowest was generally larger in white- than blue-collar jobs. The roughly 30 percent average wage spread in white-collar jobs was more than twice as wide as the average spread in skilled blue-collar jobs, but only mod erately wider than the average for material movement and custodial jobs. Among the blue-collar occupations studied, the potential for performance variation is smallest in the skilled maintenance jobs, which are restricted by definition to workers who have achieved journeyman status. Also, skilled maintenance workers, on average, are more con centrated in unionized establishments than are material movement and custodial workers. Among the individual white-collar jobs studied, mid-level electronics technicians had the widest average wage spread (42 percent), followed by entry-level electronics technicians (39 percent). These spreads are affected by the fairly broad range of duties and responsibilities in the b l s job descrip tions for the various levels of electronics technicians. Nurses and switchboard operator-receptionists—jobs that often have few incumbents within an establishment— had the narrowest average wage spreads in the white-collar group, 17 percent for the former and 19 percent for the latter. Excluding these extremes, spreads ranged from 22 to 35 percent among office clerical job classifications and from 24 to 33 percent among the professional and technical jobs. Except for guards and janitors, average wage spreads for blue-collar jobs ranged from 7 percent for maintenance pipefitters and millwrights to 30 percent for material han dling laborers. Maintenance trades helper— a more broadly defined job— was the only maintenance, toolroom, or powerplant occupation studied with a spread of more than 20 Table 1. Workers in establishments paying one rate or more to incumbents in a job, and intra-occupational pay spreads within establishments with multiple rates, all metropolitan areas, 1983 h y h Per :ent of workers in esta blishments with— Percent by which highest paid worker exceeded lowest paid worker in same job and establishment1 Two work«irs or more in job Occupation and level One worker in job All at same rate All establishments Paid at Mean two rates (average) or more Mean (average) First quartile 2 Second quartile 2 (median) Third quartile 2 Manufac turing estab lish ments Nonmanu factur ing estab lish ments Non union estab lish ments Estab lish ments with under 500 workers Estab lish ments with 500 workers or more 39 41 34 35 27 31 34 15 28 23 28 32 38 35 32 36 37 19 19 36 15 22 29 22 29 22 27 34 25 31 24 Union estab lish ments Office clerical Stenographers 1............................. Stenographers I I ........................... Transcrlbing-machine typists.......... Typists 1 ...................................... Typists I I ...................................... 8 5 17 10 8 6 5 8 5 5 86 90 78 85 87 35 34 27 32 35 12 15 14 18 18 31 28 25 29 34 51 47 36 44 50 35 30 21 23 25 35 37 28 34 39 File clerks 1 ................................. File clerks I I ................................. File clerks III................................. Messengers................................. Switchboard operators................... 15 17 19 16 28 6 4 3 7 15 79 78 79 77 57 22 28 22 29 22 11 12 11 12 9 20 25 19 26 16 30 40 31 39 31 19 21 35 19 22 29 24 28 22 Switchboard operator-receptionists . . Order clerks 1............................. Order clerks II............................... Accounting clerks 1 ....................... Accounting clerks I I ....................... 83 9 11 15 12 1 9 6 6 7 15 82 84 79 81 19 29 30 30 29 10 13 15 13 13 17 23 24 24 24 27 40 41 38 39 18 21 25 21 24 20 33 34 32 31 60 31 19 29 30 27 28 Accounting clerks III....................... Accounting clerks IV....................... Payroll clerks............................... Key entry operators 1..................... Key entry operators II..................... 16 20 47 9 11 6 7 5 7 6 78 73 47 84 83 27 29 23 31 27 11 12 11 14 13 24 25 19 25 25 38 39 32 42 37 24 26 22 22 21 28 30 24 33 29 32 19 20 35 25 26 31 24 30 27 19 28 31 22 21 20 29 22 27 22 31 28 37 30 24 17 20 30 37 38 33 29 24 35 29 Professional and technical Computer systems analysts (business) 1............................... Computer systems analysts (business) I I ............................. Computer systems analysts (business) III............................. Computer programmers (business) 1 Computer programmers (business) II 7 1 92 32 20 30 41 31 32 6 1 93 32 20 31 43 30 32 33 32 24 7 17 12 1 4 3 92 79 86 30 32 32 18 15 17 30 29 29 40 49 43 30 21 25 29 34 34 27 30 31 30 22 21 24 31 35 35 Computer programmers (business) III Computer operators 1..................... Computer operators II..................... Computer operators I I I ................... Peripheral equipment operators . . . . 29 21 18 16 6 2 6 6 5 5 69 74 76 80 89 31 28 25 25 31 18 11 11 10 16 29 21 22 23 28 41 39 35 35 41 27 28 22 24 32 29 27 26 31 30 25 25 24 31 23 18 20 16 33 34 28 28 32 Computer data librarians................. Drafters 1...................................... Drafters I I ................................... Drafters III................................... Drafters IV................................... 32 22 19 13 10 4 11 7 5 4 64 67 74 81 86 24 30 27 25 24 11 10 12 12 11 21 24 22 21 22 33 58 34 36 30 15 26 22 21 21 32 32 30 Drafters V ................................... Electronics technicians 1 ................. Electronics technicians II................. Electronics technicians I I I .............. Registered industrial nurses............ 6 4 2 2 41 4 6 10 18 6 90 90 87 80 53 29 39 42 33 17 15 20 20 16 7 26 31 35 27 16 41 60 58 44 23 27 43 33 32 16 31 31 48 33 20 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 38 29 29 35 25 15 53 16 24 32 25 25 24 30 40 35 35 17 25 22 21 27 28 27 36 24 14 29 29 27 30 42 46 31 17 13 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Wage Differences for Same Job and Establishment Table 1. Continued—Workers in establishments paying one rate or more to incumbents in a job, and intra-occupational pay spreads within establishments with multiple rates, all metropolitan areas, 1983________________________________________ Percent by which highest paid worker exceeded lowest paid worker in same job and establishment1 Percent of workers in establishments with— Occupation and level One worker in job Mean (average) All establishments Two workers or more In job All at same rate Paid at two or more rates Mean (average) First quar tile 2 Second quartiie 2 (median) Third quar tile 2 Manufac turing estab lish ments Nonmanu factur ing estab lish ments Union estab lish ments Non union estab lish ments Estab lish ments with under 500 workers Estab lish ments with 500 workers or more Maintenance, toolroom, and powerplant 10 10 12 11 10 7 Maintenance carpenters................... Maintenance electricians................. Maintenance painters..................... Maintenance machinists................. Maintenance mechanics (machinery). . Maintenance pipefitters................... 17 6 18 5 3 2 43 51 47 63 56 58 40 42 35 32 41 40 11 10 14 10 11 7 3 3 3 3 4 3 7 7 8 8 7 3 14 13 15 13 13 10 10 10 13 11 10 7 12 13 15 — 17 — 8 9 10 9 8 7 16 14 19 13 16 — — Millwrights.................................... Motor vehicle mechanics................. Maintenance trades helpers............ Machine-tool operators (toolroom) . . Tool and die makers....................... Stationary engineers....................... 1 6 12 6 3 6 48 51 35 24 36 53 51 42 53 70 61 41 7 14 21 9 10 17 3 4 5 3 2 3 4 10 14 4 4 7 12 20 34 7 14 18 7 11 18 8 10 8 — 7 10 22 8 6 10 — — 16 26 — — 31 21 19 13 19 30 15 — — 17 — 7 14 24 8 8 18 Truckdrivers, light truck................. Truckdrivers, medium truck............ Truckdrivers, heavy truck.............. Truckdrivers, tractor-trailer............ Shippers...................................... 19 6 4 3 26 35 58 60 68 36 46 36 37 29 39 26 25 26 14 19 10 7 6 3 5 21 21 22 8 14 35 36 41 19 26 33 25 19 14 16 24 25 29 14 24 — 23 17 10 8 24 26 30 19 25 24 24 26 15 17 33 27 — 12 22 Receivers...................................... Shippers and receivers................... Warehousemen............................. Order fillers................................. Shipping packers........................... Material handling laborers.............. 28 28 4 2 4 4 26 30 44 44 44 49 46 42 52 54 51 47 29 24 28 24 24 30 7 6 6 5 7 6 17 19 21 17 19 22 50 35 40 36 37 49 19 21 26 22 21 20 33 28 28 25 31 38 22 14 20 14 18 18 32 28 33 31 29 37 23 20 28 24 27 28 34 32 28 24 20 32 Forklift operators........................... Power-truck operators (other than forklift)..................................... Guards 1 ..................................... Guards I I ...................................... Janitors, porters, and cleaners. . . . 2 2 61 44 37 54 15 13 2 1 7 5 20 16 11 8 24 — 10 12 21 — 19 — 12 12 3 2 8 12 13 19 85 85 73 45 38 42 19 14 15 40 33 35 64 58 65 20 26 19 46 41 46 38 34 45 48 38 42 42 34 41 52 40 45 11 — 9 13 — M aterial movement and custodial 1Limited to establishments reporting two rates or more paid to incumbents in a job. 2The quartiles, which designate position, are calculated from arrays of workers by size of establishment pay spread. Half the observations are more and half less than the second quartile (median), one-fourth of the observations are below the first quartile, and another percent. Conversely, 12 of 16 material movement and cus todial job classifications had spreads exceeding 20 percent. The 45 percent average spread for lower level guards was the broadest among all of the jobs studied; janitors followed closely with an average wage spread of 42 percent. Many workers in these two classifications had earnings at or near the Federal minimum wage and, as with other relatively low paid workers, a modest dollar spread in their pay pro duced a relatively large percentage spread. An establish ment, for example, with one janitor at $3.35 an hour and another at $4.35 records a 30-percent spread; the same dollar difference between two electricians who earn $13 and $14 an hour produces an 8-percent spread. More importantly, perhaps, was the employment of many of the survey’s guards 14 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis fourth are above the third quartile. Thus, the difference between the first and third quartiles indicates the range of establishment pay spreads applying to the middle half of workers in an occupational classification. Note: Dashes indicate that data do not meet publication criteria. and janitors in protective or janitorial service firms. As noted, these firms often pay workers different rates based on the specific contract under which the service is per formed. Eleven of the white-collar occupations in the study are divided into two work levels or more, based on duties and responsibilities. In general, the average percentage spreads of wages were similar for all work levels of an occupation. Major exceptions were file clerks (a 28-percent spread in level II compared with 22 percent in levels I and III) and drafters (24 percent in level IV and 30 percent in level I). In the blue-collar area, average spreads were similar for forklift operators and other power-truck operators. Tractortrailer drivers, however, had considerably narrower spreads (14 percent) than the three other truckdriver categories (25 to 26 percent). The two levels of guards surveyed had a 7percentage point spread. Industry. Wage spreads between the highest and lowest paid worker in a job were generally narrower in manufac turing than in nonmanufacturing industries. This pattern applied to both white- and blue-collar occupations. Among the 59 occupations for which comparisons between the man ufacturing and nonmanufacturing sectors could be made,9 the average spread in manufacturing was narrower in 52 jobs, of equal size in three, and wider in four. For three jobs— stationary engineer, lower level guard, and janitor— the average spread was 23 to 27 percentage points narrower in manufacturing. Among blue-collar jobs, the generally narrower average pay spreads in manufacturing industries are partly traced to the greater degree of unionization in this industrial sector. For 1982— the most recent year for which unionization data are available from the Area Wage Survey program— 63 percent of the manufacturing production workers were in unionized establishments,10 compared with 43 percent of the blue-collar workers in nonmanufacturing industries. Table 1 shows, for all industries combined, that blue-collar jobs generally had narrower average spreads in unionized establishments. Maintenance trades helpers and janitors— jobs with relatively wide average wage spreads for the main tenance and custodial occupational categories— were the only exceptions to this pattern. In 33 of the 37 white-collar comparisons that could be made between industry sectors, average pay spreads were narrower in manufacturing, but unionization is not a major explanation. Unionized establishments in the 1982 Area Wage Survey program employed 9 percent of the nonsupervisory office clerical workers in manufacturing and 15 percent in nonmanufacturing. Considering this limited de gree of unionization, collective bargaining could not pro duce significant white-collar pay structure differences between these two industry sectors. Moreover, considering all in dustries combined, average pay spreads were wider in union than in nonunion establishments in 15 of 23 white-collar occupational classifications that were compared. Differences in the nature of the job and prevailing pay systems are reflected in the wider rate ranges that unions have negotiated for white-collar than for blue-collar workers. Establishment size. The average wage spread was wider in establishments employing 500 workers or more than in smaller units in all but three of the white-collar classifica tions compared— order clerk II, accounting clerk IV, and electronics technician III. This may result from the rela tively greater use of formal rate-range pay systems in large establishments. It may, however, also reflect increased di versity in pay because of greater numbers of job incumbents https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in the larger establishments; that is, the more workers an employer has in a job, the greater the likelihood of having incumbents at or near the bottom and top of the rate range for the jo b .11 Among blue-collar occupations, the pattern was mixed. Few establishments with fewer than 500 workers paid more than one rate, or had more than one employee, in mainte nance, toolroom, and powerplant occupations. Conse quently, establishment-size comparisons were possible in only 5 of 12 of these skilled worker jobs. In 4 of the 5 jobs, average pay spreads were wider in the smaller establish ments. This result— which is contrary to the general findings for white-collar occupations— may reflect a greater inci dence of skilled maintenance worker unionization in the larger establishments. Among the less skilled material movement and custodial jobs, however, average wage spreads generally were wider in the larger establishments, although the reverse occurred in 3 of the 14 jobs studied (tractortrailer truckdriver, shipping packer, and forklift operator). Other factors. Data collected in the Area Wage Survey program permit analysis of variations in pay spreads by type of occupation, industry, union status, and size of employer. Several other factors, however, may influence the spread of pay rates within individual occupations in an establish ment. Although this study cannot measure the extent of their influence, some of these factors can be noted. For example, a company in a low wage industry, and with a formal raterange pay system, may be located in a high wage area. As a result, hiring rates may be near the top of the range to attract em ployees,12 forcing a narrow spread in rates paid. The rate of worker turnover and the degree of difficulty in recruiting new employees also affect the location of hiring rates within established rate-range pay systems. Variations among establishments Averages of establishment pay spreads for individual job classifications conceal significant variations among the es tablishments. Table 1 sheds some light on establishment variations by presenting the range of pay spreads for the middle half of the employees in multiple rate situations. (The boundaries of this range are defined by the first and third quartiles.) For example, the middle half of the stenographers I were employed in establishments with pay spreads between 12 and 51 percent. For white-collar occupational classifications, considera ble variation is evident among the pay spreads within in dividual establishments. In all but four classifications, the difference between the first and third quartiles— the inter quartile range— was 20 percentage points or more. The narrowest interquartile range applied to registered industrial nurses (16 percentage points) and the widest to drafters I (48 percentage points). Among material movement and cus todial jobs, establishment variations in wage spreads were 15 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Wage Differences for Same Job and Establishment similar to those in white-collar classifications, but the var iations were not as pronounced among skilled maintenance, toolroom, and powerplant jobs. For white- and blue-collar jobs combined, variations among establishments tended to be greater in occupational classi fications with relatively wide average wage spreads. To account for this relationship, the interquartile range for each classification was standardized by dividing it by the median pay spread for that job, producing an index of relative dis persion. The indexes— which are not shown in table 1 but can be calculated from quartile data presented— were gen erally higher for blue- than for white-collar jobs. ■FOOTNOTES 1These are establishments surveyed in the Bureau’s Area Wage Survey program. Data are weighted to represent all Standard Metropolitan Statis tical Areas o f the country, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Establishments employing 50 workers or more are surveyed in six broad industry divisions: manufacturing; transportation, communication, and other public utilities; wholesale trade; retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and selected services. In the 13 largest areas, the minimum estab lishment size is 100 in manufacturing; transportation, communication, and other public utilities; and retail trade. Major exclusions from the survey are construction, extractive industries, and government. 2Descriptions for these occupations appear in the Bureau’s Area Wage Survey reports. See, for example, the July 1984 report for Hartford, c t (Bulletin 3 0 2 5 -3 5 ), pp. 16-28. 3The Area Wage Survey program samples both establishments and met ropolitan areas. Therefore, pay spreads in each surveyed establishment were also weighted by establishment and area sampling weights to provide estimates for all workers in metropolitan area establishments within the scope o f the program. 4 For a discussion o f the prevalence of formal pay plans among oflice and plant workers, see John Howell Cox, “ Time and incentive pay practices in urban areas,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1971, pp. 5 3 -5 6 . 16 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 5 See Martin E. Personick, ‘ ‘White-collar pay determination under rangeof-rate system s,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1984, pp. 2 5 -3 0 . 6David W. Belcher, C o m p e n s a tio n A d m in is tr a tio n (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974), p. 276. See also Richard B. Freeman and James L. Medoff, W h a t D o U n io n s D o ? (New York, Basic Books, Inc., 1984), pp. 7 9 -8 2 . n j, G eographic variations in pay spreads were also examined, but no con sistent patterns were observed. 8 See Belcher, C o m p e n s a tio n A d m in is tr a tio n , p. 276. 9The analysis excluded instances where comparisons for an occupation were possible in fewer than 50 establishments. 10That is, establishments in which a majority o f the production workers were covered by labor-management agreements. "For office clerical, professional-technical, and material movementcustodial jobs, there was a positive correlation between the average number o f workers per establishment in an occupational classification and the average percentage pay spread for that classification. For maintenance, toolroom, and powerplant jobs— with only 12 observations— the corre lation was negative. 12See Belcher, C o m p e n s a tio n A d m in is tr a tio n , p. 231. Changes in regional unemployment over the last decade Between the mid-1970's and 1984, the geographic distribution o f unemployment shifted; in 1975, the highest jobless rate was in New England but by 1984, that division had the lowest rate due to the influx o f high technology industries S u s a n E l iz a b e t h S h a n k During the m id-1970’s, the Northeast and the West ex perienced the highest unemployment rates in the Nation, but after a strong expansion in the late 1970’s and severe recessions in the early 1980’s, high unemployment was concentrated in a band o f States stretching from the Great Lakes south to the Gulf o f Mexico. Business cycle swings, as well as differences in industrial structure and demogra phy, account for the geographic shift in unemployment. While all regions benefited from the robust 1983-84 re covery, the East South Central division (Kentucky, Ten nessee, Mississippi, and Alabama) improved less rapidly than other areas, and its jobless rate in 1984 was the highest of the nine census divisions. In contrast, New England con tinued its dramatic improvement into the current recovery, and its unemployment rate in 1983 and 1984 was much lower than that in any other census division. This article analyzes employment and unemployment changes during three distinct cyclical swings.1 It contrasts the 1976-79 period, when employment rose strongly and unemployment declined, with the 1979-82 period, when employment growth slowed and unemployment increased sharply. Emphasis is placed on how these two periods, as well as the recovery in 1983-84, affected different sections Susan Elizabeth Shank is an economist in the Division o f Employment and Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. She was assisted by Sandy Grove, a statistician in the Division o f Data Development and Users’ Services. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis of the country. Employment developments in the four census regions and nine divisions within these regions (and occa sionally individual States) are used to demonstrate major subnational variations.2 (Footnote 2 lists the States included in census regions and divisions.) The article is based primarily on data from the Current Population Survey, a monthly sample of approximately 60,000 households nationwide, which provides information on the employment and unemployment status of the civilian pop ulation 16 years of age and over. Annual averages are used because they are subject to less sampling variability than monthly data and also give better estimates of major ag gregates at the State level. The analysis begins with 1976 because it was the first year that a consistent, reasonably reliable State data series was available.3 Occasional refer ences are made to earlier years, however, when a longer time horizon helps to explain more recent developments. Also, unemployment rates for 1984 indicate how the second year of the current recovery affected different regions and divisions. However, because final 1984 employment level data were not available at this writing, the focus in the following section is on changes over the 1976-83 period. Employment The strong U.S. employment increases of the late 1970’s came to a virtual halt at the end of the decade, as the 1980 downturn was followed closely by the severe 1981-82 recession. Total employment, which rose 11.3 percent dur17 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Changes in Regional Unemployment ing 1976-79, inched up only 0.7 percent between 1979 and 1982. While the recessions in the early 1980’s affected employment growth in all sections of the country, the impact was most visible in the East North Central, the East South Central, Mid-Atlantic, and West North Central divisions. Employment growth in these four divisions trailed the na tional pace in the 1976-79 period and then turned negative between 1979 and 1982. The sharpest drop occurred in the heavily industrial East North Central States, where em ployment fell by 5.5 percent from 1979 to 1982. The em ployment decrease, which started a year later in the East South Central division, amounted to approximately 3 per cent between 1980 and 1982. In the Mid-Atlantic and West North Central States, employment essentially held steady in the 1979-81 period and then declined about 1.5 percent in 1982. Despite the negligible growth in total U.S. employment between 1979 and 1982, employment rose about 3.5 percent in both the South Atlantic and Pacific States, while the Mountain and West South Central divisions posted gains of 7.5 to 8.5 percent. However, these increases were signifi cantly below those of the late 1970’s in all four divisions. The slowdown was particularly marked in the Pacific States, as the strong job growth that the Pacific Northwest had recorded in the late 1970’s ended. Employment in construc tion and lumber and wood products fell in both Oregon and Washington from 1979 to 1982. Employment in New England grew at about the national rate in the late 1970’s and slightly above it in the early 1980’s. These employment gains contrast markedly with the sluggish growth experienced earlier in the post-World War II period, when New England underwent a dramatic shift in its employment mix by industry. Accounting for almost half of New England’s employment, Massachusetts illustrates the movement away from labor-intensive non durable manufacturing and into the service-producing in dustries and high technology manufacturing. Between 1947 and 1975, Massachusetts’ employment in three industries— textiles, apparel, and leather— plunged from 250,000 to 90,000, or from 14 to 4 percent of its nonfarm payroll jobs.4 During this period, total manufacturing employment in the State dropped by 21 percent, in sharp contrast to a 19percent increase nationally. Starting in the mid-1970’s, manufacturing employment in Massachusetts began to pick up, with a major part of the increase occurring in three newer “ high tech’’ industries5— machinery, electrical equipment, and instruments. This recovery in manufacturing jobs, combined with continued expansion in the serviceproducing sector, resulted in statewide job growth in the late 1970’s that was close to the national pace. A central challenge to any area’s economy is that em ployment must expand simply to keep pace with population growth. An economy that stands still in job creation actually deteriorates over time if the population expands. Two dis tinctly different subperiods are evident when regional em 18 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ployment and population growth rates are compared from 1976 to 1983. In the late 1970’s, employment growth rates exceeded population increases in all nine census divisions. This relationship is measured by the employment-population ratio (the percent of the population 16 years old and over that is employed), which peaked in 1979. Between 1979 and 1982, no division recorded an employment gain equal to its population increase, so employment-population ratios fell until the onset of the 1983-84 recovery. In the late 1970’s, New England and the Pacific States recorded the largest employment-population ratio gains (4 to 4.5 percentage points), while the East South Central and the South Atlantic divisions had the smallest (1.5 to 2 per centage points). When the employment picture weakened in the early 1980’s, employment-population ratios fell most in the East North Central States (down 4.3 percentage points) and the adjacent East South Central States (down 3.4 points). These decreases outweighed the gains of the late 1970’s in both divisions, the only divisions to do so. (See table 1.) From 1976 to 1983, New England experienced the largest employment-population ratio gain (3.2 percentage points), and substantial increases (2 to 2.5 points) were also posted in the Mountain, Pacific, and West South Central divisions. At the other extreme, the ratios fell about 1.5 percentage points in the East North and East South Central divisions. In the latter division, the ratio was the lowest of the nine divisions in both 1982 and 1983. Unemployment The locus of unemployment has shifted markedly in a very short time, attesting to the influence of both cyclical changes and industrial mix on the fortunes of an area. In 1976, the highest jobless rates were recorded in the New England, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific divisions, while the low est rate occurred in the West North Central division. In 1984, the U . S . unemployment rate, at 7.5 percent, was close to the 7.7 percent rate of 1976, but the geographic distri bution differed dramatically. In both 1983 and 1984, the highest rates in the Nation occurred in the heavily indus trialized East South and East North Central divisions and in adjacent States, while New England had the lowest rate. (See chart 1.) Three changes in unemployment rate rankings were especially notable between the mid-1970’s and 1983— 84. New England shifted from the highest jobless rate di vision to the lowest; the East South Central division moved from the low unemployment rate category to the highest rate of the nine divisions; and the East North Central States shifted from an average unemployment ranking to next to the highest in both 1983 and 1984. The pronounced shift in unemployment among regions between the mid-1970’s and 1983 and 1984 reflected de velopments during three distinct cyclical subperiods: 1975— 79, when national unemployment fell, 1979-82, when it rose sharply, and 1983-84, when joblessness declined. March 1975 was the trough of the 1973-75 recession and, there- Chart 1. State unemployment rates, 1976 and 1984 1976 A i 20 percent or more below U.S. average 81 to 119 percent of U.S. average 20 percent or more above U.S. average NOTE: The U.S annual average was 7.7 percent in 1976 and 7.5 percent in 1984. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 19 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Changes in Regional Unemployment fore, 1975 is an important year in cyclical analysis. Regional and divisional data for 1975 appear in table 2. However, individual State unemployment rates for 1975 are omitted because sampling errors for many were inordinately high. The 1976-79 period. During 1976-79, the recovery from the deep 1973-75 recession continued, and the national jobless rate dropped from 7.7 to 5.8 percent. Jobless rates fell most in the West and Northeast, while States in the Midwest and East South Central division showed the least improvement. Twelve States recorded unemployment rate declines o f 3 percentage points or more. This group com prised four New England States (Connecticut, Massachu setts, New Hampshire, and Vermont), two Mid-Atlantic States (New York and New Jersey), four States in the West (Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada), and two South Atlantic States (Florida and Georgia). New England, which had the highest jobless rate of the nine divisions in 1975 (10.2 percent), recorded the largest decrease in the late 1970’s— as its rate fell to 5.4 percent in 1979. The Pacific and Mid-Alantic divisions also recorded large unemploy ment rate decreases between 1976 and 1979. In contrast, jobless rates were virtually unchanged over this period in 10 States, and the rate rose in Alaska. After construction was completed on the trans-Alaskan pipeline, the State’s jobless rate jumped from about 8 percent in 1976 to 11 percent in 1978 and then declined to 9 percent in 1979. Most of the States where unemployment rates did not im prove significantly were in the Midwest and East South Central division. Four States in the heavily agricultural West North Central division (Iowa, Nebraska, and North and South Dakota) were in this group because they had very low unemployment rates (3 to 4 percent) in both 1976 and 1979. Idaho (in the Mountain division) also showed little change in its unemployment rate between 1976 and 1979. The five other States where jobless rates did not decrease between 1976 and 1979 were Alabama, Tennessee, Ken tucky, Indiana, and Louisiana. In Alabama and Indiana, unemployment rates had edged downward between 1976 and 1978 but then increased in 1979, when employment growth in each State slowed markedly. Both States have heavy concentrations of goods-producing industries, which experienced little or no job growth from 1978 to 1979. Table 1. Employment-population ratios by census division, selected years, 1976-83 Division 1976 1979 1982 1983 United States......................... 56.8 59 9 57 8 57 9 New England ............................... Mid-Atlantic................................. East North Central......................... West North Central......................... 58 5 53.2 58.2 60 6 62 3 56.6 60.9 63 8 61 3 54 8 56 6 61 1 61 7 54 7 56 8 61 1 South Atlantic............................... East South Central......................... West South Central....................... Mountain...................................... Pacific.......................................... 57.3 55.2 57.4 59.0 56.9 59.4 56.7 60.4 62.1 61.3 57 5 53.3 60.0 61 0 59.2 57 7 53 6 59.5 61 5 59.2 20 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Despite the improved employment situation nationally, job less rates in Kentucky, Louisiana, and Tennessee showed no discernible trend between 1976 and 1979. The fact that three of four East South Central States (Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee) had virtually the same unemployment rates in 1976 and 1979 meant that this division was the only one where the unemployment rate did not drop substantially in the late 1970’s. As a result, the East South Central jobless rate shifted from well below the U.S. rate in 1976 to slightly above it in 1979. The 1979-82 period. Between 1979 and 1982, the na tional unemployment rate jumped from 5.8 and 9.7 percent, as the economy suffered two successive recessions. This increase affected all U.S. regions although with different timing and severity. The brief and relatively mild 1980 recession had the most adverse effect on industries that are highly sensitive to interest rates, particularly automobiles and housing. In the East North Central States, where au tomobile manufacturing and supplier industries are concen trated, the unemployment rate jumped from 6.1 percent in 1979 to 9.2 percent in 1980. Very sharp unemployment increases occurred in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana— States where jobless rates had begun to rise as early as 1979. Although starting from a lower level, the jobless rate in the neighboring West North Central States also increased mark edly in 1980. In contrast, the unemployment rate in the Northeast only rose from 6.6 to 7.0 percent between 1979 and 1980, and rates in the South and West both increased about 1 percentage point. Unlike the 1980 experience, the severe 1981-82 reces sion resulted in substantial unemployment increases in all sections of the country. The most adverse impact occurred in heavily industrialized States, which were still suffering from the 1980 downturn in basic industries. Jobless rates jumped to 12.5 percent in the East North and 12 percent in the East South Central divisions— double the 6 percent rates recorded in 1979. The rate in the West North Central States, while low compared with other divisions, also nearly dou bled. Seven States had 1982 unemployment rates in excess of 11.7 percent— one-fifth or more above the national av erage. Five of the seven were the East Central States of Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Alabama, and Tennessee. West Virginia and Washington were the two other States with very high 1982 jobless rates. States with jobless rates lower than the national average rates were more numerous and more geographically dis persed than those with high rates. Sixteen States recorded 1982 rates of 7.8 percent or less— at least one-fifth below the national average. Rates were below 7 percent in the following farm belt and oil and gas drilling States: Kansas, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and Texas, as well as in Connecticut, Vermont, and Hawaii. An additional six States had 1982 jobless rates between 7 and 7.8 percent— Colorado, Minnesota, Utah, New Hamp- Table 2. Unemployment rates by census region and division, 1975-84 Region and division 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 United States................................... 8.5 7.7 7.1 6.1 5.8 7.1 7.6 9.7 9.6 7.5 Northeast.................................................. New England.......................................... Mid-Atlantic............................................ 9.5 10.2 9.3 9.4 9.1 9.5 8.4 7.7 8.7 6.9 5.7 7.3 6.6 5.4 7.0 7.0 5.9 7.5 7.4 6.3 7.8 9.0 7.8 9.4 8.7 6.8 9.4 6.8 4.9 7.6 Midwest.................................................... East North Central................................... West North Central................................. 7.8 8.9 5.2 6.6 7.3 5.0 6.0 6.5 4.8 5.3 5.9 4.0 5.5 6.1 4.0 8.2 9.2 5.8 8.6 9.7 6.0 11.1 12.5 7.8 10.8 12.0 7.9 8.4 9.4 6.2 South........................................................ South Atlantic........................... , ............ East South Central................................... West South Central................................. 7.7 8.5 7.9 6.4 6.7 7.4 6.2 6.0 6.4 6.8 6.4 5.7 5.6 5.7 6.0 5.2 5.4 5.5 6.1 4.7 6.4 6.3 7.9 5.6 7.0 7.0 9.2 5.9 8.9 8.7 12.1 7.5 9.3 8.5 12.3 8.9 7.2 6.5 9.8 7.0 West......................................................... Mountain................................................ Pacific.................................................... 9.2 7.5 9.8 8.7 7.2 9.1 7.8 6.6 8.2 6.6 5.4 7.0 6.0 5.0 6.4 6.9 6.4 7.1 7.4 6.3 7.8 9.9 8.7 10.2 9.5 8.6 9.9 7.6 6.2 8.1 shire, Georgia, and Virginia. The Northeast, which had the highest unemployment rate of the four regions throughout the 1976-79 period, was less affected than other parts of the country by the recessions of the early 1980’s. Within that region, the Mid-Atlantic States moved from being the division with the highest unemploy ment rate during 1976-79 to registering slightly below the national average in 1982. During the 1970’s, employment growth had been sluggish in these States, as a shift occurred away from older manufacturing industries to the more rap idly growing service-producing sector. Jobless rates in New York and New Jersey, which had been substantially above the national average during the mid- and late 1970’s, were relatively resistant to the unemployment increases in the early 1980’s, and in 1982, both States had rates that were lower than the national average. However, Pennsylvania, which had fared better than New York and New Jersey during most of the 1970’s, was hard hit in the 1980’s by problems in industries such as steel and coal mining, and its unemployment rate jumped from 6.9 to 10.9 percent between 1979 and 1982. The New England jobless rate increased less in the 1979-82 period than in any division except the Mid-Atlantic and, at 7.8 percent in 1982, was the second lowest of the nine divisions. Throughout 1983 and 1984. The economy demonstrated a robust recovery in the 2 years following the deep 1981— 82 recession. Although annual averages obscure the mag nitude of the cyclical swings during 1982 and 1983, sig nificant regional employment and unemployment changes were evident.6 For example, New England posted a sub stantial unemployment rate drop between 1982 and 1983, while the rate rose markedly in the West South Central States. As the economy completed a second full year of recovery in 1984, the national unemployment rate fell to 7.5 percent, and all sections of the country experienced lower jobless rates. (See table 2.) Unemployment rate changes between 1982 and 1984 il lustrate how the recovery affected different geographic areas. The largest relative improvement occurred in New England, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis followed by the Mountain division. Four States— Arizona (from the Mountain division), and Rhode Island, Massa chusetts, and New Hampshire (from New England) expe rienced very large drops in the jobless rates during this period. In contrast, the least improvement occurred in the West South Central division, where the jobless rate rose in 1983 and then fell in 1984. Only six States failed to show significant unemployment rate decreases between 1982 and 1984, and two of them— Louisiana and Oklahoma— were from the West South Central division. Alaska, Mississippi, Wyoming, and West Virginia were the other four States where jobless rates did not decrease between 1982 and 1984. Despite declines during the recovery, jobless rates in both the East South and East North Central divisions were very high in 1983 and 1984. The New England jobless rate fell from 7.8 percent in 1982 to 4.9 percent in 1984. In both 1983 and 1984, New England had the lowest rate of the nine census divisions— a complete reversal from 1975, when New England had the highest rate. The strong 1983-84 rebound in the New Eng land economy was pervasive. Three of the four States that recorded the sharpest jobless rate drops from 1982 and 1984 were Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. By 1984, five of the six New England States ranked in the low unemployment group (6 percent or below) and Maine (with a 6.1-percent rate) was almost in that category. The unemployment rate improvement in the Mountain division reflected sharply different movements among the eight States. Arizona and Colorado, the division’s two most populous States, both recorded steady and substantial un employment drops over 1982-84. At the other extreme, Wyoming was one of only six States that showed no un employment rate decrease between 1982 and 1984. The Wyoming rate increased sharply from 1982 to 1983, as did the rate in many other States with substantial employment in oil and gas extraction; it then dropped in 1984 to about the 1982 level. The job situation in the West South Central division wors ened substantially in 1983 and rebounded in 1984. The 1983 deterioration contrasted with the national pattern, as well 21 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Changes in Regional Unemployment as with the strong expansion that this division experienced in the previous several years. Total employment in these States rose very strongly during 1976-81, and the unem ployment rate was consistently the lowest or next to lowest of the nine census divisions. Much of the economy’s strength during this period was linked to oil drilling and petroleum refining, which boomed following the oil embargo by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. However, when petroleum demand began to slacken in 1982 and pro duction was curtailed, this division was hit first. Total em ployment growth slowed to 1 to 1.5 percent in 1982 and 1983 from more than 4 percent annually in the 1976-81 period. Wage and salary employment in oil and gas ex traction, which had more than doubled between 1976 and 1981, was nearly unchanged from 1981 to 1982 and then dropped sharply in 1983. As employment growth slowed, the West South Central jobless rate rose from 7.5 percent in 1982 to 8.9 percent in 1983; it then fell to 7.0 percent in 1984. Oklahoma, where the rate jumped from 5.7 to 9.0 percent between 1982 and 1983 and then decreased to 7.0 percent in 1984, was the only State in the Nation where the 1984 rate was signifi cantly above the 1982 rate. The Texas jobless rate moved from 6.9 to 8.0 to 5.9 percent over the 1982-84 period. In 1984, Texas returned to the group of States with rates onefifth or more below the U.S. average. Louisiana, however, proved much less resilient than Texas. Over the 1982-84 period, the Louisiana jobless rate moved essentially from 10 to 12 and back to 10 percent— making it one of the six States where jobless rates did not decrease between 1982 and 1984. Also, in both 1983 and 1984, Louisiana was in the group of States with rates one-fifth or more above the U.S. average. The jobless rate in the East North Central States, which had doubled in the early 1980’s, fell substantially between 1982 and 1984. Over the latter period, the Michigan rate fell more than 4 percentage points, and drops of 3 to 3.5 points occurred in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio. Despite these sharp decreases, Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois were in the high unemployment group in 1984— those States with rates of 9 percent or higher (or at least one-fifth above the U.S. average). Moreover, the East North Central rate, at approximately 9.5 percent in 1984, was the second highest of the nine census divisions. The job picture in the East South Central States worsened more than in any other division from the mid-1970’s to 1983-84. While the division jobless rate decreased between 1982 and 1984, the improvement started later and was more moderate than in many other sections of the country. In 1984, three of the four East South Central States (Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky) were in the high unemployment group. Tennessee, which had been in the high group in 1983, experienced a substantial unemployment rate drop in 1984 and moved into the group of States with jobless rates close to the national average. In contrast, Mississippi, which 22 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis had a jobless rate of about 11 percent in both 1982 and 1984, was one of the six States that showed no significant decrease in its rate during the recovery. Although the list of States in the high unemployment rate category changed over 1982-84, four States consistently recorded rates of 11 percent or above. Alabama and Mississippi from the East South Central division were in this very high unemployment group, as were West Virginia and Michigan. The sharp deterioration in the East South Central divi sion’s employment situation stemmed partly from its heavy concentration in goods-producing industries, which expe rienced substantial job losses from 1979 to 1983. Another reason for high unemployment in this division is that a large proportion of the population resides in nonmetropolitan areas— 48 percent in 1980, compared with 25 percent na tionally7— which have experienced less economic growth than metropolitan areas in recent years. (The national jobless rate in nonmetropolitan areas was 10.1 percent in both 1982 and 1983, while the metropolitan area rates were about 9.5 percent.) A large part of the nonmetropolitan population in the South resides in or near small towns whose economies often depend heavily on a single industry or even a single plant. When these major local employers curtail or close down operations, the effect is often devastating on the sur rounding communities. West Virginia recorded the highest State unemployment rate in both 1983 and 1984 and was one of the six States that showed no jobless rate improvement between 1982 and 1984. In some respects, the problems in West Virginia re semble those of the neighboring heavily industrialized States, but West Virginia also has unique long-term structural prob lems. Mining (primarily coal mining) accounted for about one-fourth of nonagricultural wage and salary employment in West Virginia immediately after World War II.8 As the demand for coal decreased and the industry became increas ingly mechanized, mining employment fell preciptiously— dropping more than 60 percent from the early 1950’s to 1963. The falloff in mining jobs bottomed out in the mid1960’s, and thereafter nonfarm employment increased for several years. However, employment peaked in West Vir ginia in 1979 and dropped in each of the succeeding 4 years. Several States with concentrations of older basic industries also experienced job declines between 1979 and 1982, but West Virginia was the only State where total employment fell significantly from 1982 to 1983. Between 1979 and 1983, the number of jobs in the goods-producing sector in West Virginia plummeted 30 percent, compared with 12 percent nationally. As a result, the State’s jobless rate, which was about 1 percentage point above the U.S. rate in 1979, soared to approximately twice the national figure in 1983 and 1984. Summary The employment and unemployment picture across the United States changed substantially between the mid-1970’s and the early 1980’s, reflecting demographic and industrial composition shifts and, most importantly, business cycle effects. Throughout this period, employment growth was concentrated in the West and South, with especially large increases occuring in the West South Central and Mountain divisions. In contrast, the East North Central States expe rienced very little employment growth. Employment-pop ulation ratios clearly indicate that some parts of the country fared much better than others between 1976 and 1983. New England recorded the largest advance (more than 3 per centage points), followed by the Mountain, Pacific, and West South Central divisions. In contrast, employmentpopulation ratios fell in both the East South Central and East North Central States. The geographic distribution of unemployment also shifted markedly between the mid-1970’s and 1983-84. In 1976, the highest jobless rates (more than 9 percent) were recorded in the New England, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific divisions, while low rates (5 to 6 percent) occurred in the West North Central and the West South Central divisions. Eight years later, following a strong expansion during the late 1970’s, back-to-back recessions in the early 1980’s, and then 2 years of recovery, unemployment rates were highest in the East South and East North Central divisions and neighboring States. Most of these States have heavy concentrations of older goods-producing industries, which were battered by the 1980 and 1 9 8 1 -8 2 recessions. In contrast, New England, which has become heavily infused with high tech nology industries, recorded a dramatic jobless rate decrease between the m id-1970’s and 1984. Furthermore, the New England rate became the lowest of the nine divisions, a complete reversal of its ranking in 1975. Unemployment rates also fell in the Pacific and Mid-Atlantic divisions be tween the mid-1970’s and 1984, and both impioved rela tively— moving from high to average jobless rate rankings. □ 1Business cycle peaks and troughs are designated by the National Bureau o f Economic Research. States or areas. Annual averages reduce the monthly variability consid erably, but even on this basis estimates for the less populated States-have very large sampling errors. For example, the sampling error for the 1983 annual average unemployment rate in Wyoming of 8.4 percent was plusor-minus 1.0 percentage point at a 90-percent confidence interval. This means that users can be confident that the estimated 1983 unemployment rate for Wyoming would not be expected to differ from the “ true” rate by more than 1.0 percentage point 90 percent of the time. The sampling, error on the monthly rates was about 2 .2 times as large, cps data for the 50 States and the District of Columbia from 1976 forward meet a consistent standard o f reliability because they incorporate supplemental State samples, as well as an improved estimation methodology. 2The States which compose the census regions and divisions are: N o r th e a s t r e g io n New England division: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont Middle Atlantic division: New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania M id w e s t r e g io n (formerly North Central) East North Central division: West North Central division: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Da kota South region South Atlantic division: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia East South Central division: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee West South Central division: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas W e s t r e g io n Mountain division: Pacific division: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washing ton 3 Monthly subnational Current Population Survey ( cps ) data are subject to very high sampling variability— especially those for lightly populated https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 Industry employment data in this section are derived from the Current Employment Statistics program, a monthly sample survey o f more than 200,000 nonagricultural business establishments conducted by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and designed to provide information on wage and salary employment, average weekly hours, average hourly earnings, and average weekly earnings for the Nation, States, and metropolitan areas. 5 For an analysis of the concepts o f high technology industries and their effect on employment, see Richard W. Riche, Daniel E. Hecker, and John U. Burgan, “ High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of the employment p ie,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1983, pp. 5 3 -5 8 . 6 For an analysis o f the substantial changes that occurred between the fourth quarters of 1982 and 1983, see George D. Stamas, “ State and regional employment and unemployment in 1983,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , September 1984, pp. 9 -1 5 . Also see Richard J. Rosen, “ Regional vari ations in employment and unemployment during 1 9 7 0 -8 2 ,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1984, pp. 3 8 -4 5 . 7 1980 Census of Population, Vol. I, pc8 0 - 1 - a 1. 8 See footnote 4. 23 Productivity trends in kitchen cabinet manufacturing After 7 years o f strong gains, output per hour fell between 1979 and 1982; declining output was the major factor in the reversal, as recession and a slump in residential construction took their toll H orst Bra nd and N o rm a n Bennett Output per employee hour in the manufacture of wood kitchen cabinets rose at an average annual rate of 2.1 percent be tween 1972 and 1982,1 or at virtually the same pace as for all manufacturing (2.0 percent). However, annualized in creases in both output and employee hours were greater for the industry (4.7 percent and 2.5 percent) than for total manufacturing (1.4 percent and - 0 . 5 percent). Factors underlying the 10-year productivity advance in the making o f kitchen cabinets include improvements in woodworking machinery and particleboard processing equipment; faster drying glues and coating materials; and more mechanized transfer apparatus. Capital expenditures increased strongly during the latter half o f the seventies, although they subsequently tapered through the early eight ies. The productivity trend in the industry was marked by two distinct phases, which paralleled developments in all man ufacturing. Between 1972 and 1979 (the industry’s output peak for the period examined here), productivity rose strongly, reflecting fast-paced output gains. But over the 1979-82 period, which was marked by recession and a deep slump in residential construction, the trend reversed direction, with output declining at an even faster rate than employee hours: Horst Brand and Norman Bennett are economists in the Division of Industry Productivity and Technology Studies, Bureau o f Labor Statistics. 24 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1972-79 1979-82 Kitchen cabinet manufacturing Productivity ............................................ Output.................................................... Employee hours ..................................... 3.3 8.0 4.6 —2.7 -10.7 —7.8 All manufacturing Productivity ............................................ Output .................................................... Employee hours ..................................... 2.1 3.3 1.2 1.7 -2 .9 -4 .5 Manufacturing generally experienced a slowdown in its productivity rate between 1979 and 1982, rather than a reversal; but the trends in output and employee hours were downward, as in kitchen cabinet manufacturing. Year-to-year changes in the industry’s productivity were quite volatile, ranging from an increase of 23 percent in 1977 to a decline of 11 percent in 1982. In 5 of the 10 years after 1972, productivity rose; in the other 5, it fell. However, in 2 o f the years of rising productivity, the increase was attributable to a more rapid decline in employee hours than in output. And in 3 of the years of declining productivity, both output and employee hours increased, but the latter grew faster than the former. These patterns contrast with the experience of durable manufacturing industries gener ally, which evidenced a much narrower range of year-toyear fluctuations in productivity during the review period ( —3 percent in 1974 to 4 percent in 1981). The volatility o f productivity movements in kitchen cabinet manufacturing stems largely from the industry’s close link to the highly cyclical demand for residential housing. Output and demand factors The kitchen cabinet industry manufactures stock line and custom cabinets, as well as bathroom vanities. Stock line cabinets, which account for about one-half o f industry out put, are mass produced, and are distributed to residential building contractors. Custom cabinets represent roughly onethird o f output and, while the cabinets are built to customer specifications, large-scale production is often feasible with the application of flexible manufacturing technologies.2 Vanities make up the remaining one-sixth of output. Most kitchen cabinets and vanities are made of wood; those made of plastics accounted for 14 percent of output in 1982 (up from 11 percent in 1977). The manufacture of metal cabi nets, which were once a large proportion of total kitchen cabinet production, is no longer a significant industry ac tivity.3 Industry output is closely linked with residential construc tion, replacement, and rehabilitation markets. Among these markets, new residential housing starts provide an estimated one-fourth o f the industry’s major outlets. Over the study period, such starts tended to decline from the high set in 1972, although there were secondary peaks in the late sev enties. Housing starts subsequently plummeted, however, so that by 1982 levels were nearly two-fifths below those recorded in 1979.4 Throughout most of the review period, replacement and remodeling activity, spurred in large part by high rates of sales o f existing homes, tended to offset the impact of de clining housing starts on the output of cabinets and vanities. Existing-home sales rose at an average annual rate of 10 percent between 1972 and 1979, then fell by nearly 20 percent per year to 1982. Constant-dollar outlays for major replacements— 30 to 40 percent of which are for newly installed kitchen cabinets5— rose 4.9 percent per year over the earlier period, then dropped by 1.7 percent annually. Remodeling outlays, a significant proportion of which like wise are devoted to new kitchens and bathrooms and their furnishings, also rose, then declined, although at more mod erate rates than major replacement spending.6 Most remod eling and replacement work is performed on older structures, which are more likely to need redesigned kitchens and en hanced storage space. (In 1982, four-fifths of replacement and remodeling expenditures were made for residential structures built prior to 1970, and more than half on struc tures built prior to I960.7) However, the number of cabinets per kitchen— estimated to average 12 in new single-family homes in 1983, and 15 in remodeled homes8— is not be lieved to have changed much over the past 10 to 20 years,9 although a rising proportion of single-family homes feature two or more bathrooms, hence requiring additional vani ties.10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The comparative strength of remodeling and replacement demand resulted in a considerably higher rate of production of custom than of stock line cabinets. Between 1972 and 1979, production of the former rose by nearly 8 percent a year, of the latter by only about 4 percent a year. Output of vanities paced that of custom cabinets. After 1979, how ever, output of both custom and stock line cabinets slumped, while production of vanities declined moderately. Employment, hours, and occupational mix Employment in kitchen cabinet manufacturing, currently numbering 58,000 persons, rose strongly— by 42 percent— between 1972 and 1979. By 1982, however, employment had fallen 22 percent. The expansion and subsequent decline in the industry’s employment contrasts with the more mod erate pattern of employment trends for manufacturing as a whole, as indicated by annualized percent changes for the two subperiods: Kitchen cabinets 1972-82 ..................................... 2.8 1972-79 ................................ 4.8 1979-82 ................................ -7 .6 Manufacturing -0 .2 1.4 -3 .6 The number of production workers in the industry rose at only about three-fifths of the rate for nonproduction work ers over the review period (2.5 percent per year versus 4.0 percent). In 1979, production worker employment stood 44 percent above 1972 levels, but then plummeted 28 percent by 1982. By contrast, nonproduction worker employment increased steadily, so that by 1982 it was nearly half again as large as 10 years earlier, and the proportion of nonprod uction workers in total employment had expanded from 17 percent to 22 percent. Reasons for the rising proportion of nonproduction workers include the hiring of larger sales and distribution staffs, and increases in the number of tech nicians. Average weekly hours in the industry exceeded 38.0 hours in only 4 years between 1972 and 1982. They usually ran about 94 percent of the manufacturing average. Industry sources believe that the lower average workweek arises mainly from the workweek practices of the smaller custom cabinet establishments. Industry overtime hours fell to 70 percent of the all-manufacturing average after 1973, and dropped to less than 60 percent in years of declining output. Even in years of strong output growth, neither average weekly hours nor overtime approached the manufacturing average. By comparison with all of manufacturing, then, the industry evidently preferred to hire rather than lengthen work hours during periods of increasing demand for its products, and to reduce its work force rather than work hours when de mand declined.11 Hourly wages of production workers in the industry av eraged 17 percent below the comparable manufacturing fig ure for the review period. Also, they tended to decline relative to the manufacturing average over time, so that they 25 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Productivity in Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturing lagged by 21 percent in the last few years of the period. The industry’s lower average hourly wage is probably a reflection of the large proportion of semiskilled workers it employs. That this is, in fact, the case is suggested by data on the industry’s occupational mix, which is weighted much more toward operative and laborer (that is, unskilled) positions than is employment in manufacturing generally. (These data apply to the group of woodworking industries of which kitchen cabinet manufacturing represents about one-quarter of the employment. But because the woodworking industries group as a whole uses similar production technologies and serves similar markets, differences in occupational com position among industries within the group are likely to be minor.12) Of the group’s total 1983 work force, 81 percent were blue-collar workers, compared with 69 percent for all manufacturing. Most of the difference was linked to the high proportion of workers classed as laborers in the wood working group (17 percent versus 9 percent for manufac turing). A relatively large number o f laborers in the woodworking industries are engaged in such tasks as loading and unloading production machinery, handling of stock, and as helpers— tasks which tend to be mechanized in other manufacturing industries. The proportion of operatives employed in the wood working industries group is slightly higher than in all man ufacturing (42 percent versus 40 percent). Here, the difference stems chiefly from the greater relative importance of assem blers, sawyers, edgers, and other workers in occupations typical for woodworking. The group also employs a mar ginally greater relative number of craft and related workers than manufacturing generally. White-collar workers, how ever, play a comparatively lesser role in the woodworking group, despite the increase in the share of nonproduction workers in kitchen cabinet manufacturing employment noted earlier. In 1982, white-collar workers represented 19 percent of employment in the group, as against 31 percent for all manufacturing. Much of this difference reflects the much smaller proportion of professional and technical workers in the woodworking group than in general manufacturing (3 percent versus 10 percent). The share of clerical workers in the group (8 percent) also was significantly smaller than in all manufacturing (12 percent). Technology The manufacture of wood kitchen cabinets and vanities entails the sawing, shaping, planing, and sanding of hard wood components (less often softwood, hardwood plywood, and hardwood veneer components), most often used for the facing of the final product or drawers, and of particleboard (or fiberboard), which usually constitutes the “ box” or in terior of the cabinet. After the components are imprinted with ink by means o f cylindrical presses and hardware is 26 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis affixed, cabinets are assembled by stapling and gluing. Larger firms may locate the fabricating plant close to lumber supply areas, and perform assembly and other nonfabricating op erations in separate establishments from which markets may be readily served. Kitchen cabinet manufacturers use the same basic wood working technologies employed in millwork generally. (Prior to 1972, the industry was defined as a subset of mill work for purposes of Federal statistical studies.13) The speciali zation and large-scale operations that came to characterize the stock line segment of the cabinet industry, and to a lesser extent its custom segments, did not fully develop until the 1950’s. Kitchen design then shifted away from metal cabinets, partly because of certain disadvantages associated with use of the latter;14 and distributor networks enabling nationwide distribution sprang up. As in mill work generally, large-scale production of kitchen cabinets and vanities was to some extent promoted by the introduction of synthetic resin adhesives, which yield a quick-curing bond.15 Kitchen cabinet and vanity manufacturing is highly mech anized: all work that transforms the lumber and processes the shaped components and particleboard is done by ma chines or mechanically driven devices (such as inking cyl inders). Especially in the stock line segment of the industry, transfer of stock has been increasingly conveyorized, rather than being performed by material handling equipment or manually. Conveyorization has in turn been made possible by the economies of scale of mass production, and also by advances in technology, such as those that permit the rapid application and curing of inks and glue.16 First in the sequence of the industry’s manufacturing op erations is the treatment of the rough lumber. The lumber is delivered in uniformly sized sheets to predrying facilities. Predrying facilities began to be installed by the industry during the late sixties. They are designed to reduce the drying process from 5 months— if the lumber were to be left to dry in the open air— to 1 month (more or less, de pending upon the species of wood). Predrying generally shrinks the lumber’s moisture content by about 70 percent; it has the additional advantage of preventing the quality degradation characteristic of lengthier drying processes.17 The lumber is then transferred to kilns, usually for a 15day period, so as to further reduce moisture content. The machinery used in kitchen cabinet manufacturing reflects woodworking technologies that have been applied for many decades. However, a large proportion of such machinery appears to be comparatively new, and thus fea tures the many minor innovations and modifications that cumulatively enhance the productivity of manufacturers’ capital stock. According to a 1979 survey conducted by Woodworking and Furniture Digest,18 much of the existing woodworking and other equipment used in kitchen cabinet manufacturing establishments was less than a decade old. For example, one-half of all sawing and profiling machinery was 10 years old or less, as were two-thirds of all dado, grooving, planing, and mitering machines. Most types of sanding machines were likewise of comparatively recent vintage. Well over four-fifths of edge banding machines employing hot-melt adhesives had been installed within the previous 10 years. Where the proportion of equipment 10 years old or less fell below 50 percent— as in the case of manually operated shapers, certain kinds of lathes, carving machines, tenoners, and sanders— it was preponderantly between 10 and 20 years old. Of innovations to the production processes of the industry only a few examples can be given here. Defects in the lumber used in manufacturing kitchen cabinets were for merly spotted by a worker’s trained eye and had to be laboriously removed with hand tools. Now, an electronic device “ finds” the defect, and programs the cut so as to isolate and eliminate the defect. Labor requirements as well as material waste are thus considerably reduced. Cutting heads of shapers, as well as saw blades, have been toughened by tungsten carbide, reducing time spent in removing and sharpening such devices. Particleboard pieces of similar thickness can now simultaneously be sawed to varying dimensions (as specified by different customers) by programming a computer, which generates a machine-read able tape that informs the sawing machinery of the cuts to be made and their sequence. The computer also generates a tape that can be read by the machine operator, so that he or she may check and follow the cutting operations, and override when necessary. Such lumping of small orders for processing of particleboard without manual resetting of ma chinery has raised output per unit of labor input in some establishments by three to five tim es.19 Secondary sanding operations, traditionally performed by hand, have been disappearing gradually; the use of multi functional sander attachments, which reduce or eliminate the relatively high labor requirements associated with hand sanding, is becoming more prevalent. Automatic thickness settings permit a wide range of bites, down to finest surface Table 1. polish.20 In addition, air-operated hand-held polishing ap paratus has been developed that also dispenses with sec ondary sanding, and prevents swirl patterns by means of its so-called random orbit action.21 A shift away from electri cally powered tools to air-operated hand tools is widely believed to have improved operator efficiency. Air-powered tools are lighter and less fatiquing to operate, and offer a wider choice of such options as handles and styles adaptable to operator preferences. Adhesives and the means of applying them have likewise been improved. High-speed production and assembly re quires rapid curing, and gluing has become an integral part of the production process in the larger, mass-producing es tablishments. However, stapling has not yet been eliminated in kitchen cabinet and vanity assembly, where it supple ments gluing in the fastening of parts. Gluing, like stapling is performed by hand-held power tools. Such tools have been redesigned so as to minimize operator fatigue, and technically improved for ease and speed of operation: for example, screw-in cartridges now permit quick replacement of the glue-dispensing head.22 Processing of particleboard gained considerably in effi ciency during the review period with the introduction of synthetic precision coaters, which ensure that the board is free of voids or craters, and of ultraviolet light as a device for rapidly curing such coaters.23 Fast curing is, of course, indispensable in the mass pro duction of the cabinet box (which, as noted, consists of particleboard). The board is also run through a wood grain printer consisting of chrome cylinders engraved with the desired grain pattern, and is imprinted with the pattern by means of inks that dry almost immediately when the board has been run through an oven. Prior to the introduction of these processes, the cabinet box was left unfinished, mean ing that more expensive particleboard had to be used. De spite the expense of capital investment in the new process, costs of fabricating the box have declined, while the final product has become more attractive.24 Productivity and related indexes for the wood kitchen cabinet industry, 1972-82 [1977 = 100] Output per hour Year All employees Production workers Employee hours Nonproduction workers Output All employees Production workers Nonproduction workers 1972 1973 1974 1975 ......................... ......................... ......................... ......................... 82.3 83.6 78.6 86.7 80.9 83.6 81.3 90.9 90.1 83.3 67.6 70.5 73.2 80.5 68.9 61.2 88.9 96.3 87.7 70.6 90.5 96.3 84.8 67.3 81.2 96.6 101.9 86.8 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ......................... ......................... ......................... ......................... ......................... 81.4 100.0 100.5 96.4 102.1 81.9 100.0 100.2 95.7 104.5 79.3 100.0 102.3 100.2 91.4 63.0 100.0 116.7 118.5 110.7 83.5 100.0 116.1 122.9 108.4 83.0 100.0 116.5 123.8 105.9 85.7 100.0 114.1 118.3 121.1 1981......................... 1982 ......................... 99.3 88.7 104.4 96.2 80.3 63.9 105.2 83.7 105.9 94.4 100.8 87.0 131.0 131.0 20 -3.6 47 5.2 Average annual rates of change (in percent) 1972-82 ................... 1977-82 .............. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2.1 -1.6 2.6 0.0 0.0 -8.4 4.7 -3.6 25 -2.0 27 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Productivity in Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturing Capital investment Expenditures for plant and equipment by kitchen cabinet manufacturers paralleled output trends over the review pe riod. Capital expenditures by the industry, in constant dol lars,25 rose at an average annual rate of nearly 7 percent between 1972 and 1979, then declined at a rate of 17 percent per year to 1982. The industry’s capital spending varied from year to year in line with its output, although fluctua tions in spending were far greater than those in production. Thus, in 1977, capital spending soared 51 percent compared with 47 percent for output, while in 1980, it plummeted 44 percent (always in terms of price-adjusted dollars) as against a 7-percent output drop. Average annual percentage changes in capital spending for the industry differ markedly from similar estimates for all manufacturing: K itc h e n c a b in e ts 1972-82 ........................................ 1.9 1972-79 .................................. 6.7 1979-82 .................................. - 16.8 M a n u fa c tu r in g 3.7 8.1 -6 .0 In terms of current dollars, assets per worker in the kitchen cabinet manufacturing industry have risen less than in total manufacturing. According to Bureau of the Census data, assets per worker in the industry increased 42 percent during the review period, compared with 76 percent for all man ufacturing. The industry used considerably less capital per worker than manufacturing generally throughout the period, and in recent years, its capital intensity actually declined. Until the mid-1970’s, assets per worker in the industry av eraged 34 percent of the comparable figure for manufac turing, thereafter dropping to an estimated 26 percent. The decline to some extent reflected a decrease in the value of structures (that is, plant) relative to the industry’s gross asset value— from about two-fifths in the earlier part of the period to one-third in the later years. The industry thus tended to place relatively more emphasis on installing new equipment than on constructing new plants. Structure of the industry The number of establishments in kitchen cabinet manu facturing rose 65 percent between 1972 and 1982. Most of the growth occurred before 1978, but despite slackening output in subsequent years, the number climbed by an ad ditional 15 percent by 1982. The increase centered on cus tom cabinet fabricators rather than stock line firms, attesting to the strength of demand for replacement and remodeling of kitchen cabinets and vanities. It is possible that the rapid rise in the number of custom cabinetmaking firms contrib uted to the productivity slowdown in the industry in the more recent years of the review period. Virtually all the employment increase in the industry during the seventies occurred among custom cabinet and vanity fabricators rather than among stock line establishment. The great majority of industry establishments are small firms employing fewer than 20 workers. In 1977, four-fifths 28 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis of all establishments classified in the industry accounted for but one-fifth of total employment. Three percent of all es tablishments employing 100 workers or more accounted for 40 percent of all workers. Changes over time in the distri bution of establishments by employment size were small. Concentration ratios shifted upward for stock line manu facturers, with the eight largest firms accounting for 71 percent of the value of shipments in 1977, as against 49 percent in 1972. The upward shift was less pronounced for custom fabricators (25 percent in 1977 versus 22 percent in 1972.) Outlook Swings in residential construction, and high interest rates (if they persist), are likely to retard short- or medium-term productivity improvements in kitchen cabinet manufactur ing, because they tend to depress capacity utilization and capital investment. Nevertheless, the experience over the 1972-82 period suggests that, over the long term, produc tivity should continue to advance. Productivity gains are also foreshadowed by continued diffusion of innovations, at least in the large establishments. Automated systems are likely to be adopted more widely in the industry as costs of numerical controls decline. The precision of cuts made by such woodworking machinery as saws, shapers, and planers is likely to be controlled much more readily by the use of microcomputers, which would reduce setup time and waste, and improve product quality.26 The application of coating also appears likely to become increasingly computerized: In a new type of technology, an electronic eye determines the dimensions of the wood com ponent to which the coating is applied, relaying the infor mation to a computer that operates revolving spray heads. These spray heads turn on and off as programmed. Changes in the color of the coating do not require significant down time. The chemical characteristics of the spray have evolved so as to reduce drying time to little more than 2 minutes, and further reductions are in the offing. Together with ap propriate changes in factory layout, such innovations have at least halved labor requirements of establishments in which they have been adopted.27 Flexibility in setting up woodworking machinery afforded by microelectronic devices and numerical controls should also advance the efficiency of custom cabinet production. Moreover, families of common parts are more efficiently produced where group technology concepts or flexible man ufacturing systems have been adopted by establishments in this segment of the industry.28 The Bureau of Labor Statistics has projected an average annual rise in the employment of the industry group to which kitchen cabinet manufacturing belongs of 2.3 to 2.4 percent between 1982 and 1995. These rates are somewhat lower than the 2.8-percent annual increase recorded for the 1972— 82 span. The occupational mix of the industry group is not projected to change significantly. The Bureau also projects great strength in residential construction in the years ahead, with 2.16 million private housing starts in 1988, and 1.9 million annually thereafter to 1995.29 Expenditures for re placement and remodeling are also likely to increase, con sidering the large additions to the stock of residential housing in the 1970’s.30 Consequently, if demand for kitchen cab inets and vanities grows with the projected rise in residential construction and replacement and remodeling outlays, cap ital investment in the industry should be spurred, ensuring continued productivity improvement. □ ■ F O O TN O T E S 1Establishments primarily manufacturing wood kitchen cabinets and wood bathroom vanities are classified as number 2434 in the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tria l C la s s ific a tio n (s ic ) M a n u a l of the Office of Management and Budget. As discussed in the text, the industry also manufactures cabinets made of plastics. Average annual rates shown in the text and the table are based on the linear least squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers. The indexes for productivity and related variables will be updated annually and published in the annual b l s bulletin, P r o d u c tiv ity M e a s u r e s f o r S e le c te d I n d u s tr ie s . 2Made-to-measure units (custom cabinets) can often be manufactured with standard production methods and high-speed production machinery, although the range o f designs may be limited. According to one report, up to 200 different sizes can be made in the same establishment, with setup changes causing little loss in efficiency. See W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e s t, April 1981, pp. 17-18. See also footnote 28. 3 Metal cabinets are classified on sic 2514. In 1982, they accounted for 1 percent o f total kitchen cabinet output, compared with up to 25 percent during the late forties and early fifties. See William B. Lloyd, M illw o rk , P r in c ip le s a n d P r a c tic e s (Chicago, Cahners Publishing C o., 1966), p. 353. 4Housing starts surged in 1983, rising by 60 percent from 1982. A continued, if moderate, increase is indicated for 1984. Evidence suggests that output and employment in kitchen cabinet and vanity manufacturing also rose strongly over these 2 years. 5 Unpublished data, Bureau of the Census. 6The rates noted in the text mask year-to-year swings o f sometimes great amplitude. For example, in 1975, remodeling outlays (in constant dollars) soared 90 percent; in 1978, they dropped 36 percent. These swings, of course, affected kitchen cabinet and vanity output. 7U .S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Residential 8 Estimate from National Kitchen and Bath Association. 9Information from National Kitchen and Bath Association. 10Number o f bathrooms in new housing in percent: I .................. .................. .................. .................. 22 16 24 21 I-V 2 11 16 17 21 2 2 -'/2 o r m o r e 45 48 40 34 13Until 1972, kitchen cabinet and vanity manufacturing was classified as part o f the millwork industry in the Census o f Manufactures. See also Veigle and Brand, “ Millwork industry,” especially the technology section of the article. M illw o r k , P r in c ip le s a n d P r a c tic e s , p. 353. ^Information from William Lloyd, author o f M illw o r k , P r in c ip le s a n d P r a c tic e s . 16Information from industry sources. 17Information from industry sources. 18See A n I n v e n to r y o f M a c h in e s a n d E q u ip m e n t in th e W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e M a r k e t, issued by W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e s t, Wheaton, 111., 1979. A n I n v e n to r y presents the number o f woodworking machines, by type, for each woodworking industry (as classified by the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la s s ific a tio n M a n u a l). In a separate presentation, A n I n v e n to r y shows the age breakdown of each type of woodworking ma chinery, but the age breakdown is not grouped by industry. The discussion in the text assumes that the age breakdown applies to machinery in kitchen cabinet manufacturing where this industry accounts for a relatively large proportion o f a given type of woodworking machinery. The authors o f A n I n v e n to r y believe this assumption to be valid. 19F u r n itu r e !W o o d w o rk in g P r o d u c t N e w s , May 1983. 2' I b i d . , under “ New developments,” pp. 16 flf. 23 Industry sources. See also F u r n itu r e /W o o d w o r k in g P r o d u c t N e w s , March 1976, p. 16. 24 Industry sources. 11 Average annual rates of change in employment and employee hours in kitchen cabinet manufacturing compared with manufacturing generally as follows: M a n u fa c tu rin g 1972-82: Employment ....................... .............. Employee hours ................ .............. Ratio .................................... ............. 2.8 2.5 1.12 - 0 .2 - 1.2 0.17 1972-79: Employment ....................... ............. Employee hours ................ ............. Ratio .................................... ............. 4.8 4.6 1.04 1.4 0.5 2.80 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 12Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. See also Jack Veigle and Horst Brand, “ Millwork industry shows slow growth in productivity,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , September 1982, pp. 2 1 -2 6 . 22W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e s t, January 1981, p. 10. 22 26 20 16 See Bureau of the Census, C h a r a cte r istics o f N e w H o u sin g , various years. K itc h e n c a b in e ts - 3 .6 - 4 .5 0.80 20 “ Larger manufacturers . . . have been quick to pick up many kinds o f sanding attachments, narrow belts, abrasive wheels . . . , and anything else that can reduce or eliminate secondary steps in process when these attachments are offered on multifunction machines.” See W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e s t, May 1981, pp. 18-19. A lte r a tio n s a n d R e p a ir s , Annual, 1982, table 7, p. 14. 1982 1979 1975 1971 1979-82: Employment ...................................... —7 .6 Employee hours ................................ - 7 . 8 Ratio .................................................... 0.97 25 Constant-dollar data based on deflators from the Bureau o f Business Economics, U .S. Department of Commerce. 26Industry sources. 27 Industry sources. 28 Flexible manufacturing systems depend on automatically adjustable machinery, often linked with robots or other automatic transfer devices. S e e A m e r ic a n M a c h in is t, December 1981, pp. 5 5 -5 6 . 29See Arthur J. Andreassen and others, “ Economic outlook for the 1990’s: three scenarios for economic growth,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1983, pp. 11-23. 30The number of housing units rose 17 percent between 1960 and 1970, and 28 percent between 1970 and 1980. See S ta tis tic a l A b s tr a c t o f th e U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 8 2 - 8 3 , p. 751. 29 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Productivity in Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturing APPENDIX: Measurement techniques and limitations Indexes of output per employee hour measure changes in the relation between the output of an industry and employee hours expended on that output. An index of output per employee hour is derived by dividing an index of output by an index of industry employee hours. The preferred output index for manufacturing industries would be obtained from data on quantities of the various goods produced by the industry, each weighted (multiplied) by the employee hours required to produce one unit of each good in some specified base period. Thus, those goods that require more labor time to produce are given more impor tance in the index. In the absence of adequate physical quantity data, the output index for this industry was constructed using a de flated value technique. The value of shipments of the various product classes was adjusted for price changes by appro 30FRASER Digitized for https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis priate Producer Price Indexes and Industry Sector Price In dexes to derive real output measures. These, in turn, were combined with employee hour weights to derive the overall output measure. The result is a final output index that is conceptually close to the preferred output measure. Employment and employee hour indexes were derived from data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Em ployees and employee hours are each considered homoge neous and additive, and thus do not reflect changes in the qualitative aspects of labor, such as skill and experience. The indexes of output per employee hour do not measure any specific contributions, such as that of labor or capital. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of factors such as changes in technology, capital investment, capacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and effort of the work force, man agerial ability, and labor-management relations. Erratum The provisions related to financing and disqualification under Rhode Is land’s unemployment insurance program were not enacted, contrary to the report in “ Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1984,” Monthly Labor Review, January 1985. Productivity Reports Productivity increased in many industries in 1983 A rthur S. H erm an Productivity, as measured by output per employee hour, increased in 1983 in more than three-quarters of the indus tries for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics regularly pub lishes data. Productivity gains were unusually large in many industries and were in contrast to 1982 when productivity declined in almost half of the industries measured. The widespread gains in 1983 are consistent with the increase in the nonfarm business sector of the economy, which grew 3.5 percent. Table 1 shows productivity trends in industries measured by the Bureau and includes new measures introduced for additional industries: refrigeration and heating equipment, internal combustion engines, machine tool accessories, and wood kitchen cabinets.1 Changes by industry Manufacturing. The steel industry, one of the more im portant industries included, had a record productivity in crease o f 27.7 percent, compared with a record productivity decline of 18.8 percent in 1982. Steel output was up 14.7 percent in 1983, as demand increased, especially from the motor vehicle and appliance markets, and employee hours declined 10.2 percent as the industry' continued its consol idations and plant closings. The motor vehicles industry, another important industry covered, had a large productivity gain of 14.2 percent which was based on a steep increase in output of 30.6 percent, while employee hours were up 14.3 percent. Demand for motor vehicles increased signif icantly as compared with 1982 when demand was lower and output declined 8.0 percent. Another manufacturing industry with a large productivity gain was household appliances. Productivity grew 17.6 per cent in this key industry, as output was up a sharp 27.4 percent and hours increased 8.4 percent. Demand for house hold appliances was aided by increased sales of homes, more Arthur S. Herman is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis favorable consumer credit, and an increase in personal dis posable income in 1983. Other manufacturing industries with unusually large pro ductivity gains included: synthetic fibers (21.5 per cent), gray iron foundries (17.4 percent), hydraulic cement (15.9 percent), copper rolling and drawing (14.9 per cent), brick and structural clay tile (12.4 percent), primary aluminum (12.1 percent), electric lamps (11.9 percent), aluminum rolling and drawing (11.1 percent), and paints (10.5 percent). All of these industries, except two, had output gains of more than 10 percent in 1983. Conversely, a small number of manufacturing industries had productivity declines in 1983. Noteworthy was machine tools in which productivity dropped a steep 29.9 percent as output fell 43.5 percent. Mining. All of the mining industries recorded large gains in productivity in 1983. Iron mining (usable ore) posted the largest gain— 41.2 percent— of all the measures. Output was up 7.7 percent in this industry while hours fell off sharply. Coal mining had a productivity increase of 13.9 percent, as output fell 6.4 percent and hours dropped 17.7 percent. Copper mining (recoverable metal) had a produc tivity gain of 10.8 percent, as output fell 9.5 percent and hours declined even more. In nonmetallic minerals, pro ductivity was up 7.9 percent, as output grew due to the increased construction activity in 1983. Transportation and utilities. Productivity was up in most transportation and utility industries. In railroads (revenue traffic), productivity advanced sharply by 23.0 percent. Out put grew 6.8 percent, as commodity shipments increased in 1983 and hours continued to decline by 13.1 percent. Air transportation had a large productivity gain of 9.9 percent, as output grew 8.5 percent and hours declined slightly. Productivity grew 2.2 percent in petroleum pipelines as hours fell more than output. However, productivity dropped 6.6 percent in bus carriers, with output dropping 11.7 per cent and hours falling 5.5 percent. In telephone communications, productivity was up 12.7 percent, as output grew 1.7 percent and hours declined 9.8 percent. Electric utilities posted a gain in productivity of 1.7 percent— the first increase in this industry since 1977. On the other hand, gas utilities had a large productivity 31 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Productivity Reports Table 1. Indexes of output per employee hour in selected industries, 1978-83, and percent changes 1982-83 and 1978-83 Average sic Code1 Industry 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 19832 Percent change 1 9 8 2 -8 3 annual percent change 1 9 7 8 -8 3 Mining 1011 1011 1021 1021 111,121 121 14 142 Iron mining, crude ore............................. Iron mining, usable o re ........................... Copper mining, crude ore......................... Copper mining, recoverable metal ............ Coal mining............................................ Bituminous coal and lignite mining............ Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels............ Crushed and broken stone ....................... 116.8 119.2 109.6 107.6 106.4 106.7 104.6 109.0 125.5 125.6 108.8 97.8 99.4 99.6 102.4 108.4 129.0 127.5 99.1 91.3 112.5 112.6 96.2 103.3 139.0 136.8 101.5 97.2 122.2 122.7 95.0 100.7 106.9 104.0 105.8 115.4 119.1 120.0 89.8 98.1 147.3 146.9 126.9 127.9 135.6 136.5 96.9 108.2 37.8 41 2 19 9 10 8 13 9 13 7 79 10.3 107.7 115.8 89.8 137.0 107.6 106.3 113.2 124.8 89.9 146.2 51 78 01 67 2.2 1.6 1.9 4.2 5.4 5.5 - 2.2 - 1.0 Manufacturing 2011, 13 2011 2013 2026 203 2033 204 Red meat products................................. Meat packing plants ............................... Sausages and other prepared meats.......... Fluid milk .............................................. Preserved fruits and vegetables................. Canned fruits and vegetables..................... Grain mill products................................. 98.7 100.9 93.6 108.0 104.4 103.7 100.4 101.7 104.9 94.6 116.3 99.3 101.4 102.2 107.0 109.1 101.8 124.8 101.2 100.6 107.1 107.9 114.2 94.3 129.3 99.6 99.7 112.9 2041 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047,48 205 Flour and other grain mill products............ Cereal breakfast foods............................. Rice milling............................................ Blended and prepared flour....................... Wet corn milling..................................... Prepared feeds for animals and fowls........ Bakery products..................................... 101.5 101.7 92.7 92.5 102.0 100.8 97.2 98.5 107.6 96.3 91.0 110.8 102.0 94.1 96.7 106.5 111.8 104.8 129.2 106.2 92.3 99.2 110.0 117.9 104.6 143.8 112.6 94.3 2061,62,63 2061,62 2063 2082 2086 2111,21,31 2111,31 Sugar .................................................... Raw and refined cane sugar ..................... Beet sugar ............................................ Malt beverages....................................... Bottled and canned soft drinks ................. All tobacco products............................... Cigarettes, chewing and smoking tobacco .. 101.0 100.7 101.2 100.0 104.5 102.8 103.8 109.1 107.3 110.9 107.4 105.6 102.2 102.1 109.1 107.8 111.7 112.1 109.8 102.2 101.1 2121 2251,52 2281 2421 2431 2434 2435,36 Cigars .................................................. Hosiery.................................................. Nonwool yarn m ills................................. Sawmills and planing mills, general .......... Millwork................................................ Wood kitchen cabinets............................. Veneer and plywood ............................... 98.2 101.4 104.2 101.4 90.4 100.5 101.7 103.7 106.5 103.9 96.7 92.3 96.4 94.6 2435 2436 251 2511,17 2512 2514 2515 Hardwood veneer and plywood ................. Softwood veneer and plywood................... Household furniture................................. Wood household furniture ....................... Upholstered household furniture ............... Metal household furniture......................... Mattresses and bedsprings....................... 100.7 102.1 104.6 104.9 108.8 97.4 101.4 252 2521 2522 2611,21,31,61 2643 2651 2653 Office furniture........................................ Wood office furniture............................... Metal office furniture............................... Paper, paperboard and pulp mills.............. Paper and plastic bags............................. Folding paperboard boxes......................... Corrugated and solid fiber board boxes . . . . 2823,24 2834 2841 2844 2851 2911 301 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 4.1 - 1.2 6.0 40.6 40.3 100.4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111.2 111.1 111.4 113.0 114.3 100.6 98.9 105.7 102.5 110.6 115.8 118.3 100.8 98.6 107.6 112.8 99.0 122.1 126.4 100.6 97.2 18 10.0 -10 5 5.4 68 -0 2 -1.4 0.7 1.3 -0.3 3.6 3.9 -0.5 -1.3 110.3 105.3 99.8 101.8 93.9 102.1 102.7 112.5 118.9 103.2 104.5 96.9 99.3 106.7 118.3 110.3 119.6 117.6 87.0 88.7 110.5 129.1 107.1 91 -2.9 0 09 0 0 5.2 1.4 42.7 4.1 4-0.3 97.8 93.4 101.3 101.5 104.9 89.9 102.6 104.1 102.7 99.7 97.1 101.9 93.1 111.9 100.3 111.8 102.6 97.0 110.1 97.9 113.7 100.8 116.6 105.0 98.8 116.2 108.6 104.2 0 0 (3) 8.0 40.3 44.6 1.6 100.1 100.7 99.9 103.2 99.9 102.8 103.5 107.3 110.7 104.8 105.4 97.6 101.4 107.1 112.5 109.2 114.4 105.2 94.0 97.1 111.3 109.1 99.4 114.7 104.4 91.7 98.6 110.2 108.6 97.4 115.4 106.2 94.5 96.8 113.0 Synthetic fibers ..................................... Pharmaceutical preparations ..................... Soaps and detergents ............................. Cosmetics and other toiletries................... Paints and allied products ....................... Petroleum refining ................................. Tires and inner tubes............................... 105.2 99.0 105.2 99.3 104.7 101.3 108.8 115.0 106.4 104.0 93.1 105.7 94.9 109.5 115.7 107.3 108.4 82.5 102.1 94.2 105.6 120.9 106.1 105.9 74.9 101.5 83.7 123.2 109.0 109.6 99.5 81.9 108.0 82.5 134.8 119.3 86.9 147.7 3079 314 3221 3241 325 3251,53,59 3251 Miscellaneous plastics products................. Footwear................................................ Glass containers..................................... Hydraulic cement ................................... Structural clay products........................... Clay construction products....................... Brick and structural clay tile ..................... 100.8 102.5 101.4 101.3 102.6 102.6 96.5 94.8 100.2 106.7 96.0 96.1 92.1 85.8 95.7 99.1 112.0 87.0 97.8 94.8 85.6 98.5 95.6 118.7 91.1 100.9 98.4 85.2 111.2 97.3 117.8 95.3 105.3 107.6 92.5 3253 3255 3271,72 3273 331 3321 3324,25 Ceramic wall and floor tile ....................... Clay refractories..................................... Concrete products................................... Ready-mixed concrete............................. Steel .................................................... Gray iron foundries................................. Steel foundries....................................... 115.3 102.9 98.6 103.1 108.3 102.1 98.1 111.8 109.1 94.6 99.9 106.9 96.8 99.4 120.3 108.0 93.2 93.1 102.9 90.8 99.1 126.5 109.0 92.5 95.4 112.0 92.5 90.8 132.1 98.0 96.8 90.4 90.9 95.3 93.0 32 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (3 ) (3) 116.9 (3) 0 0 0 0 118.6 0 3 0 0 0 113.4 3 0 0 0 0 0 115.8 0 97.8 118.8 132.4 0 0 (? ) 43.1 a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 10 5.1 (?) 40.7 4 - 2.2 42.9 4- 1.6 41.8 43.1 41.6 41.8 4-1.7 43.9 1.7 4-1.7 - 1.1 2.4 21 5 0 0 0 10 5 53 9.6 3.0 42.0 4-0.9 4-5.9 102.0 120.0 110.5 113.9 115.1 104.0 0 0 48 19 15 9 82 7.0 12.4 42.4 -0.4 3.5 1.3 2.4 3.1 1.7 0 0 0 0 10.1 0 0 44.0 0.2 40.6 4-3.0 - 0.2 0 0 4 - 2.0 0 0 0 107.9 116.1 111.9 27.7 17.4 2.1 -3.7 6.8 - 1.2 Table 1. Continued— Indexes of output per employee hour in selected industries, 1978-83, and percent changes 1982-83 and 1978-83 sic Code1 Industry 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 19832 Percent change 1 9 8 2 -8 3 Average annual percent change 1S7S—S3 3331,32,33 3331 3334 3351 3353,54,55 3411 3423 Primary copper, lead, and zinc ................. Primary copper ..................................... Primary aluminum ................................. Copper rolling and drawing....................... Aluminum roiling and drawing................... Metal cans ............................................ Hand and edge tools............................... 96.5 99.4 99.6 100.2 104.6 102.3 100.6 106.5 113.3 99.7 98.8 101.5 103.6 104.3 103.7 105.3 100.0 94.9 101.9 102.6 99.0 118.6 124.4 103.8 99.2 99.4 108.1 95.8 121.8 119.9 103.0 107.6 105.1 119.0 95.1 131.6 124.6 115.5 123.6 116.8 130.0 (3) 3441 3494 3498 3519 352 3523 Fabricated structural metal ....................... Valves and pipe fittings ........................... Fabricated pipe and fittings....................... Internal combustion engines, n.e.c.............. Farm and garden machinery ..................... Farm machinery..................................... 100.4 100.9 100.7 105.4 101.0 98.4 102.0 104.3 90.1 98.8 103.3 100.2 101.9 101.4 89.9 94.8 96.3 94.0 98.3 103.5 93.1 94.4 98.6 98.0 101.4 100.4 89.8 87.0 98.5 95.0 (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) 3524 3531 3541,42 3541 3542 3545 Lawn and garden equipment..................... Construction machinery and equipment . . Machine tools ....................................... Metal cutting machine tools ..................... Metal forming machine tools..................... Machine tool accessories......................... 108.6 105.8 102.5 103.6 99.9 104.0 113.9 100.3 101.9 103.1 98.4 101.7 107.0 97.4 98.7 100.9 92.4 100.3 101.3 96.1 96.5 99.3 88.0 103.7 106.8 89.0 93.2 95.1 87.6 91.5 (3) (3) 65.3 64.5 67.9 (3) 3561,63 3561 3562 3563 3585 3612 Pumps and compressors ......................... Pumps and pumping equipment................. Ball and roller bearings ........................... Air and gas compressors......................... Refrigeration and heating equipment.......... Transformers......................................... 103.3 101.1 105.6 106.1 100.6 103.4 102.5 100.7 105.3 106.1 102.2 108.5 101.3 99.2 94.7 105.5 95.0 110.8 102.7 100.6 93.4 106.8 101.1 107.1 97.7 94.9 82.8 107.3 101.7 102.6 (3) 87.6 (3) (3) 99.3 0 0 0 0 5.8 0 0 -3.2 4-1.1 4-1.3 -4.7 40.3 40.1 -1.1 3613 3621 3631,32,33,39 3631 3632 3633 Switchgear and switchboard apparatus . . Motors and generators............................. Major household appliances ..................... Household cooking equipment................... Household refrigerators and freezers.......... Household laundry equipment................... 102.4 98.6 100.5 100.3 98.4 102.3 102.7 97.9 108.9 108.5 112.2 108.2 102.6 94.9 105.9 103.4 114.3 102.2 98.4 97.7 108.1 104.9 117.2 104.0 103.5 100.1 110.5 114.8 115.2 106.1 101.8 94.4 129.9 144.3 127.5 118.0 -1.6 -5.7 17.6 25.7 10.7 11.2 -0.1 -0.3 3.9 5.9 4.1 1.9 3639 3641 3645,46,47,48 3651 371 3825 Household appliances, n.e.c....................... Electric lamps ....................................... Lighting fixtures..................................... Radio and television receiving sets............ Motor vehicles and equipment................... Instruments to measure electricity ............ 104.0 103.0 100.6 113.1 99.7 100.3 104.3 106.2 95.0 118.2 98.5 99.0 101.6 104.7 93.9 116.4 92.2 106.3 103.9 108.8 89.4 132.8 95.0 109.1 101.3 111.0 92.6 157.9 99.7 114.7 121.1 124.2 (3) (3) 113.9 (3) 19.5 11.9 2.0 3.2 4-2.2 48.2 2.1 43.7 401 401 4111,31,414 pt 4213 PT 4213 PT 4511,21, pt Railroad transportation-revenue traffic........ Railroad transportation-car miles .............. Class I bus carriers................................. Intercity trucking6 ................................... Intercity trucking—general freight6 ............ Air transportation6 ................................. 104.5 102.8 96.7 99.8 98.6 109.3 104.7 102.9 98.3 98.6 96.6 113.1 107.3 107.9 100.8 94.3 87.9 106.2 111.5 107.6 90.9 98.7 92.5 104.9 115.8 110.1 90.0 93.3 86.8 114.7 142.4 128.9 84.1 (3) (3) 126.0 23.0 17.1 -6.6 5.5 3.9 -3.0 4-1,3 4-2.9 2.1 4612,13 4811 491,492,493 491,493 PT 492,493 pt 54 Petroleum pipelines................................. Telephone communications....................... Gas and electric utilities........................... Electric utilities....................................... Gas utilities............................................ Retail food stores7 ................................. 101.7 105.8 98.2 96.8 101.4 95.7 101.7 110.8 97.6 95.4 103.4 98.0 93.0 118.1 96.2 94.0 102.1 100.8 86.0 124.4 94.4 93.0 98.1 98.2 89.2 129.1 89.5 89.3 89.9 96.9 91.2 145.5 88.4 90.8 82.6 97.1 2.2 12.7 -1.2 1.7 -8.1 0.2 -2.9 6.2 -2.3 -1.5 -4.2 5511 5541 56 5611 5621 5651 Franchised new car dealers....................... Gasoline service stations7 ......................... Apparel and accessory stores7 ................. Men’s and boys’ clothing stores7 .............. Women’s ready-to-wear stores7 ................. Family clothing stores7 ........................... 98.6 104.3 110.0 105.4 111.3 96.4 94.6 109.5 112.0 110.0 115.0 99.6 99.5 107.9 116.4 110.0 116.2 109.6 96.6 110.8 122.0 120.9 125.5 113.3 97.4 118.0 123.8 121.3 139.0 116.2 102.2 121.5 125.2 125.2 147.8 118.1 4.9 3.0 1.1 3.2 6.3 1.6 0.7 2.9 2.9 3.6 6.1 4.4 5661 58 5912 602 7011 721 Shoe stores7 .......................................... Eating and drinking places7 ..................... Drug and proprietary stores7 ..................... Commercial banking ............................... Hotels, motels, and tourist courts7 ............ Laundry and cleaning services7 ................ 108.7 99.3 102.3 101.2 103.1 100.6 111.2 99.2 102.9 99.3 102.4 94.1 107.7 99.4 105.6 92.7 98.6 87.8 110.8 96.8 105.8 91.8 96.2 85.1 106.0 96.1 105.6 96.2 93.6 88.6 104.6 98.4 104.8 (3) 94.3 88.1 -1.3 2.4 -0.8 -0.9 -0.5 0.6 4-1.8 -2.1 -2.5 8.0 3.9 12.1 14.9 11.1 9.2 (3) 6.1 4.3 2.5 3.9 1.8 4.9 4-2.0 (3) 4-0.2 4-0.2 4-1.9 4-4.2 4-1.0 4-0.9 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 -29.9 -32.2 -22.5 0 0 14.2 0 4-1.5 4-3.8 -7.0 -7.2 -6.4 4-2.3 Other 1As defined in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972 published by the Office of Management and Budget. Preliminary data. 3Not available. Percent change, 1978-82. Pate of change is less than 0.05 percent. 60utput per employee. 70utput per hour of all persons. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 0 0 9.9 0 0.7 -0.6 0 Note: Although the output per employee-hour measures relate output to the hours of all employees engaged in each industry, they do not measure the specific contribution of labor, capital, or any other single factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effects of many influences, including new technology, capital investment, the level of output, capacity utilization, energy use, and managerial skills, as well as the skills and efforts of the work force. Some of these measures use a labor input series that is based on hours paid and some use a labor input series that is based on plant hours. n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified. 33 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Productivity Reports decline of 8.1 percent, as output dropped 10.5 percent in 1983. Trade and services. Productivity changes were varied among the trade and service industries. Productivity was up 4.9 percent for new car dealers, as output grew 8.5 percent, aided by a sharp increase in new car sales. Productivity grew 3.0 percent in gasoline service stations, as output increased 2.4 percent and hours were down 0.6 percent. Eating and drinking places had a productivity gain of 2.4 percent based on a significant gain in output of 5.9 percent. Although the overall apparel store industry had a produc tivity gain of 1.1 percent in 1983, one of the component industries, shoe stores, had a decline in productivity of 1.3 percent. Small productivity gains were posted by the hotel and motel industry (0.7 percent) and the retail food store industry (0.2 percent). Conversely, productivity declines occurred in drug stores ( - 0 . 8 percent) and laundry and cleaning services ( - 0 . 6 percent). Trends, 1978-83 Except for metal forming machine tools and bus carriers, all the industries measured have recorded average annual gains in productivity over the long term (1947-83 for many of the industries). Over the more recent period (1978-83), however, about 40 percent of the industries recorded de clining rates of productivity. In addition, almost three quar ters of the industries had lower rates of productivity change during 1978-83 than in the preceding long-term period (1947— 78 for many industries). The slowdown in productivity in the more current period matches the trend in the nonfarm business sector of the economy, where productivity grew at the low rate of 0.5 percent per year from 1978 to 1983, compared with a 2.3-percent rate from 1947 to 1978. Gains. The tires and tubes industry had the highest rate (6.8 percent per year) of productivity gain of all the indus tries measured during the 1978-83 period. Although output declined 3.6 percent per year in this industry, employee hours fell even more, dropping at a rate of 9.7 percent in the period. The introduction of new, more automatic equip ment for tiremaking as well as the closing of a number of old and inefficient plants during the period, allowed the 1For a detailed report on these industries, see Horst Brand and Clyde Huffstutler, “ Productivity in making air conditioners, refrigeration equip ment and furnaces,’’ M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1984, pp. 11-17; Horst Brand and Norman Bennett, “ Productivity trends in kitchen cabinet 34 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis industry to increase productivity significantly despite the drop in output. The telephone communications industry had the second highest rate of gain at 6.2 percent. Output was up 5.7 percent while hours fell off slightly during the period. Continuing adoption of electronic switching equipment, fi ber optic cables, automatic testing equipment, and increas ing computerization have aided productivity growth in this industry. Other industries with high rates of growth from 1978 to 1983 include: primary copper, lead, and zinc and w om en’s ready-to-wear clothing stores (both 6.1 per cent); fluid milk (6.0 percent); household cooking equip ment (5.9 percent); railroad transportation (5.5 percent); and coal mining (5.4 percent). Declines. Among the many industries with declining pro ductivity rates, the machine tool industries have recorded the largest drops over the 1978-83 period. Metal cutting machine tools declined at a rate of 7.2 percent, as output averaged a 13.9-percent decline and hours fell at a rate of 7.2 percent. Productivity in the metal forming machine tool industry fell at a 6.4-percent rate based on an average decline of 15.7 percent in output and a 9.9-percent drop in hours. These industries were significantly affected by the economic slowdowns and by increasing imports during the 1978-83 period. Output fell off sharply, leading to steep declines in productivity, because machine tool manufacturers tend to retain highly skilled workers during cyclical downturns. In addition, because demand for machine tools tends to lag in economic recoveries, these industries did very poorly in 1983. The next largest productivity falloff from 1978 to 1983 was in the ball and roller bearings industry— 4.7 percent. Output fell at a 9.9-percent rate as the economic slowdowns cut sharply into industry demand and hours declined at a rate of 5.5 percent. The gas utilities industry also had a large productivity decline of 4.2 percent per year over this period. Although the number of customers in this industry increased, output actually declined at a 2.7-percent rate, due in part to conservation and introduction of more energy efficient equipment, while employee hours increased at a 1.5-percent rate. Other industries with declining rates from 1978 to 1983 included petroleum refining ( - 3 . 7 percent), bus carriers ( - 3.0 percent), and petroleum pipelines ( - 2.9 percent). □ manufacturing,” this issue, pp. 24—30; and articles on the internal com bustion engine and machine tool accessory industries which will appear in forthcoming issues of the R e v ie w . Technical Note Employment in recession and recovery: a demographic flow analysis D onald R. W il l ia m s As in earlier downturns, the impacts of recession during 1981-82 were not evenly distributed among the many de mographic groups in the labor force. For example, the rise in the unemployment rate was greatest, in relative terms, for men. The decrease in labor force participation was most pronounced among teenagers, while the labor force partic ipation rate for women actually increased during this period of general economic decline. To what extent were these and other differential impacts of the recession the result of differences in the behavior of the labor force participants? To what extent were they in stead the result of differing labor market opportunities? These, of course, are very difficult questions to answer, particularly when dealing with aggregate data. To illustrate, a decrease in labor force participation can be the result of two factors— an increase in the rate at which individuals leave the labor force, or a decrease in the rate at which workers enter the labor force. Because these and other types of labor force transitions can have different behavioral interpretations (that is, they may have “ different kinds of sources” ), it is im portant to identify which transitions generate demographic differences in labor force participation and unemployment experience. To address these issues, I examine, by age, sex, and race, the monthly flows into and out of the labor force and between employment and unemployment from January 1981 to January 1984, well into the current recovery period. Distribution of economic impacts Race, sex, and age differences in the levels of unem ployment and labor force participation rates can be seen in table 1. The entries are averages over the period December 1980 to December 1983 of data from Current Population Survey “ Gross Change Tabulations,” which give monthly estimates of the numbers of people employed, unemployed, and out of the labor force during the preceding month. The Donald R. Williams is an assistant professor of economics at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis entries in the table therefore are not based on or equivalent to the unemployment and participation rates published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.1 Inspection of the table indicates, however, that the wellknown race, sex, and age differences found in the published estimates are also found here. Blacks and members of other races, on average, have higher unemployment rates than whites, and lower levels of labor force participation, re gardless of sex or age. Women have slightly lower unem ployment rates than men (a relatively recent phenomenon), and lower labor force participation rates, regardless of age or race. Unemployment rates are seen to decrease with age for all sex/race groups, while labor force participation rates increase and then decrease with age, peaking in the 25- to 59-year-old “ prime-age” category. Although the point es timates from the gross change data may differ from the published b l s estimates, the age, race, and sex relationships seem to be the same. The focus of this study is not on differences in the levels of unemployment and participation, however, but rather on differences in their behavior over the most recent business cycle. The National Bureau of Economic Research has iden tified the peak of that cycle as July 1981 and the trough as November 1982. The corresponding changes in the unem ployment rates during the period for each demographic group are presented in table 2, along with changes since the re covery began, for the November 1982 to December 1983 period. During the downturn, the unemployment rate in creased more on average for men than for women, more for whites than for blacks and others, and more for older (over 59) workers than for teenagers (age 16 to 19), youth (20 to 24), or prime-age workers (24 to 59). The greatest increases were felt among older women, who experienced growth in their unemployment rate of more than 158 percent. The sex difference was reversed for nonwhite teens, youth, and older workers, with nonwhite women experiencing greater relative unemployment increases than non white men. The racial difference was reversed for teenagers. Of course, the lags in the impacts of an economic down turn can vary across demographic groups, so that the “ of ficial” definition of the timing of the downturn may not be the appropriate timeframe for this type of analysis. For example, the unemployment rate for black men did not peak until July 1983. To account for this, I computed the per35 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Technical Notes Table 1. Average unemployment and labor force participation rates by sex, race, and age, December 1980-December 1983 [In percent] Unemployment rate Sex and race Total.......................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Males ...................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Females.................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Labor force participation rate Total Teens (1 6 -1 9 ) Youth (2 0 -2 4 ) Prime-age (2 5 -5 9 ) Older (60 + ) Total Teens (1 6 -1 9 ) Youth (2 0 -2 4 ) Prim e-age (2 5 -5 9 ) Older (60 + ) 8.6 7.5 16.3 8.6 7.6 16.7 8.5 7.4 15.9 21.5 18.7 42.2 22.5 19.8 42.7 20.2 17.4 41.6 14.1 11.6 28.0 15.2 13.1 28.6 12.3 9.9 27.2 6.7 5.9 12.0 6.6 5.9 12.2 6.8 6.0 11.8 4.0 3.6 7.2 4.1 3.7 8.8 3.8 3.6 5.1 64.0 64.4 62.7 76.9 77.6 71.6 52.7 52.3 55.3 53.8 57.2 38.4 57.2 60.1 41.9 51.0 54.2 35.1 76.0 78.0 68.1 84.6 85.7 77.6 68.9 70.6 60.1 78.1 78.5 76.8 92.7 93.5 87.3 64.6 64.1 68.2 22.4 22.2 22.9 31.7 31.9 29.6 15.3 15.0 17.9 Note: Estimates calculated from Current Population Survey “ Gross Change Tabulations.” centage change in the unemployment rate for each demo graphic group between the month the group’s rate was at its minimum and the month it reached its maximum. These estimates are presented in the following tabulation, for the “ all ages” and “ teens” subgroups: A ll w orkers All ages Teens 60.3 64.7 50.3 79.3 84.3 59.8 45.7 46.3 46.3 52.7 43.4 62.1 45.3 56.0 81.2 41.5 37.2 57.1 .................. White ............... Blacks and others Males.................... Whites ............. Blacks and others Females................. Whites ............. Blacks and others Most of the qualitative conclusions noted above do not change. The relative increases in the unemployment rate were still worse for men than for women and worse for whites than for members of other races (except among teens). One difference is that, by this measure, teens suffered greater than average unemployment rate increases, while one might conclude the opposite using the measure in table 2. Referring again to table 2, we see that the pattern in the recovery period differs somewhat from that of the recession. For instance, the effect of the recovery was relatively stronger for women than for men, while the opposite was true of the recession. The racial difference remained the same: the effect of the recovery was felt more, on average, by whites than by nonwhites. The sex difference is primarily due to the fact that the unemployment rate continued to rise for non white men well into the recovery period. Again, these ob servations are consistent with those based on the published unemployment rates.2 Many explanations have been offered for these differ ences. For example, the effect of the downturn has been said to have been greater for men than for women because the economic decline affected primarily the goods-producing, as opposed to the service-producing, sector.3 Construc- Table 2. Percent change in unemployment and labor force participation rates by sex, race, and age, July 1981-November 1982 and November 1982-December 1983 July 1981— November 1982 Sex and age November 1982— December 1983 Total Teens (1 6 -1 9 ) 44.7 46.7 33.5 54.0 55.7 40.1 33.5 35.2 26.3 22.0 22.1 21.2 26.3 25.6 24.6 22.2 19.7 26.7 27.3 31.9 19.1 29.1 31.5 15.8 32.1 32.4 22.6 57.6 59.0 49.2 69.6 71.9 52.8 44.0 42.7 45.3 47.3 45.9 65.1 49.1 52.4 26.4 52.5 36.5 158.3 -25.0 -27.6 -16.2 -24.5 -24.9 -22.2 -25.6 -31.2 -9.0 -21.0 -22.7 -16.4 -17.1 -17.3 -19.7 -25.7 -28.3 -12.7 -6.2 -8.1 -7.0 .4 -2.2 6.6 -19.5 -17.0 -19.9 -25.4 -26.3 -18.1 -25.6 -26.2 -21.9 -23.1 -26.5 -13.8 .4 5.3 -30.9 3.4 9.7 -21.0 -9.8 -1.9 -44.6 .3 .1 1.7 -.8 -1.1 2.4 1.7 1.9 .8 -4.1 -3.3 -4.6 -6.3 -5.7 -7.5 -1.3 -.8 -1.8 3.1 .5 5.1 .1 -.1 2.7 1.8 1.1 7.1 1.3 1.3 1.6 .1 (1) 2.1 2.8 3.1 .9 -1.3 -2.4 5.4 -4.3 -5.8 12.5 3.9 4.4 -.5 .8 -.1 6.9 .3 .3 4.3 1.2 -.1 9.7 -.3 -1.9 5.6 -1.5 -3.1 9.0 .3 -.5 1.6 -1.8 -.1 2.2 1.0 1.3 6.3 -.9 -.7 -3.4 1.2 .4 6.5 .3 -.1 2.9 2.2 .8 10.5 -1.4 -1.7 .7 -1.5 -1.3 -5.0 -1.6 -2.5 8.1 Youth (2 0 -2 4 ) Prime-age (2 5 -5 9 ) Older (60 + ) Total Teens (1 6 -1 9 ) Youth (2 0 -2 4 ) Prim e-age (2 5 -5 9 ) Older (6 0 + ) Unemployment rate Total.......................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Males..................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Females ................................. White................................. Nonwhite............................. Labor force participation rate Total......................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Males..................................... White................................. Nonwhite............................. Females ................................. White................................. Nonwhite............................. ’ Less than -0.1. 36 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tion and auto-related industries, including steel manufacturing, were especially hard hit. In contrast, some service industries actually increased employment (although at a decreasing rate) throughout most of the recession. Along the same lines, blue-collar workers suffered worse employment losses than white-collar workers. Because men and women are distrib uted differently among industries and occupations, with men in the more cyclically sensitive ones, men would be expected to suffer relatively greater increases in their unemployment rates. The fact that the industries and occupations that in curred the greatest losses in demand are also those with traditionally higher than average layoff rates4 could have further aggravated their employment declines. The contribution this makes to the sex difference in the employment declines is unclear, however. We know that men have higher layoff rates than women, but that is prob ably primarily because of the sex difference in the occu pational distribution.5 Any sex differences in the cyclic sensitivity of layoff rates are also probably due to the in dustrial or occupational distributions. To fully understand the role of layoff rates in explaining the sex differences in the cyclic behavior of unemployment rates, we need to know whether the responsiveness of the layoff rate is less for women than for men in the same industry and occupation. Evidence presented by Norman Bowers suggests that in the three previous recessions the responsiveness of the layoff rate was actually greater for women than for men, both on average and by industry and occupation.6 Findings by Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn, however, seem to show that there is little, if any, sex difference in the cyclical component of layoffs after controlling for industry, occupation, and other worker characteristics.7 Differences in cyclical variations in layoff rates also fail to explain the racial difference in changes in the unemploy ment rate. Nonwhites suffered relatively smaller unemploy ment rate increases than whites during the last recession, yet their layoff rates have historically been more cyclically responsive, even after controlling for worker and job char acteristics.8 Instead of layoff rate disparities, the racial dif ference in the unemployment response is probably due, at least in part, to the fact that members of racial minorities never fully recovered from the 1980 recession. Their un employment rates were already high when the most recent downturn began, so that the increases it brought about were relatively small. One other factor that could be important in explaining the differential unemployment rate impacts both by race and by sex is the propensity, as unemployment rates increase (or, put differently, as employment opportunities decline), for labor force participation rates to decrease. If women and nonwhites tend to drop out of the labor force at a greater rate than white males in response to a given change in employment opportunities, then their unemployment rates will not rise by as much as those for white males. The “ economic impact” for men and women could therefore be https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis the same— women could suffer as much as men— but it would not be reflected in the unemployment rate. It is for this reason that many analysts argue that unemployment rates are not appropriate measures of the welfare of a de mographic group, and prefer to study the “ employment to population ratio” instead.9 I prefer to examine the problem directly and look at the behavior of both the unemployment and labor force participation rates. In particular, we need to examine the relationships between the two. Estimates of the percentage changes in (seasonally ad justed) labor force participation rates for the July 1981— November 1982 period and the November 1982-December 1983 period are presented in table 2. As with the cyclic behavior of the unemployment rate, differences exist ac cording to age, race, and sex. Note that the participation rate decreased for men during the economic decline, while it increased for women. The rate rose for whites, but the increase was small relative to the increase for blacks and others. Referring to the previous discussion, we find these results suggest that the unemployment rate measure actually overstates the burden of the recession for women and mem bers of racial minorities relative to white men, rather than understating it as had been hypothesized above. Certainly, these changes may be due to recent trends more than to the business cycle. To correctly interpret changes in the unemployment rate, we need to look at its relationship with participation rates net of trend. I do this by examining the coefficient on the unemployment rate variable in the following equation: (1) log (LFPR)t = p 0 + (3jTIMEt + (32URATEt_i + T(seasonal dummies) + ut where lfpr is a given group’s labor force participation rate in period t, and URATEhI is the unemployment rate (for that group, for the entire population, or for some reference group, such as prime-age men), lagged one period. Lagging the unemployment rate is one way to eliminate the problems created by the fact that sampling errors in URATE and LFPR may be highly correlated at any point in time. Estimates of /3; and are presented in table 3, by age, race, and sex. Table 3. Regression coefficients for equation 1, by sex, race, and age Sex and race All workers TIM E Total................. White............ Nonwhite . . . . 1.0003 .0002 2.0039 UR ATE -.0170 -.0160 -.0199 Males............... .0002 2-.0252 White............ - .0002 1- .0203 Nonwhite . . . . 2-.0033 - .0304 Females............ White............ Nonwhite . . . . 2.0012 2.0006 2.0044 -.0138 -.0014 - .0036 Teenagers TIM E U R ATE - .0005 - .0857 .0002 2-1512 .0049 -.1807 Prime-age TIM E 2.0045 2.0004 2.0031 UR ATE - .0030 -.0021 .0356 - .0002 2-,1180 2.0001 2 - 0070 -.0011 2-.0970 2-.0001 - .0004 .0690 1- .3483 2.0017 -.0172 2.0018 2-,1914 2.0012 2-,1772 1.0043 -.1757 2.0015 2.0010 2.0041 -.0090 - .0003 .0190 Significant at a 90-percent confidence level. Significant at a 95-percent confidence level. 37 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Technical Notes (The estimates are derived using the Cochrane-Orcutt tech nique, assuming first-order serial correlation. The unem ployment rate variable is here defined as the average unemployment rate for the population as a whole.) The results indicate that the relationship between the un employment rate and the labor force participation rate (as measured by the coefficient on urate ) did not differ much by race, except for male teenagers. For nonwhite male teens, a 1-percent increase in the unemployment rate (that is, from 10.0 to 10.01) is associated with a .3483-percent decrease in their labor force participation rate. That response is almost four times the response exhibited by whites. For the pop ulation as a whole, however, the magnitudes of the re sponses vary little by race. Some differences do exist by sex, with males exhibiting a strong tendency to decrease their participation as unemployment rates rise. This is true for all groups except white teens. The coefficients on TIME indicate that the increases in the participation rates of women during the period (recall the results in table 2) were indeed largely the effect of a trend component rather than a cyclic one. Relating these results back to our interpretation of the “ burdens” of the recession, the fact that declines in ag gregate demand seem to generate relatively larger decreases in participation for men and teens, and especially minority male teens, suggests that the unemployment rates for those groups may understate the true relative burden of the reces sion. Explanations for the differing participation rate responses include the notion that teens and men exhibit greater than average decreases in participation as unemployment rates rise because they suffer greater than average decreases in demand for their labor. A decrease in demand can have two effects: first, assuming some degree of wage rigidity, there is a direct effect on employment, and hence a direct effect on participation— if the number of people employed de clines then, other things equal, the participation rate will decline. Second, there is the “ discouraged worker effect,” the decline in participation because persons think they will have little success finding a job. An alternative explanation is that demand does not decrease more for teens or men, but rather that, given a change in the demand for their labor, teens and men simply respond more. Results from another study have shown that sources of differences in participation responses include differential costs of search, differential wage rates, and differential levels of (not changes in) labor demand, in addition to differential “ preferences” for work.10 Possible explanations for the relatively small decreases in participation exhibited by women may therefore include the following: (1) demand for women’s labor does not de cline much as unemployment rates rise; (2) women have stronger preferences for work and lower costs of search; or (3) women will enter the labor force as unemployment rates rise to compensate for income lost because of the unemployment of other family members (the “ added worker effect” ). Evidence of the validity of each of these hy 38 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis potheses is presented later in this study. In sum, using relative changes in the unemployment rate as a measure of the impact of the recent recession, the evidence indicates that the heaviest burdens were placed on male, white, and prime-aged and older workers. The mag nitude of the burdens is open to question, however, if one keeps in mind that changes in labor force participation rates affect measured unemployment rates, and that the partici pation rate is endogenously determined. Inspection of flu relationship between labor force participation rates and ag gregate demand suggests that the unemployment rate vari able probably understates the recession’s relative impact on men and on teens. The nature of differential impacts According to the gross change data, 3,293,000 workers became unemployed during December 1983. Some 1,837,000 entered unemployment from employment, while 1,456,000 entered unemployment from outside the labor force. During the same month, 3,576,000 workers left unemployment— 1,745,000 into employment and 1,831,000 into the non participation state. As this example illustrates, the labor market is in continual motion. The goal of the following discussion is to examine the cyclical variations in unem ployment and labor force participation noted earlier in the context of such labor market flows. Let us denote the number of workers who make a tran sition from state / to state J (for example, from employment (£) to unemployment (u), or from unemployment to non participation (n )) during month t as u . Define the probability of making such a transition, given that one is in state / in month t-1 , as Xu - I J , / I , where lul is the number of people in state I in period t-1. It can then be shown that unem ployment rates and labor force participation rates can be expressed as explicit functions of the six transition proba bilities Ayy£, Xjyu, Ajjryy, AEE, AEE, and Akw-11 The relation ships are such that the unemployment rate increases with increases in \ NU and \ EU and decreases with increases in \ UE and \ UN. The effects of changes in \ NE and \ EN depend on the relative magnitudes of the other transition probabil ities. The participation rate will increase with increases in \ NE and \ NU, and decrease with increases in \ EN and \ UN. The effects of \ UE and \ EU depend on the relative magni tudes of \ UN and \ EN. Whatever their size or direction, changes in these transition probabilities are the sources of changes in unemployment and labor force participation rates. We can therefore analyze cyclical changes in unemployment and participation rates in terms of cyclical variations in transition probabilities. Before proceeding to that analysis, however, it may be useful to examine age, race, and sex differences in levels of transition probabilities. The averages over the December 1981-December 1983 period are presented in table 4 for the population as a whole, and for the teenage and primeaged groups. Given the race, sex, and age differences in Table 4. Probabilities of transition among labor force states, by age, sex, and race, December 1981 — December 1983 averages Transition A ge, sex, and race n to E N tO U E tO N E tO U U tO E U to N A ll w orkers Total............................. White..................... Nonwhite................. .0437 .0445 .0433 .0301 .0257 .0623 .0301 .0295 .0362 .0198 .0183 .0302 .2236 .2489 .1556 .1897 .1739 .2397 Males: White..................... Nonwhite................. .0563 .0540 .0352 .0732 .0195 .0291 .0206 .0352 .2561 .1729 .1245 .1841 Females: White..................... Nonwhite................. .0391 .0365 .0216 .0550 .0428 .0429 .0157 .0241 .2306 .1323 .2430 .3016 Total............................. White..................... Nonwhite................. .1016 .1183 .0582 .0858 .0827 .1037 .1041 .0997 .1516 .0484 .0445 .0808 .2178 .2498 .1244 .3054 .2848 .3732 Males: White..................... Nonwhite................. .1210 .0668 .0902 .1102 .0961 .1405 .0502 .0861 .2487 .1245 .2648 .3494 Females: White..................... Nonwhite................. .1032 .0478 .0748 .0935 .1024 .1609 .0395 .0742 .2432 .1213 .3102 .4072 Total............................. White..................... Nonwhite................. .0526 .0536 .0508 .0355 .0317 .0674 .1081 .0177 .0216 .0159 .0147 .0231 .2230 .2445 .1205 .1514 .1450 .1960 Males: White..................... Nonwhite................. .0763 .0708 .0688 .0908 .0065 .0141 .0165 .0279 .2592 .1867 .0828 .1232 Females: White..................... Nonwhite................. .0477 .0442 .0249 .0598 .0330 .0294 .0123 .0181 .2144 .1235 .2328 .2756 Teen ag ers P rim e -a g e unemployment and participation rates, the differences in transition probabilities are not surprising. Women have lower probabilities of making the transitions from N-to-E and Nto-u, and much higher probabilities of moving from E-to-N and u-to-N. All of these differences contribute to the lower labor force participation rates for women. Members of racial minorities have much lower rates of transition from U-to-E than do whites, and slightly higher transition rates from Eto-u, which contribute to their higher unemployment rates. Racial differences also exist in the N-to-u and u-to-N tran sition rates, with nonwhites more likely to enter unemploy ment on the one hand, and more likely to leave it on the other. These differences tend to cancel one another out. A significant racial difference also exists for the N-to-E tran sition for teenagers, with non whites much less likely to make the transition. On average, teenagers are much more volatile than other labor force groups, with higher than average probabilities for the N-to-E, N-to-u, E-to-N, E-to-u, and uto-N transitions. The U-to-E transition rate does not differ much by age. Prime-aged workers differ from others pri marily in their lower E-to-N and U-to-N transition probabil ities. The hypothetical relationships between aggregate demand https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and each of the transition probabilities are relatively straight forward for some flows and very complex for others, de pending on one’s model and assumptions. In a fairly general model, all of the effects of a change in demand are inde terminant.12 A decline in aggregate demand will tend to decrease \ UE and \ NE because the number, frequency, and attractiveness of job offers will decline. A decrease in the frequency of job offers can cause workers’ reservation wages to fall, however, which would tend to increase kUE and \ NE. A decline in aggregate demand can increase the flows from E-to-u and E-to-N due to an increase in layoffs and termi nations, but it can decrease the same flows if it lowers workers’ propensity to quit a job. As aggregate demand falls, we might expect XUN to increase and \ NU to decrease as a result of declining job offers, but this conclusion de pends critically on the relative magnitudes of the levels of changes in job offer rates to people in the u and N states. In addition, \ UN may decrease and \ NU may increase when aggregate demand falls, as individuals respond to the un employment of other family members. The actual relation ships between aggregate demand and transition probabilities are, at best, empirical issues. Using the lagged population-average unemployment rate as a measure of aggregate demand, I have explored these relationships by estimating the parameters of the following equation for each transition rate and for the entire popula tion, teens, and the prime-aged group: (2) log(Xu)t= p 0 + p,TIM Et + 0 2URATEt., + T(seasonal dummies) + ut These estimates of /3; and (32 are presented in table 5. The results indicate that some transition probabilities were much more cyclically responsive than others and that the respon siveness varied significantly across demographic groups. First, the N-to-E transition rate declined with aggregate de mand, for the population as a whole and for each of the subgroups except non white teenage females. The decline is especially large for non white males. Nonwhite male teen agers exhibited the strongest response, which would con tribute to their stronger participation rate response. (See table 3.) Overall, the N-to-E transition rate seems more re sponsive for racial minorities than for whites, and more responsive for men than women. The responsiveness of the N-to-U transition rate differs primarily by race, not only in magnitude but also in direction. The N-to-u transition rate tends to increase for whites as aggregate demand falls, but decreases for blacks and others (though the effect is often statistically insignificant). The effect of this difference is to decrease labor force participation among nonwhites and boost it among whites. The E-to-N transition rate declines as ag gregate demand falls, for all age, race, and sex groups. The effect is stronger for non whites, with little difference by sex. The u-to-N transition rate also decreases with aggregate demand for the population on average, although it increases 39 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Technical Notes Table 5. Regression coefficients for equation 2, by age, sex, and race N t0 E N tO U Age, sex, and race E tO N E tO U U to E T IM E UR A TE Total.................................... White........................... Nonwhite....................... .0027 .0018 1.0175 1- .4319 2-.3437 '-1.0818 - .0005 - .0028 '.0146 .3642 '.4889 -.1346 .0006 - .0004 2.0052 -.2372 -.1580 -.6477 2 - 0061 '-.0073 - .0072 '.7083 '.7898 '.7443 Males: White........................... Nonwhite....................... .0016 1.0190 1- .4465 '-1.3081 - .0031 '.0141 2.4295 .0978 .0004 .0061 -.1801 2-.6826* -.0047 - .0069 Females: White........................... Nonwhite....................... .0015 1.0163 - .2825 2-.8360 - .0028 '.1518 2.5168 - .3004 -.0012 2.0051 -.1516 1-.6668 Total.................................... White........................... Nonwhite....................... .0032 .0039 .0106 1- .7232 '-.7785 2-.9029 .0011 .0011 '.0123 -.0005 .0557 1- .6703 .0031 .0025 .0114 Males: White........................... Nonwhite....................... .0108 .0150 '-.6733 1-1.4732 .0000 '.0163 .1672 -.6510 Females: White........................... Nonwhite....................... '.0063 .0032 -.9134 .0618 .0008 .0086 1.0048 2.0044 '.0025 2-.3302 - .2976 '-1.1878 .4484 1.0257 .0033 1.0233 T IM E UR A TE T IM E UR ATE T IM E UR A TE T IM E U to N UR ATE T IM E U R A TE .0019 2.0034 2-.0036 '-.7211 1-.8467 - .2003 '.0024 '.0028 .0020 1-.5755 2-.5597 '-.6469 '.7306 2.6578 .0028 .0004 '-.9117 '-.5699 .0014 -.0030 1- .6308 '-.5828 1- .0078 -.0056 '.6068 '.6620 2.0039 '-.0117 '-.7309 2.4444 '.0042 .0044 1- .4224 - .5734 -.3511 - .3020 '-1.0923 ’ -.0069 2 - 0067 - .0092 '.6651 '.5866 21.0227 .0025 .0038 -.0032 2-.5565 2-.5904 -.5360 - .0020 .0001 1-.0065 .0233 .1143 - .0954 .0027 2.0177 -.3491 '-1.5392 1- .0078 - .0060 '.5345 .5419 - .0002 - .0053 - .5043 - .3205 .0020 - .0023 .0602 - .5546 .0884 2-.7404 .0026 .0062 - .2763 - .7382 - .0048 -.0175 .6528 1.5361 2.0078 - .0001 - .6402 -.7861 - .0034 '-.0119 .2985 2.4737 .0020 -.0038 '.0203 2.4652 '.7377 -.2505 .0008 -.0008 '.0058 - .0878 .0106 '-.4480 - .0022 -.2177 2-.0085 .4494 .5179 2.7098 .0007 .0013 ' -.0044 1- .7733 '-.8419 1- .3552 .0029 - .0034 - .0006 '-.7342 -.2514 1- .6493 - .4801 - .9399 - .0048 '.0155 2.5723 .3240 .0031 .0025 - .0533 -.1046 .0023 -.0098 .2912 .7779 .0002 .0010 '-.9130 '-.9174 - .0058 1-.0089 - 4546 -.2507 - .2047 '-1.1469 -.0031 '.0224 '.7779 -.5208 - .0027 '.0081 .0423 '-.6849 2-.0067 - .0047 '.6001 2.5695 .0027 '-.0126 1- .7456 .4215 .0046 -.0025 - .4099 '-.6798 All workers Teenagers Prime-age Total.................................... White........................... Nonwhite....................... Males: White........................... Nonwhite....................... Females: White........................... Nonwhite....................... 'Significant at the 95-percent confidence level. for female teens. Both of these transition rate responses (for E-to-N and u-to-N) are counter to standard views of the effects of declines in aggregate demand. In particular, they tend to increase rather than decrease labor force participa tion. The strong negative relationship between the unem ployment rate and participation rates exhibited by many of the demographic groups therefore is not the result of an increased tendency to drop out of the labor force. Rather, the relationship is the result of a decrease in the tendency to enter the labor force, particularly directly into employ ment. The E-to-u and u-to-E transition rates increase and de crease, respectively, as aggregate demand falls. There is little difference in the E-to-u response by race or by sex, except for teens and perhaps prime-age men. Large race and sex differences do exist for the U-to-E transition rate, however, which are probably the primary source of the differential unemployment rate responses noted earlier. As aggregate demand fell during the recession, the U-to-E tran sition rate declined more for whites than for racial minorities (except prime-age men), and more for males than for fe males except, again, among teens. These differences may be the result of the disproportionate distribution of the sexes and races across occupations and industries. 40 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Significant at the 90-percent confidence level. All of these differences in the responsiveness of transition probabilities can be related to race, sex, and age differences in the cyclic responsiveness of unemployment and labor force participation rates, and can help identify their sources. The fact that the unemployment rate increased more for men than for women during the recession seems to be the result of the sex differences in the responsiveness of the u-to-E transition probability. This may be interpreted as support for the hypothesis that the demand for labor declined rel atively more for men. The fact that the participation rate declined more for men than for women seems to be the result of a tendency for the N-to-E transition rate to decline more for men. This fact could suggest that the differential participation rate response is a labor demand, rather than a labor supply, phenomenon. The added worker effect as an explanation for the sex differences in the participation re sponse does not get much support here, because the 7V-toU transition probability does not respond any more for women than it does for men, at least among whites. The racial difference in the responsiveness of the un employment rate during the recession is primarily the result of racial differences in the responsiveness of the N-to-u and U-to-E transition probabilities. Both tend to boost unem ployment rates more for whites than for non whites. The N- to-u difference indicates that the added and discouraged worker effects may be important explanations here, with whites being the added workers and nonwhites the dis couraged ones. This could simply be the result of the racial difference in the distribution of single-parent households. However, it could also be an indication that members of racial minorities feel that they are at a considerable labor market disadvantage because of their race. The relatively large decline in the N-to-E transition rate for nonwhites may very well mean that nonwhites do suffer larger decreases in demand for their labor as aggregate demand declines. The major age differences in the responsiveness of un employment and participation rates can also be related to specific transition rates. The unemployment rate of teen agers rose less than average as aggregate demand fell be cause the u-to-E transition rate did not decline by as much for teens as for other groups, and because the u-to-N tran sition rate increased for teens (except nonwhite males) while decreasing for other groups. The first phenomenon could indicate that reservation wages fell more for teens than for other workers, or that the demand for teenage labor declined less than the demand for others, while the second phenom enon suggests that teens were more likely to become dis couraged and quit looking for work.13 The response of the U-to-N transition probability also obviously contributes to age differences in the responsiveness of the labor force par ticipation rate. Other factors are the age differences in the responses o f the N-to-E and N-to-u transition rates, especially for non white males. The large N-to-E response could indicate that a substantial portion of the participation rate decline for teens is the result of a decrease in the demand for their labor. The results presented here lend support to many of the hypotheses put forth earlier regarding the sources of de mographic differences in unemployment and participation rate behavior. The male/female difference in unemployment rate behavior is indeed probably due to differential changes in demand, which may be attributable to the occupational distribution of the sexes. There is no support, however, for the hypothesis that the participation rate differences arise because women are more likely than men to be “ added workers.” Differences between the participation responses of whites and nonwhites and between those of teens and other workers appear to be due both to differences in relative responses of the demand for their labor (with the demand for labor decreasing more for racial minorities and teens), and to differences in “ supply.” Suggestions for further research This analysis of gross change data from the Current Pop ulation Survey provides insights into the nature of the dif ferential effects of the recent recession which cannot be obtained from an analysis of unemployment or participation rates alone. Many questions remain unanswered, however. Foremost, of course, is, what exactly causes each of the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis differential transition rate responses? If men are discouraged more than women, why? That is a difficult question even with microdata. There are also some questions relating to the methodology, including those related to the timing of the effects of the recession and the appropriate lag structures to use for the urate variable in equations 1 and 2. Further, exactly what is the effect on the unemployment rate of a 1percent decrease in a given transition rate? Does the effect differ by race or sex? One last question we may want to address is, how do the effects of the 1981-82 recession differ from those of earlier downturns? Have there been structural changes in the relationships between aggregate demand and transition rates which may indicate, for ex ample, that there is less sex or race discrimination in the labor market today, or that there has been a profound and lasting change in women’s attitudes toward work outside the home? Many researchers address these issues in other contexts,14 but a comparison of the results presented here with those from studies of earlier periods could lead to better understanding. Finally, it should be noted that many cyclical changes in employment status are not between employment, unem ployment, and nonparticipation, but rather between full-time and part-time employment.15 The data used in this study do not distinguish between full- and part-time employment. An analysis of gross flow data that make such a distinction could be very fruitful, as could further study of gross change data broken down by industry of employment. -------- footnotes -------'The gross flow data are a byproduct of the Current Population Survey, a monthly survey of approximately 60,000 households conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It should be noted that the gross flow data have not been published since 1952 because o f concern about various sources of error. See Ralph E. Smith and Jean E. Vanski, “ The Volatility of the Teenage Labor Market: Labor Force Entry, Exit, and Unemployment F low s,” in Y ou th U n e m p lo y m e n t: I ts M e a s u r e m e n t a n d M e a n in g (U .S. Department of Labor, May 1980); G r o s s F lo w D a ta f r o m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u rv e y , 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0 (U .S. Department of Labor, March 1982); and John M. Abowd and Arnold Zellner, ‘Estimating Gross Labor Force F low s,” paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Statistical Association, August 1983. However, because the errors should not affect the interpretation o f the results of this analysis, the raw gross flow data were used. 2 See Norman Bowers, “ Employment on the rise in the first half of 1983,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , August 1983, pp. 8-14; and Eugene H. Becker and Norman Bowers, “ Employment and unemployment improve ments widespread in 1983,’ M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1984 pp. 3 -1 4 . 3See Deborah P . Klein, “ Trends in employment and unemployment in fam ilies,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1983, pp. 21-25; Joyanna Moy, “ Labor market developments in the U .S. and nine other countries,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , January 1984, pp. 4 4 -5 1 ; Becker and Bowers, “ Employment and unemployment” ; and Larry DeBoer and Michael Seeborg, “ The female-male unemployment differential: effects of changes in industry employment,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1984, pp. 8 -1 5 . 4See David M. Lilien, “ The Cyclical Pattern of Temporary Layoffs in United States Manufacturing,” R e v ie w o f E c o n o m ic s a n d S ta tis tic s , Feb ruary 1980, pp. 24-31; and Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, “ Causes and Consequences of Layoffs,” E c o n o m ic I n q u ir y , April 1981, pp. 270 -9 6 . 41 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Technical Notes 5Blau and Kahn, “ Causes and Consequences.’’ 6Norman Bowers, “ Have employment patterns in recessions changed?” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1981, pp. 15-28. 7Blau and Kahn, “ Causes and Consequences.” HI b id . 9 See Carol Boyd Leon, “ The employment population ratio: its value in labor force analysis,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1981, pp. 3 6 -4 5 . 10Donald R. Williams, “ Racial Differences in Male Teenage Labor Force Participation Rates,” Ph.D. D iss., Northwestern University, August 1984. 11 See Stephen Marston, “ Employment Instability and High Unemploy ment Rates,” B ro o k in g s P a p e r s on E co n o m ic A c tiv ity , \ o \ . 1, 1976,pp. 169— 203; and Williams, “ Racial Differences.” 12Williams, “ Racial Differences.” 13For further evidence of age differences in discouragement, see T. Aldrich Finegan, “ Discouraged Workers and Economic Fluctuations,” I n d u s tr ia l a n d L a b o r R e la tio n s R e v ie w , October 1981, pp. 88-102. l4See Ralph E. Smith, Jean E. Vanski, and Charles C. Holt, “ Recession and the Employment o f Demographic Groups,” B r o o k in g s P a p e r s on E c o n o m ic A c t iv it y , vol. 3, 1974, pp. 737-58; Marston, “ Employment Instability” ; Kim B. Clark and Lawrence H. Summers, “ Demographic Differences in Cyclical Employment Variations,” J o u r n a l o f H u m a n R e s o u r c e s , Winter 1981, pp. 61-79; and Bowers, “ Have employment pat terns in recessions changed?” l5Robert W. Bednarzik, “ Short workweeks during economic down turns,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1983, pp. 3—11. New data series on involuntary part-time work Harv ey R. H am el The number of nonagricultural workers “ on part-time schedules for economic reasons,” shows a strong relation ship to business cycle trends, according to seasonally ad justed data from the Current Population Survey.1 The number and proportion of persons involuntarily working part time— sometimes referred to as the “ partially unemployed” — generally rise during a recession and decline during a re covery period. In a comprehensive examination and analysis of these data which appeared in the June 1983 Monthly Labor Review,2 Robert W. Bednarzik demonstrated that during cyclical periods, the incidence of economic part-time work moves in the same direction as, but leads, movements in the civilian unemployment rate. Bednarzik explained that such part-time employment typically rises before unem ployment begins to increase during a recession, mainly be cause employers tend to reduce hours of work when possible before laying off employees. During recovery periods, em ployers usually restore the hours of those on shortened work weeks before rehiring laid-off workers. The main focus of Bednarzik’s analysis, however, was the relationship and variation in cyclical behavior of the two main causes of involuntary part-time work, cutbacks in weekly hours due to slack work and failure to find full-time work,3 both of Harvey R. Hamel is a senior economist in the Division of Employment and Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 42 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis which were seasonally adjusted specifically for his study. Following up on Bednarzik’s analysis, b l s tested the cyclical sensitivity and accuracy of the new series and con firmed that these data captured more clearly the distinctions between the concepts of persons working part time invo luntarily than did the existing published series, which di vided the total number into those who “ usually work full time” and those who “ usually work part time.” 4 Thus, to provide data users with more relevant series that can isolate the main causes of part-time work, b l s has replaced the existing usual full- and part-time series with the new series. Effective with data for January 1985, the new series are published in monthly issues of “ The Employment Situa tion” news release and Employment and Earnings,5 and, beginning with this issue, are also published in table 4 in the Current Labor Statistics section of the Monthly Labor Review. Data are published for all persons (in agriculture and nonagricultural industries combined) as well as for per sons in nonagricultural industries only. (The former series were limited to workers in nonagricultural industries.) Time series based on the new definitions are available back to 1955 and can be obtained from b l s . The new series clearly show different cyclical behavior, which, in turn, illustrates different underlying labor market problems. The more cyclical “ slack work” series reflects short-run adjustments made by firms to minimize layoffs and subsequent recalls or hirings. Thus, slack work rises sharply during economic downturns, but shows rapid im provement during the early stages of recovery. The “ failure to find full-time work” series reflect the experience, skills, and training of workers; the match of available workers to work schedules; and the types and locations of job openings, as well as the general state of the economy. The “ failure to find” series is clearly less cyclical. Indeed, in contrast to the “ slack work” component, it typically rises during the early stages of a recovery, probably because many un employed workers find and accept part-time jobs (perhaps after exhausting unemployment insurance benefits) as a bet ter alternative to remaining fully unemployed without com pensation. Recent data illustrate this point. The following tabulation shows the number of persons (seasonally adjusted) and the percent of total civilian employment on part-time schedules for economic reasons during September of 1982 and 1983 and January 1985: C o u l d o n ly f i n d _______ S l a c k w o r k _______ p a r t-tim e w o rk P ercen t o f N um ber (th o u s a n d s ) September 1982 .......... September 1983 .......... January 1985 .......... c iv ilia n P ercen t o f N um ber e m p lo y m e n t (th o u sa n d s ) c iv ilia n e m p lo y m e n t 3,718 3.7 2,731 2.7 2,696 2.6 3,182 3.1 2,431 2.3 2,848 2.7 t The number of persons involuntarily working part time due to slack work dropped by 1 million in the first 12 months of recovery from the series high in September 1982 and by only 265,000 in the subsequent 16 months (through January 1985). During the first 12 months of recovery, the proportion of the total employed comprised by persons on short work weeks due to slack work fell from 3.7 to 2.6 percent. In January 1985, the group accounted for 2.3 percent of the employed. This pattern of decline was similar to that fol lowing the recovery from the 1973-75 recession. Thus, it seems clear that this component shows rapid improvement early in the recovery, as employers restore hours of those workers retained but with reduced workweeks before adding new workers, and then improves more slowly as the recov ery matures. In contrast, the other major component— per sons who can only find part-time jo b s— show ed no improvement early in the recovery period; indeed, it rose slightly. It did moderate later, but not by the magnitude of the decline in the slack-work component. Revisions in Hispanic population and labor force data P h il ip L . R o n e s 4The “ full-time” component was meant to reflect persons on short work weeks due to slack work, while the “ part-time” component was intended to mirror those workers who could only find part-time work. However, there has been a substantial amount of ambiguity in these series because, although they were intended to represent the reason for working less than 35 hours, they more likely represented the survey respondent’s perception o f usual full-time status. For example, of the 2.4 million persons who were involuntarily employed part time due to “ slack work” in 1984, only about 55 percent still considered themselves to “ usually work full tim e.” The remainder may have been working part time for so long that they no longer looked upon themselves as “ usual full-time” workers who were waiting for their hours to be restored (but continued to report themselves in the “ slack work” vein nonetheless). Because of these and related ambiguities, we believed these series did not capture what they were intended to rep resent. b l s has also discontinued publication of two other seasonally ad justed series— persons at work in nonagricultural industries on full-time schedules and the total at work in nonagricultural industries— because of their erratic seasonal movements (especially in the spring months), their inconsistency with related data on full-time and total civilian employment, and the seemingly limited uses of the series. However, b ls continues to maintain all of the former series and will make them available to data users upon request. In January 1985, procedures designed to improve the esti mates of the Hispanic population were introduced into the Current Population Survey ( c p s ). As shown in table 1, these procedural changes have had a substantial impact on the estimates of Hispanic labor force, employment, and un employment levels. Based on information from the 1980 census, independent population estimates for Hispanics were developed for Jan uary 1980 up through the present. This, in turn, permitted a revision of the historical data for major Hispanic labor force series for this period. (Data prior to 1980 are not comparable to the revised series.) Monthly seasonally ad justed data for the two independently adjusted Hispanic series— employment and unemployment levels for all His panics age 16 and over— have also been revised back to 1980. From these, adjusted labor force, participation rate, employment-population ratio, and unemployment rate series are derived. In the past, the c p s did not use independent population estimates for Hispanics— the only major population group for which this was the case. Instead, the population estimates were derived from the c p s itself. This yielded estimates that were too low relative to those from tho decennial census (because of problems with c p s coverage) and quite unstable over time. Under the revised procedure, c p s sample esti mates are “ inflated” to the independent estimate of the Hispanic population rather than being determined by the proportion of Hispanics found in the sample each month. The independent population estimates were developed using a cohort-component methodology, in which the 1980 census count is updated by adding estimates of Hispanic births and immigrants and subtracting estimates of deaths and emigrants. These procedures integrate data on changes in the Hispanic population from a number of sources. Data on births come from the annual c p s fertility questionnaire and from the National Center for Health Statistics. Death rates are derived from mortality statistics in California and Texas, States with more than half of the Hispanic population in 1980. Data on immigration and emigration are from the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Puerto Rican Planning Board, and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The new methodology results in sharply higher population estimates and, hence, higher labor force counts, although overall national estimates are not affected. For example, table 1 shows that, on an annual average basis for 1984, the revised Hispanic civilian noninstitutional population lev- 5See “ The Employment Situation: January 1985,” u s d l n e w s , Feb. 1, 1985, and E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s , February 1985. Philip L. Rones is an economist in the Division of Employment and Un employment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics. ---------- F O O T N O T E S ---------'The Current Population Survey, conducted for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau of the Census, is a monthly sample survey of some 59,500 households in the United States. Information is obtained on the employment status of all persons 16 years and older in the civilian noninstitutional population. For the employed, questions are asked about how many hours they worked (in the prior week); those working less than 35 hours are asked the reason for their “ short” workweeks. 2 See Robert W. Bednarzik, “ Short workweeks during economic down turns,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1983, pp. 3 -1 1 . 3 Other economic (involuntary) reasons for working less than 35 hours include material shortages or repairs to plant and equipment, new job started during week, and job terminated during week. About 6 percent of the total number o f persons working part time for economic reasons in 1984 in dicated that these other factors caused their short workweeks. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 43 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Technical Notes Table 1. Population and labor force status of persons of Hispanic origin by sex and age, as published and revised, 1984 annual averages [Numbers in thousands] Civilian noninstitutional population Sex and age Employed Unemployed Unemployment rate Published Revised Difference Published Revised Difference Published Revised Difference Published Revised Difference Total, 16 years and older................................... 9,881 11,164 1,283 5,679 6,469 790 676 778 102 10.6 10.7 0.1 Men, 16 years and older................................. 16 to 19 years............................................ 20 years and older..................................... 4,659 552 4,107 5,471 617 4,854 812 65 747 3,359 217 3,142 3,950 242 3,708 591 25 566 390 70 320 464 82 382 74 12 62 10.4 24.4 9.2 10.5 25.3 9.3 1 .9 .1 Women, 16 years and older............................. 16 to 19 years............................................ 20 years and older..................................... 5,221 565 4,656 5,692 617 5,075 471 52 419 2,320 185 2,135 2,519 202 2,317 199 17 182 286 54 232 314 60 254 28 6 22 11.0 22.6 9.8 11.1 22.9 9.9 .1 .3 .1 els were almost 1.3 million, or 13 percent higher than the old estimates. Adult men were the group most affected by these changes; their 1984 population estimates rose by more than 18 percent. The levels of various labor force measures (that is, employment, unemployment, and persons not in the labor force) expanded, to a large extent, proportionately. 44 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Hence, rates calculated using these levels are not signifi cantly different from those derived with the old methodol ogy. For example, in 1984, only the unemployment rates for teenagers rose by more than a tenth of a percentage point. Revised data for major Hispanic labor force measures for the years 1980-84 are available upon request. A note on communications The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be considered for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not po lemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212. Major Agreements Expiring Next Month T h is list o f se lecte d co llectiv e b a rg a in in g a g reem en ts ex p irin g in A pril is based on in for m ation from the B u r e a u ’s O ffice o f W a g es and In d u stria l R ela tio n s. T h e list in clu d es agreem en ts coverin g 1 ,00 0 w o rk ers o r m o re. P riv a te in d u stry is a rra n g ed in o rd er o f S tan d ard In d u strial C lassification . Employer and location Private industry Labor organization1 Number of workers Tennessee Chemical Co. (Copperhill, tn ) .................................................... Eastern Contractors Association, Inc. (Albany, ny ) ........................................ Eastern Contractors Association, Inc. (Albany, ny ) ....................................... Building Trades Employers Association, Inc., Westchester and Putnam counties (White Plains, ny ) Mining .................................... Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Chemical Workers ......................... Carpenters.................................... Laborers ......................................... Laborers ......................................... 1,100 1,200 1,000 1,200 Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, pa) ............ Construction Contractors Council, Inc. (Washington, dc and vicinity) . . . . Construction Contractors Council, Inc. (Washington, dc and vicinity) . . . . Steel and Machinery Erectors Association, Inc., Tampa area (Florida) . . . West Tennessee Bargaining Group, Inc. (Memphis, tn ) ............................. Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction ........................... ........................... ........................... ........................... ........................... Laborers ......................................... Carpenters....................................... Operating Engineers....................... Laborers ......................................... 5,000 2,000 1,100 1,000 1 100 Construction Employers Association and two others (Cleveland, oh ) ......... Construction Employers Association and two others (Cleveland, oh ) ......... Construction Employers Association (Cleveland, oh ) .................................. Associated General Contractors, Ohio Building Chapter, building construction agreement (Ohio) Construction Construction Construction Construction ........................... ........................... ........................... .................... Carpenters....................................... Laborers ......................................... Painters.................................. Operating Engineers....................... 6,000 2,500 1,500 4,000 Building Trades Employers Association, a division of Builders Exchange of Rochester, ny , Inc. (New York) Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania, Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania, heavy and highway construction, Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) Construction ........................... Laborers ......................................... 1,400 Construction ........................... Carpenters....................................... 1,200 Construction ........................... Laborers ......................................... 2,200 Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Operating Engineers....................... Operating Engineers....................... Operating Engineers....................... 12,000 1.800 5,000 Construction ........................... Laborers .................................... 2.300 Construction ........................... Laborers ....................................... 1.300 Construction ........................... Electrical Workers ( ibew ) ............... 1.500 Construction ........................... Electrical Workers ( ibew ) ............... 1.900 Construction ........................... Sheet Metal Workers .................... 1.750 Ohio Contractors Association (Ohio) ........................................................... Wisconsin Road Builders Association (Wisconsin)...................................... General Building Contractors Association, building, heavy and highway construction, Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) Construction Contractors Council, Inc. (District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia) Construction Contractors Council, Inc. (District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia) National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc., Nassau-Suffolk Chapter (New York) National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc., Philadelphia Division, Penn-Del-Jersey Chapter (Pennsylvania) Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors' Association of Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) Mechanical Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania. Inc., Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) Mechanical Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania, Inc., Philadelphia and vicinity (Pennsylvania) National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc., Southern Louisiana Chapter (New Orleans, la ) Minneapolis Association of Plumbing Contractors (Minnesota).................. Mason Contractors Association (Cleveland, oh ) ......................................... Construction Employers Association (Cleveland, oh ) .................................. National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc., Greater Cleveland Chapter (Ohio) Mechanical Contractors' Association of Cleveland, Inc. (Ohio).................. Cleveland Plumbing Contractors’ Association (O h io ).................................. National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc. (Minneapolis, mn) ......... Twin Cities Piping Industry Association (Minneapolis and St. Paul, mn) . Construction ........................... 1.350 Construction ........................... 2,800 Construction ........................... Electrical Workers ( ibew ) .............. 1,550 Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Construction ........................... Bricklayers .................................... 1 ?so 1.200 1 600 Construction ........................... Electrical Workers ( ibew ) .............. 1,750 Construction Construction Construction Construction Pipefitters ................................ 1,500 1 100 1,700 1,600 ........................... ........................... ........................... ........................... Electrical Workers (ibew ) ............... Plum bers......................................... See footnotes at end of table. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 45 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Major Agreements Expiring Next Month Continued— Major Agreements Expiring Next Month Employer and location Private industry Labor organization1 Number of workers Chicago Midwest Meat Association (Illinois)......................................... American Schiffli Embroiderers’ Association (New Jersey) James River Corp. (Wisconsin) ........................................... Printing Industry of Twin Cities (Minneapolis, mn) ................................ E.R, Squibb and Sons, Inc. (New Brunswick, nj) Food products ........... A pparel.................... Paper ................ Printing and publishing........... Chemicals .............. Food and Commercial Workers Clothing and Textile Workers . . Paperworkers . . . . Graphic Communications . . . Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union Carbide Corp., Agricultural Products Co. (Institute, wv) Exxon Company, USA, Baytown Refinery (Texas) ....................... Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. (Interstate).................................. B.F. Goodrich Co. (Interstate)......................................... Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. (Interstate) .................................... 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,100 1,600 Chem icals.............. Petroleum ......... Rubber ......... Rubber ............. Rubber ............. Machinists......... Gulf Coast Industrial Workers (Ind ) Rubber Workers . . Rubber Workers . Rubber Workers . . Uniroyal, Inc. (Interstate) ............................................... Shoe companies in New Hampshire and Maine (New Hampshire and Maine) Owens-Coming Fiberglas Corp. (Anderson, sc) .................................... 1 000 1,000 9,500 8,700 18,000 Rubber ........... L eather............. Rubber Workers . . Clothing and Textile Workers . . . . 4,500 2,000 Stone, clay, and glass products Glass, Pottery, Plastics and Allied Workers Auto Workers . . . . 1,200 Norris Industries, Vernon Facility (California) Fabricated metal products . . . . Reliance Electric Co., Dodge Division (Mishawaka, in ) ........................... GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. (Illinois) ............................. Machinery . . . . Electrical products . . Cartage Exchange of Chicago, Inc. and others (Illinois) Eastern Airlines, pilots (Interstate)2 ...................................... The Flying Tiger Line, ramp service and traffic agents (Interstate)2 . . . . 1,300 Trucking............. Air transportation......... Air transportation......... Steelworkers . . . . Electrical Workers (ibew ); Machinists; Office and Professional Employees; and Carpenters Machinists . . . . Air Line P ilots......... Machinists . . . Hawaii Telephone Co. (Hawaii).................................... Metropolitan Edison Co. (Pennsylvania).................................... Cincinnati Gas and Electric Co. (O hio).................................... Peoples Gas Light and Coke Co. (Illinois) ............................................. Northern Minnesota and Northern Wisconsin Food Merchants 2 800 3 900 L200 Communication ......... Utilities............. Utilities........... Utilities................ Retail trade .............. Electrical Workers (ibew ) Electrical Workers (ibew ) Electrical Workers ( ibew ) . Service Employees . . . Food and Commercial Workers . . . Hospital Service and Medical-Surgical Plans of New Jersey (New Jersey) Maintenance Contractors Association of King County (Seattle, wa) Realty Advisory Board, apartment agreement (New York, ny ) Affiliated Hospitals of San Francisco (California) Associated Hospitals of East Bay (Oakland, ca) 3,600 1,600 1,900 1,700 1,300 Insurance .................. Services ......... Real estate............. Hospitals................ Hospitals.................. Office and Professional Employees Service Employees . Service Employees . Service Employees . Service Employees . . . . Government activity District of Columbia: Oregon: Missouri: Board of Education Portland Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District Kansas City, city-wide u n it........................... ‘Affiliated with afl- cio except where noted as independent (Ind.). information is from newspaper reports. 46 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Labor organization1 1,000 5,600 1,550 1,300 20,000 2,200 1,000 Number of workers Education ......... Teachers ........... Transportation ......... Amalgamated Transit . . . . 1,500 General government......... State, County and Municipal Employees 2,300 7,250 Developments in Industrial Relations Postal negotiations end in arbitration For the first time in the 14-year collective bargaining relationship between the U.S. Postal Service and its four major unions, the parties were unable to agree on wage and benefit terms. As a result, their differences were resolved by arbitration panels selected by the parties. (Arbitration was first used in 1981, but only for one of the unions— the Rural Letter Carriers Association.) Bargaining began in April 1984 and continued until the July 20, 1984, expiration of current agreements, when all meaningful negotiations on the major economic issues essentially ended, although the parties were able to agree on some other issues. The main impediment to settlements was the Postal Ser vice’s contention that the employees were overpaid relative to workers holding comparable jobs in the private economy. Accordingly, the Postal Service called for adoption of a two-tier pay system under which new employees would be paid about one-third less than current employees. The Postal Service also pressed for a wage freeze for current employ ees, adoption of a less liberal automatic cost-of-living pay adjustment formula, adoption of some restrictions on pre mium pay for Sunday and night work, and additional limits on eligibility for sick pay. The unions demanded a 20percent wage increase, and vowed not to accept any type of two-tier pay system. The provision of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 for binding arbitration was triggered on October 20 when the stalemate had extended 90 days beyond the expiration date of the prior contracts. The first arbitration award, handed down on December 24, covered 500,000 workers repre sented by the American Postal Workers’ Union and the National Association of Letter Carriers, which had bar gained jointly with management. In its 3-year award, the panel agreed that Postal Service workers’ wages had pulled ahead of wages for comparable workers in the private economy, but concluded that the discrepancy should be corrected through a policy of “ mod erate restraint” of postal workers increases over a number of years. To begin, the panel awarded a 2.7-percent specified pay increase in each contract year. “ Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben of the Division o f Developments in Labor-Management Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is largely based on information from secondary sources. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis In arriving at this figure, the panel estimated that con sumer prices would rise at a 5.5-percent annual rate during the contract term, and 60 percent (or 3.3 percent) of the rise would be offset by automatic semiannual pay adjust ments under the cost-of-living formula, which was contin ued. This meant that the workers would need a 2.2-percent a year specified increase to stay even with inflation. The panel added to the 2.2 percent a 0.5-percent “ improvement factor’ ’ equal to one-third of the estimated annual national rate of increase in productivity over the contract term. The panel also found that substantial compression of the percentage differential between the lowest and highest pay rates had developed over the years as a result of giving all workers uniform pay increases in dollars. This was partly alleviated by awarding the percentage pay increases and by adding some top pay progression steps for employees in the higher grades (who were found to be slightly underpaid relative to workers in the private economy) and adding some new lower starting steps for workers in the lowest grades (who were found to be substantially overpaid relative to workers in the private economy). To further relieve the pay compression, the panel also excluded workers in the new lower starting steps from receiving the first 2.7-percent pay increase, which was retroactive to July 20, 1984. Other award terms included a tenth paid holiday (Martin Luther King, Jr’s birthday) beginning in 1986; provision for a union-management task force to consider the establish ment of a Postal Service health plan; and increased annual allowances for uniforms and work clothes. Similar provisions were announced by another arbitration panel early in January for 40,000 workers represented by the Mail Handlers Division of the Laborers International Union. The January award for the 60,000 workers represented by the Rural Letter Carriers differed somewhat from the others: • It runs for V/i years, expiring January 20, 1988, instead of July 20, 1987. • The wage increases in July of 1984, 1985, and 1986 are in the same dollar amounts as those for the other letter carriers, but amount to 2.9 percent instead of 2.7 percent. • The Rural Letter Carriers will receive a July 21, 1987, specified pay increase equal to half the increase they re47 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Developments in Industrial Relations ceive in July 1986. They may also receive an automatic cost-of-living pay adjustment in November 1987. If any specified wage change and cost-of-living adjustment re sulting from the 1987 settlements for the members of the other unions for July 1987 to January 1988 total more than that the Rural Letter Carriers receive during those 6 months, the Rural Letter Carriers’ pay will be raised to make up the difference. Health plan issues settled in precontract talks Uniroyal, Inc. and the United Rubber Workers negotiated a plan designed to contain rising health care costs, rather than shift these costs to employees. The plan, which will be incorporated into the labor contract the parties will ne gotiate in 1985, contains a number of cost-control features: • The attending physician will be required to complete a “ Precertification form’’ prior to each nonemergency ad mission to a hospital. The form will be reviewed by the plan’s staff. Any questions on admission, care, or pro posed length of stay will be referred to a reviewing phy sician, who will discuss a possible modification of treatment with the attending physician. If they are unable to agree, the attending physician’s opinion will prevail. • Employees and retirees will have to obtain company-paid second opinions prior to specified nonemergency surgical procedures. Employees will be paid for up to 4 hours worktime lost while obtaining the second opinion. • Before nonemergency surgery, workers and retirees will have to obtain from the surgeon a form indicating the diagnosis, operating procedures, and amount to be charged. If the proposed charge is higher than the allowable amount, the plan administrator will attempt to resolve the differ ence. If this cannot be accomplished, the worker or retiree will not have to pay the difference. • Preadmission tests prior to nonemergency surgery will be performed on an outpatient basis, with participants be coming immediately eligible for sickness and accident benefits, rather than after a waiting period. As before, participants receive a $50 bonus for certain surgical pro cedures if they are performed on an outpatient basis. • Plan participants must generally obtain all prescription drugs through the plan’s mail order firm, either by mailing in or telephoning in the prescription. The drugs, which are free to the participant, will be mailed by the plan in postage free envelopes. The mail order firm also offers toothpaste, shampoo, and similar items at reduced prices. • Claims administration will be improved to cut costs. • Health maintenance organizations that provide better ben efits at competitive costs will continue to be reviewed. ibm plan stresses preventive health care Increasing employer efforts to moderate the cost of pro viding health care for employees was reflected in Interna 48 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tional Business Machines Corp.’s ( i b m ) adoption of a new plan stressing preventive medicine and less costly alterna tives to traditional care. A company spokesman said that i b m spends about $500 million a year for health care for its 220,000 domestic employees and that the new approach was expected to reduce the annual rate of cost increase to 10 percent, from 15. Provisions of the new plan include: • A $200 a year personal health account to help employees pay for prenatal tests, immunizations, infant care, eye glasses, and other services not covered by the health in surance. Costs are reimbused at 80 percent, meaning that the costs must total $250 in a year before the employee receives the full $200. • Cost controls requiring employees to now pay 40 percent of the first day’s charge for use of a hospital room and 20 percent of the cost of elective surgery performed with out a second opinion. Also, the $150 annual deductible, which previously applied to all employees, was raised to 0.3 percent of annual salary for those earning more than $50,000 a year. In other changes, health insurance was extended to pro vide full coverage of up to 50 home care visits by licensed professionals and reimbursement for birthing center ser vices. Dental care rates will now vary according to the cost of living in the region where the employee resides, lifetime coverage was raised to $7,500 per person, from $5,000, and the maximum benefits for orthodontics was raised to $1,100, from $900. Yale contract comes 20 months after election In January, about 20 months after it won a representation election at Yale University, Local 34 of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union negotiated an initial con tract, ending a bitter dispute between the parties. Through out the talks, the union had contended that the 1,500 workers (mostly women) were underpaid relative to men performing work of comparable worth to society simply because the Yale workers held “ traditional” women’s jobs, such as telephone operators and secretaries. The university disputed this, saying that it paid equal wages for all employees per forming the same work, and that settlement of such com parable worth disputes could be resolved only through broad national decisions. According to the union, the 3 '/2 -year contract provides for general wage increases totaling 20.25 percent, and a revamping of the salary structure that will bring the com bined overall average annual salary increase to about 35 percent for current employees. Previously, the average sal ary was about $13,300. The settlement was preceded by a strike that began on September 26 and ended on December 4, when the em ployees returned to work. Company allowed to reduce wages, ‘if necessary’ In Clayton, m o , the St. Joe Lead Co. announced that it had negotiated a contract with Steelworkers’ Local 6242 that permits the company to reduce wages by $3 an hour “ if deemed necessary for business reasons.” Prior to the settlement, which ended an 8-month strike, pay averaged $12.29 an hour, according to the company. Another provision ended a requirement that employees belong to the union. During the strike, St. Joe had continued to mine some lead, using 130 nonunion salaried employees and some miners who had left the union. At the time of settlement, the local union had 550 members. Others terms of the contract, which runs to March 31, 1986, included a 33-cent-an-hour wage increase, termina tion of automatic cost-of-living pay adjustments, and cuts in health benefits. In another change, St. Joe gained the right to hire outside contractors for additional construction and maintenance projects. A company official said the cost reduction moves were necessitated by flat worldwide demand for lead and domestic regulations that reduced the amount of lead used as additives to gasoline. Workers at employee-owned plant settle A possible closedown of employee-owned Hyatt Clark Industries, Clark, n j , was averted when United Auto Work ers Local 736 agreed to a contract. The settlement came at the deadline set by General Motors Corp., which had an nounced that it would shift to other suppliers of roller bear ings if there was a work stoppage, ( g m provides 85 percent of Hyatt’s business.) The plant had been owned by General Motors until October 1981, when the employees purchased it to avert a scheduled shutdown. To help finance the ac quisition, the employees had agreed to a number of cuts in compensation and changes in work rules. (See Monthly La bor Review, January 1982, p. 22.) The new 3-year agreement, negotiated in mid-December, provided for 50 cents an hour wage increases in the first and second years and 55 cents in the final year. About 1,250 workers were involved. To some extent, the negotiations were slowed by disputes between Hyatt and the union members over the degree of participation in management that the workers should be given. The workers contended that their input was far short of the level anticipated when the plant was purchased, while management maintained that any increase in the current level would hamper production. twa discriminated against older pilots In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that Trans World Airlines ( t w a ) had discriminated against its older pilots by making it difficult for them to move into flight engineers jobs when they reached the age 60 ceiling for pilots set by Federal law. The case, Trans World Airlines https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis v. Thurston, had broad significance because several similar discrimination suits were processed against several other airlines. Under t w a policy, pilots reaching age 60 could bid on flight engineers jobs, but were forced to retire if no such jobs were available. In the opinion written by Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., the Court said the policy was “ discriminatory on its face” because a pilot unable to fly for reasons other than age would have been given another job without having to bid or wait for it. In another important aspect of the ruling that has appli cations throughout the economy, the Court held that double damages can be awarded in discrimination cases only if the employer acted in “ reckless disregard” of antidiscrimina tion law. Under Federal law, double damages can be as sessed if the violation is “ willful,” which had been interpreted in a number of ways by Federal courts. In their arguments before the Supreme Court in the t w a case, attorneys for the pilots had contended that double damages should apply if t w a was aware of the law and its provisions. This ar gument was rejected by the Court, which said that such a standard “ would result in an award of double damages in almost every case.” Instead, the Court backed t w a ’ s ar gument by defining willful conduct as occurring when an employer “ knew or showed reckless disregard for” whether its action was prohibited by Federal law. Equitable to pay $12.5 million in age bias suit An age discrimination lawsuit against the Equitable Life Assurance Society ended when a U.S. district judge ap proved a settlement worked out between the company and 363 former employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( e e o c ) had also joined the plaintiffs in charging that Equitable had violated Federal age discrimination rules in 1978, when it fired the plaintiffs. At the time, Equitable had indicated that the firings were simply part of a plan to cut costs. This was contested by the plaintiffs— many of whom were more than 40 years old— who claimed that they were terminated to open promotions to younger employees. In describing the settlement, the e e o c asserted that Equi table had timed the firings to precede the January 1, 1979, effective date of an amendment to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act that extended protection to persons be tween age 40 and 70. An Equitable official said that the e e o c assertions were “ absolutely untrue” and that the settlement did not contain any findings of illegal conduct by the company. Continuing, the official said that Equitable “ has always denied and con tinues to deny that it violated the law” and that it had settled only to avoid prolonged and costly court proceedings. Under the settlement, $12.5 million— reportedly a record amount for a discrimination case— will be distributed to the plaintiffs according to the financial losses they sustained. In exchange, they agreed to drop their claims against the company. 49 Book Reviews Quality of worklife and union interests Worker Participation and American Unions: Threat or Opportunity? By Thomas A. Kochan, Harry C. Katz, Nancy R. Mower. Kalamazoo, m i , W. E. Upjohn In stitute for Employment Research, 1984. 202 pp. $17.95, cloth; $12.95, paper. In reviewing the burgeoning literature on quality of worklife ( q w l ) issues and activities, one is hard-pressed to locate many publications that critically examine what some have come to see as “ the new industrial relations” and that trace out the broader implications of prevailing practices with regard to worker participation. Much of what has been writ ten to date is disappointingly simplistic and all too remi niscent of the sophistry that marked the human relations era of a few decades ago. Too many books and articles are “ sales oriented,” with individual authors seeming to vie for recognition as the purveyor of wisdom and truth and often doing so with extravagant reports of various gains achieved by using this or that set of “ best practices.” Oth ers, in their rush to judgment, offer only single-time snap shots of program experiences that portray early “ successes” but stop short of capturing subsequent setbacks or “ fail ures.” While this may seem too harsh a description of the extant q w l literature, in reviewing it one cannot help but sympathize with managers and union officials who under standably seek (and assuredly deserve) information in which they can have confidence and upon which they might base decisions that may well affect profoundly the institutions they lead. Particularly conspicuous by their absence from this lit erature are studies of how various kinds of worker partic ipation schemes affect labor unions, their members, and the relations of both with employers. This void may reflect, in part at least, the fact that the social/behavioral scientists who helped give rise to the q w l movement have historically been, at best, not interested in unions, an attitude that has been easily reciprocated by labor leaders. It is only recently that these q w l advocates have come to recognize unions as more than an “ externality” in their industrial relations cal culus. To be sure, we are well acquainted by now with the publicly expressed views of some of the Nation’s key labor 50 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis leaders, especially those who fall at the more extreme points of the pro-con q w l continuum, and we have had confirmed once more that the labor movement in the United States, unlike many of its counterparts abroad, does not speak with a single voice on all matters of common concern. But what is still obscure, even to otherwise astute observers, is how q w l and participation programs have in fact affected unions thus far and what these early experiences imply for their future and the future of labor-management relations in this country. These are vital questions and they can be answered not by impressions or by vacuous philosophical debates or by bits and pieces of data incidentally produced during-the course of program evaluations focusing largely on produc tivity improvement. What is required is the kind of system atic empirical research and thoughtful exposition of issues that readers are apt to find in Worker Participation and American Unions by Kochan, Katz, and Mower. The authors of this volume are, in turn, two faculty mem bers and a research associate in the Industrial Relations Section of m i t ’ s Sloan School of Management. The research they report grows out of a project initiated by the a f l - c i o ’ s Industrial Union Department and, according to a foreword by its president, Howard D. Samuel, was intended “ to assess the impact on trade unions and collective bargaining of worker participation or quality of worklife programs.” While the authors describe as their primary audience “ rep resentatives of the labor movement who need to come to grips with the role of worker participation processes,” they quite correctly acknowledge settings: Xerox and the Amal gamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union, g m ’ s Packard Electronic division and the International Union of Elec tronic, Electrical, Technical, Salaried and Machine Work ers, the Uniform Piston Co. (a fictitious name) and its unnamed local union, a Canadian grocery chain and the union rep resenting its workers (both unnamed), and the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, whose employees are represented by the Newspaper Guild. These cases are presented and analyzed in some detail, and each tells an interesting tale in itself. They are tales of joint committees, participation teams, au tonomous work groups, and, yes, quality circles. They are also stories of successes and failures, and in some respects mixtures of the two. One would hope that they are read with particular care by those who champion ‘ ‘one best way” and who see participation processes in mechanistic terms, for experience proves otherwise. This obviously is a field of human endeavor that cannot be negotiated with the aid of anything resembling an American Automobile Associa tion triptik. And, indeed, as the authors conclude, “ there is not a magical single line of steady positive results of improvements that automatically flow from a worker par ticipation process.” Each case is sui generis, its experiences determined to a great extent by the character of and relations among the people involved, as well as the distinctive internal and external conditions that underlie decisions to “ go the participation w ay.” In all instances, however, the line sep arating QWL/participation programs, or “ experiments” if you wish, from the ongoing process of collective bargaining is faint if perceptible at all. The authors shift their focus from happenings in single plants and offices to the broader arena of national labormanagement relations. Chosen for examination here are the initiatives of the Steelworkers and the companies that are party to the Basic Steel Agreement, and the Automobile Workers joint efforts with both General Motors and the Ford Motor Co. In chronicling the evolution of the Labor-Man agement Participation Team program in the steel industry, the authors discuss the several impediments encountered in the diffusion of this process that inevitably threaten its con tinuity, residing both within each party and in the nature of the relationship between them. In the face of these barriers, as well as the economic travail confronting the industry, it is impressive that four of the six l m p t programs examined were still operative at the time of the study. As to long term survivability, however, it can only be concluded that the jury is still out. If any collective bargaining parties have occupied center stage in the q w l drama now being played out in the United States, they are the United Automobile Workers, General Motors, and the Ford Motor Co. Encouraged by the cele brated Lordstown strike and begun with a 1973 letter of understanding between g m and the u a w , an impressive number and variety of q w l programs (“ Employee Involve ment” at Ford) have been launched in the auto industry. Obviously these multiplant programs are too numerous and too varied for the authors to have attempted more than a brief encapsulation of them. But what they have described serves well to illustrate the kinds of innovations that have been explored and adopted as well as the accomplishments and pitfalls of these joint efforts. Unlike the widely touted Volvo/Kalmar plant, assembly lines, seen by many as the curse of the autoworker, have not been discarded in favor of entirely new production methods. However, through worker participation, changes in “ the rules of the game” have led to a greater measure of flexibility that has, in instances at least, produced demonstrable benefits for both management and labor. With the economic crisis faced by this industry, as well as steel, likely to continue, it now remains to be seen how far, how fast, and in what directions worker par https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ticipation will proceed during the second decade of these joint efforts. It is in the book’s fourth chapter that narrative comes to be joined with empirical data. Here the authors present and analyze the result of surveys they conducted of rank-andfile workers’ attitudes toward participation programs and how these affect their jobs and their local unions. Survey data were collected from more than 900 members of five national unions, roughly equal proportions of whom were participants and nonparticipants in various kinds of q w l projects. If one feels some discomfort about the adequacy of sampling and survey procedures, it is understandable. As the authors acknowledge, these respondent groups are truly “ samples of convenience” and the data they contribute, by questionnaires completed onsite and via mail, permit few confident conclusions and only limited generalization. Still, at the very least what is offered is a good bit of information as to how these particular workers and union members re gard these particular participation schemes. And in a re search area where data of this kind and on this scale are rare, this is no small contribution. And what do union members think? Briefly: (1) they, participants more than nonparticipants, want their say in q w l issues but by no means express a diminished interest in influencing traditional bread-and-butter issues; (2) they report themselves as having less influence than they prefer over both q w l and non-QWL issues regardless of whether they are involved in participation programs; (3) they offer some evidence, although not compelling, that q w l pro cesses tend to improve the character of the jobs they per form; (4) they give their unions higher marks on their handling of bread-and-butter than q w l issues; and (5) they, nonpar ticipants in this case, differ markedly from organization to organization in their desire to become involved in partici pation processes. By way of general observation, the authors conclude that “ effective performance on q w l issues will not serve as an effective substitute for an inability to deliver economic benefits, job security, and protection from any arbitrary actions on the part of management.” Thus, the rank-and-file support essential to initiate and sustain q w l and participation programs requires, in the authors’ view, that these be integrated into the overall collective bargaining framework. Moving onward and upward, the authors then present additional attitudinal data derived from indepth interviews of 30 local union officials and q w l activists (for example, “ facilitators” ) and questionnaire responses from another 110 officials in five auto plants. This sample is even more difficult to characterize, and the discussion of survey results represents an artistic blending of both qualitative (interview) and quantitative (questionnaire) data. We are assured, how ever, that “ the two data sources reveal very similar view s.” Consistent with other studies and popular reports, local officials claim that participation processes played a major role in reducing both grievance and absentee rates, and also 51 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Book Reviews helped improve productivity and product quality. Judgments about program impacts on local unions were, however, mixed, with no clear evidence that they enhanced either member identification or satisfaction with their unions. And not withstanding other reports to the contrary, they dispute that support for participation programs had any bearing on union election outcomes. Finally, these officials differ widely in their views of the future of participation programs, some seeing them as limited, albeit useful, supplements to col lective bargaining and others envisioning them as leading to still broader assumptions of management responsibility and possibly as a route to union engagement in nonwork and community interests. But in any event, they voice strong support for participation processes and the role of unions in jointly managing them. In next presenting “ Views from the Top of the Labor Movement,” the authors continue the logical progression of the book “ to review the contemporary thinking of key national labor movement leaders.” Here the data are purely qualitative, consisting o f information and presumably impressions extracted from interviews, speeches, and var ious union documents. Although the a f l - c io has taken no official stance on q w l programs, the position of its secre tary-treasurer, Thomas Donahue, is characterized as one of “ cautious skepticism.” He is described as accepting q w l activities as supplements to adversarial bargaining but op posed to their being cast as a philosophical movement. And, in his view, the major roadblock to greater labor-manage ment cooperation is the resistance to organized labor man ifested by champions of a “ union free environment.” The authors identify four quite distinct positions regarding worker participation processes among national unions. Rep resenting “ general opposition” on one extreme is the In ternational Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers ( i a m ) , whose president, William W. Winpisinger, is cast as the “ harshest contemporary critic” of q w l programs. (In considering this view from the top, it might have been noted that the i a m is reportedly engaged quite actively in joint q w l efforts at the local level, a situation that speaks clearly of the autonomy exercised by most local unions in the United States.) Located at the opposite end is the Com munication Workers of America ( c w a ) , whose president, Glenn E. Watts, is said to be the only one of his rank among major unions to advocate worker participation processes as “ an integral part of the union’s long-run strategy.” Yet, despite the differences between these two leaders, they are in firm agreement that labor-management cooperation re quires a much greater acceptance by employers of the le gitimacy of unions and the cessation of “ antiunion warfare.” Positioned between the “ extremes” represented by the i a m and the c w a are the decentralized policies of unions such as the Electrical Workers, the Allied Industrial Work ers, and the Food and Commercial Workers on the one hand and the Auto Workers and Steelworkers on the other. The authors describe the first of these, “ decentralized neutral 52 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ity,” as the principal national union strategy now prevailing. Here, top officials neither publicly espouse support for worker participation nor lend staff to encouraging and assisting local efforts. Rather, each local makes its own determination in the light of its particular circumstances and aims. By con trast, both the u a w and u s a encourage and assist local initiatives, by high level and staff support, but have presi dents who themselves offer no public endorsement. In summarizing these views of top officials, the authors once again stress the importance of gaining employer ac ceptance of unions as a condition essential for the sustenance and diffusion of q w l and participation programs. But be yond this basic point of agreement, and even in the face of greater employer acceptance, a consensus has yet to emerge as to whether unions should adopt a proactive or reactive position, how far leaders should go in elevating q w l issues on union agendas, and how vigorously they should promote q w l involvement. Perhaps the most basic issue, however, is “ whether worker participation can enhance the effective ness of their representational role at the workplace and even tually be used as a means of enhancing industrial democracy within American society.” In their concluding chapter, the authors derive as “ the central implication” of their study the belief “that for worker participation processes to survive . . . each party must see these processes as contributing to their separate economic and organizational interests. ” During a time when mutuality of interests is being so prominently discussed, it is notable that some recognition is given to the differences in aims still dividing employers and unions, differences whose under standing and acceptance is key to appreciating the full mean ing of collective bargaining and labor-management relations. And while it is undeniably true that one does not live by bread alone, can it be any less equivocal that “ psychological rewards alone do not appear to be sufficient to maintain the commitment of management, the union and its leaders, or rank-and-file workers” in participation programs? This is sue, raised by the authors, might well be pondered by those with q w l program responsibility who seem to be getting by through doling out various kinds of “ psychic” and sym bolic rewards in lieu of more tangible benefits. In deriving the implications of their study, the authors argue that union leaders must “ link [participation] processes to the union’s broader strategies for improving the effec tiveness of its bargaining relationship” and cite three pre requisites for labor’s support: (1) employer acceptance of union legitimacy; (2) a sustained management commitment to supporting participation processes; and (3) an econom ically viable enterprise. But even with these requirements met they unhesitatingly conclude that “ a total separation of worker participation from collective bargaining is neither possible nor desirable.” The task of harmonizing the two obviously poses no small challenge to the leadership of the labor movement. And as yet there is no clear answer to whether q w l will turn out to be “ a limited supplement to collective bargaining or an evolving step toward an Amer ican brand of shop floor democracy that is an integral part of the collective bargaining process.” Going still further in their discussion, the authors suggest that collective bargaining may be shifting away from a ‘ ‘job control” concept of unionism and toward one marked by “ a more flexible and varied form of work organization.” However, the extent to which such a shift actually occurs depends on the parties substantially redefining their roles and their preparedness to make tradeoffs that inevitably in volve a measure of risk for both. What could ensue with greater worker participation, in the authors’ view, is “ a more proactive form of labor-management relations based around greater joint research and analysis, planning and consultation” and in time a breeching, or at least a repo sitioning, of the legally (by the National Labor Relations Act) defined boundary between labor and management. Al though ‘‘works councils” are also envisioned as a possi bility, they as well as other forms of ‘‘codetermination,” including board representation, are given scant attention. Well down the road, as the more or less ultimate extrapo lation, lies the creation of “ the microfoundation for a new industrial and human resource development policy,” a mat ter clearly deserving of inclusion in the arena of public policy debate. Appended in a postscript are some comments by the pres idents of the c w a and i a m . Watts cautions against “ any blurring of the distinction between collective bargaining and q w l ” and also injects a new thought by conceding the importance of implementing q w l values and processes within his own union. Winpisinger agrees that “ in theory, q w l is a concept which any responsible union representative would support,” cites some ways in which “ q w l programs have the potential for being disruptive and unfair,” and under scores the imperative for “ both management and govern ment to recognize the need for unions in a just society.” Worker Participation and American Unions is not without its flaws and limitations, methodologically and interpretively. In addition to offering a wider range of systematically gathered empirical data, especially on the specific individual and institutional outcomes of q w l programs and worker participation, one might have hoped for a more extensive discussion of the changing face of industrial relations. Yet, a more inclusive book, to the extent it took the form of an academic tome, would have been likely to escape the at tention of much of the readership for which this short volume was intended. But make no mistake, this is a well written and provocative work, one that is a refreshing departure from the often tedious rhetoric that clutters the mainstream of the q w l literature. In its relatively few pages, the authors distill much of the essence of the ongoing q w l debate into a logically developed and easily digestible discussion of some basic issues whose resolution is destined to have an enormous impact on the future course of this country’s labor unions and industrial relations system. It would be a mistake https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis for any participant in or serious observer of our rapidly changing industrial relations scene not to read and reflect on its message. — R ic h a r d P. S h o r e Bureau of Labor-Management Relations and Cooperative Programs U.S. Department of Labor Looking to the future Life After Early Retirement: The Experiences of LowerLevel Workers. By Dean W. Morse, Anna B. Dutka, Susan H. Gray. Totowa, n j , Rowman & Allanheld Publishers, 1983. 192 pp. $25. Because of the social security and private pension sys tems, older people are less likely to be without an income than any other group in America. Older workers are also less likely to be unemployed than any other group. The basic statistics on which these statements are based mask the serious concerns of older people in America today. In their book, Life After Early Retirement: The Expe rience of Lower-Level Workers, the authors focus on the effects of inflation and lack of adequate private pension and social security benefit indexing, of rising health care costs, and the lack of life-long health benefits for the elderly. This information is based on a survey of more than 800 retirees of three corporations— a utility, a chain store, and a manufacturer. The authors’ survey presents evidence of all three problems, including supporting com mentary by respondents in their sample. The casual approach of this book keeps the interest of the nontechnical reader more easily than some of the more rigorous empirical work in the area of retirement behavior and policy. Many readers will find that the cross-tabulations of the survey responses and the anecdotes provide insight into the effect of retirement on the lives of workers. Nevertheless, the work would have been considerably improved if the results the authors obtained from their survey had been reinforced by national statistics on activities of the older worker. For example, the authors write that it appears that a great many of the elderly men in their sample who chose to work moved into the self-employed status after retirement. This phenomenon could have been easily con firmed for all men in this country, age 65 and over, using employment statistics from the Current Population Survey, published regularly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. There are many other instances where greater attention to other research studies could have improved the book. Moreover, there is little indication that the authors are familiar with the extensive literature in the field, and it is a rare occasion when another author is noted. An equally disturbing problem arose when the authors attempted to hypothesize at to what the results would have been to a question that they appear to have mistakenly left 53 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Book Reviews out of their survey, by mentally extrapolating the results of a previous, but actually unrelated, question. Because their work does not define the retirement decision within the framework of a model, the authors are not limited by the assumptions of any model. Thus, many o f the aspects of the retirement decision have not been addressed by more scholarly analysts. As a result, the readers benefit from a discussion of the social as well as the economic importance of employment among the elderly. Retirement alternatives that are addressed include flexible schedules for the elderly, advancement, retraining, and job reassignment. Aside from some repetition, the work is clearly written and provides the reader with a great deal of knowledge concerning retirement behavior, its analysis, policy impli cations, and areas of future policy concerns. — A u d r e y J. W r ig h t Presidential Management Intern Bureau of Labor Statistics Publications received Agriculture and natural resources “ Aid to Food and Agriculture: A Permanent Challenge,” The O E C D Observer, November 1983, pp. 12-16. Drabenstott, Mark and Marvin Duncan, “ Another Troubled Year for U.S. Agriculture,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, December 1984, pp. 30-44. “ The Prospects for Soviet Agriculture,” The O E C D Observer, No vember 1983, pp. 22-27. Economic and social statistics Ashenfelter, Orley, Macroeconomic Analyses and Microecon omic Analyses of Labor Supply. Cambridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1984, 36 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1500.) $1.50, paper. Blackburn, McKinley L. and David E. Bloom, “ What Is Hap pening to the Middle Class,” American Demographics, Jan uary 1985, pp. 18-25. Gastwirth, Joseph L., “ Statistical Methods for Analyzing Claims of Employment Discrimination,” Industrial and Labor Re lations Review, October 1984, pp. 75-86. Newitt, Jane, “ How to Forecast Births (and Be Right),” American Demographics, January 1985, beginning on p. 39. Rosen, Sherwin, Distribution of Prizes in a Match-Play Tourna ment with Single Eliminations. Cambridge, m a , National Bu reau of Economic Research, Inc., 1984, 37 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1516.) $1.50, paper. Sato, Ryuzo, R & D Activities and the Technology Game: A Dy namic Model of U.S.-Japan Competition. Cambridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1984, 38 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1513.) $1.50, paper. Economic growth and development Colander, David, “ Was Keynes a Keynesian or a Lernerian?” Journal of Economic Literature, December 1984, pp. 1572— 75. 54 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Economic Council of Canada, Steering the Course: Twenty-First Annual Review of the Economic Council of Canada, 1984. Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Canada, 1984, 121 pp. $5.95, Canada; $7.15, other countries. Kotlikoff, Laurence J., “ Taxation and Savings: A Neoclassical Perspective,” Journal of Economic Literature, December 1984, pp. 1576-1629. McNulty, Paul J., The Origins and Development of Labor Eco nomics. Cambridge, m a , The mit Press, 1984, 248 pp. $7.95, paper. Morris, Milton D., Immigration—The Beleaguered Bureaucracy. Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1985, 150 pp. $22.95, cloth; $8.95, paper. Scitovsky, Tibor, “ Lerner’s Contribution to Economics,” Journal of Economic Literature, December 1984, pp. 1547-71. Health and safety Arnett, Ross H. Ill and Gordon R. Trapnell, “ Private Health Insurance: New Measures of a Complex and Changing In dustry,” Health Care Financing Review, Winter 1984, pp. 31-42. Gibson, Robert M. and others, “ National Health Expenditures, 1983,” Health Care Financing Review, Winter 1984, pp. 129. Schiller, Bradley R., The Economics of Poverty and Discrimi nation. 2d ed. Englewood Cliffs, nj , Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1984, 241 pp. $8.95. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, What Every Employer Needs to Know About O S H A Recordkeeping. Rev. ed. Washington, 1984, 28 pp. (Report 412-3). U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, Summary Re port: Workshop on the Sources and Uses of Forecasts in the Health Sector, Held in June 1982. Rockville, m d , U.S. De partment of Health and Human Services, Public Health Ser vices, Health Resources and Services Administration, 1984, 35 pp. (odam Report, 2-85.) ----- The Area Resource File ( a r f ) System: Information for Health Resources, Planning and Research. Rockville, m d , U.S. De partment of Health and Human Services, Public Health Ser vice, Health Resources and Services Administration, Bureau of Health Professions, Office of Data Analysis and Manage ment, 1984, 88 pp. (hrs- p- od-84-6.) Wolfson, Jay and Peter J. Levin, Managing Employee Health Benefits: A Guide to Cost Control. Homewood, il , Dow Jones-Irwin, 1985, 195 pp. Industrial relations Clark, Kim B., “ Unionization and Firm Performance: The Impact on Profits, Growth, and Productivity,” The American Eco nomic Review, December 1984, pp. 893-919. Estreicher, Samuel, “ Unjust Dismissal Laws in Other Countries: Some Cautionary Notes,” Employee Relations Law Journal, Autumn 1984, pp. 286-302. Ferguson, Tracy H. and John Gaal, “ Codetermination: A Fad or a Future in America?” Employee Relations Law Journal, Autumn 1984, pp. 176-99. Freeman, Richard P. and James L. Medoff, What Do Unions Do? New York, Basic Books, Inc., 1984, 293 pp. $22.95. Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ Protection of Wages: Legislative Proposals,” Employment Gazette, November 1984, pp. 504-05. ----- “ Trade Union Democracy—the 1984 Act,’’ Employment Gazette, August 1984, pp. 378-80. Kochan, Thomas A., ed., Challenges and Choices Facing Amer ican Labor. Cambridge, m a , The mit Press, 1985, 356 pp. $30 cloth; $15, paper. McDonald, James J., Jr., “ State Plant Closing Laws: Preempted by the nlra ?’’ Employee Relations Law Journal, Autumn 1984, pp. 241-57. Schuster, Michael and Christopher S. Miller, “ An Empirical As sessment of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, October 1984, pp. 64-74. Sloane, Arthur A. and Fred Witney, Labor Relations. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, nj , Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1985, 542 pp. $28.95. International economics Charnovitz, Steven, “ The Human Rights of Foreign Labor,” Worldview, January 1985, pp. 7-9. Dixon, William J., “ Trade Concentration, Economic Growth, and the Provision of Basic Human Needs,” Social Science Quart erly, September 1984, pp. 761-74. Felmingham, B. S., “ The Recovery of World Labor Markets and the U.S. Monetary Stance: Rationale and Evidence,” Kyklos, Vol. 37, 1984, Fasc. 3, pp. 424-43. Pecchiolo, Rinaldo, “ International Banking: Controlling the Risks,” The o e c d Observer, November 1983, pp. 20-21. Labor and economic history Bellush, Jewel and Bernard Bellush, Union Power and New York: Victor Gotbaum and District Council 37. New York, Praeger Publishers, 1984, 473 pp. $33.95, cloth; $14.95, paper. Briggs, Vernon M., Jr., Immigration and the American Labor Force. Baltimore, m d , The Johns Hopkins Press, 1984, 294 pp. $26.50. Kornbluh, Joyce L. and Mary Frederickson, eds., Sisterhood and Solidarity: Workers’ Education for Women, 1914-1984. Phil adelphia, pa , Temple University Press, 1984, 372 pp., bib liography. $29.95. Ozanne, Robert W., The Labor Movement in Wisconsin: A History. Madison, The State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1984, 290 pp., bibliography. $20. Weiner, Lynn Y., From Working Girl to Working Mother: The Female Labor Force in the United States, 1820-1980. Chapel Hill, n c , The University of North Carolina Press, 1985, 187 pp., bibliography. $17.95. Labor force Freedman, Audrey, “ The Case for a Free Labor Market,” Across the Board, January 1985, pp. 42-48. Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ Great Britain Labor Force Estimates for 1983,” Employment Gazette, August 1984, pp. 361-66. ----- “ Is Childminding Real Work?” by Helen Kay, Employment Gazette, November 1984, pp. 483-86. ----- Unemployed Women: A Study of Attitudes and Experiences. By Arnold Cragg and Tim Dawson. London, Department of Employment, 1984, 83 pp. (Research Paper 47.) ----- “ Unemployment and Less Qualified Urban Young People,” by Michael Banks, Philip Ullah, and Peter Warr, Employment Gazette, August 1984, pp. 343-46. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ----- “ Unemployment Flows: Detailed Analysis,” Employment Gazette, August 1984, pp. 347-53. Green, Carole A. and Marianne A. Ferber, “ Employment Dis crimination: An Empirical Test of Forward Versus Reverse Regression,” The Journal of Human Resources, Fall 1984, pp. 557-69. Greenwood, Michael J. and Gary L. Hunt, “ Migration and In terregional Employment Redistribution in the United States,” The American Economic Review, December 1984, pp. 95769. Lawrence, Robert Z., “ Sectoral Shifts and the Size of the Middle Class,” The Brookings Review, Fall 1984, pp. 3-11. Presser, Harriet B., “ Job Characteristics of Spouses and Their Work Shifts,” Demography, November 1984, pp. 575-89. Roscow, Jerome M. and Robert Zager,4‘The Case for Employment Security,” Across the Board, January 1985, pp. 35-41. Sproat, Kezia V., Helene Churchill, Carol Sheets, The National Longitudinal Surveys of Labor Market Experience: An An notated Bibliography of Research. Lexington, m a , D. C. Heath and Co., Lexington Books, 1985, 429 pp., bibliography. $40. Management and organization theory Arthur, Michael B. and others, Working with Careers. New York, Columbia University, Graduate School of Business, Center for Career Research and Human Resource Management, 1984, 130 pp. $22.50, cloth; $19, paper. Blair, David C., “ The Management of Information: Basic Dis tinctions,” Sloan Managment Review, Fall 1984, pp. 13-23. Gooch, Bill G., Lois A. Carrier, John Huck, Strategies for Suc cess: Work Life Planning. North Scituate, m a , Breton Pub lishers, A Division of Wadsworth, Inc., 1983, 404 pp. Gregg, Gail, “ Woman Entrepreneurs: The Second Generation,” Across the Board, January 1985, pp. 10-18. Monetary and fiscal policy Burchell, Robert W. and others, The New Reality of Municipal Finance: The Rise and Fall of the Intergovernmental City. New Brunswick, n j , Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research, 1984, 433 pp., bibliography. Cacy, J. A. and Glenn H. Miller, Jr., “ The U.S. Economy and Monetary Policy in 1984,” Economic Review, Federal Re serve Bank of Kansas City, December 1984, pp. 3-18. Productivity and technological change Great Britain, Department of Employment, “ New Technology and Flexible Patterns of Working Time,” by Auriol Blandy, Em ployment Gazette, October 1984, pp. 439-44. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Productivity: A Selected Anno tated Bibliography, 1979-82. Compiled by Horst Brand. Washington, 1984, 196 pp. (Bulletin 2212.) Stock No. 029GO1-02831-8. $7, Superintendent of Documents, Washing ton 20402. Wages and compensation Betson, David and Jacques van der Gaag, “ Working Married Women and the Distribution of Income,” The Journal of Human Resources, Fall 1984, pp. 532-43. Borjas, George J., The Impact of Assimilation on the Earnings of Immigrants: A Reexamination of the Evidence. Cambridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1984, 41 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1515.) $1.50, paper. 55 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Book Reviews Ryan, Ellen M., “ Comparable Worth—A Necessary Vehicle for Pay Equity,” Marquette Law Review, Fall 1984, pp. 93-129. Siniscalco, Gary R. and Cynthia L. Remmers, “ Nonjudicial De velopments in Comparable Worth,” Employee Relations Law Journal, Autumn 1984, pp. 222-40. Empirical Reexamination,” The Journal of Human Re sources, Fall 1984, pp. 512-31. Poats, Rutherford M., “Towards More Effective Campaigns Against Poverty,” The O E C D Observer, November 1983, pp. 5-11. Welfare programs and social insurance Burtless, Gary, “ Manpower Policies for the Disadvantaged: What Works?” The Brookings Review, Fall 1984, pp. 18-22. Lovell, Malcolm R., Jr., “ An Antidote for Protectionism,” The Brookings Review, Fall 1984, pp. 23-28. Rumberger, Russell W., “ The Incidence and Wage Effects of Occupational Training Among Young Men,” Social Science Quarterly, September 1984, pp. 775-88. Simpson, Wayne, “ An Econometric Analysis of Industrial Train ing in Canada,” The Journal of Human Resources, Fall 1984, pp. 435-51. Streker-Seeborg, Irmtraud, Michael C. Seeborg, Abera Zegeye, “ The Impact of Nontraditional Training on the Occupational Attainment of Women,” The Journal of Human Resources, Fall 1984, pp. 452-71. □ Aaron, Henry J., “ Six Welfare Questions Still Searching for An swers,” The Brookings Review, Fall 1984, pp. 12-17. Fields, Gary S. and Olivia S. Mitchell, Retirement, Pensions, and Social Security. Cambridge, m a , The mit Press, 1984, 152 pp. $19.95. Grämlich, Edward M. and Deborah S. Laren, “ Migration and Income Redistribution Responsibilities,” The Journal of Hu man Resources, Fall 1984, pp. 489-511. Kotlikoff, Laurence J. and David A. Wise, The Incentive Effects of Private Pension Plans. Cambridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. 1984, 73 pp. (nber Working Paper Series, 1510.) $1.50, paper. Leigh, Duane E., “ Why Is There Mandatory Retirement? An 56 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Worker training and development Current Labor Statistics Notes on Current Labor Statistics ...................................................................................................................................................... 58 Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series ........................................................................................... 58 Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes ......................................................................... 59 59 60 61 62 62 63 63 63 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-84 ................................ Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted . . . . Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted .................. Selected employment indicators, seasonally ad ju sted ...................................................................................................................... Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally ad ju sted .................................................................................................................. Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................................... Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally ad ju sted .................................................................................. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted............................................................................................................................... Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. . . Employment, by industry, selected years, 1950-83 ......................................................................................................................... Employment, by State ............................................................................................................................................................................ Employment, by industry, seasonally a d ju sted ................................................................................................................................. Average hours and earnings, by industry, 1968-83 ........................................................................................................................ Average weekly hours, by industry, seasonally adjusted ............................................................................................................... Average hourly earnings, by industry ................................................................................................................................................. Hourly Earnings Index, by industry...................................................................................................................................................... Average weekly earnings, by industry................................................................................................................................................. Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, seasonally a d ju sted ........................................................... Unemployment insurance data. Definitions..................................................................................... .................................................................................................... 71 71 ........................................................................................................................................................ Consumer Price Index, 1967-83 . . . .................................................................................................................................................... Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected it e m s .................................................................... Consumer Price Index, cross-classification of region and population size c l a s s ....................................................................... Consumer Price Index, selected areas ................................................................................................................................................. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing ............................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings ........................................................................................................................... Producer Price Indexes, by special commodity groupings ............................................................................................................. Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ........................................................................ Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries ....................................................................... 72 73 73 79 80 81 82 84 84 85 18. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations Price data. Definitions and notes 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Productivity data. Definitions and notes 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. ...................................................................................................................................... Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years, 1950-83 ............................................... Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs,and prices, selected years, 1950-84 ........................... Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1974-84 .................................................. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted .............................. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs,and p r ic e s.............. Wage and compensation data. Definitions and notes 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 64 65 65 66 67 68 69 69 70 70 ...................................................................................................... Employment Cost Index, by occupation and industry group ........................................................................................................ Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group .................................................................. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size ....................................... Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1980 to d a te ....................................................... Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more,1980 to date ....................... Work stoppage data. Definition .......................................................................................................................................................... 38. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date ....................................................... ........................................ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 86 87 87 88 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 94 95 95 57 NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS This section of the Review presents the principal statistical series collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A brief introduction to each group of tables provides definitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually found in footnotes. Readers who need additional information are invited to consult the BLS regional offices listed on the inside front cover of this issue of the Review. Some general notes applicable to several series are given below. quarter to quarter are published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series. However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U .S. average All Items CPI. Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are available for this series. A d ju stm e n ts fo r p rice ch a n g e s. Some data are adjusted to eliminate the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of 150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is $2 ($3/150 x 100 = $2). The resulting values are described as “ real,” “ constant,” or “ 1967” dollars. S e a so n a l a d ju stm e n t. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate the effect o f such factors as climatic conditions, industry pro duction schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short-term movements o f the statistical series. Tables containing these data are identified as “ sea sonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are computed each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for several preceding years. Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 3 - 8 were revised in the February 1985 issue o f the R e v ie w , to reflect experience through 1984. Beginning in January 1980, the BLS introduced two major modifications in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new procedure called X -11/ ARIMA, which was developed at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard X -11 method. A detailed description of the procedure appears in T h e X - l l A R IM A S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t M e th o d by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 12-564E, January 1983). The second change is that seasonal factors are now being calculated for use during the first 6 months o f the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year for the July-December period. Revisions of historical data continue to be made only at the end of each calendar year. Annual revision o f the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in tables 11, 13, and 15 were made in July 1984 using the X - l l ARIMA seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for productivity data in tables 29 and 30 are usually introduced in the September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent changes from month to month and from A v a ila b ility o f in fo r m a tio n . Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety of sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published according to the schedule given below. More information from household and establishment surveys is provided in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s , a monthly publication o f the Bureau. Comparable household information is published in a two-volume data b o o k - L a b o r F o r c e S ta tis tic s D e r iv e d F ro m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u r v e y , Bulletin 2096. Comparable establishment information appears in two data books - E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , and E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s , S ta te s a n d A r e a s , and their annual supplements. More detailed information on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining appears in the monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts . More detailed price information is published each month in the periodicals, the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P r ic e s a n d P r ic e I n d e x e s . Symbols p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series, pre liminary figures are issued based on representative but in complete returns. r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability of later data but may also reflect other adjustments, n .e.c. = not elsewhere classified. Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series Series Release date Peridd covered Release date Period covered Release date Period covered Employment situation ................................. March 8 February April 5 March May 3 April 1-11 Producer Price Index ................................. March 15 February April 12 March May 10 April 23-27 March 22 February April 23 March May 21 April 19-22 March 22 February April 23 March May 21 April 12-16 April 25 1st quarter May 29 1st quarter Real earnings.............................................. MLR table number Productivity and costs: 58 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 29-32 29-32 36-37 April 30 1st quarter 33-35 EMPLOYMENT DATA FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY E mployment data in this section are obtained from the Current Population Survey, a program of personal interviews conducted monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of about 60,000 households selected to represent the U.S population 16 years of age and older. House holds are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months. r a te for all civilian workers represents the number unemployed as a percent o f the civilian labor force. The la b o r fo r c e consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. Persons n ot in th e la b o r fo rce are those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes persons who are retired, those engaged in their own housework, those not working while attending school, those unable to work because of long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because o f personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The n o n in stitu tio n a l p op u la tio n comprises all persons 16 years o f age and older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions, sani tariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members o f the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. The la b o r fo rce p articip ation rate is the proportion of the noninstitutional population that is in the labor force. The e m p lo y m en t-p o p u la tio n ratio is total employment (including the resident Armed Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional population. Definitions E m p lo y ed p erso n s include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any time during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and (2) those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. Members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the em ployed total. A person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at which he or she worked the greatest number of hours. Notes on the data From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjustments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for estimating errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect the compara bility of historical data presented in table 1. A description o f these ad justments and their effect on the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s . Data in tables 2 - 8 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal ex perience through December 1984. U n em p lo y e d p erso n s are those who did not work during the survey week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The overall u n e m p lo y m en t rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the labor force, including the resident Armed Forces. The u n em p loym en t 1. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-84 [Numbers in thousands] Labor force Year Noninsti tutional population Employed Number Percent of population 1950 .............. 1955 .............. 1960 .............. 106,164 111,747 119,106 63,377 67,087 71,489 59.7 60.0 60.0 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 128,459 130,180 132,092 134,281 136,573 76,401 77,892 79,565 80,990 82,972 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 139,203 142,189 145,939 148,870 151,841 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 .............. .............. .............. .............. ........... Total Unemployed Civilian Percent of population Resident Armed Forces Total Agriculture Nonagricultural industries Number Percent ot labor force Not In labor force 56.6 57.5 56.8 1,169 2,064 1,861 58,918 62,170 65,778 7,160 6,450 5,458 51,758 55,722 60,318 3,288 2,852 3,852 5.2 4.3 5.4 42,787 44,660 . 46,617 56.9 57.6 58.0 58.2 58.7 1,946 2,122 2,218 2,253 2,238 71,088 72,895 74,372 75,920 77,902 4,361 3,979 3,844 3,817 3,606 66,726 68,915 70,527 72,103 74,296 3,366 2,875 2,975 2,817 2,832 4.4 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.4 52,058 52,288 52,527 53,291 53,602 84,889 86,355 88,847 91,203 93,670 59.5 59.8 60.2 60.3 60.8 61.0 60.7 60.9 61.3 61.7 60,087 64,234 67,639 73,034 75,017 76,590 78,173 80,140 80,796 81,340 83,966 86,838 88,515 58.0 57.2 57.5 58.3 58.3 2,118 1,973 1,813 1,774 1,721 78,678 79,367 82,153 85,064 86,794 75,215 75,972 78,669 81,594 83,279 4,093 5,016 4,882 4,355 5,156 4.8 5.8 5.5 4.8 5.5 54,315 55,834 57,091 57,667 58,171 154,831 157,818 160,689 163,541 166,460 95,453 97,826 100,665 103,882 106,559 61.6 62.0 62.6 63.5 64.0 87,524 90,420 93,673 97,679 100,421 56.5 57.3 58.3 59.7 60.3 1,678 1,668 1,656 1,631 1,597 85,845 88,752 92,017 96,048 98,824 3,463 3,394 3,484 3,470 3,515 3,408 3,331 3,283 3,387 3,347 82,438 85,421 88,734 92,661 95,477 7,929 7,406 6,991 6,202 6,137 8.3 7.6 6.9 6.0 5.8 59,377 59,991 60,025 59,659 59,900 169,349 171,775 173,939 175,891 178,080 108,544 110,315 111,872 113,226 115,241 64.1 65.2 64.3 64.4 64.7 100,907 102,042 101,194 102,510 106,702 59.6 59.4 58.2 58.3 59.9 1,604 1,645 1,668 1,676 1,697 99,303 100,397 99,526 100,834 105,005 3,364 3,368 3,401 3,383 3,321 95,938 97,030 96,125 97,450 101,685 7,637 8,273 10,578 10,717 8,539 7.0 7.5 9.5 9.5 7.4 60,806 61,460 62,067 62,665 62,839 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 59 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 2. Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] Employment status and sex Annual average 1984 1985 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 175,891 113,226 64.4 102,510 58.3 1,676 100,834 3,383 97,450 10,717 9.5 62,665 178,080 115,241 64.7 106,702 59.9 1,697 105,005 3,321 101,685 8,539 7.4 62,839 177,219 114,006 64.3 104,980 59.2 1,686 103,294 3,294 100,000 9,026 7.9 63,213 177,363 114,408 64.5 105,572 59.5 1,684 103,888 3,364 100,524 8,836 7.7 62,955 177,510 114,592 64.6 105,809 59.6 1,686 104,123 3,305 100,818 8,783 7.7 62,918 177,662 114,895 64.7 106,095 59.7 1,693 104,402 3,379 101,023 8,800 7.7 62,767 177,813 115,412 64.9 106,852 60.1 1,690 105,162 3,367 101,795 8,560 7.4 62,401 177,974 115,309 64.8 107,081 60.2 1,690 105,391 3,368 102,023 8,228 7.1 62,665 178,138 115,566 64.9 107,075 60.1 1,698 105,377 3,333 102,044 8,491 7.3 62,572 178,295 115,341 64.7 106,860 59.9 1,712 105,148 3,264 101,884 8,481 7.4 62,954 178,483 115,484 64.7 107,114 60.0 1,720 105,394 3,319 102,075 8,370 7.2 62,999 178,661 115,721 64.8 107,354 60.1 1,705 105,649 3,169 102,480 8,367 7.2 62,940 178,834 115,773 64.7 107,631 60.2 1,699 105,932 3,334 102,598 8,142 7.0 63,061 179,004 116,162 64.9 107,971 60.3 1,698 106,273 3,385 102,888 8,191 7.1 62,842 179,081 116,572 65.1 108,088 60.4 1,697 106,391 3,320 103,071 8,484 7.3 62,509 84,064 64,580 76.8 58,320 69.4 1,533 56,787 6,260 9.7 85,156 65,386 76.8 60,642 71.2 1,551 59,091 4,744 7.3 84,745 64,966 76.7 59,843 70.6 1,542 58,301 5,123 7.9 84,811 65,081 76.7 60,113 70.9 1,540 58,573 4,968 7.6 84,880 65,151 76.8 60,262 71.0 1,542 58,720 4,889 7.5 84,953 65,200 76.7 60,289 71.0 1,548 58,741 4,911 7.5 85,024 65,304 76.8 60,578 71.2 1,545 59,033 4,726 7.2 85,101 65,348 76.8 60,758 71.4 1,545 59,213 4,590 7.0 85,179 65,412 76.8 60,687 71.2 1,551 59,136 4,725 7.2 85,257 65,357 76.7 60,766 71.3 1,563 59,203 4,591 7.0 85,352 65,589 76.8 60,959 71.4 1,571 59,388 4,630 7.1 85,439 65,558 76.7 61,018 71.4 1,557 59,461 4,540 6.9 85,523 65,657 76.8 61,155 71.5 1,552 59,603 4,502 6.9 85,607 65,814 76.9 61,252 71.6 1,550 59,702 4,562 6.9 85,629 65,822 76.9 61,213 71.5 1,549 59,664 4,609 7.0 91,827 48,646 53.0 44,190 48.1 143 44,047 4,457 9.2 92,924 49,855 53.7 46,061 49.6 146 45,915 3,794 7.6 92,474 49,040 53.0 45,137 48.8 144 44,993 3,903 8.0 92,552 49,327 53.3 45,459 49.1 144 45,315 3,868 7.8 92,630 49,441 53.4 45,547 49 2 144 45,403 3,894 7.9 92,709 49,695 53.6 45,806 49.4 145 45,661 3,889 7.8 92,789 50,108 54.0 46,274 49.9 145 46,129 3,834 7.7 92,873 49,961 53.8 46,323 49.9 145 46,178 3,638 7.3 92,958 50,154 54.0 46,388 49.9 147 46,241 3,766 7.5 93,039 49,984 53.7 46,094 49.5 149 45,945 3,890 7.8 93,132 49,895 53.6 46,155 49.6 149 46,006 3,740 7.5 93,222 50,163 53.8 46,336 49.7 148 46,188 3,827 7.6 93,311 50,116 53.7 46,476 49.8 147 46,329 3,640 7.3 93,397 50,348 53.9 46,719 50.0 148 46,571 3,629 7.2 93,452 50,750 54.3 46,875 50.2 148 46,727 3,875 7.6 Jan. TOTAL Noninstitutional population1’2 ...................... Labor force2 ............................................ Participation rate3 ......................... Total employed2 Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident Armed Forces1 ................... Civilian employed.............................. Agriculture .................................... Nonagricultural industries.............. Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate5 ...................... Not in labor force ................................... Men, 1S years and over Noninstitutional population1’2 ...................... Labor force2 ............................................ Participation rate3 ........................ Total employed2 .................................... Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident Armed Forces1 ................... Civilian employed.............................. Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate5 ...................... W om en, 16 years and over Noninstitutional population1'2 ...................... Labor force2 ............................................ Participation rate3 ......................... Total employed2 .................................... Employment-population rate4 . . . . Resident Armed Forces1 ................... Civilian employed.............................. Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate5 ...................... 1The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation. 2Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. 3Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population. 60 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population. Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces). 3. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] Annual average 1984 1985 Employment status 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 174,215 111,550 64.0 100,834 57.9 10,717 9.6 62,665 176,383 113,544 64.4 105,005 59.5 8,539 7.5 62,839 175,533 112,320 64.0 103,294 58.8 9,026 8.0 63,213 175,679 112,724 64.2 103,888 59.1 8,836 7.8 62,955 175,824 112,906 64.2 104,123 59.2 8,783 7.8 62,918 175,969 113,302 64.3 104,402 59.3 8,800 7.8 c62,667 176,123 113,722 64.6 105,162 59.7 8,560 7.5 62,401 176,284 113,619 64.5 105,391 59.8 8,228 7.2 62,665 176,440 113,868 64.5 105,377 59.7 8,491 7.5 62,572 176,583 113,629 64.3 105,148 59.5 8,481 7.5 62,954 176,763 113,764 64.4 105,394 59.6 8,370 7.4 62,999 176,956 114,016 64.4 105,649 59.7 8,367 7.3 62,940 177,135 114,074 64.4 105,932 59.3 8,142 7.1 63,061 177,306 114,464 64.6 106,273 59.9 8,191 7.2 62,842 177,384 114,875 64.8 106,391 60.0 8,484 7.4 62,509 74,872 58,744 78.5 53,487 71.4 2,429 51,058 5,257 8.9 76,219 59,701 78.3 55,769 73.2 2,418 53,351 3,932 6.6 75,692 59,285 78.3 55,012 72.7 2,367 52,645 4,273 7.2 75,786 59,372 78.3 55,233 72.9 2,399 52,834 4,139 7.0 75,880 59,400 78.3 55,352 72.9 2,382 52,970 4,048 6.8 75,973 59,474 78.3 55,387 72.9 2,446 52,941 4,087 6.9 76,073 59,572 78.3 55,663 73.2 2,443 53,220 3,909 6.6 76,176 59,668 78.3 55,861 73.3 2,448 53,413 3,807 6.4 76,269 59,730 78.3 55,846 73.2 2,444 53,402 3,884 6.5 76,350 59,771 78.3 55,935 73.3 2,406 53,529 3,836 6.4 76,451 59,892 78.3 c56,075 78.3 2,414 53,661 3,817 6.4 76,565 59,913 78.3 56,182 73.4 2,334 53,848 3,731 6.2 76,663 59,994 78.3 56,269 73.4 2,434 53,835 3,725 6.2 76,753 60,131 78.3 56,372 73.4 c2,494 53,878 3,759 6.3 76,760 60,033 78.2 56,234 73.3 2,417 53,817 3,798 6.3 84,069 44,636 53.1 41,004 48.8 620 40,384 3,632 8.1 85,429 45,900 53.7 42,793 50.1 595 42,198 3,107 6.8 84,860 45,031 53.1 41,840 49.3 621 41,219 3,191 7.1 84,962 45,313 53.3 42,178 49.6 627 41,551 3,135 6.9 85,064 45,482 53.5 42,334 49.8 587 41,747 3,148 6.9 85,168 45,685 53.6 42,524 49.9 613 41,911 3,161 6.9 85,272 46,130 54.1 43,003 50.4 603 42,400 3,127 6.8 85,380 45,958 53.8 42,986 50.3 611 42,375 2,972 6.5 85,488 46,131 54.0 43,001 50.3 580 42,421 3,130 6.8 85,581 46,092 53.9 42,878 50.1 573 42,305 3,214 7.0 85,688 45,950 53.6 42,906 50.1 590 42,316 3,044 6.6 85,793 46,264 53.9 43,091 c50.2 569 c42,522 3,173 6.9 85,897 46,279 53.9 43,252 50.4 580 42,672 3,027 6.5 85,995 46,463 54.0 43,511 50.6 595 42,916 2,952 6.4 86,015 46,771 54.4 43,610 50.7 592 43,018 3,161 6.8 15,274 8,171 53.5 6,342 41.5 334 6,008 1,829 22.4 14,735 7,943 53.9 6,444 43.7 309 6,135 1,499 18.9 14,981 8,004 53.4 6,442 43.0 306 6,136 1,562 19.5 14,931 8,039 53.8 6,477 43.4 338 6,139 1,562 19.4 14,880 8,024 53.9 6,437 43.3 336 6,101 1,587 19.8 14,828 8,043 54.2 6,491 43.8 320 6,171 1,552 19.3 14,778 8,020 54.3 6,496 44.0 321 6,175 1,524 19.0 14,728 7,993 54.3 6,544 44.4 309 6,235 1,449 18.1 14,683 8,007 54.5 6,530 44.5 309 6,221 1,477 18.4 14,653 7,766 53.0 6,335 43.2 285 6,050 1,431 18.4 14,624 7,922 54.2 6,413 43.9 315 6,098 1,509 19.0 14,598 7,839 53.7 6,376 43.7 266 6,110 1,463 18.7 14,575 7,801 53.5 6,411 44.0 320 6,091 1,390 17.8 14,557 7,870 54.1 6,390 43.9 296 6,094 1,480 18.8 14,610 8,072 55.2 6,547 44.8 311 6,236 1,525 18.9 150,805 97,021 64.3 88,893 58.9 8,128 8.4 152,347 98,492 64.6 92,120 60.5 6,372 6.5 151,939 97,824 64.4 91,068 59.9 6,756 6.9 152,079 98,121 64.5 91,494 60.2 6,627 6.8 152,285 98,343 64.6 91,750 60.2 6,593 6.7 152,178 98,419 64.7 91,852 60.4 6,567 6.7 152,229 98,749 64.9 92,330 60.7 6,419 6.5 152,295 98,690 64.8 92,516 60.7 6,174 6.3 152,286 98,627 64.8 92,389 60.7 6,238 6.3 152,402 98,223 64.4 91,951 60.3 6,272 6.4 152,471 98,426 64.6 92,177 60.5 6,249 6.3 152,605 98,631 64.6 92,407 60.6 6,224 6.3 152,659 98,630 64.6 92,587 60.6 6,043 6.1 152,734 99,005 64.8 92,884 60.8 6,121 6.2 153,103 99,496 65.0 93,124 60.8 6,372 6.4 18,925 11,647 61.5 9,375 49.5 2,272 19.5 19,348 12,033 62.2 10,119 52.3 1,914 15.9 19,196 11,712 61.0 9,721 50.6 1,991 17.0 19,222 11,890 61.9 9,928 51.6 1,962 16.5 19,248 11,845 61.5 9,878 51.3 1,967 16.6 19,274 11,898 61.7 9,913 51.4 1,985 16.7 19,302 11,968 62.0 10,053 52.1 1,915 16.0 19,330 11,959 61.9 10,138 52.4 1,821 15.2 19,360 12,083 62.4 10,079 52.1 2,004 16.6 19,386 12,142 62.6 10,222 52.7 1,920 15.8 19,416 12,082 62.2 10,260 52.8 1,822 15.1 19,449 12,208 62.8 10,340 53.2 1,868 15.3 19,481 12,276 63.0 10,426 53.5 1,850 15.1 19,513 12,306 63.1 10,462 53.6 1,844 15.0 19,518 12,315 63.1 10,475 53.7 1,840 14.9 10,795 6,884 63.8 5,943 55.1 940 13.7 11,164 7,247 64.9 6,469 57.9 778 10.7 10,995 7,076 64.4 6,271 57.0 805 11.4 11,026 7,018 63.6 6,293 57.1 725 10.3 11,058 7,144 64.6 6,333 57.3 811 11.4 11,088 7,113 64.2 6,294 56.8 819 11.5 11,118 7,170 64.5 6,402 57.6 768 10.7 11,148 7,267 65.2 6,519 58.5 748 10.3 11,180 7,264 65.0 6,503 58.2 761 10.5 11,209 7,299 65.1 6,521 58.2 778 10.7 11,240 7,353 65.4 6,573 58.5 780 10.6 11,270 7,384 65.5 6,574 58.3 810 11.0 11,301 7,394 65.4 6,636 58.7 758 10.3 11,332 7,472 65.9 6,698 59.1 774 10.4 11,363 7,255 63.8 6,487 57.1 768 10.6 Jan. TOTAL Civilian noninstltutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force.................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... Not in labor force ................................... M en, 20 years and over Civilian nonlnstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force.................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture......................................... Nonagricultural Industries ................ Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... W om en, 20 years and over Civilian nonlnstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force.................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture......................................... Nonagricultural industries ................ Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... Both sexes, 16 to 19 years Civilian noninstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force.................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Agriculture......................................... Nonagricultural industries ................ Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... White Civilian noninstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force.................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... Black Civilian noninstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... Hispanic origin3 Civilian nonlnstitutional population1 .............. Civilian labor force................................... Participation rate........................... Employed ............................................ Employment-population ratio2 . . . . Unemployed......................................... Unemployment rate ...................... 1The population figures are not seasonally adjusted. Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian nonlnstitutional population. 3Data for 1984 and earlier years have been revised. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis c = corrected. NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because data for the “other races” groups are not presented and Hlspanics are included in both the white and black population groups. 61 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 4. Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted [In thousands] 1985 1984 Annual average Soloctnd categories Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Doc. J in . 1983 1984 100,834 56,787 44,047 37,967 24,603 5,091 105,005 59,091 45,915 39,056 25,636 5,465 1,579 1,565 240 1,555 1,553 213 1,468 1,608 234 1,547 1,598 230 1,522 1,579 211 1,627 1,545 215 1,580 1,549 239 1,578 1,566 211 1,519 1,557 220 1,453 1,562 209 1,565 1,555 195 1,511 1,487 187 1,593 1,555 204 1,733 1,485 212 1,596 1,531 227 89,500 15,537 73,963 1,247 72,716 7,575 376 93,565 15,770 77,794 1,238 76,556 7,785 335 91,812 15,562 76,250 1,216 75,034 c7,863 361 92,374 15,773 76,601 1,235 75,366 7,824 331 92,747 15,765 76,982 1,164 75,818 7,769 332 92,908 15,765 77,143 1,280 75,863 7,812 341 93,780 15,744 78,036 1,327 76,709 7,745 323 93,845 15,713 78,132 1,297 76,835 7,815 347 93,768 15,639 78,129 1,238 76,891 7,744 318 93,680 15,758 77,922 1,199 76,723 7,807 321 94,140 15,881 78,259 1,198 77,061 7,752 318 94,415 15,997 78,418 1,213 77,205 7,782 314 94,442 15,785 78,657 1,228 77,429 7,731 357 94,725 15,858 78,867 1,257 77,610 7,786 357 95,068 15,738 79,330 1,374 77,956 7,783 343 6,266 2,833 3,099 12,911 5,744 2,430 2,948 13,169 5,946 2,508 3,112 13,048 5,937 2,499 3,112 13,091 5,619 2,343 3,039 13,100 5,758 2,390 3,085 13,326 5,625 2,286 3,042 13,250 5,831 2,326 2,984 13,090 5,759 2,373 2,832 13,248 5,582 2,371 2,743 13,210 5,690 2,461 2,943 13,144 5,710 2,514 2,879 13,126 5,623 2,449 2,855 13,142 5,814 2,596 2,873 13,239 5,628 2,431 2,848 13,355 5,997 2,684 2,993 12,417 5,512 2,291 2,866 12,704 5,719 2,368 3,013 12,570 5,697 2,354 3,012 12,602 5,465 2,237 2,958 12,592 5,520 2,255 2,982 12,924 5,377 2,153 2,949 12,799 5,549 2,160 2,911 12,621 5,482 2,214 2,756 12,786 5,384 2,254 2,675 12,747 5,449 2,306 2,847 12,669 5,483 2,364 2,821 12,679 5,413 2,319 2,782 12,670 5,596 2,473 2,793 12,778 5,389 2,287 2,749 12,861 CHARACTERISTIC Civilian employed, 16 years and over .................. Men............................................................. Women........................................................ Married men, spouse present........................ Married women, spouse present.................. Women who maintain families ..................... 103,294 103,888 104,123 104,402 105,162 105,391 105,377 105,148 105,394 105,649 105,932 106,273 106,391 58,301 58,573 58,720 58,741 59,033 59,213 59,136 59,203 59,388 59,461 59,603 59,702 59,644 44,993 45,315 45,403 45,661 46,129 46,178 46,241 45,945 46,006 46,188 46,329 46,571 46,727 38,676 38,859 38,895 39,012 39,060 39,060 39,123 39,073 39,071 39,054 39,337 39,443 39,441 24,991 25,244 25,286 25,468 25,658 25,734 25,719 25,772 25,715 25,897 25,995 26,122 25,912 5,584 5,396 5,396 5,496 5,429 5,378 5,606 5,622 5,626 5,449 5,482 5,328 5,373 MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS OF WORKER Agriculture: Wage and salary workers ............................. Self-employed workers ................................ Unpaid family workers.................................. Nonagricultural industries: Wage and salary workers ............................. Government.......................................... Private industries.................................. Private households ........................ Other ............................................. Self-employed workers ................................ Unpaid family workers.................................. PERSONS AT WORK PART TIM E1 All industries: Part time for economic reasons........................ Slack w ork.................................................. Could only find part-time work ..................... Voluntary part tim e.......................................... Nonagricultural industries: Part time for economic reasons........................ Slack w ork.................................................. Could only find part-time work ..................... Voluntary part tim e.......................................... c = corrected NOTE: This issue incorporates a new series on part-time work. 1Excludes persons “with a job but not at work" during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes. 5. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted [Unemployment rates] 1985 1984 Annual average Selected categories 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Total, all civilian workers..................................... Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.......................... Men, 20 years and over .......................... Women, 20 years and over.......................... 9.6 22.4 8.9 8.1 7.5 18.9 6.6 6.8 8.0 19.5 7.2 7.1 7.8 19.4 7.0 6.9 7.8 19.8 6.8 6.9 7.8 19.3 6.9 6.9 7.5 19.0 6.6 6.8 7.2 18.1 6.4 6.5 7.5 18.4 6.5 6.8 7.5 18.4 6.4 7.0 7.4 19.0 6.4 6.6 7.3 18.7 6.2 6.9 7.1 17.8 6.2 6.5 7.2 18.8 6.3 6.4 7.4 18.9 6.3 6.8 White, total.................................................. Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .................. Men, 16 to 19 years ..................... Women, 16 to 19 years ................ Men, 20 years and over........................ Women, 20 years and over .................. 8.4 19.3 20.2 18.3 7.9 6.9 6.5 16.0 16.8 15.2 5.7 5.8 6.9 16.4 17.7 14.9 6.3 6.0 6.8 16.5 16.8 16.1 6.1 5.9 6.7 16.9 17.3 16.4 5.9 5.9 6.7 16.2 16.8 15.7 5.9 6.0 6.5 16.2 16.9 15.5 5.7 5.8 6.3 15.8 16.6 15.1 5.4 5.6 6.3 15.2 17.4 12.9 5.5 5.8 6.4 16.0 16.7 15.4 5.5 5.9 6.3 16.3 17.0 15.5 5.5 5.7 6.3 15.9 16.6 15.2 5.4 5.8 6.1 15.1 16.2 13.9 5.4 5.5 6.2 15.9 16.2 15.5 5.4 5.5 6.4 15.8 15.9 15.8 5.5 5.9 Black, total.................................................. Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .................. Men, 16 to 19 years ..................... Women, 16 to 19 years ................ Men, 20 years and over........................ Women, 20 years and over .................. 19.5 48.5 48.8 48.2 18.1 16.5 15.9 42.7 42.7 42.6 14.3 13.5 17.0 47.4 46.6 48.2 15.1 14.6 16.5 43.8 46.0 41.4 14.6 14.4 16.6 46.6 44.3 49.4 15.1 13.8 16.7 44.3 42.9 45.9 15.6 13.6 16.0 44.4 41.4 48.1 14.3 13.7 15.2 37.1 38.2 35.8 14.6 12.6 16.6 42.3 42.3 42.2 15.5 138 15.8 41.3 40.5 42.2 14.1 13.8 15.1 41.9 41.0 43.0 13.5 12.6 15.3 40.2 43.8 36.2 13.4 13.4 15.1 41.2 42.0 40.2 12.8 13.5 15.0 42.1 43.8 40.1 13.3 12.7 14.9 42.1 45.3 38.5 12.7 12.8 Hispanic origin, total1 .................................. 13.7 10.7 11.4 10.3 11.4 11.5 10.7 10.3 10.5 10.7 10.6 11.0 10.3 10.4 10.6 Married men, spouse present........................ Married women, spouse present .................. Women who maintain families ..................... Full-time workers.......................................... Part-time workers ........................................ Unemployed 15 weeks and over .................. Labor force time lost2 .................................. 6.5 7.0 12.2 95 10.4 3.8 10.9 4.6 5.7 10.3 7.2 9.3 2.4 8.6 5.0 6.0 10.7 7.8 9.4 2.8 9.1 4.9 5.9 10.8 7.6 9.4 2.7 9.0 4.7 5.8 10.8 7.5 9.3 2.6 8.9 4.7 5.8 10.5 7.5 9.3 2.5 8.8 4.6 5.8 10.0 7.2 9.4 2.5 8.6 4.6 5.7 9.8 6.7 10.0 2.3 8.4 4.5 5.8 9.8 7.2 9.6 2.3 8.5 4.5 5.8 10.3 7.1 9.6 2.3 8.5 4.6 5.7 10.1 7.1 9.3 2.3 8.5 4.5 5.7 10.4 7.1 9.1 2.2 8.4 4.4 5.4 10.8 6.9 8.6 2.1 8.2 4.4 5.4 9.6 6.9 8.8 2.1 8.3 4.6 5.7 10.0 7.1 9.3 2.0 8.2 9.9 17.0 18.4 11.2 12.1 10.0 7.4 10.0 7.2 5.3 16.0 7.4 10.0 14.3 7.5 7.2 7.8 5.5 8.0 5.9 4.5 13.5 7.9 11.3 15.2 8.2 8.0 8.6 5.2 8.4 6.2 4.9 15.1 7.8 11.8 14.9 7.7 7.5 8.0 5.9 8.3 6.3 4.5 14.1 7.7 10.8 13.6 7.6 7.7 7.5 5.4 8.2 6.3 4.5 14.6 7.7 10.1 14.4 7.7 7.5 8.0 5.5 8.7 6.1 4.4 12.7 7.3 8.8 14.7 7.2 7.1 7.3 5.7 8.0 5.7 4.7 13.8 7.0 7.5 14.6 7.3 7.2 7.5 5.3 7.3 5.5 4.2 12.3 7.4 7.7 14.6 7.5 6.9 8.5 5.9 7.8 5.9 4.5 14.3 7.4 10.2 14.1 7.4 6.9 8.1 5.9 7.7 6.0 4.4 13.1 7.3 8.6 13.9 7.4 6.9 8.1 5.9 8.0 5.6 4.5 14.7 7.2 10.5 13.7 7.3 6.9 7.8 5.3 7.9 5.7 4.4 13.7 7.2 11.7 14.2 7.2 7.0 7.4 5.2 7.6 5.8 4.3 11.2 7.2 10.7 13.7 7.2 7.1 7.2 5.0 7.5 5.9 4.4 12.2 7.3 10.1 13.4 7.6 7.2 8.1 4.9 7.7 5.9 4.1 15.5 CHARACTERISTIC INDUSTRY Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers . . Mining ....................................................... Construction ............................................... Manufacturing ............................................. Durable goods ..................................... Nondurable goods ............................... Transportation and public utilities.................. Wholesale and retail trade............................. Finance and service industries ..................... Government workers .......................................... Agricultural wage and salary workers .................. 1Data for 1984 and earlier years have been revised https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours. 6. Unemployment rates by sex and age, seasonally adjusted [Civilian workers] Annual average 1984 Sex and age 1985 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Total, 16 years and over ...................................... 16 to 24 years ................................................. 16 to 19 years.............................................. 16 to 17 years............................................ 18 to 19 years............................................ 20 to 24 years............................................... 25 years and over ............................................ 25 to 54 years............................................ 55 years and over ...................................... 9.6 17.2 22.4 24.5 21.1 14.5 7.5 8.0 5.3 7.5 13.9 18.9 21.2 17.4 11.5 5.8 6.1 4.5 8.0 14.7 19.5 22.2 17.8 12.3 6.2 6.5 4.7 7.8 14.3 19.4 22.1 17.8 11.7 6.1 6.4 4.4 7.8 14.4 19.8 22.7 18.1 11.7 6.0 6.3 4.4 7.8 14.5 19.3 22.1 17.6 12.1 6.0 6.3 4.3 7.5 14.1 19.0 20.6 17.9 11.6 5.8 6.0 4.5 7.2 13.2 18.1 20.1 16.8 10.8 5.7 5.8 4.5 7.5 13.6 18.4 20.7 16.7 11.2 5.8 6.1 4.5 7.5 13.9 18.4 21.2 16.7 11.7 5.7 6.0 4.5 7.4 13.9 19.0 20.9 17.7 11.4 5.6 5.9 4.5 7.3 13.5 18.7 20.2 17.8 11.0 5.7 5.9 4.7 7.1 13.2 17.8 20.0 16.8 10.9 5.5 5.8 4.4 7.2 13.5 18.8 21.0 17.7 10.9 5.5 5.8 4.1 7.4 13.6 18.9 21.2 17.4 10.9 5.8 6.1 4.2 Men, 16 years and over................................. 16 to 24 years............................................ 16 to 19 years ...................................... 16 to 17 years................................... 18 to 19 years................................... 20 to 24 years ...................................... 25 years and over ...................................... 25 to 54 years.................................... 55 years and over .............................. 9.9 18.4 23.3 25.2 22.2 15.9 7.8 8.2 5.6 7.4 14.4 19.6 21.9 18.3 11.9 5.7 5.9 4.6 8.1 15.4 20.5 22.5 19.4 12.9 6.2 6.5 4.9 7.8 14.7 19.9 22.2 18.3 12.2 6.1 6.4 4.6 7.7 14.7 20.0 23.0 18.2 12.0 5.9 6.1 4.7 7.7 14.9 19.7 23.3 17.7 12.6 5.9 6.2 4.5 7.4 14.3 19.5 21.7 18.1 11.7 5.7 5.9 4.6 7.2 13.9 18.9 22.4 17.0 11.5 5.5 5.7 4.5 7.4 14.5 20.4 22.6 18.5 11.6 5.6 5.8 4.6 7.2 14.3 18.8 22.2 16.6 12.1 5.5 5.7 4.6 7.2 14.6 19.7 21.0 18.7 12.2 5.5 5.6 4.8 7.1 13.8 19.8 21.3 18.9 10.9 5.4 5.6 4.7 7.0 13.7 18.9 20.3 18.3 11.2 5.4 5.6 4.7 7.1 14.1 19.4 19.8 19.3 11.5 5.4 5.6 4.4 7.2 13.8 19.1 21.2 18.0 11.2 5.5 5.8 4.3 Women, 16 years and over........................... 16 to 24 years............................................ 16 to 19 years ...................................... 16 to 17 years................................... 18 to 19 years.................................... 20 to 24 years ...................................... 25 years and over ...................................... 25 to 54 years.................................... 55 years and over .............................. 9.2 15.8 21.3 23.7 19.9 12.9 7.2 7.7 4.7 7.6 13.3 18.0 20.4 16.6 10.9 6.0 6.3 4.2 8.0 14.0 18.4 22.0 16.0 11.6 6.2 6.5 4.5 7.9 13.8 18.9 22.1 17.2 11.1 6.1 6.5 4.1 7.9 14.1 19.6 22.3 17.9 11.2 6.1 6.5 4.0 7.8 14.0 18.8 20.8 17.6 11.4 6.0 6.4 4.0 7.7 13.9 18.4 19.4 17.7 11.5 5.9 6.2 4.3 7.3 12.5 17.3 17.6 16.5 10.0 5.9 6.0 4.5 7.5 12.7 16.4 18.7 14.7 10.8 6.0 6.4 4.2 7.8 13.5 18.1 20.3 16.7 11.1 6.1 6.5 4.3 7.5 13.2 18.3 20.9 16.6 10.5 5.9 6.2 4.0 7.7 13.2 17.4 19.0 16.5 11.1 6.0 6.2 4.8 7.3 12.6 16.6 19.7 15.1 10.7 5.7 6.1 3.9 7.2 12.8 18.1 22.3 16.0 10.2 5.6 6.0 3.7 7.7 13.3 18.6 21.2 16.7 10.5 6.1 6.4 4.2 7. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] Annual average 1984 Reason lor unemployment Job losers ............................................................ On layoff ....................................................... Other job losers ............................................ Job leavers............................................................ Reentrants............................................................ New entrants......................................................... 1985 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. 6,258 1,780 4,478 830 2,412 1,216 4,421 1,171 3,250 823 2,184 1,110 4,829 1,257 3,572 810 2,199 1,185 4,739 1,271 3,468 786 2,171 1,102 4,622 1,248 3,374 777 2,208 1,200 4,531 1,117 3,414 792 2,301 1,197 4,373 1,187 3,186 812 2,184 1,170 4,271 1,162 3,109 809 1,989 1,134 4,475 1,165 3,310 850 2,111 1,092 4,227 1,146 3,081 833 2,294 1,088 4,188 1,110 3,078 841 2,254 1,057 4,261 1,151 3,110 829 2,150 1,060 4,141 1,068 3,073 869 2,161 1,024 4,176 1,070 3,106 858 2,218 1,011 4,313 1,229 3,084 884 2,244 1,049 100.0 58.4 16.6 41.8 7.7 22.5 11.3 100.0 51.8 13.7 38.1 9.6 25.6 13.0 100.0 53.5 13.9 39.6 9.0 24.4 13.1 100.0 53.9 14.4 39.4 8.9 24.7 12.5 100.0 52.5 14.2 38.3 8.8 25.1 13.6 100.0 51.4 12.7 38.7 9.0 26.1 13.6 100.0 51.2 13.9 37.3 9.5 25.6 13.7 100.0 52.1 14.2 37.9 9.9 24.2 13.8 100.0 52.5 13.7 38.8 10.0 24.8 12.8 100.0 50.1 13.6 36.5 9.9 27.2 12.9 100.0 50.2 13.3 36.9 10.1 27.0 12.7 100.0 51.3 13.9 37.5 10.0 25.9 12.8 100.0 50.5 13.0 37.5 10.6 26.4 12.5 100.0 50.5 12.9 37.6 10.4 26.8 12.2 100.0 50.8 14.5 36.3 10.4 26.4 12.4 5.6 .7 2.2 1.1 3.9 .7 1.9 1.0 4.3 .7 2.0 1.1 4.2 .7 1.9 1.0 4.1 .7 2.0 1.1 4.0 .7 2.0 1.1 3.8 .7 1.9 1.0 3.8 .7 1.8 1.0 3.9 .7 1.9 1.0 3.7 .7 2.0 1.0 3.7 .7 2.0 .9 3.7 .7 1.9 .9 3.6 .8 1.9 .9 3.6 .7 1.9 9 3.8 .8 2.0 .9 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION Total unemployed................................................. Job losers ............................................................ On ayoff ....................................................... Other job losers ............................................ Job leavers............................................................ Reentrants............................................................ New entrants......................................................... PERCENT OF CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE Job losers ............................................................ Job leavers............................................................ Reentrants............................................................ New entrants.......................................................... 8. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] Annual average 1984 W eeks ol unemployment Less than 5 weeks................................................. 5 to 14 weeks...................................................... 15 weeks and over .............................................. 15 to 26 weeks.............................................. 27 weeks and over ......................................... Mean duration in weeks......................................... Median duration in weeks...................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1985 1983 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. 3,570 2,937 4,210 1,652 2,559 20.0 10.1 3,350 2,451 2,737 1,104 1,634 18.2 7.9 3,298 2,529 3,201 1,194 2,007 19.9 8.9 3,359 2,482 3,002 1,172 1,830 19.0 8.4 3,378 2,514 2,894 1,122 1,772 18.9 8.4 3,407 2,485 2,842 1,102 1,740 18.7 8.1 3,275 2,440 2,833 1,173 1,660 18.5 8.3 3,229 2,303 2,630 1,012 1,618 18.1 7.5 3,409 2,449 2,672 1,088 1,584 18.0 7.6 3,513 2,406 2,621 1,116 1,505 17.6 7.6 3,313 2,533 2,605 1,106 1,499 17.3 7.6 3,395 2,406 2,527 1,092 1,435 16.7 7.3 3,352 2,324 2,428 990 1,438 17.4 7.3 3,282 2,516 2,374 972 1,402 17.3 7.4 3,662 2,552 2,243 941 1,302 15.3 6.7 63 EMPLOYMENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA FROM ESTABLISHMENT SURVEYS E mployment , hours , and earnings data in this section are com piled from payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by over 200,000 establishments representing all industries except agriculture. In most industries, the sampling probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An establishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for example, or warehouse.) Selfemployed persons and others not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the survey because they are excluded from establishment records. This largely accounts for the difference in employment figures between the household and establishment sur veys. Definitions E m p lo y ed p erso n s are all persons who received pay (including holiday and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 percent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establishment which reports them. P r o d u c tio n w o rk ers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker su pervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with produc tion operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 12-16 include production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construc tion; and nonsupervisory workers in transportation and public utilities; in wholesale and retail trade; in finance, insurance, and real estate; and in services industries. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private nonagricultural payrolls. E a r n in g s are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers re ceive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special payments. R ea l ea rn in g s are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). The H o u rly E a r n in g s In d ex is calculated from average hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects o f two types of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments: fluctuations in overtime premiums 64 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available) and the effects o f changes and seasonal factors in the proportion o f workers in high-wage and low-wage industries. H o u rs represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsuper visory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard or scheduled hours. O v ertim e h o u rs represent the portion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess o f regular hours and for which overtime premiums were paid. T h e D iffu sion In d e x , introduced in table 17 of the May 1983 issue, represents the percent of 185 nonagricultural industries in which employ ment was rising over the indicated period. One-half of the industries with unchanged employment are counted as rising. In line with Bureau practice, data for the 3-, 6-, and 9-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while that for the 12-month span is unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measuring the dispersion of economic gains or losses and is also an eco nomic indicator. Notes on the data Establishment data collected by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics are pe riodically adjusted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called “ benchmarks” ). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release o f May 1984 data, published in the July 1984 issue of the R e v ie w . Con sequently, data published in the R e v ie w prior to that issue are not necessarily comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to April 1982; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January 1979. Unadjusted data from April 1983 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1980 forward are subject to revision in future bench marks. Earlier comparable unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a S u p p le m e n t to E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s (unadjusted data from April 1977 through February 1984 and seasonally adjusted data from January 1974 through February 1984) and in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s , U n ite d S ta te s , 1 9 0 9 - 7 8 , BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods). A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “ Com paring employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 . See also B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982). 9. Employment, by industry, selected years, 1950-83 [Nonagricultural payroll data, In thousands] Goods-producing Year Total Private sector Total Mining Service-producing Construc tion Manufac turing Total Transpor tation and public utilities W hole sale trade Retail trade Finance, insurance, and real estate Government Services Total Federal State Local 1950 .............................. 1955 .............................. I9602 ........................... 1964 .............................. 1965 .............................. 45,197 50,641 54,189 58,283 60,765 39,170 43,727 45,836 48,686 50,689 18,506 20,513 20,434 21,005 21,926 901 792 712 634 632 2,364 2,839 2,926 3,097 3,232 15,241 16,882 16,796 17,274 18,062 26,691 30,128 33,755 37,278 38,839 4.034 4,141 4,004 3,951 4.036 2,635 2,926 3,143 3,337 3,466 6,751 7,610 8,248 8,823 9,250 1,888 2,298 2,629 2,911 2,977 5,357 6,240 7,378 8,660 9,036 6,026 6,914 8,353 9,596 10,074 1,928 2,187 2,270 2,348 2,378 (1) 1,168 1,536 1,856 1,996 (1) 3,558 4,547 5,392 5,700 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 .............................. .............................. .............................. .............................. .............................. 63,901 65,803 67,897 70,384 70,880 53,116 54,413 56,058 58,189 58,325 23,158 23,308 23,737 24,361 23,578 627 613 606 619 623 3,317 3,248 3,350 3,575 3,588 19,214 19,447 19,781 20,167 19,367 40,743 42,495 44,160 46,023 47,302 4,158 4,268 4,318 4,442 4,515 3,597 3,689 3,779 3,907 3,993 9,648 9,917 10,320 10,798 11,047 3,058 3,185 3,337 3,512 3,645 9,498 10,045 10,567 11,169 11,548 10,784 11,391 11,839 12,195 12,554 2,564 2,719 2,737 2,758 2,731 2,141 2,302 2,442 2,533 2,664 6,080 6,371 6,660 6,904 7,158 19 71.............................. 1972 .............................. 1973 .............................. 1974 .............................. 1975 .............................. 71,214 73,675 76,790 78,265 76,945 58,331 60,341 63,058 64,095 62,259 22,935 23,668 24,693 24,794 22,600 609 628 642 697 752 3,704 3,889 4,097 4,020 3,525 18,623 19,151 20,154 20,077 18,323 48,278 50,007 51,897 53,471 54,345 4,476 4,541 4,656 4,725 4,542 4,001 4,113 4,277 4,433 4,415 11,351 11,836 12,329 12,554 12,645 3,772 3,908 4,046 4,148 4,165 11,797 12,276 12,857 13,441 13,892 12,881 13,334 13,732 14,170 14,686 2,696 2,684 2,663 2,724 2,748 2,747 2,859 2,923 3,039 3,179 7,437 7,790 8,146 8,407 8,758 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 .............................. .............................. .............................. .............................. .............................. 79,382 82,471 86,697 89,823 90,406 64,511 67,344 71,026 73,876 74,166 23,352 24,346 25,585 26,461 25,658 779 813 851 958 1,027 3,576 3,851 4,229 4,463 4,346 18,997 19,682 20,505 21,040 20,285 56,030 58,125 61,113 63,363 64,748 4,582 4,713 4,923 5,136 5,146 4,546 4,708 4,969 5,204 5,275 13,209 13,808 14,573 14,989 15,035 4,271 4,467 4,724 4,975 5,160 14,551 15,303 16,252 17,112 17,890 14,871 15,127 15,672 15,947 16,241 2,733 2,727 2,753 2,773 2,866 3,273 3,377 3,474 3,541 3,610 8,865 9,023 9,446 9,633 9,765 1981.............................. 1982 .............................. 1983 .............................. 91,156 89,566 90,138 75,126 73,729 74,288 25,497 23,813 23,394 1,139 1,128 957 4,188 3,905 3,940 20,170 18,781 18,497 65,659 65,753 66,744 5,165 5,082 4,958 5,358 5,278 5,259 15,189 15,179 15,545 5,298 5,341 5,467 18,619 19,036 19,665 16,031 15,837 15,851 2,772 2,739 2,752 3,640 3,640 3,660 9,619 9,458 9,439 1Not available. 2Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. 10. NOTE: See "Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. E m p lo y m e n t, b y S ta te [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands ] State December 1983 November 1984 December 1984P State December 1983 November 1984 December 1984P Alabama.................................................... Alaska ....................................................... Arizona .................................................... Arkansas ................................................. California ................................................. 1,338.8 206.2 1,115.5 760.4 10,183.4 1,356.6 218.0 1,189.4 783.2 10,530.2 1,351.3 213.3 1,198.7 782.4 10,599.4 Montana.................................................... Nebraska ................................................. Nevada .................................................... New Hampshire......................................... New Jersey............................................... 273.3 617.4 416.6 419.4 3,216.4 275.8 642.0 426.3 440.9 3,315.4 274.8 639.5 424.3 441.2 3,324.2 Colorado ................................................. Connecticut............................................... Delaware ................................................. District of Columbia ................................. Florida....................................................... 1,351.8 1,484.6 270.8 598.5 4,056.4 1,387.6 1,515.5 278.7 602.6 4,239.8 1,394.6 1,528.2 278.5 606.1 4,266.8 New Mexico.............................................. New Y ork................................................. North Carolina ......................................... North Dakota............................................ Ohio......................................................... 485 3 7,440.7 2,475.8 252.3 4,176.1 504.0 7,571.4 2,526.5 254.7 4,244.3 506.5 7,582.1 2,524.5 252.2 4,244.9 Georgia .................................................... Hawa ....................................................... Idaho ....................................................... Illinois....................................................... Ind ana .................................................... 2,341.3 406.1 323.8 4,541.6 2.037.7 2,484.8 406.9 330.2 4,631.2 2,093.1 2,502.2 409.3 329.4 4,579.1 2,088.2 Oklahoma................................................. Oregon .................................................... Pennsylvania ............................................ Rhode Island ............................................ South Carolina ......................................... 1,181.0 976.4 4,602.5 400.5 1,214.2 1,187.8 1,008.8 4,679.5 409.6 1,239.2 1,191.0 1,004.1 4,657.9 (1) 1,242.9 Iowa.......................................................... Kansas .................................................... Kentucky ................................................. Louisiana ................................................. M aine....................................................... 1,036.9 928.6 1,186.4 1,580.7 424.6 1,046.6 955.6 1,215.3 1,581.1 437.0 1,040.0 952.7 1,217.1 1,582.7 435.4 South Dakota............................................ Tennessee ................................................. Texas ....................................................... Utah......................................................... Vermont.................................................... 234.6 1,766.6 6,281.9 586.7 209.1 241.8 1,825.6 6,412.4 616.7 212.3 238.3 1,833.7 6,444.7 618.7 213.8 Maryland ................................................. Massachusetts ......................................... Michigan ................................................. Minnesota................................................. Mississippi ............................................... Missouri.................................................... 1,733.4 2,741.6 3,273.9 1,757.1 805.1 1,940.9 1,775.1 2,778.1 3,350.3 1,876.3 816.0 1,977.8 1,785.7 2,779.1 3,355.9 1,866.1 818.8 1,978.4 Virginia .................................................... Washington.............................................. West Virginia............................................ Wisconsin................................................. Wyoming ................................................. 2,251.5 1,601.4 591.9 1,889.9 202.4 2,326.4 1,667.4 594.0 1,955.2 200.8 2,337.0 1,661.6 590.2 1,944.6 197.4 Virgin Islands............................................ 35.4 34.3 34.6 1 Data not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis p = preliminary. 65 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 11. Employment, by industry, seasonally adjusted [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] Annual average 1984 1985 Industry division and group Mar. Apr. May June 92,846 93,058 76,971 77,185 93,449 93,768 94,135 94,350 77,546 77,864 78,241 78,422 24,383 24,577 24,595 24,760 24,851 24,974 25,059 957 600 975 608 978 607 978 607 984 612 995 619 1,002 623 3,905 991 3,940 1,015 4,154 1,100 4,226 1,111 4,151 1,099 4,246 1,110 4,286 1,126 18,781 12,742 18,497 12,581 19,254 13,234 19,373 13,326 19,466 13,388 19,530 13,443 Production workers ...................................... 11,039 7,311 10,774 7,151 11,343 7,643 11,440 7,718 11,513 7,769 Lumber and wood products ........................... Furniture and fixtures...................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal industries ................................. Blast furnaces and basic steel products . . . . Fabricated metal products................................. 598 432 577 922 396 1,427 658 447 573 838 343 1,374 702 475 595 871 347 1,440 706 480 604 877 348 1,447 Machinery, except electrical ........................... Electrical and electronic equipment................... Transportation equipment................................. Motor vehicles and equipment ...................... Instruments and related products ................... Miscellaneous manufacturing........................... 2,244 2,008 1,735 699 716 382 2,038 2,024 1,756 758 695 371 2,137 2,152 1,876 858 711 384 Production workers ...................................... 7,741 5,431 7,724 5,430 Food and kindred products.............................. Tobacco manufactures .................................... Textile mill products......................................... Apparel and other textile products................... Paper and allied products................................. 1,636 69 749 1,161 662 Printing and publishing.................................... Chemicals and allied products ......................... Petroleum and coal products........................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products . . Leather and leather products........................... TOTAL ........................................................................ PRIVATE SECTOR GOODS-PRODUCING M ining ................................................................................... Oil and gas extraction.................................... Construction ........................................................................ General building contractors........................... M a n u fa c tu r in g ..................................................................... Production workers ...................................... Durable goods ................................................................. Nondurable goods .......................................................... SERVICE-PRODUCING Transportation and public u t i l i t i e s ............................. Transportation................................................. Communication and public utilities................... W holesale t r a d e ................................................................. Durable goods................................................. Nondurable goods............................................ Retail trade ........................................................................ General merchandise stores ........................... Food stores .................................................... Automotive dealers and service stations........... Eating and drinking places .............................. Finance, insurance, and real e s t a t e ......................... Finance............................................................ Insurance ....................................................... Real estate....................................................... Services ................................................................................ Business services............................................ Health services .............................................. Government ........................................................................ Federal............................................................ State ............................................................... Loca ............................................................... p = preliminary. 66 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1982 1983 Jan. Feb. 89,566 90,138 92,391 73,729 74,288 76,533 23,813 23,394 1,128 708 July Aug. Sept. Oct. 94,523 94,807 78,566 78,698 25,098 1,007 629 4,343 1,135 19,570 13,465 11,551 7,799 712 483 606 877 347 1,456 2,151 2,175 1,898 865 715 387 7,911 5,591 1,622 69 744 1,164 662 1,272 1,075 201 697 219 Nov. Dec.P Jan.P 95,154 95,494 95,661 96,009 79,054 79,371 79,616 79,949 25,010 25,080 25,123 25,265 25,347 1,017 636 1,020 642 1,012 643 1,009 648 1,003 646 992 637 4,356 1,133 4,356 1,132 4,374 1,140 4,382 1,140 4,396 1,146 4,452 1,157 4,522 1,192 19,629 13,492 19,696 13,541 19,725 13,558 19,616 13,448 19,686 13,497 19,718 13,505 19,810 13,577 19,833 13,586 11,598 7,826 11,652 7,860 11,702 7,899 11,758 7,945 11,696 7,876 11,752 7,915 11,776 7,925 11,843 7,974 11,861 7,977 714 482 604 879 345 1,459 711 482 605 887 347 1,469 712 485 605 884 345 1,479 708 485 606 880 342 1,490 706 484 603 879 334 1,491 703 481 603 865 324 1,485 710 487 606 866 320 1,495 713 492 606 865 320 1,498 717 495 613 860 319 1,503 720 498 613 853 316 1,502 2,166 2,202 1,905 863 718 388 2,189 2,212 1,905 857 719 388 2,203 2,228 1,906 848 722 385 2,226 2,237 1,917 855 723 384 2,242 2,252 1,926 858 727 386 2,252 2,267 1,961 894 726 389 2,243 2,263 1,939 864 726 388 2,255 2,269 1,945 865 729 390 2,251 2,274 1,957 877 731 389 2,254 2,282 1,994 906 733 392 2,252 2,293 2,011 921 729 390 7,933 5,608 7,953 5,619 7,979 5,644 7,972 5,639 7,977 5,632 7,994 5,642 7,967 5,613 7,920 5,572 7,934 5,582 7,942 5,580 7,967 5,603 7,972 5,609 1,638 66 758 1,207 676 1,637 65 767 1,213 680 1,638 66 769 1,218 680 1,648 67 766 1,226 680 1,643 67 762 1,217 681 1,644 67 759 1,209 685 1,655 66 755 1,206 687 1,642 65 751 1,200 686 1,630 69 744 1,181 680 1,640 69 735 1,178 684 1,644 67 731 1,178 683 1,658 69 728 1,186 684 1,662 71 727 1,181 683 1,296 1,047 195 718 208 1,328 1,053 191 774 210 1,333 1,054 190 784 210 1,339 1,054 190 790 209 1,348 1,057 189 790 208 1,356 1,057 188 795 206 1,362 1,062 188 797 204 1,368 1,064 187 801 205 1,371 1,067 187 800 198 1,375 1,063 186 798 194 1,380 1,065 185 805 193 1,386 1,066 185 810 192 1,385 1,069 184 813 191 1,393 1,070 185 814 186 65,753 66,744 68,008 68,269 68,463 68,689 68,917 69,161 69,291 69,425 69,797 70,074 70,371 70,396 70,662 5,082 2,789 2,293 4,958 2,739 2,219 5,095 2,816 2,279 5,105 2,828 2,276 5,112 2,839 2,273 5,129 2,862 2,267 5,144 2,871 2,273 5,163 2,883 2,280 5,175 2,896 2,279 5,202 2,924 2,278 5,213 2,937 2,276 5,225 2,951 2,274 5,226 2,953 2,273 5,238 2,964 2,274 5,248 2,962 2,286 5,278 11,039 7,741 5,259 10,774 7,724 5,406 11,343 7,911 5,438 11,440 7,933 5,457 11,513 7,953 5,473 11,551 7,979 5,492 11,598 7,972 5,502 11,652 7,977 5,528 11,702 7,994 5,544 11,758 7,967 5,588 11,696 7,920 5,612 11,752 7,934 5,623 11,776 7,942 5,645 11,843 7,967 5,677 11,861 7,972 15,179 2,184 2,478 1,632 4,831 15,545 2,161 2,560 1,667 5,007 15,914 2,210 2,618 1,725 5,111 15,980 2,211 2,626 1,740 5,121 16,030 2,230 2,626 1,748 5,136 16,095 2,251 2,635 1,743 5,154 16,166 2,273 2,630 1,751 5,183 16,245 2,295 2,641 1,751 5,199 16,283 2,301 2,648 1,762 5,211 16,295 2,303 2,640 1,758 5,238 16,342 2,318 2,648 1,755 5,255 16,468 2,334 2,677 1,763 5,280 16,644 2,391 2,696 1,772 5,303 16,635 2,351 2,707 1,779 5,325 16,765 2,373 2,720 1,787 5,359 5,341 2,646 1,714 981 5,467 2,740 1,721 1,005 5,573 2,797 1,737 1,039 5,593 2,812 1,741 1,040 5,613 2,831 1,742 1,041 5,640 2,851 1,742 1,047 5,662 2,863 1,746 1,053 5,676 2,854 1,752 1,066 5,676 2,854 1,759 1,063 5,679 2,850 1,763 1,066 5,684 2,856 1,766 1,062 5,705 2,865 1,774 1,066 5,725 2,874 1,778 1,073 5,748 2,886 1,784 1,078 5,761 2,897 1,786 1,078 19,036 3,286 5,812 19,665 3,539 5,973 20,162 3,798 6,030 20,278 ‘ 20,378 3,845 3,875 6,040 6,052 20,449 3,912 6,062 20,549 3,979 6,073 20,681 4,014 6,064 20,701 4,035 6,079 20,748 4,069 6,034 20,861 4,085 6,085 20,964 4,110 6,087 21,030 4,142 6,104 21,085 4,152 6,112 21,151 4,190 6,148 15,837 2,739 3,640 9,458 15,851 2,752 3,660 9,439 15,858 2,760 3,670 9,428 15,875 2,763 3,682 9,430 15,903 2,771 3,693 9,439 15,904 2,767 3,699 9,438 15,894 2,777 3,699 9,418 15,928 2,779 3,697 9,452 15,957 2,785 3,714 9,458 16,109 2,804 3,725 9,580 16,100 2,790 3,719 9,591 16,123 2,801 3,724 9,598 16,045 2,794 3,706 9,545 16,060 2,799 3,715 9,546 15,873 2,770 3,686 9,417 NOTE: See “Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 12. Average hours and earnings, by industry 1968-83 [Production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls] Year Average weekly hours Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average w eekly hours Average hourly earnings Average w eekly earnings Average w eekly hours Mining Private sector Average hourly earnings Average w eekly eam ings Construction 1968 ............................................................... 1969 ............................................................... 1970 ............................................................... 37.8 37.7 37.1 $2.85 3.04 3.23 $107.73 114.61 119.83 42.6 43.0 42.7 $3.35 3.60 3.85 $142.71 154.80 164.40 37.3 37.9 37.3 $4.41 4.79 5.24 $164.49 181.54 195.45 19 71............................................................... 1972 ............................................................... 1973 ............................................................... 1974 ............................................................... 1975 ............................................................... 36.9 37.0 36.9 36.5 36.1 3.45 3.70 3.94 4.24 4.53 127.31 136.90 145.39 154.76 163.53 42.4 42.6 42.4 41.9 41.9 4.06 4.44 4.75 5.23 5.95 172.14 189.14 201.40 219.14 249.31 37.2 36.5 36.8 36.6 36.4 5.69 6.06 6.41 6.81 7.31 211.67 221.19 235.89 249.25 266.08 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... 36.1 36.0 35.8 35.7 35.3 4.86 5.25 5.69 6.16 6.66 175.45 189.00 203.70 219.91 235.10 42.4 43.4 43.4 43.0 43.3 6.46 6.94 7.67 8.49 9.17 273.90 301.20 332.88 365.07 397.06 36.8 36.5 36.8 37.0 37.0 7.71 8.10 8.66 9.27 9.94 283.73 295.65 318.69 342.99 367.78 19 81............................................................... 1982 ............................................................... 1983 ............................................................... 35.2 34.8 35.0 7.25 7.68 8.02 255.20 267.26 280.70 43.7 42.7 42.5 10.04 10.77 11.27 438.75 459.88 478.98 36.9 36.7 37.2 10.82 11.63 11.92 399.26 426.82 443.42 Transportation and public utilities Manufacturing W holesale trade 1968 ............................................................... 1969 ............................................................... 1970 ............................................................... 40.7 40.6 39.8 $3.01 3.19 3.35 $122.51 129.51 133.33 40.6 40.7 40.5 $3.42 3.63 3.85 $138.85 147.74 155.93 40.1 40.2 39.9 $3.05 3.23 3.44 $122.31 129.85 137.26 1971............................................................... 1972 ............................................................... 1973 ............................................................... 1974 ............................................................... 1975 ............................................................... 39.9 40.5 40.7 40.0 39.5 3.57 3.82 4.09 4.42 4.83 142.44 154.71 166.46 176.80 190.79 40.1 40.4 40.5 40.2 39.7 4.21 4.65 5.02 5.41 5.88 168.82 187.86 203.31 217.48 233.44 39.5 39.4 39.3 38.8 38.7 3.65 3.85 4.08 4.39 4.73 129.85 144.18 151.69 160.34 183.05 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... 40.1 40.3 40.4 40.2 39.7 5.22 5.68 6.17 6.70 7.27 209.32 228.90 249.27 269.34 288.62 39.8 39.9 40.0 39.9 39.6 6.45 6.99 7.57 8.16 8.87 256.71 278.90 302.80 325.58 351.25 38.7 38.8 38.8 38.8 38.5 5.03 5.39 5.88 6.39 6.96 194.66 209.13 228.14 247.93 267.96 19 81............................................................... 1982 ............................................................... 1983 ............................................................... 39.8 38.9 40.1 7.99 8.49 8.83 318.00 330.26 354.08 39.4 39.0 39.0 9.70 10.32 10.80 382.18 402.48 421.20 38.5 38.3 38.5 7.56 8.09 8.54 291.06 309.85 328.79 Finance, insurance, and real estate Retail trade Services 1968 ............................................................... 1969 ............................................................... 1970 ............................................................... 34.7 34.2 33.8 $2.16 2.30 2 44 $74.95 78.66 82.47 37.0 37.1 36.7 $2.75 2.93 3.07 $101.75 108.70 112.67 34.7 34.7 34.4 $2.42 2.61 2.81 $83 97 90.57 96.66 1971............................................................... 1972 ............................................................... 1973 ............................................................... 1974 ............................................................... 1975 ............................................................... 33.7 33.4 33.1 32.7 32.4 2.60 2.75 2.91 3.14 3.36 87.62 91.85 96.32 102.68 108.86 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.5 36.5 3.22 3.36 3.53 3.77 4.06 117.85 122.98 129.20 137.61 148.19 33.9 33.9 33.8 33.6 33.5 3.04 3.27 3.47 3.75 4.02 103.06 110.85 117.29 126.00 134.67 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... 32.1 31.6 31.0 30.6 30.2 3.57 3.85 4.20 4.53 4.88 114.60 121.66 130.20 138.62 147.38 36.4 36.4 36.4 36.2 36.2 4.27 4.54 4 89 5.27 5.79 155.43 165.26 178.00 190.77 209.60 33.3 33.0 32.8 32.7 32.6 4.31 4.65 4.99 5.36 5.85 143.52 153.45 163.67 175.27 190.71 1981............................................................... 1982 ............................................................... 1983 ............................................................... 30.1 29.9 29.8 5.25 5.48 5.74 158.03 163.85 171.05 36.3 36.2 36.2 6.31 6.78 7.29 229.05 245.44 263.90 32.6 32.6 32.7 6.41 6.92 7.30 208.97 225.59 238.71 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 67 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 13. Average weekly hours, by industry, seasonally adjusted [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average 1984 1985 Industry 1982 1983 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. D ec.F J an .F ...................................................... 34.8 35.0 35.4 35.3 35.3 35.4 35.3 35.3 35.2 35.2 35.4 35.1 35.2 35.3 35.2 M A N U FA C TU R IN G ................................................................. 38.9 2.3 40.1 3.0 40.9 3.5 40.9 3.5 40.7 3.5 41.1 3.7 40.6 3.3 40.6 3.3 40.5 3.3 40.5 3.3 40.6 3.3 40.4 3.3 40.5 3.4 40.7 3.4 40.6 3.3 Overtime hours...................................... 39.3 2.2 40.7 3.0 41.6 3.7 41.7 3.8 41.4 3.7 41.8 4.0 41.3 3.5 41.2 3.5 41.2 3.5 41.2 3.4 41.5 3.5 41.3 3.5 41.2 3.6 41.4 3.6 41.4 3.6 Lumber and wood products........................... Furniture and fixtures .................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ................... Primary metal industries................................. Blast furnaces and basic steel products . . . . Fabricated metal products.............................. 38.0 37.2 40.1 38.6 37.9 39.2 40.1 39.4 41.5 40.5 39.5 40.6 40.6 40.0 42.1 41.9 41.0 41.6 40.4 39.9 42.5 42.0 41.3 41.8 40.1 39.6 41.9 41.8 41.2 41.3 40.4 39.7 42.3 42.2 41.0 41.8 39.6 39.7 42.1 42.1 41.6 41.4 39.4 39.1 41.8 41.7 41.1 41.3 39.3 39.8 41.9 41.5 39.9 41.3 39.4 39.1 41.7 41.0 39.6 41.1 40.2 39.9 42.0 41.3 40.0 41.5 39.7 39.6 41.8 41.3 40.1 40.3 39.5 39.8 41.8 41.5 40.8 41.1 40.2 39.6 41.8 41.2 39.8 41.5 40.1 40.3 41.7 41.0 39.4 41.2 Machinery, except electrical........................... Electrical and electronic equipment................ Transportation equipment.............................. Motor vehicles and equipment...................... Instruments and related products................... 39.7 39.3 40.5 40.5 39.8 40.5 40.5 42.1 43.3 40.4 41.8 41.2 43.2 44.8 41.3 41.9 41.2 43.1 44.3 41.2 41.9 41.0 42.9 44.4 41.1 42.3 41.3 43.5 44.8 41.4 41.9 41.0 42.4 42.9 40.7 42.0 40.8 42.3 43.1 41.3 41.8 40.8 42.2 42.4 41.3 42.0 40.9 42.4 43.3 41.1 42.0 41.2 42.8 43.9 41.5 41.9 40.9 42.4 43.3 41.2 41.7 41.0 42.4 43.4 41.5 41.9 40.9 43.0 44.4 41.9 41.8 40.9 43.2 44.6 40.8 Overtime hours...................................... 38.4 2.5 39.4 3.0 39.9 3.3 39.9 3.3 39.8 3.3 40.2 3.4 39.6 3.1 39.6 3.2 39.4 3.1 39.5 3.1 39.4 3.0 39.3 2.9 39.4 3.2 39.6 3.1 39.4 2.9 Food and kindred products ........................... Textile mill products...................................... Apparel and other textile products ................ Paper and allied products.............................. 39.4 37.5 34.7 41.8 39.5 40.5 36.2 42.6 39.7 40.6 36.6 43.2 39.7 40.8 36.9 43.2 39.8 40.6 36.7 43.0 40.1 41.2 37.4 43.2 39.7 40.0 36.5 43.1 39.8 40.0 36.4 42.9 39.5 39.8 35.8 43.3 39.7 39.4 36.0 43.1 39.6 39.2 35.9 43.1 39.6 38.7 35.9 43.0 39.7 39.0 36.0 43.2 40.0 39.3 36.3 43.1 39.8 39.2 36.2 43.0 Printing and publishing ................................. Chemicals and allied products........................ Petroleum and coal products......................... Leather and leather products ........................ 37.1 40.9 43.9 35.6 37.6 41.6 43.9 36.8 37.9 42.1 44.8 37.3 37.9 42.1 44.5 37.2 37.9 42.0 44.7 36.7 38.2 42.0 43.7 37.5 38.0 41.8 43.5 36.5 37.7 41.9 43.1 36.7 37.7 41.9 43.2 37.0 37.8 42.0 43.9 36.0 37.9 41.8 43.1 36.5 37.8 41.6 43.5 36.4 37.9 41.7 43.5 36.4 37.6 42.0 43.0 36.9 37.4 41.6 43.0 36.7 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 39.0 39.0 39.5 39.3 39.2 39.5 39.4 39.6 39.8 39.4 39.8 39.1 39.4 39.2 39.4 WHOLESALE TRADE 38.3 38.5 38.6 38.5 38.5 38.7 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.7 38.8 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.4 PRIVATE SECTOR Overtime hours...................................... Durable goods ................................................................. Nondurable goods .......................................................... RETAIL TRADE 29.9 29.8 30.1 30.0 30.1 30.0 30.1 30.2 29.9 29.9 30.0 29.8 29.9 30.0 29.9 SERVICES 32.6 32.7 32.8 32.7 32.8 32.8 32.7 32.7 32.7 32.6 32.8 32.7 32.7 32.8 32.7 p = preliminary. 68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 14. Average hourly earnings, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] 1984 Annual average Industry 1983 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. D e c.F J an.F Seasonally adjusted................................. $7.68 (1) $8.02 (1) $8.26 8.21 $8.24 8.23 $8.24 8.25 $8.29 8.31 $8.28 8.29 $8.29 8.33 $8.32 8.35 $8.30 8.34 $8.43 8.40 $8.40 8.38 $8.43 8.42 $8.46 8.47 $8.49 8.44 .................................................................................... 10.77 11.27 11.54 11.49 11.60 11.62 11.56 11.57 11.57 11.57 11.66 11.52 11.57 11.64 11.69 11.63 11.92 12.08 11.99 11.97 11.95 11.99 11.94 11.97 12.01 12.15 12.14 12.01 12.18 12.25 8.49 8.83 9 08 9.06 9.09 9.11 9.11 9.14 9.18 9.14 9.23 9.22 9.30 9.38 9.40 9.63 7.88 6.75 9.38 11.49 13.10 9.31 9.66 7.87 6.76 9.40 11.44 12.97 9.31 9.67 7.89 6.76 9.51 11.51 13.12 9.34 966 7.92 6.80 9.54 11.49 13 09 9.33 9.69 8.04 6.84 9.58 11.46 13.02 9.33 9.70 8.01 6.88 9.64 11.45 13.02 9.33 9.68 8.05 6.90 9.62 11.34 12.90 9.30 9.77 8.15 6.95 9.64 11.39 13.01 9.41 9.76 8.06 6.95 9.63 11.31 12.86 9.38 9.82 8.01 6.96 9.66 11.44 12.99 9.42 9.94 8.03 7.03 9.68 11.46 12.97 9.56 9.95 8.02 7.05 9.74 11.43 12.94 9.55 PRIVATE SECTOR MINING 1985 1982 ....................................................... CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURING Lumber and wood products................... Furniture and fixtures.............................. Stone, clay, and glass products.............. Primary metal industries......................... Blast furnaces and basic steel products Fabricated metal products...................... 9.04 7.43 6.31 8.87 11.33 13.35 8.77 9.38 7.79 6.62 9.27 11.34 12.89 9.11 9.64 7.88 6.76 9.42 11.38 12.76 9.31 Machinery, except electrical................... Electrical and electronic equipment . . . . Transportation equipment ...................... Motor vehicles and equipment.............. Instruments and related products........... Miscellaneous manufacturing ................ 9.26 8.21 11.11 11.62 8.06 6.42 9.55 8.65 11.66 12.12 8.46 6.80 9.85 8 88 12 06 12.53 8.68 7.00 9.87 8.86 12.00 12.41 8.66 6.97 9.90 8.88 12.12 12.62 8.71 6.97 9.91 8.89 12.06 12.56 8.73 6.97 9.90 8.89 12 04 12.51 8.71 6.99 9.93 8.91 12.14 12.67 8.78 6.98 9.96 8.95 12.13 12.61 8.83 7.02 9.92 9.00 12.13 12.59 8.85 6.97 10.01 9.08 12.23 12.69 8.92 7.01 10.01 9.09 12.29 12.81 8.89 7.02 10.06 9.15 12.42 12.96 8.91 7.03 10.15 9.26 12.61 13.22 8.99 7.12 10.09 9.33 12.60 13.22 9.01 7.15 Nondurable goods ...................................................... 7.74 7.92 9.79 5.83 5.20 9.32 8.08 8.20 10.35 6.18 5.37 9.94 8.27 8.41 10.77 6.39 5.50 10.23 8.24 8.37 11.13 6.40 5.46 10.22 8.27 8.39 11.29 6.41 5.48 10.25 8.29 8.43 11.43 6.43 5.49 10.29 8.30 8.43 11.55 6.42 5.48 10.34 8.33 8.44 11.92 6.43 5.50 10.42 8.41 8.41 11.67 6.43 5.51 10.56 8.37 8.36 10.75 6.46 5.53 10.50 8.44 8.37 10.31 6.49 5.61 10.55 8.44 8.33 10.35 6.49 5.59 10.56 8.52 8.46 11.76 6.55 5.59 10.67 8.54 8.48 10.88 6.57 5.65 10.68 8.56 8.48 11.00 6.58 5.69 10.67 8.74 9.96 12.46 9.11 10.59 13.29 9.26 10.91 13.47 9.30 10 90 13.43 9.29 10.95 13.44 9.29 10.97 13.44 9.31 11.02 13.32 9.30 11.03 13.33 9.36 11.12 13.27 9.42 11.13 13.32 9.51 11.23 13.54 9.48 11.32 13.52 9.54 11.35 13.67 9.55 11.35 13.59 9.54 11.37 13.72 7.64 5.33 7.99 5.54 8.17 5.68 8.16 5.67 8.20 5.68 8.25 5.68 8.20 5.68 8.23 5.67 8.30 5.70 8.28 5.67 8.31 5.72 8.31 5.71 8.39 5.76 8.41 5.79 8.45 5.81 10.32 10.80 11.08 11.01 11.02 11.07 11.03 11.07 11.18 11.17 11.27 11.22 11.29 11.33 11.33 8.09 8.54 8 82 8.79 8.79 8.89 8.86 8.90 8.97 8.95 9.05 8.99 9.06 9.16 9.14 5.87 5.84 5.89 5.88 5.94 5.89 5.94 7.60 7.57 7.76 7.67 7.71 7.80 7.81 7.69 7.74 7.82 7.84 Durable goods Food and kindred products ................... Tobacco manufactures........................... Textile mill products .............................. Apparel and other textile products........... Paper and allied products ...................... Printing and publishing........................... Chemicals and allied products................ Petroleum and coal products ................ Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products................................. Leather and leather products ................ TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES WHOLESALE TRADE .......................................................... RETAIL TRADE 5.48 5.74 5.89 5.89 5.89 5.90 5.88 5.88 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE 6.78 7.29 7.55 7.54 7.54 7.62 7.55 7.58 6.92 SERVICES 7.30 7.57 7.54 7.55 7.60 1Not available. p = preliminary. 15. 7.55 7.53 7.56 7.53 7.69 NOTE: See “Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. The Hourly Earnings Index, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls; 1977 = 100] Seasonally adjusted Not seasonally adjusted Industry PRIVATE SECTOR (In current dollars) Mining .................................................... Construction............................................ Manufacturing......................................... Transportation and public utilities............ Wholesale trade....................................... Retail trade............................................... Finance, insurance, and real estate........... Services ................................................. PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant dollars) Sept. 1984 Oct. 1984 Nov. 1984 Dec. 1984P Jan. 1985P Percent change from: Dec. 1984 to Jan. 1985 Nov. 1984 Dec. 1984F Jan. 1985P 159.2 162.2 163.2 163.5 2.7 158.4 161.6 161.3 162.0 163.0 162.7 -0 .2 171.0 146.6 160.8 161.0 163.3 153.2 164.2 161.4 176.0 146.5 164.5 164.3 167.6 154.7 167.2 165.1 176.7 148.0 165.5 165.0 169.4 154.1 169.1 166.6 176.7 148.5 166.2 165.1 168.8 154.2 168.9 166.8 3.3 1.3 3.3 2.6 3.4 .7 2.8 3.4 <1) 146.3 160.3 159.9 (1) 152.7 (1) 159.8 (1) 146.8 163.4 163.0 (1) 154.0 (1) 164.7 (1) 146.3 163.8 163.0 (1) 153.9 (1) 164.0 (1) 146.5 164.5 163.1 (1) 155.1 (1) 164.8 (1) 147.5 165.1 164.3 (1) 155.2 (1) 166.4 (1) 148.2 165.6 164.0 (1) 153.8 (1) 165.2 <1) .5 .3 -.2 (1) -.9 (1) -.7 95.4 94.4 94.9 (2) (2) 94.8 94.2 93.9 94.3 94.7 (2) (2) 1This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small relative to the trendcycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be separated with sufficient precision. 2Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Jan. 1984 Jan. 1984 Percent change from: Jan. 1984 to Jan. 1985 p = preliminary. NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 69 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 16. Average weekly earnings, by industry [Production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] 1984 Annual average 1985 Industry Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May 1982 1983 June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Current dollars.............................................. Seasonally adjusted................................... Constant (1977) dollars................................. $267.26 (1) 168.09 $280.70 (1) 171.37 M I N IN G ................................................................................... 459.88 478.98 499.68 492.92 496.48 499.66 499.39 505.61 497.51 503.30 513.04 497.66 503.30 514.49 496.83 CONSTRUCTION 426.82 443.42 438.50 443.63 439.30 448.13 458.02 460.88 462.04 462.39 467.78 461.32 449.17 457.97 444.68 330.26 207.71 354.08 216.17 368.65 221.01 368.74 220.67 369.96 221.40 372.60 222.45 369.87 219.77 372.91 221.05 369.95 218.39 369.26 215.94 375.66 218.41 373.41 217.10 378.51 220.32 386.46 224.69 377.88 (1) Lumber and wood products ........................... Furniture and fixtures...................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal industries ................................. Blast furnaces and basic steel products........... Fabricated metal products................................. 355.27 282.34 234.73 355.69 437.34 505.97 343.78 381.77 312.38 260.83 384.71 459.27 509.16 369.87 398.13 311.26 263.64 386.22 476.82 521.88 385.43 398.68 313.62 263.93 389.27 482.58 539.72 386.37 399.92 314.01 267.02 389.16 480.48 534.36 384.50 402.27 317.18 267.02 401.32 488.02 549.73 387.61 399.92 317.59 268.60 404.50 481.43 540.62 386.26 402.14 324.01 270.86 407.15 480.17 536.42 388.13 396.73 316.40 269.70 406.81 472.89 524.71 380.66 396.88 322.00 273.24 405.96 462.67 506.97 381.30 405.46 329.26 278.70 408.74 472.69 524.30 389.57 403.09 320.79 279.39 405.42 462.58 506.68 387.39 406.55 313.99 279.10 405.72 473.62 524.80 389.05 418.47 321.20 284.72 404.62 476.74 518.80 404.39 408.95 312.78 276.36 395.44 468.63 508.54 391.55 Machinery except electrical.............................. Electrical and electronic equipment................... Transportation equipment................................. Motor vehicles and equipment...................... Instruments and related products ................... Miscellaneous manufacturing........................... 367.62 322.65 449.96 470.61 320.79 246.53 386.78 350.33 490.89 524.80 341.78 265.88 411.73 364.97 517.37 555.08 356.75 272.30 413.55 364.15 514.80 544.80 356.79 276.01 415.80 364.08 521.16 560.33 358.85 276.01 417.21 364.49 523.40 563.94 358.80 275.32 413.82 363.60 514.11 546.69 354.50 274.71 417.06 365.31 519.59 557.48 362.61 273.62 411.35 361.58 508.25 537.19 361.15 273.08 411.68 366.30 504.61 532.56 362.85 272.53 420.42 374.10 517.33 548.21 371.07 277.60 417.42 371.78 521.10 554.67 365.38 278.69 422.52 376.98 530.33 562.46 371.55 279.09 435.44 386.14 553.58 593.58 381.18 283.38 421.76 380 66 540.54 584.32 365.81 278.14 297.22 312.05 370.06 218.63 180.44 389.58 318.35 323.90 387.09 250.29 194.39 423.44 326.67 331.35 410.34 257.52 198.55 440.91 326.30 327.27 405.13 259.84 200.38 438.44 327.49 329.73 416.60 258.96 201.12 437.68 329.94 332.99 451.49 260.42 202.03 442.47 328.68 333.83 457.38 257.44 200.02 443.59 331.53 337.60 482.76 259.77 202.40 449.10 331.35 333.04 437.63 252.70 198.36 456.19 331.45 335.24 421.40 256.46 200.74 451.50 335.07 336.47 408.28 255.71 201.96 457.87 332.54 331.53 412.97 253.11 201.80 455.14 337.39 338.40 471.58 257.42 201.80 462.01 341.60 342.59 424.32 259.52 205.10 467.78 334.70 334.96 390.50 255.96 203.13 456.68 324.25 407.36 546.99 342.54 440.54 583.43 347.25 458.22 594.03 349.68 457.80 584.21 353.02 458.81 585.98 353.02 460.74 590.02 351.92 460.64 580.75 349.68 463.26 579.86 351.94 463.70 579.90 357.02 464.12 584.75 362.33 471.66 598.47 358.34 470.91 590.82 363.47 475.57 597.38 365.77 482.38 584.37 352.98 471.86 581.73 302.54 189.75 329.19 203.87 343.14 208.46 342.72 208.66 341.94 205.05 347.33 210.16 341.94 209.59 344.84 213.76 341.96 212.61 342.79 206.39 344.87 208.21 344.03 207.27 349.02 210.82 353.22 214.81 349.83 209.74 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 402.48 421.20 434.34 429.39 429.78 435.05 432.38 440.59 447.20 443.45 449.67 439.82 445.96 447.54 443.00 WHOLESALE TRADE 309.85 328.79 338.69 335.78 336.66 342.27 342.00 344.43 348.04 347.26 351.14 347.91 350.62 356.32 349.15 Nov. Dec.P Jan.P PRIVATE SECTOR $289.10 $288.40 $288.40 $292.64 $291.46 $294.30 $296.19 $294.65 $299.27 $295.68 $295.89 $300.33 $295.45 290.63 290.52 291.23 294.17 292.64 294.05 293.92 293.57 297.36 294.14 296.38 298.99 297.09 173.32 172.59 172.59 174.71 173.18 174.45 174.85 172.31 173.99 171.91 172.23 174.61 <1) MANUFACTURING Current dollars............................................... Constant (1977) dollars................................. Durable goods Nondurable goods .......................................................... Food and kindred products.............................. Tobacco manufactures .................................... Textile mill products......................................... Apparel and other textile products................... Paper and allied products................................. Printing and publishing.................................... Chemicals and allied products ......................... Petroleum and coat products........................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products......................................... Leather and leather products........................... RETAIL TRADE 163.85 171.05 173.17 173.17 174.34 175.82 176.40 178 75 180.21 178.70 177.29 174.64 176.42 179.65 173.45 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE 245.44 263.90 275.58 274.46 273.70 278.13 274.07 275.15 278.92 275.55 284.02 279.96 280.64 286.26 283.50 SERVICES 225.59 238.71 246.78 246.13 245.80 248.52 246.13 247.74 250.24 248.49 252.23 250.69 252.32 256.50 254.80 1Not available. p = preliminary. NOTE: See “Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. 17. Indexes of diffusion: industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted [In percent] Tim e span Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Over 1-month span 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 1985 . . . . 54.3 71.1 P58.1 46.5 73.2 60.8 67.0 68.9 63.8 69.5 64.1 64.6 63.0 74.3 62.4 68.6 57.6 69.5 40.8 75.4 65.7 69.7 51.9 73.8 P63.5 Over 3-month span 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 46.8 82.2 57.3 80.5 64.1 76.5 75.1 71.1 75.7 68.4 77.8 68.9 74.1 63.5 81.6 58.1 80 8 58 6 78.9 53.5 79.5 P65.4 77.6 P61.6 Over 6-month span 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 50.8 81.9 63.0 82.7 69.2 79.7 75.1 75.4 80.0 69 2 82.4 63.2 84.1 62.4 82.4 62.7 84.6 P64.3 85 9 P61.6 86.8 83.8 Over 12-month span 1983 . . . . 1984 . . . . 49.5 86.5 54.3 81.9 61.9 78 9 71.1 76.8 77.3 74.3 79.5 P74.9 83.8 P72.7 88.1 86.8 87.3 85.4 87.3 NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment rising. (Half of the unchanged components 70 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis are counted as rising.) Data are centered within the spans. See the “Definitions” in this section. See “Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DATA N ational unemployment insurance data are compiled monthly persons in unemployment insurance programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiving compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The rate o f in su red u n em p lo y m en t expresses the number o f in sured unemployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a 12-month period. by the Employment and Training Administration of the U.S. De partment of Labor from monthly reports of unemployment insur ance activity prepared by State agencies. Railroad unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board. Definitions Average weekly seasonally adjusted insured unemployment data are computed by BLS’ Weekly Seasonal Adjustment program. This procedure incorporated the X - l l Variant of the Census Method II Seasonal Adjust ment program. Data for all p ro g ra m s represent an unduplicated count of insured un employment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation for ExServicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act. Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs for civilian employees, insured workers must report the completion of at least 1 week o f unemployment before they are defined as unemployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about 10 percent of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. In itia l cla im s are notices filed by An a p p lica tio n for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the beginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no application is required for subsequent periods in the same year. N u m b e r o f paym ents are payments made in 14-day registration periods. The av era g e am oun t o f b e n efit p a y m e n t is an average for all compensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or settlement of underpayments. However, to ta l b en efits paid have been adjusted. 18. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations [All items except average benefits amounts are in thousands] 1983 1984 Item Dec. All programs: Insured unemployment......................... State unemployment insurance program:1 Initial claims2 ...................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume)................................. Rate of insured unemployment.............. Weeks of unemployment compensated . . Average weekly benefit amount for total unemployment ................... Total benefits paid .............................. State unemployment insurance program:1 (Seasonally adjusted data) Initial claims2 ...................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume)................................. Rate of insured unemployment.............. Unemployment compensation for exservicemen:3 Initial claims1 ...................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume)................................. Weeks of unemployment compensated . . Total benefits paid .............................. Unemployment compensation for Federal civilian employees:4 Initial claims......................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume)................................. Weeks of unemployment compensated . . Total benefits paid .............................. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.P Dec.P 2,915 3,374 3,174 2,958 2,613 2,290 2,166 2,327 2,184 2,083 2,149 2,441 2,105 2,355 1,528 1,424 1,429 1,368 1,387 1,767 1,459 1,260 1,674 1,824 2,805 3.3 10,168 3,249 3.8 12,232 3,056 3.6 11,622 2,843 3.3 11,339 2,515 2.9 9,695 2,215 2.6 9,304 2,111 2.5 8,053 2,270 2.6 8,380 2,129 2.5 8,716 2,023 2.3 r7,209 . 2,072 2.4 7,862 2,355 2.7 8,446 $122.61 $123.60 $124.30 $124.67 $125.26 $123.69 $1,203,605 $1,457,983 $1,400,458 $1,369,536 $1,173,601 $1,109,268 $121.96 $948,381 $119.83 $120.24 $122.49 $974,135 $1,017,804 r$853,424 $123.85 $124.26 $939,653 $1,011,118 1,604 1,617 1,572 1,570 1,569 1,614 1,559 1,661 1,618 1,707 1,662 1,764 2,687 3.1 2,510 2.9 2,428 2.8 2,470 2.9 2,507 2.9 2,300 2.7 2,356 2.7 2,457 2.8 2,355 2.7 2,567 3.0 2,461 2.8 2,551 2.9 14 15 13 13 12 12 12 13 14 13 15 13 27 113 $14,815 27 112 $14,532 24 96 $12,540 22 89 $11,813 20 78 $10,349 18 79 $10,577 18 C71 $9,467 18 71 $9,573 19 79 $10,715 20 72 r$9,820 21 86 $11,712 22 85 $11,592 13 16 10 9 13 9 11 12 10 9 14 12 29 119 $13,888 32 133 $15,588 31 129 $15,003 28 122 $14,778 23 98 $11,844 20 88 $10,529 19 76 $8,994 20 80 $9,489 19 83 $9,776 19 69 $8,198 21 82 $9,832 23 91 $11,286 Railroad unemployment insurance: Applications......................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume)................................. Number of payments........................... Average amount of benefit payment . . . Total benefits paid .............................. 8 10 4 3 2 2 11 25 7 6 9 10 11 43 95 $213.71 $19,870 51 121 $210.73 $23,866 49 104 $209.56 $23,228 41 99 $208.96 $20,112 27 70 $196.32 $13,356 19 54 $188.45 $10,233 16 38 $187.37 $7,039 16 35 $189.06 $6,691 17 37 $197.85 $6,695 18 34 $196.15 $6,349 21 46 $195.20 $8,596 26 52 $198.85 29 61 $205.26 Employment service:5 New applications and renewals.............. Nonfarm placements ........................... 4,297 782 8,231 1,469 11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican sugarcane workers. Excludes transition claims under State programs. Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs. 4Excludes data or claims and payments made jointly with State programs. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 9,517 1,810 4,132 1,000 Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1-September 30). Data computed quarterly, p = preliminary r _ revjSe() c _ corrected NOTE: Data for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands included. Dashes indicate data not available. 71 PRICE DATA P rice data are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from retail and primary markets in the United States. Price indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100, unless otherwise noted). Definitions The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure o f the average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and services. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began pub lishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. It introduced a CPI for All Urban Consumers, covering 80 percent of the total noninstitutional pop ulation, and revised the CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covering about half the new index population. The All Urban Consumers index covers in addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, managerial, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force. The t P I is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, transportation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and serv ices that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only price changes will be measured. Data are collected from more than 24,000 retail establishments and 24,000 tenants in 85 urban areas across the country. All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are included in the index. Because the CPI’s are based on the ex penditures o f two population groups in 1972-73, they may not accurately reflect the experience o f individual families and single persons with dif ferent buying habits. Though the CPI is often called the “ Cost-of-Living Index,” it measures only price change, which is just one of several important factors affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period. P ro d u c e r P rice In d ex es measure average changes in prices received in primary markets o f the United States by producers of commodities in all stages o f processing. The sample used for calculating these indexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all commodities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial transactions in primary markets in the United States. Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products by degree o f fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure organizes products by sim ilarity o f end-use or material composition. 72 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price Indexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the United States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. Most prices are ob tained directly from producing companies on a voluntary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month. In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the various commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights repre senting their importance in the total net selling value of all commodities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage o f processing groupings, commodity groupings, durability of product groupings, and a number o f special composite groupings. P rice in d e x e s fo r th e ou tp u t o f selecte d S IC in d u stries measure av erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries, as defined in the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la s s ific a tio n M a n u a l 1 9 7 2 (Washing ton, U .S. Office o f Management and Budget, 1972). These indexes are derived from several price series, combined to match the economic activity o f the specified industry and weighted by the value of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive industrial censuses conducted by the U .S. Bureau of the Census and the U .S. Department of Agriculture. Notes on the data Regional CPI’s cross classified by population size were introduced in the May 1978 R e v ie w . These indexes enable users in local areas for which an index is not published to get a better approximation of the CPI for their area by using the appropriate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified indexes are published bimonthly. (See table 20.) For details concerning the 1978 revision of the CPI, see T h e C o n s u m e r P r ic e In d e x : C o n c e p ts a n d C o n te n t O v e r th e Y e a r s, Report 517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978). As of January 1976, the Producer Price Index incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 values of shipments. Additional data and analyses o f price changes are provided in the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P r ic e s a n d P r ic e I n d e x e s , both monthly publications o f the Bureau. For a discussion of the general method of computing producer, and industry price indexes, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 7. For consumer prices, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s (1976), chapter 13. See also John F. Early, ‘‘Improving the measurement of producer price change,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , April 1978. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, ‘‘Industry and Sector Price Indexes,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , August 1965. 19. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-83 [1967 = 100] Food and beverages All items Year Percent change Index Index Apparel and upkeep Housing Percent change Index Percent change Transportation Percent change Index Index M edical care Percent change Index Percent change Other goods and services Entertainm ent Index Percent change Index Percent change 1967 1968 1969 1970 ................. ................. ................ ................. 100.0 104.2 109.8 116.3 4.2 5.4 5.9 100.0 103.6 108.8 114.7 3.6 5.0 5.4 100.0 104.0 110.4 118.2 4.0 6.2 7.1 100.0 105.4 111.5 116.1 5.4 5.8 4.1 100.0 103.2 107.2 112.7 3.2 3.9 5.1 100.0 106.1 113.4 120.6 6.1 6.9 6.3 100.0 105.7 111.0 116.7 5.7 5.0 5.1 100.0 105.2 110.4 115.8 5.2 4.9 5.8 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 ................. ................. ................. ................. ................. 121.3 125.3 133.1 147.7 161.2 4.3 3.3 6.2 11.0 9.1 118.3 123.2 139.5 158.7 172.1 3.1 4.1 13.2 13.8 8.4 123.4 128.1 133.7 148.8 164.5 4.4 3.8 4.4 11.3 10.6 119.8 122.3 126.8 136.2 142.3 3.3 2.1 3.7 7.4 4.5 118.6 119.9 123.8 137.7 150.6 5.2 1.1 3.3 11.2 9.4 128.4 132.5 137.7 150.5 168.6 6.5 3.2 3.9 9.3 12.0 122.9 126.5 130.0 139.8 152.2 5.3 2.9 2.8 7.5 8.9 122.4 127.5 132.5 142.0 153.9 4.8 4.2 3.9 7.2 8.4 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ................. ................. ................. ................. ................. 170.5 181.5 195.3 217.7 247.0 5.8 6.5 7.6 11.5 13.5 177.4 188.0 206.2 228.7 248.7 3.1 8.0 9.7 10.9 8.7 174.6 186.5 202.6 227.5 263.2 6.1 6.8 8.6 12.3 15.7 147.6 154.2 159.5 166.4 177.4 3.7 4.5 3.4 4.3 6.6 165.5 177.2 185.8 212.8 250.5 9.9 7.1 4.9 14.5 17.7 184.7 202.4 219.4 240.1 287.2 9.5 9.6 8.4 9.4 11.3 159.8 167.7 176.2 187.6 203.7 5.0 4.9 5.1 6.5 8.5 162.7 172.2 183.2 196.3 213.6 5.7 5.8 6.4 7.2 8.8 1981 ................. 1982 ................. 1983 ................ 272.3 288.6 297.4 10.2 6.0 3.0 267.8 278.5 284.7 7.7 4.0 2.2 293.2 314.7 322.0 11.4 7.3 2.3 186.6 190.9 195.6 5.2 2.3 2.5 281.3 293.1 300.0 12.3 4.2 2.4 295.1 326.9 355.1 10.4 10.8 8.6 219.0 232.4 242.4 7.5 6.1 4.3 233.3 257.0 286.3 9.2 10.2 11.4 20. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers and revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, U.S. city average— general summary and groups, subgroups, and selected items [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers All Urban Consumers General summary 1984 1983 1984 1983 Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. All I t e m s .................................................................................................................................. 303.5 311.7 313.0 314.5 315.3 315.3 315.5 301.5 307.5 310.3 312.1 312.2 311.9 312.2 Food and beverages .................................................................................. Housing ................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep.................................................................................. Transportation.......................................................................................... Medical care Entertainment .......................................................................................... Other goods and services.......................................................................... 286.5 327.4 199.3 306.3 366.2 249.5 298.6 295.3 338.1 196.6 312.9 380.3 255.3 306.5 296.9 339.5 200.1 312.9 381.9 256.4 307.2 296.4 341.4 204.2 313.7 383.1 257.3 314.6 296.6 341.2 205.7 315.5 385.5 258.3 315.8 296.3 340.9 205.2 316.1 387.5 259.0 316.5 297.2 341.2 203.2 315.8 388.5 260.1 316.7 286.8 324.2 198.1 308.2 364.3 245.8 295.9 295.3 328.7 195.3 315.2 378.5 251.4 304.5 296.9 334.2 199.0 315.2 380.1 252.5 305.3 296.3 336.8 203.3 316.0 381.2 253.4 310.9 296.5 335.5 204.8 317.8 383.7 254.2 311.9 296.2 334.4 204.2 318.3 385.6 254.8 312.6 297.1 335.0 202.1 317.9 386.7 255.8 312.8 Commodities............................................................................................. Commodities less food and beverages.............................................. Nondurables less food and beverages............................................ Durables........................................................................................ 275.5 266.0 273.5 261.8 280.6 269.0 274.3 267.8 281.4 269.3 274.8 267.8 282.3 271.0 277.2 268.7 283.1 272.1 278.6 269.3 283.0 272.2 278.2 270.0 282.8 271.4 277.0 269.8 276.3 267.1 275.4 258.9 280.1 268.8 276.2 261.3 281.4 270.0 276.6 263.0 282.5 271.8 279.0 264.4 283.1 272.5 280.3 264.6 282.8 272.3 279.9 264.5 282.7 271.8 278.7 264.6 Services ................................................................................................... Rent, residential ............................................................................... Household services less rent of shelter (12/82 = 10 0)...................... Transportation services .................................................................... Medical care services ....................................................................... Other services .................................................................................. 351.6 242.0 104.1 310.8 396.3 287.2 364.5 249.7 109.7 321.4 410.9 294.2 366.5 251.1 110.5 323.8 412.7 295.5 368.9 252.4 111.0 324.6 413.9 302.5 369.7 253.8 109.9 327.5 416.5 304.2 369.9 254.8 108.8 328.9 418.5 305.2 370.6 256.1 108.5 330 1 419.3 306.1 348.4 241.3 358.2 249.0 363.9 250.3 366.8 251.7 366.3 253.1 365.9 254.0 366.8 255.3 306.9 393.8 284.3 317.4 408.6 291.5 319.6 410.4 292.8 320.7 411.5 299.0 323.7 414.1 300.6 325.1 416.1 301.5 326.1 417.0 302.3 All items less food..................................................................................... All items less homeowners' costs ............................................................ All items less mortgage interest costs....................................................... Commodities less food ............................................................................. Nondurables less food ............................................................................. Nondurables less food and apparel............................................................ Nondurables............................................................................................. Services less rent of shelter (12/82 = 100).............................................. Services less medical care ....................................................................... Domestically produced farm foods............................................................ Selected beef cuts..................................................................................... Energy ..................................................................................................... Energy commodities ............................................................................. All items less energy ............................................................................... All items less food and energy............................................................... Commodities less food and energy.................................................... Services less energy.................................................................................. 304.0 103.7 312.0 106.5 313.2 106.9 315.2 107.4 316.1 107.6 316.2 107.6 316.2 107.6 302.1 307.3 310.4 312.7 312.9 312.6 312.7 263.8 268.5 308.6 281.2 104.8 344.5 269.7 265.5 418.0 411.8 295.0 293.6 249.0 345.5 266.8 269.5 311.9 286.0 109.0 357.1 279.0 271.9 428.3 408.9 303.1 301.3 253.0 356.8 267.1 270.0 311.0 287.1 109.7 359.2 281.4 274.2 427.3 404.2 304.6 302.8 254.2 358.6 268.8 272.3 312.3 288.0 110.5 361.7 280.0 271.5 429.0 405.4 306.1 304.9 256.0 361.0 269.8 273.6 313.5 288.8 110.6 362 3 279.7 271.0 426 7 408.2 307.1 306.1 256.8 362.7 269.9 273.3 313.4 288.5 110.5 362.3 278.8 271.6 421.8 407.2 307.7 306 9 257.0 364.0 269.2 272.2 312.8 288.3 110.6 363.0 279.9 276.0 418.9 404.1 308.2 307.3 256.7 365.0 288.5 264.9 270.4 310.1 282.2 294.9 266.7 271.4 313.3 286.8 296.4 267.8 271.8 312.2 287.8 297.9 269.6 274.1 313.5 288.8 298.4 270.3 275.4 314.8 289.5 298.2 270.1 275.0 314.5 289.2 298.3 269.6 273.9 313.8 289.0 341.3 268.7 266.6 418.7 412.9 292.1 290.3 247.7 341.8 350.5 277.4 272.8 427.8 409.5 297.8 295.1 250.1 349.7 356.6 279.8 275.5 426.5 404.9 301.0 298.7 252.0 355.5 359.6 278.3 273.2 428.3 406.3 302.7 301.0 253.8 358.4 358.9 278.0 272.2 426.1 408.9 303.1 301.5 254.3 358.9 358.2 277.2 273.0 421.5 407.8 303.2 301.6 254.2 359.4 359.2 278.2 277.4 418.5 404.7 303.8 302.1 254.0 360.7 Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 = $1 .............................. $0.329 $0.321 $0.319 $0.318 $0.317 $0.317 $0.317 $0.320 $0.320 $0.321 $0.320 ' Special indexes: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis $0.332 $0.325 $0.322 73 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary Dec. Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1983 July Aug. Sept. 1983 Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. 1984 July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. FOOD AND BEVERAGES 286.5 295.3 296.9 296.4 296.6 296.3 297.2 286.8 295.3 296.9 296.3 296.5 296.2 297.1 F o o d ......................................................................................................................................... 293.9 303.2 304.8 304.2 304.4 304 1 305.1 294.0 302.8 304.5 303.8 304.0 303.7 304.7 Food at home ........................................................................................... Cereals and bakery products ............................................................ Cereals and cereal products (12/77 = 100) .............................. Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 100)................... Cereal (12/77 = 100) ....................................................... Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 = 100) ......................... Bakery products (12/77 = 100)................................................. White bread....................................................................... Other breads (1277 = 10 0).............................................. Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 = 100) .............. Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 = 100) ......................... Cookies (12/77 = 100) .................................................... Crackers, bread, and cracker products (12/77 = 100) . . . Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts (12/77 = 100) Frozen and refrigerated bakery products and fresh pies, tarts, and turnovers (12/77 = 100) .............. 283.0 297.1 158.2 140.1 178.0 146.8 156.9 257.4 152.0 157.8 159.7 159.2 148.1 157.7 292.5 306.6 164.5 147.2 185.7 150.3 161.5 260.9 155.7 158.7 163.9 166.1 160.7 163.0 294.4 307.8 165.0 148.3 185.9 150.5 162.2 262.6 154.9 159.3 164.9 167.9 162.0 163.4 293.4 307.9 164.5 146.3 186.1 150.4 162.4 263.2 155.8 159.7 165.9 167.3 161.7 162.9 293.4 308.7 163.6 145.2 186.2 148.5 163.3 264.3 155.7 160.7 167.4 168.3 162.7 163.8 292.4 293.2 309.0 J310.7 163.8 164.2 143.9 143.4 186.7 187.6 149.3 149.9 163.4 164.5 265.8 265.4 155.4 156.2 161.1 161.9 166.4 169.6 168.5 170.9 160.9 164.3 163 9 164.1 282.1 295.7 158.9 140.4 180.1 148.0 155.7 253.2 154.1 153.7 157.9 159.9 149.6 160.4 291.0 304.9 165.2 147.5 188.0 151.4 160.1 256.6 157.8 154.6 161.8 167.1 162.0 165.6 292.9 306.3 165.7 148.6 188.2 151.7 160.9 258.5 157.3 155.1 162.7 168.9 163.4 166.3 291.9 306.3 165.1 146.6 188.3 151.5 161.1 258.8 158.0 155.6 163.6 168.3 163.0 165.9 291.8 307.1 164.3 145.6 188.4 149.7 161.9 260.1 158.0 156.4 165.0 169.5 164.2 166.6 290.9 307.4 164.4 144.4 189.0 150.5 162.1 261.3 157.6 157.0 164.1 169.6 162.4 166.7 291.7 309.0 164.7 143.6 189.8 151.0 163.1 261.0 158.4 157.5 167.3 171.9 166.0 166.9 161.5 169.0 168.9 169.3 170.0 171.1 171.7 154.9 162.1 161.8 162.0 162.7 163.8 164.3 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs .......................................................... Meats, poultry, and fis h ............................................................ Meats ............................................................................... Beef and veal.................................................................. Ground beef other than canned.................................... Chuck roast ............................................................... Round roast............................................................... Round steak............................................................... Sirloin steak............................................................... Other beef and veal (12/77 = 100) ........................... Pork............................................................................... Bacon ....................................................................... Chops ....................................................................... Ham other than canned (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................... Sausage .................................................................... Canned h a m ............................................................... Other pork (12/77 = 100) ......................................... Other meats .................................................................. Frankfurters ............................................................... Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 = 100) . . . . Other lunchmeats (12/77 = 100) .............................. Lamb and organ meats (12/77 = 100) ...................... Poultry................................................................................ Fresh whole chicken.................................................... Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........... Other poultry (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... Fish and seafood ............................................................... Canned fish and seafood ............................................ Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 100) . . . Eggs........................................................................................... 259.3 261.8 258.3 266.0 251.3 266.9 231.3 249.9 262.7 164.7 240.3 253.0 219.0 111.8 303.4 246.5 129.9 261.3 259.0 150.4 134.7 136.1 209.8 219.4 139.4 122.3 376.4 132.5 149.9 234.0 264.6 271.4 267.3 272.1 253.0 269.1 231.4 250.6 286.5 170.5 255.5 272.4 242.4 111.4 322.0 246.5 142.0 268.0 265.3 154.8 138.2 139.0 221.3 228.1 146.6 132.7 387.0 134.4 155.1 182.7 265.7 272.7 269.9 274.3 254.8 272.7 235.7 254.7 287.7 171.2 259.9 272.3 250.7 113.5 322.9 248.1 146.1 268.4 267.8 154.8 138.2 138.6 216.5 218.6 144.1 133.3 387.0 134.4 155.1 179.3 264.5 271.6 268.0 271.9 252.9 271.8 234.3 252.4 286.1 169.0 257.5 270.3 242.3 116.8 321.2 251.4 142.5 268.7 267.6 155.6 138.8 137.3 217.2 220.2 144.7 132.7 390.6 133.7 157.7 178.6 263.5 270.4 267.1 271.3 252.4 276.6 236.5 251.3 273.9 168.5 255.0 271.1 235.9 117.2 319.0 252.6 139.0 270.0 269.6 156.2 139.4 138.2 214.0 213.8 141.4 135.1 390.6 132.9 158.2 177.8 262.4 269.4 266.1 271.9 254.3 280.9 234.1 248.4 271.6 168.8 251.2 266.5 232.7 115.6 315.3 246.8 137.0 269.4 265.0 155.8 138.6 141.1 213.1 215.4 140.4 132.6 389.2 133.0 157.3 175.6 265.9 272.5 269.6 276.2 257.2 286.1 239.0 255.7 276.2 171.2 254.6 270.5 234.1 120.9 316.6 248.8 137.3 270.2 266.6 156.2 139.2 140.8 213.8 210.4 140.4 138.9 392.2 133.4 158.9 185.7 258.6 261.0 257.7 266.4 251.7 275.2 233.9 248.0 264.1 163.5 239.8 256.4 217.5 108.8 304.2 252.0 129.3 260.7 257.5 150.2 132.8 139.3 207.8 216.7 137.2 122.1 374.9 132.0 149.5 235.3 263.9 270.4 266.6 272.4 253.7 277.3 235.1 247.7 288.4 169.1 254.8 276.3 240.1 108.3 322.9 252.0 141.1 267.5 263.8 154.8 136.4 142.0 218.8 225.4 144.4 131.5 385.5 133.9 154.8 183.7 265.2 272.1 269.4 274.9 256.0 280.4 239.9 254.4 288.9 169.8 259.2 276.3 248.3 110.4 323.6 253.4 145.3 268.0 266.3 154.7 136.4 141.7 214.0 216.1 141.8 132.3 385.7 133.9 155.0 180.4 264.1 271.0 267.7 272.8 254.4 280.6 237.8 251.4 288.7 167.8 257.0 274.2 240.6 113.6 322.7 256.0 141.7 268.2 266.1 155.4 137.0 140.1 214.7 217.5 142.4 131.8 389.1 133.2 157.5 179.7 262.9 269.7 266.6 271.9 253.5 285.1 240.3 248.3 275.3 167.2 254.3 275.0 234.0 113.8 319.6 258.4 138.5 269.5 268.0 156.0 137.5 141.0 211.6 211.4 139.2 134.3 389.1 132.5 157.9 178.7 261.8 268.7 265.5 272.5 255.7 289.9 237.9 246.4 273.6 167.3 250.3 270.4 230.4 112.5 315.5 250.4 136.4 268.6 263.3 155.7 136.7 143.9 210.9 213.0 138.4 131.9 388.2 132.5 157.3 176.4 265.3 271.7 268.9 276.9 258.2 294.7 242.3 253.6 279.1 170.0 253.7 274.1 232.1 117.7 316.7 253.9 136.7 269.4 265.1 156.1 137.3 143.4 211.3 208.0 138.2 138.0 391.4 132.9 159.1 186.5 Dairy products.................................................................................. Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100)......................................... Fresh whole milk ............................................................... Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100)......................... Processed dairy products ......................................................... Butter ............................................................................... Cheese (12/77 = 1 0 0 )....................................................... Ice cream and related products (12/77 = 100)................... Other dairy products (12/77 = 100) ................................. 249.9 135.9 222.3 136.2 148.8 254.1 146.4 154.0 146.0 252.2 136.7 223.3 137.5 150.8 261.2 147.9' 155.8 148.3 252.7 136.7 223.2 137.7 151.5 264.4 148.2 157.4 148.1 254.9 137.7 224.7 138.7 153.1 266.0 149.1 160.9 149.9 256.1 138.7 226.8 139.0 153.3 268.8 149.5 160.0 150.0 257.2 139.8 228.7 140.0 153.3 268.7 150.1 158.1 150.9 258.4 140.4 229.6 140.7 154.1 269.4 150.1 160.1 152.5 249.0 135.3 221.4 135.6 149.0 256.6 146.7 153.0 146.5 251.1 136.0 222.2 136.8 151.0 263.8 148.2 154.8 148.6 251.7 136.0 222.0 137.0 151.8 266.7 148.6 156.5 148.6 253.8 136.9 223.5 138.0 153.4 268.6 149.4 159.9 150.4 255.1 137.9 225.6 138.3 153.7 271.4 149.9 159.0 150.4 256.2 139.1 227.5 139.3 153.6 271.5 150.5 157.1 151.3 257.3 139.6 228.4 139.9 154.4 272.3 150.5 159.0 152.8 Fruits and vegetables ....................................................................... Fresh fruits and vegetables ....................................................... Fresh fruits ....................................................................... App es ....................................................................... Bananas .................................................................... Oranges .................................................................... Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 100)................................. Fresh vegetables ............................................................... Potatoes .................................................................... Lettuce....................................................................... Tomatoes .................................................................. Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 100)........................ 292.6 294.2 270.4 270.0 230.0 283.4 143.0 316.6 317.6 371.8 222.2 177.2 320.0 332.4 346.9 329.9 271.8 486.5 163.6 318.8 455.6 246.0 237.3 167.1 327.7 345.7 353.3 341.8 257.0 530.8 160.4 338.7 478.1 316.6 310.4 157.1 319.7 332.5 364.8 337.9 249.9 553.6 170.4 302.3 354.1 337.8 252.9 152.1 318.4 329.3 354.3 298.0 242.1 538.4 172.7 306.0 324.3 363.6 255.1 158.7 314.8 323.4 343.9 302.8 234.9 473.6 175.3 304.4 313.1 350.5 245.3 164.3 309.7 312.6 331.6 297.5 225.2 428.0 174.3 294.8 327.3 276.0 232.4 167.4 289.3 289.8 261.1 270.8 227.8 257.5 137.8 315.7 314.3 375.0 224.7 176.1 315.1 325.2 333.5 330.6 269.5 448.5 157.0 317.8 451.1 246.2 242.1 166.1 322.4 337.6 338.8 342.8 254.7 487.7 153.6 336.7 470.0 319.1 314.3 155.3 313.6 323.0 349.6 339.6 248.4 507.1 163.6 299.2 344.5 338.0 256.2 150.2 312.3 319.9 337.4 299.9 240.6 489.1 165.2 304.2 318.4 365.1 259.9 157.0 308.9 314.6 329.3 304.5 232.7 434.1 168.1 301.5 305.1 349.2 249.7 162.6 303.9 303.9 317.6 299.3 224.0 390.2 167.0 291.6 320.4 274.4 236.0 165.2 Processed fruits and vegetables................................................. Processed fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................................... Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................ Fruit juices other than frozen (12/77 = 100) .............. Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................... 293.3 152.0 143.6 155.7 155.0 309.2 163.6 163.9 165.7 161.2 310.7 164.3 166.2 165.3 161.5 308.4 163.1 165.2 165.1 159.3 309.2 164.5 166.3 168.0 159.2 308.0 163.5 165.0 166.8 158.7 309.3 164.5 166.6 168.3 158.7 291.2 151.6 142.9 154.8 155.1 306.5 163.1 163.1 164.8 161.4 308.0 163.7 165.5 164.1 161.8 305.6 162.6 164.5 163.9 159.5 306.5 164.0 165.6 167.1 159.3 305.2 162.9 164.2 165.7 158.8 306.5 164.0 166.0 167.3 158.7 74 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Ail Urban Consumers General summary 1983 Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1983 1984 Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Fruits and vegetables— Continued Processed vegetables (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................. Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100) .............................. Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77 = 100) Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77 = 100) . . . . 142.8 151.5 145.8 136.8 147.2 155.1 152.3 140.6 148.1 157.0 153.1 141.2 146.9 156.2 150.9 140.2 146.5 157.1 149.8 139.4 146.1 156.9 149.7 138.9 146.5 156.9 150.8 139.0 141.6 153.2 143.2 135.3 146.0 156.7 149.7 138.9 146.9 158.6 150.5 139.5 145.7 157.7 148.3 138.6 145.3 158.9 147.2 137.8 145.0 158.7 147.1 137.3 145.3 158.7 148.0 137.4 Other foods at home.......................................................................... Sugar and sweets .................................................................... Candy and chewing gum (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................... Sugar and artificial sweeteners (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................... Other sweets (12/77 = 100)............................................... Fats and oils (12/77 = 100) .................................................... Margarine.......................................................................... Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (12/77 = 100) . . . Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12/77 = 100)........... Nonalcoholic beverages ............................................................ Cola drinks, excluding diet cola ......................................... Carbonated drinks, Including diet cola (12/77 = 100) . . . . Roasted coffee .................................................................. Freeze dried and instant coffee............................................ Other noncarbonated drinks (12/77 = 100) ...................... Other prepared foods.................................................................. Canned and packaged soup (12/77 = 100)......................... Frozen prepared foods (12/77 = 100) .............................. Snacks (12/77 = 1 0 0 )....................................................... Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish (12/77 = 100) . . . Other condiments (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... Miscellaneous prepared foods (12/77 = 100) ................... Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12/77 = 100) . . 343.6 377.7 152.8 171.1 152.3 278.2 273.7 151.4 145.4 433.7 314.3 148.8 354.2 351.2 141.8 278.2 142.8 155.5 158.9 160.6 155.5 153.3 148.0 353.1 391.8 161.3 171.0 159.4 291.4 293.2 153.2 152.7 442.7 315.1 150.5 374.8 366.9 147.4 285.4 145.6 159.1 166.0 163.8 160.0 154.9 151.6 354.0 392.6 161.6 171.0 160.1 295.4 296.0 154.9 155.2 441.5 313.3 149.2 375.9 369.6 147.6 286.9 146.4 162.0 166.5 164.4 159.9 155.5 152.1 355.1 393.7 162.1 172.3 159.7 295.1 296.6 156.3 154.2 444.0 316.8 149.4 376.3 369.2 148.3 287.3 146.4 161.6 166.9 165.6 159.5 155.9 152.8 356.1 393.3 161.3 172.5 160.2 294.9 297.5 157.5 153.3 446.8 319.8 149.9 377.7 371.9 148.9 287.8 146.5 162.9 167.8 166.2 159.3 155.9 151.9 355.0 390.9 161.6 170.3 158.0 293.0 292.9 157.3 152.7 445.5 317.3 148.8 376.0 372.7 150.5 287.5 148.1 162.6 167.4 164.9 158.8 155.6 152.1 354.6 391.7 162.3 169.4 159.1 293.7 295.6 158.7 152.1 443.4 316.4 146.8 376.7 373.8 149.7 287.7 148.7 162.2 166.4 165.9 159.9 155.4 152.7 344.4 377.6 152.7 172.4 150.0 278.2 271.7 149.6 146.1 435.7 311.6 146.9 349.0 350.5 142.2 279.7 144.6 154.5 161.0 159.5 157.4 153.5 149.2 353.5 391.1 161.0 172.2 157.0 291.0 291.1 151.3 153.2 444.0 312.4 148.1 369.0 366.3 147.7 287.0 147.6 158.3 168.3 162.9 161.9 154.9 152.8 354.3 391.9 161.3 172.3 157.6 295.0 293.6 153.1 155.7 442.8 310.7 147.0 369.9 368.9 147.9 288.5 148.4 161.2 168.8 163.5 161.7 155.6 153.2 355.4 393.1 161.8 173.5 157.2 294.6 294.3 154.2 154.7 445.2 314.1 147.1 370.2 368.2 148.7 288.7 148.2 160.4 169.2 164.7 161.4 155.9 153.9 356.5 392.8 161.2 173.7 157.7 294.4 295.0 155.3 153.8 448.2 317.0 147.7 371.5 371.2 149.3 289.3 148.3 162.0 170.0 165.2 161.2 156.0 153.0 355.3 390.5 161.5 c171.7 155.5 292.5 290.6 155.3 153.2 446.7 314.4 146.6 369.8 371.9 150.8 288.8 149.8 161.5 169.7 164.0 160.7 155.6 153.1 354.9 391.4 162.2 170.7 156.7 293.1 292.6 156.6 152.8 444.7 313.9 144.3 370.3 372.9 150.1 289.1 150.4 160.9 168.7 164.8 161.8 155.4 153.8 Food away from home ............................................................................. Lunch (12/77 = 1 0 0 )....................................................................... Dinner (12/77 = 100)....................................................................... Other meals and snacks (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................................ 325.5 157.5 156.5 161.0 334.4 161.5 161.0 165.5 335.5 161.9 161.7 166.0 335.8 162.4 161.8 165.7 336.6 162.8 162.2 166.0 337.7 163.2 162.8 166.5 339.2 163.8 163.6 167.3 328.7 159.0 158.3 161.4 337.7 163.0 162.8 166.0 338.8 163.5 163.5 166.5 339.0 163.9 163.6 166.3 339.8 164.3 163.9 166.6 340.9 164.7 164.6 167.1 342.3 165.3 165.4 167.8 Alcoholic beverages ......................................................................................................... 218.1 222.5 222.9 223.1 224.2 223.8 223.9 221.2 225.8 226.2 226.4 227.5 227.1 227.2 Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Beer and ale ..................................................................................... Whiskey............................................................................................. Wine ................................................................................................ Other alcoholic beverages (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................................... Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77 = 100) .............................. 140.4 225.5 152.4 232.1 121.4 150.4 142.8 231.5 153.5 232.5 122.7 155.5 142.9 231.1 154.0 234.2 122.6 156.4 142.8 231.5 153.8 231.8 123.4 157.2 143.7 232.7 154.6 234.8 123.2 157.7 143.2 231.9 154.3 233.0 123.5 158.2 143.2 232.5 154.0 232.2 122.8 158.5 142.6 224.8 152.9 239.9 121.3 151.5 145.0 230.6 153.9 240.1 122.4 156.6 145.1 230.3 154.3 241.6 122.4 157.8 145.1230.5 154.1 239.5 123.2 158.6 145.8 231.7 154.9 242.5 122.9 159.1 145.4 230.7 154.6 241.3 123.3 159.5 145.4 231.6 154.1 239.7 122.5 159.8 324.2 328.7 334.2 336.8 335.5 334.4 335.0 Shelter ( C P I - W ) .................................................................................................................... 346.6 347.9 356.1 359.3 358.3 357.7 359.0 Rent, residential........................................................................................ 241.3 249.0 250.3 251.7 253.1 254.0 255.3 Other renters' costs .................................................................................. Lodging while out of town.................................................................. Tenants' Insurance (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).................................................... Homeownership........................................................................................ Home purchase ............................................................................... Financing, taxes, and Insurance......................................................... Property Insurance.................................................................... Property taxes .......................................................................... Contracted mortgage interest costs............................................ Mortgage interest rates....................................................... Maintenance and repairs.................................................................... Maintenance and repair services................................................. Maintenance and repair commodities................................................. Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and equipment (12/77 = 100).............................................. Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77 = 100)........... Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling supplies (12/77 = 100) .................................................... Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........... 352.9 363.9 159.4 384.1 298.9 497.6 437.2 240.7 629.4 208.7 351.0 395.6 257.0 375.1 400.6 160.4 382.7 294.9 496.5 441.6 246.4 624.9 210.1 357.3 405.2 257.1 380.2 407.6 162 6 393.4 299.8 519.0 441.8 248.9 658.4 217.4 357.4 405.4 256 9 383.6 404.8 163.4 397.2 302.5 524.9 442.4 251.4 666 4 218.6 359.4 407.9 258.1 381.9 399.8 163.4 395.5 302.4 520.5 443.2 252.2 659.3 216.8 358.9 408.1 256.2 378.7 394.8 163.3 394.4 301.0 519.5 446.6 252.9 657.1 216.9 358.5 406.6 257.8 374.6 388.3 163.5 395.9 301.4 522.4 447.6 254.4 661.0 217.6 359.8 407.7 259.3 149.1 123.7 147.2 123.1 147.4 123.3 147 8 123.5 147.0 123.1 149.1 122.4 151.0 122.5 138.4 143.7 142.1 146.3 142.8 144.2 142.7 146.7 141.5 144.0 142.0 145.5 142.0 145.2 HOUSING 327.4 338.1 339.5 341.4 341.2 340.9 341.2 Shelter ( C P I - U ) .................................................................................................................... 351.8 362 7 364.6 366.5 367.8 368.9 370.1 Renters' costs.......................................................................................... Rent, residential ............................................................................... Other renters' costs .......................................................................... Homeowners' costs.................................................................................. Owners' equivalent re n t.................................................................... Household insurance.......................................................................... Maintenance and repairs .......................................................................... Maintenance and repair services ....................................................... Maintenance and repair commodities................................................. 105.1 242.0 356.1 367.0 106.1 160.4 354.7 400.8 262.6 108.9 249.7 375.7 107.6 107.7 106.7 360.3 411.6 263.1 109.6 251.1 380.7 108.1 108.1 108.0 360.1 412.3 262.2 110.2 252.4 384.3 108.7 108.7 108.6 362.7 414.3 264.8 110.7 253.8 382.6 109.1 109.1 108.7 361.6 414.4 262.9 110.9 254.8 379.1 109.4 109.4 108.8 362.9 412.6 266.5 111.3 256.1 375.1 109.8 109.8 108.9 364.4 414.2 267.7 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 75 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Urban W age Earners and Clerical W o r te n All Urban Consumers General summary 1984 1983 1984 1983 Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Fuel and other u t i l i t i e s ..................................................................................................... 370.6 393.9 395.5 397.0 392.4 387.5 386.0 372.0 395.4 396.9 398.4 393.6 388.7 387.1 Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas............................................................ Fuel oil ..................................................................................... Other fuels (6/78 - 100) ......................................................... Gas (piped) and electricity.................................................................. Electricity.................................................................................. Utility (piped) gas ..................................................................... 467.4 623.9 631.5 191.4 427.5 329.8 578.2 496.5 637.4 646.2 193.7 459.1 368.7 589.7 498.6 625.5 632.4 193.3 463.9 374.3 592.2 500.1 622.1 628.4 193.1 466.4 374.9 598.4 492.1 626.8 633.6 193.7 456.0 361.0 597.1 482.6 626.9 633.0 194.9 444.7 350.9 584.9 480.2 625.9 631.5 195.6 442.2 348.2 583.0 467.2 626.4 633.9 192.3 426.7 329.0 575.7 496.1 640.0 648.8 194.4 458.2 369.0 585.1 498.2 628.1 635.1 193.9 463.0 374.8 587.1 499.8 624.5 630.8 193.6 465.5 375.5 593.2 491.4 629.4 636.3 194.3 454.7 360.8 592.1 482.1 629.3 635.6 195.4 443.7 350.5 580.9 479.7 628.4 634.0 196.2 441.0 347.3 579.7 Other utilities and public services ............................................................ Telephone services.................................................................... , . . . local charges (12/77 - 1 0 0 ).................................................... Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Water and sewerage maintenance....................................................... 216.5 174.3 142.2 121.4 119.7 364.3 230.6 188.1 162.3 116.2 125.9 376.6 231.3 188.4 163.3 116.1 124.9 378.9 232.7 189.8 165.3 116.1 124.8 380.2 232.9 190.0 165.5 116.3 124.8 380.5 234.4 191.1 166.9 116.2 125.4 382.8 234.1 190.4 166.5 116.2 124.1 384.4 217.4 174.7 142.6 121.9 119.8 368.5 231.7 188.7 163.1 116.6 125.7 381.0 232.4 189.1 164.0 116.5 124.8 383.2 233.7 190.4 166.0 116.5 124.6 384.5 233.9 190.5 166.1 116.6 124.6 384.8 235.3 191.6 167.4 116.6 125.2 386.8 235.0 190.9 167.0 116.5 124.0 388.3 Household furnishings and operations .................................................................... 240.5 241.9 242.2 244.1 244.3 244.2 244.2 237.3 238.3 238.6 240.6 240.7 240.6 240.5 Housefurnishings ..................................................................................... Textile housefurnishings.................................................................... Household linens (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).............................................. Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) ....................................................... 198.8 230.3 135.6 197.9 232.9 136.6 198.1 238.6 143.1 200.6 245.6 146.8 200.5 242.7 147.1 200.2 240.5 145.2 199.7 239.9 141.6 196.9 233.1 136.2 195.6 236.4 137.7 195.9 242.0 144.1 198.3 249.9 148.1 198.2 247.1 148.8 197.6 244.6 146.6 197.3 244.1 143.0 152.0 154.2 154.7 159.8 155.8 154.9 158.0 156.1 158.6 158.8 164.8 160.2 159.4 162.9 Furniture and bedding............................................................................... Bedroom furniture (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Sofas (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Living room chairs and tables (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................... Other furniture (12/77 = 100) ................................................. Appliances including TV and sound equipment .................................... Television and sound equipment .............................................. Television .......................................................................... Sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Household appliances ............................................................... Refrigerators and home freezers......................................... Laundry equipment............................................................ Other household appliances (12/77 = 100) ...................... Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing machines (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................................ Office machines, small electric appliances, and air conditioners (12/77 = 100) ................................. Other household equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... Floor and window coverings, infants', laundry, cleaning, and outdoor equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................... Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................ Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric kitchenware (12/77 = 100).................................................... Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 - 100) ....................................................... 221.3 154.9 120.2 124.4 142.3 150.9 104.8 99.0 111.0 189.4 195.8 144.4 125.5 222.1 151.5 121.9 126.3 144.7 147.2 101.3 94.5 108.2 187.1 194.2 145.5 123.2 220.8 151.7 120.6 127.1 142.2 147.2 101.0 94.1 108.1 187.5 194.6 145.4 123.6 225.5 156.6 121.7 126.8 146.9 147.7 100 8 93.5 108.3 189.4 196.8 146.9 124.8 228.2 160.2 121.6 128.1 148.1 147.1 100.4 92.5 108.4 188.4 197.6 147.7 123.5 227.4 160.7 122.2 127.5 145.9 146.0 99.9 92.1 107.7 186.7 197.3 148.1 121.8 225.6 160.1 122.3 125.8 143.9 145.2 99.2 92.5 106.1 185.9 197.5 147.6 121.0 218.3 151.3 120.3 125.7 138.2 151.7 103.9 97.6 110.1 190.5 201.7 145.1 124.2 218.7 148.1 122.1 127.2 140.2 148.4 100.2 93.0 107.2 188.4 199.8 146.0 121.4 217.9 148.4 120.7 128.1 138.4 148.5 100.0 92.7 107.1 188.9 200.6 146.3 121.7 222.2 153.5 121.6 127.8 142.1 149.4 99.8 92.2 107.2 190.9 202.6 147.6 123.2 224.5 155.9 121.8 129.0 143.5 148.8 99.5 91.1 107.4 190.2 203.5 148.0 121.7 223.4 156.3 122.0 127.9 141.4 148.0 98.9 90.7 106.6 189.2 203.2 149.1 119.9 222.5 156.4 121.9 126.4 140.4 147.3 98.2 91.3 105.0 188.6 203.8 148.9 118.9 Housekeeping supplies ............................................................................. Soaps and detergents....................................................................... Other laundry and cleaning products (12/77 = 100) ........................ Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins (12/77 = 100) Stationery, stationery supplies, and gift wrap (12/77 = 100) ........... Miscellaneous household products (12/77 = 100) ........................... Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 = 10 0)......................................... Housekeeping services ............................................................................. Postage............................................................................................. Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and drycleaning services (12/77 = 10 0).............................................. Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................... 124.5 121.7 123.6 127.5 124.4 122.4 121.8 123.5 120.0 121.6 125.5 122.6 120.6 120.2 126.6 142.3 124.9 142.1 123.9 141.7 122.8 141.9 122.9 141.2 121.5 142.8 120.5 143.9 124.9 140.1 122.9 139.5 121.8 138.9 120.6 139.1 120.6 138.5 119.0 139.8 117.4 140.7 146.6 134.1 147.0 135.5 147.7 134.3 146.7 137.1 147.9 135.6 148.4 137.4 152.0 137.2 138.4 129.6 137.8 130.7 137.3 129.8 136.2 132.8 138.2 130.8 137.8 132.6 141.9 132.5 147.4 147.2 147.0 145.5 143.5 147.6 145.5 143.6 143.3 143.1 141.5 139.8 143.4 140.9 137.2 135.2 134.4 135.5 134.8 139.1 142.4 140.7 139.8 141.4 141.1 140.2 298.6 295.9 152.7 148.6 141.7 156.6 145.4 303.8 299.8 154.9 153.7 143.7 161.2 144.9 304.2 298.8 154.9 153.6 144.2 162.0 145.7 304.9 299.1 155.8 155.2 144.2 162.2 144.8 135.5 305.4 299.9 156.6 156.5 144.8 161.7 143.5 306.2 302.3 157.1 156.1 145.5 162.1 143.4 307.5 305.7 157.1 155.8 145.2 161.5 146.3 295.3 291.8 151.5 148.6 144.7 151.1 138.3 301.0 295.3 153.6 153.7 147.1 155.9 138.7 301.1 294.2 153.4 153.4 147.7 156.6 139.1 302.0 294.8 154.3 155.2 147.9 156.7 138.3 302.5 295.4 155.1 156.4 148.4 156.2 137.1 303.5 297.6 155.7 155.8 149.1 156.7 137.5 144.3 304.6 301.1 155.7 155.6 148.8 156.0 140.3 322.8 337.5 327.6 337.5 328.2 337.5 329.4 337.5 330.2 337.5 330.3 337.5 330.6 337.5 322.9 337.5 328.2 337.5 328.8 337.5 330.0 337.5 330.8 337.5 330.9 337.5 331.1 337.5 168.4 147.1 174.5 150.9 174.6 152.2 175.9 153.4 176.3 154.7 176.0 155.4 176.6 155.3 168.5 145.2 174.9 148.9 175.1 150.0 176.4 151.0 176.8 152.2 176.4 152.9 176.9 152.8 APPAREL AND UPKEEP 199.3 196.6 200.1 204.2 205.7 205.2 203.2 198.1 195.3 199.0 203.3 204.8 204.2 202.1 Apparel c o m m o d itie s ......................................................................................................... 186.9 183.0 186.6 191.2 192.6 191.9 189.6 186.3 182.4 186.1 190.9 192.3 191.6 189.2 Apparel commodities less footwear.................................................... 183.4 178.9 183.1 187.8 189.2 188.3 185.9 182.5 177.9 182.2 187.3 188.7 187.8 185.3 Men’s and boys'............................................................................... Men's (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100)................... Coats and jackets............................................................... Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................ Shirts (12/77 = 100) ....................................................... Dungarees, jeans, and trousers (12/77 = 100) ................ Boys' (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........... Furnishings (12/77 = 100) .............................................. Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) , . 191.8 120.9 112.9 104.4 147.8 125.7 112.9 123.9 118.8 137.0 122.7 189.8 119.3 113.2 96.1 145.6 125.6 111.3 124.1 120.8 136.5 121.8 192.6 121.2 113.5 100.9 147.6 127.3 113.7 125.5 125.5 134.7 121.8 195.6 123.2 115.6 105.7 150.9 128.2 114.5 126.9 127.0 135.8 123.3 197.6 124.3 116.4 107.9 151.8 129.5 115.5 128.6 126.8 136.8 126.7 197.8 124.5 115.7 106.6 152.0 129.4 117.6 128.5 125.9 138.9 126.4 196.0 123.2 113.3 105.6 151.7 128.3 116.6 128.1 123.9 139.2 126.9 192.1 121.5 105.8 107.6 144.1 128.5 118.8 122.4 120.6 132.9 120.0 189.9 119.6 106.2 99.6 141.8 127.7 117.2 122.7 123.1 132.2 119.0 193.0 121.7 106.8 104.0 143.3 130.0 120.0 124.3 128.0 130.5 119.1 196.2 123.9 108.9 109.0 146.6 131.0 120.9 125.7 129.8 131.8 120.4 198.1 125.0 109.7 111.1 147.7 132.1 122.0 127.2 129.2 132.7 123.8 198.6 125.4 109.2 109.9 147.8 132.2 124.3 127.1 128.3 134.4 123.7 196.8 124.1 106.8 108.8 147.6 130.7 123.1 126.5 125.6 134.7 124.2 76 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary 1983 Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1983 1984 Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 163.1 108.6 167.7 172.0 172.2 115.0 181.7 179.9 104.3 138.5 94.1 112.3 106.2 108.2 170.4 113.4 181.9 175.8 103.6 138.5 87.6 112.7 106.8 107.7 167.2 111.3 175.0 174.3 100.8 138.8 81.6 110.9 104.0 106.2 166.0 110.8 174.8 157.1 99.4 136.2 100.2 108.8 98.8 106.3 157.4 104.8 162.4 153.1 88.6 136.2 97.1 104.0 98.4 96.7 164.1 109.5 176.1 159.9 93.1 137.5 96.5 107.5 100.4 103.5 172.1 115.8 185.2 165.5 102.9 138.9 112.1 108.6 98.3 107.5 173.8 116.4 186.3 165.8 104.7 138.0 114.0 112.0 105.0 108.9 171.9 114.9 186.0 162.4 104.1 138.1 106.6 111.8 105.8 106.9 168.6 112.6 178.2 160.7 101.5 138.3 99.9 109.9 101.8 106.3 Women’s and girls' .......................................................................... Women's (12/77 = 100) ......................................................... Coats and jackets............................................................... Dresses ............................................................................. Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ........................ Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100) ........... Suits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................................................... Girls' (12/77 = 100).................................................................. Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).............. Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) ........................ Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and accessories (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................................ Infants’ and toddlers' ....................................................................... Other apparel commodities ............................................................... Sewing materials and notions (12/77 = 100) ........................... Jewelry and luggage (12/77 = 100) ......................................... 164.9 109.5 170.3 172.0 98.9 136.5 81.7 110.2 101.8 106.7 156.2 103.7 156.8 163.7 88.2 136.7 74.4 104.6 99.7 96.9 138.0 85.1 107.7 101.0 103.1 170.5 114.4 181.1 178.3 102.5 139.4 93.5 108.6 98.6 106.7 130.5 282.7 215.6 121.4 147.0 127.1 281.2 218.0 122.5 148.8 127.4 288.7 216.3 123.8 146.7 128.3 291.3 216.5 122.8 147.3 130.0 291.6 216.0 120.6 147.7 131.6 290.2 215.4 120.1 147.4 130.9 291.9 213.3 121.9 144.7 129.1 292.1 204.2 119.3 137.8 125.7 292.0 206.0 120.7 138.9 126.0 298.9 204.9 122.3 137.1 127.0 303.2 205.0 121.5 137.6 128.7 302.5 204.0 119.0 137.8 130.2 302.1 203.1 118.4 137.2 129.6 302.9 201.0 120.5 134.3 Footwear................................................................................................... Men's (12/77 = 1 0 0 )....................................................................... Boys' and girls' (12/77 = 100)......................................................... Women's (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).................................................................. 207.9 134.7 132.9 125.2 208.0 137.5 131.0 124.2 207.7 137.4 131.9 123.4 211.1 138.0 133.5 127.0 212.9 138.3 136.0 128.0 212.9 138.4 136.3 127.6 211.4 137.1 135.3 127.0 208.3 136.6 135.2 121.7 208.7 139.6 133.7 120.8 208.5 139.4 134.8 119.9 211.6 139.8 136.3 123.3 213.2 140.1 138.7 124.1 213.1 140.2 139.0 123.6 211.7 138.9 138.3 122.9 Apparel services ................................................................................................................ 297.0 305.1 307.5 307.6 309.5 310.8 311.5 295.0 303.0 305.5 305.6 307.4 308.8 309.3 Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 = 100) ........... Other apparel services (12/77 = 100)....................................................... 177.7 154.5 183.4 157.2 184.1 159.9 184.3 159.7 185.5 160.4 186.3 161.1 186.9 161.2 176.0 155.6 181.7 158.5 182.3 161.3 182.6 161.0 183.8 161.7 184.4 162.5 184.9 162.6 315.2 316.0 317.8 318.3 317.9 9 2.9 ............................................................................................................ 306.3 312.9 312.9 313.7 315.5 316.1 315.8 308.2 315.2 P r iv a t e ...................................................................................................................................... 301.8 307.5 307.5 308.4 310.2 310.8 310.4 305.6 311.2 311.1 312.1 313.9 314.4 313.9 New cars................................................................................................... Used cars ................................................................................................ Gasoline ................................................................................................... Automobile maintenance and repair .......................................................... Body work (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous mechanical repair (12/77 = 100) ................................................. Maintenance and servicing (12/77 = 100)......................................... Power plant repair (12/77 = 100) .................................................... Other private transportation....................................................................... Other private transportation commodities ......................................... Motor oil, coolant, and other products (12/77 = 100) .............. Automobile parts and equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Tires .................................................................................. Other parts and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................... Other private transportation services................................................. Automobile insurance ............................................................... Automobile finance charges (12/77 = 100) .............................. Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) . . State registration ............................................................... Drivers' licenses (12/77 = 100)......................................... Vehicle inspection (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... Other vehicle-related fees (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................... 207.0 357.6 375.2 335.4 169.6 208.1 383.2 369.8 341.6 172.6 208.1 383.8 365.9 342.7 173.5 208.2 384.2 368.8 344.2 174.7 209.6 384.6 370.3 345.3 175.6 211.4 383.6 369.2 345.8 175.8 212.0 382.7 365.7 346.2 176.1 206.5 357.6 377.0 335.9 168.3 207.6 383.2 376.4 342.3 171.6 207.6 383.8 367.4 343.4 172.1 207.6 384.2 369.4 344.9 173.1 209.0 384.6 371.7 346.2 174.1 210.8 383.6 370.5 346.7 174.3 211.3 382.6 367.1 347.1 174.7 163.6 152.8 160.1 266.8 208.9 153.3 132.4 182.7 132.9 284.8 315.0 160.0 147.5 195.6 154.5 139.8 160.7 166.5 155.3 163.5 272.4 200.6 154.3 126.2 169.6 134.7 294.1 324.8 166.2 152.0 199.8 161.0 139.9 166.5 167.2 155.9 163.9 274.9 200.8 153.6 126.4 170.4 133.9 297.2 325.2 168.7 156.8 209.7 161.3 139.9 170.0 168.1 156.3 164.7 275.9 201.2 155.1 126.5 170.9 133.3 298.4 326.9 169.9 156.4 212.2 163.7 139.9 166.4 169.2 156.5 164.9 278.7 199.0 153.2 125.1 168.3 133.2 302.5 332.3 172.0 157.6 213.5 163.7 140.0 168.3 169.6 156.8 164.9 280.7 201.0 155.3 126.4 170.2 134.1 304.6 335.9 172.2 158.0 213.5 163.7 142.2 169.1 169.7 157.0 165.1 282.3 202.2 156.2 127.1 171.4 134.5 306.2 340.0 170.9 158.4 213.5 163.7 142.2 170.1 167.4 152.0 159.5 267.9 211.4 152.3 134.3 186.5 132.7 285.4 314.3 159.7 148.6 195.4 154.8 140.5 167.9 170.6 154.5 163.2 273.4 202.9 153.8 127.8 173.0 134.1 294.6 323.9 165.7 153.1 200.0 161.2 140.4 173.8 171.3 155.0 163.5 275.8 203.2 153.2 128.1 174.0 133.3 297.5 324.2 168.2 157.4 208.8 161.5 140.5 176.4 172.2 155.5 164.3 277.0 203.4 154.5 128.0 174.2 132.7 299.1 325.9 169.5 157.7 211.7 164.1 140.5 173.8 173.4 155.8 164.6 279.8 201.0 152.6 126.5 171.5 132.5 303.3 331.3 171.7 158.9 212.9 164.1 140.5 176.0 173.8 156.1 164.6 281.9 203.5 154.4 128.1 174.0 133.5 305.3 334.9 171.9 159.2 212.9 164.1 142.3 176.7 174.0 156.3 164.8 283.3 204.7 155.2 128.9 175.1 134.0 306.7 338.9 170.5 159.6 212.9 164.1 142.3 177.8 ...................................................................................................................................... 369.0 389.3 390.8 389.5 391.1 391.8 392.8 359.0 380.7 381.6 380.4 381.6 382.4 382.8 Airline fa re ................................................................................................ Intercity bus fare ..................................................................................... Intracity mass transit ............................................................................... Taxi fare ................................................................................................... Intercity train fa re .................................................................................. 428.5 405.5 324.5 307.6 370.7 450.1 438.9 346.6 310.4 381.9 450.1 442.2 346.5 310.8 381.9 453.5 445.3 346.6 311.1 382.0 455.4 447.0 345.9 311.3 383.5 456.2 455.4 346.7 311.3 388.2 424.4 402.6 322.7 316.7 371.3 446.6 438.7 346.6 319.7 382.1 450.5 441.3 345.8 319.7 382.2 445.4 442.6 346.5 319.8 382.2 MEDICAL CARE ................................................................................................................... 366.2 380.3 454.1 441.1 345.7 310.4 381.9 381.9 383.1 385.5 387.5 388.5 364.3 378.5 380.1 381.2 448.8 445.4 346.6 320.0 382.2 383.7 450.6 447.8 345.9 320.1 383.8 385.6 451.1 455.4 346.5 320.3 388.7 386.7 M edical care c o m m o d itie s .............................................................................................. 229.9 240.7 241.6 242.4 244.1 245.6 247.3 230.1 240.7 241.5 242.3 244.1 245.6 247.2 Prescription drugs..................................................................................... Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 100).................................................... Tranquilizers and sedatives (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................................... Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and prescription medical supplies (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................. Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77 = 10 0).............................. Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and respiratory agents (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................................................. 222.3 161.2 188.4 160.6 234.9 166.1 205.1 170.4 236.6 167.7 207.6 171.3 238.0 168.4 208.7 171.7 240.2 170.5 212.7 172.8 242.2 171.0 216.2 174.4 244.4 171.8 218.8 174.9 223.7 163.5 188.3 160.3 236.3 168.3 205.1 169.5 237.9 170.0 207.5 170.4 239.4 171.0 208.6 170.9 241.7 173.3 212.7 172.1 243.8 173.8 216.3 173.7 245.9 174.6 218.9 174.2 205.0 181.1 216.2 189.7 218.1 191.0 220.7 192.0 222.3 192.7 223.8 194.4 228.3 198.2 207.1 183.0 218.4 191.7 220.4 192.8 223.2 193.8 224.7 194.7 226.1 196.3 230.7 197.2 165.7 175.9 175.5 176.1 176.9 178.3 179.1 166.2 176.5 176.2 176.9 177.7 179.0 179.7 Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 = 100)...................... Eyeglasses (12/77 = 100) ............................................................... Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs................................. Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 = 100) . . . 158.3 137.7 257.5 152.6 164.3 140.6 269.5 157.0 164.4 140.5 269.4 157.9 164.5 141.4 269.5 157.1 165.4 141.9 271.3 157.7 166.0 142.2 271.5 159.8 166.8 141.9 273.7 160.3 159.1 136.5 258.8 154.0 165.1 139.5 270.6 158.4 165.2 139.3 270.4 159.4 165.3 140.4 270.5 158.6 166.3 140.8 272.4 159.1 166.9 141.2 272.7 161.5 167.8 140.9 275.0 161.9 TRANSPORTATION Public https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 77 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 20. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary M edical care s e r v i c e s ..................................................................................................... Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1983 1983 1984 Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 396.3 410.9 412.7 413.9 416.5 418.5 419.3 393.8 408.6 410.4 411.5 414.1 416.1 417.0 349.8 380.8 331.9 160.0 351.8 382.2 334.8 160.8 353.1 383.0 336.6 161.5 354.0 383.8 337.7 166.1 333.3 365.9 311.8 152.7 347.4 382.1 325.7 156.4 348.6 383.6 326.8 156.6 350.1 384.8 329.5 156.2 352.1 386.2 332.4 157.1 353.4 387.0 334.3 157.8 354.4 387.9 335.3 158.4 Professional services............................................................................... Physicians' services.......................................................................... Dental services.................................................................................. Other professional services (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................... 332.9 362.0 314.0 156.2 347.0 378.1 327.9 160.1 348.2 379.5 329.1 160.3 Other medical care services .................................................................... Hospital and other medical services (12/77 = 100) ......................... Hospital room............................................................................... Other hospital and medical care services (12/77 = 100) .............. 473.0 202.2 643.5 198.8 488.3 210.9 672.9 207.0 490.7 212.5 678.1 208.5 491.5 213.0 679.5 209.1 494.7 215.0 687.1 210.7 497.7 217.2 691.3 213.6 498.2 217.6 690.8 214.4 469.5 200.1 635.9 197.0 485.2 208.9 664.6 205.4 487.7 210.4 669.5 206.8 488.4 210.9 670.8 207.4 491.7 212.9 677.3 209.3 494.6 214.7 680.8 211.7 495.3 215.1 680.9 212.5 ENTERTAINMENT 249.5 255.3 256.4 257.3 258.3 259.0 260.1 245.8 251.4 252.5 253.4 254.2 254.8 255.8 Entertainm ent c o m m o d itie s .......................................................................................... 248.7 253.3 254.5 254.8 255.9 256.0 256.8 243.1 247.8 248.8 249.2 249.6 250.2 250.9 Reading materials (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................................................ Newspapers ..................................................................................... Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................... 162.3 308.2 168.6 164.5 315.0 169.4 166.0 315.2 172.5 166.3 315.4 173.0 167.7 317.5 174.7 167.8 319.2 174.1 168.8 320.1 175.6 161.8 308.3 168.7 164.0 315.1 169.3 165.4 315.3 172.4 165.6 315.6 172.8 167.0 317.7 174.6 167.2 319.4 173.7 168.2 320.4 175.4 Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100)......................................... Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) ......................................................... Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 = 100) .............. Bicycles .......................................................................................... Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100)........................ 135.0 138.5 117.4 198.2 134.8 137.8 142.9 117.7 200.2 134.3 138.3 143.9 117.9 198.3 134.8 138.7 144.4 117.3 198.9 135.5 138.8 144.5 117.2 198.8 135.6 140.0 146.0 118.2 198.1 137.3 139.6 145.9 118.0 198.4 134.4 129.1 129.2 115.3 199.0 134.7 131.4 132.6 115.9 201.2 134.2 131.9 133.7 115.9 199.4 134.0 132.3 134.0 115.5 200.3 135.0 132.2 133.9 115.3 200.0 135.1 133.6 135.8 116.4 199.1 136.5 133.0 135.4 116.1 199.5 134.0 Toys, hobbies, and other entertainment (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................... Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Pet supplies and expenses (12/77 = 100) ...................................... 138.8 136.6 130.2 148.9 141.7 139.3 134.2 151.4 141.9 138.6 135.0 153.1 142.0 138.3 135.2 153.7 141.9 138.2 135.1 153.5 141.8 138.1 134.9 153.4 142.5 139.1 135.1 154.0 137.6 132.9 131.2 150.2 140.7 135.9 135.6 152.7 141.0 135.2 136.3 154.2 141.1 135.1 136.4 153.6 263.4 165.0 156.1 154.7 140.9 134.8 136.2 154.5 141.5 135.6 136.4 155.3 Entertainm ent s e r v ic e s ..................................................................................................... 251.1 258.5 259.7 261.3 262.8 263.8 265.5 251.7 258.8 260.1 262.0 263.4 264.0 265.6 Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 100) .............................................. Admissions (12/77 = 100) .................................................................... Other entertainment services (12/77 = 1 0 0 )............................................ 156.9 147.2 133.0 159.7 156.0 135.3 160.1 157.3 136.1 162.3 156.9 136.2 163.6 157.2 137.0 165.1 156.8 136.7 165.9 158.2 138.0 158.1 146.3 134.0 160.4 155.0 136.0 161.0 156.1 136.8 163.2 155.7 137.1 165.0 156.1 137.6 166.2 155.6 137.0 166.8 156.9 138.5 OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES 298.6 306.5 307.2 314.6 315.8 316.5 316.7 295.9 304.5 305.3 310.9 311.9 312.6 312.8 Tobacco products ................................................................................................................ 299.9 313.2 313.9 314.1 314.6 314.7 314.6 299.6 312.9 313.5 313.7 314.2 314.3 314.2 Cigarettes ................................................................................................ Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 = 100) ........... 308.0 153.9 322.0 159.3 322.6 159.7 322.8 159.9 323.3 160.0 323.4 160.6 323.2 161.0 307.0 153.9 320.9 159.4 321.5 159.8 321.7 159.9 322.2 160.1 322.2 160.6 322.1 161.0 Personal c a r e ....................................................................................................................... 266.3 271.8 272.6 273.6 274.7 276.3 276.6 264.4 269.7 270.5 271.6 272.4 274.0 274.4 Toilet goods and personal care appliances .............................................. Products for the hair, hairpieces, and wigs (12/77 = 100) .............. Dental and shaving products (12/77 = 100) .................................... Cosmetics, bath and nail preparations, manicure and eye makeup implements (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100) . . . 266.3 154.0 167.3 270.2 156.1 167.2 270.6 156.2 167.6 271.6 156.1 167.9 272.0 155.9 168.2 273.4 156.9 170.9 273.5 156.5 172.1 267.1 153.1 165.6 270.9 155.1 165.2 271.4 155.3 165.6 272.5 155.3 165.8 272.6 155.0 166.0 274.0 156.2 168.9 274.2 155.8 170.0 149.8 150.7 154.0 152.7 153.2 154.2 154.5 155.0 154.9 155.4 154.9 155.5 155.3 154.7 151.1 154.4 155.1 156.4 154.5 158.0 155.9 158.7 155.9 159.0 155.8 159.1 156.3 158.3 Personal care services ............................................................................. Beauty parlor services for women .................................................... Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100) . . . 267.4 270.7 147.8 274.3 277.3 152.1 275.4 278.4 152.8 276.4 279.2 153.6 278.0 281.2 154.0 279.9 283.1 155.0 280.4 283.8 155.1 262.1 263.7 146.7 269.0 270.2 150.9 270.0 271.2 151.6 271.1 272.0 152.4 272.6 274.0 152.8 274.4 275.8 153.8 275.0 276.6 153.8 ........................................................................ 352.1 358.6 359.3 381.9 384.0 384.1 384.3 353.7 361.3 362.1 384.1 386.0 386.2 386.4 Schoolbooks and supplies ....................................................................... Personal and educational services............................................................ Tuition and other school fees............................................................ College tuition (12/77 = 100) ................................................. Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................... Personal expenses (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).................................................... 308.9 361.9 182.9 182.8 183.9 196.8 318.8 367.9 184.8 185.2 183.9 205.0 319.2 368.7 185.0 185.3 184.3 206.4 331.5 393.1 200.7 200.1 201.1 207.3 333.7 295.2 201.3 201.4 201.3 208.5 333.8 395.4 201.3 201.4 201.3 208.9 334.0 395.5 201.3 201.3 201.4 209.5 313.0 363.6 183.3 182.7 184.9 197.3 323.4 370.8 185.6 186.0 185.0 205.6 323.8 371.6 185.8 186.1 185.4 207.0 336.4 395.6 201.4 201.1 202.6 207.9 338.6 397.4 202.3 202.3 202.8 208.8 338.7 397.6 202.3 202.3 202.8 209.2 338.9 397.8 202.3 202.2 202.9 209.7 Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products...................................... 370.9 365.9 362.4 364.3 366.6 365.6 362.3 Utilities and public transportation ............................................................ Housekeeping and home maintenance services......................................... 339.8 364.9 362.9 370.9 365.6 371.6 367.0 373.0 362.8 373.7 358.5 373.7 357.5 374.1 372.5 419.4 338.5 372.0 367.3 422.0 362.0 379.9 363.8 437.3 364.6 380.3 365.7 441.6 366.1 382.3 367.9 440.3 361.5 382.7 366.8 440.4 357.1 381.9 363.6 442.8 355.9 382.7 Personal and educational expenses Special indexes: c = corrected. 78 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 21. Consumer Price Index for Ail Urban Consumers: Cross classification of region and population size class by expenditure category and commodity and service group [December 1977 = 100] Size class A (1 .25 m illion or m ore) Category and group Size class B (3 8 5 ,0 0 0 -1 ,2 5 0 m illion) 1984 1984 Aug. Oct. Size class C (7 5 ,0 0 0 -3 8 5 ,0 0 0 ) Dec. Aug. Oct. Size class 0 (7 5 ,0 0 0 or less) 1984 Dec. Aug. 1984 Oct. Dec. Aug. Oct. Dec. Northeast EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ......................................................................................................................... Food and beverages ................................................................................................ Housing................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ................................................................................................ Transportation ........................................................................................................ Medical care ........................................................................................................... Entertainment........................................................................................................... Other goods and services ....................................................................................... 162.6 154.2 167.4 125.7 172.0 176.8 149.7 172.3 163.5 153.7 168.2 128.2 172.0 178.3 150.9 178.1 164.3 154.1 169.7 125.5 173.0 181.4 151.3 178.9 168.9 152.0 180.6 125.6 175.6 181.0 148.2 172.0 170.0 152.6 180.9 129.0 176.9 182.7 149.9 177.4 169.9 152.3 181.2 126.7 176.8 183.5 149.8 177.4 173.7 157.5 187.7 131.1 176.2 178.9 153.9 176.6 175.3 156.1 190.1 139.0 176.3 182.7 155.3 180.7 174.4 155.8 187.5 138.2 176.3 184.1 155.4 181.5 167.2 152.7 172.3 138.5 175.7 184.9 153.6 175.6 169.8 152.0 177.4 141.4 176.2 188.7 154.8 181.1 169.7 151.4 176.9 138.7 176.9 192.8 156.5 180.9 154.9 154.6 172.0 155.3 156.1 173.4 155.1 155.4 175.3 159.8 163.1 182.3 161.0 164.7 183.3 161.0 164.9 183.1 160.2 161.0 195.0 160.9 162.8 198.0 160.6 162.7 196.1 158.7 161.0 179.1 159.1 162.2 185.2 159.0 162.3 185.3 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities................................................................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .................................................................... Services........................................................................................................................... North Central Region EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ......................................................................................................................... Food and beverages ................................................................................................ Housing................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ................................................................................................ Transportation ........................................................................................................ Medical care ........................................................................................................... Entertainment........................................................................................................... Other goods and services ....................................................................................... 172.3 150.2 192.0 120.2 171.9 180.0 146.4 168.7 173.4 150.0 192.2 122.9 174.0 181.5 148.3 172.9 173.2 150.4 191.8 120.8 173.7 182.1 148.4 173.0 168.1 149.4 177.3 131.7 173.4 182.0 139.6 180.6 168.9 149.2 178.1 134.4 173.9 183.0 140.3 184.7 169.2 149.6 178.3 132.5 174.3 184.6 139.9 186.1 166.6 150.7 175.3 130.2 175.1 175.2 153.9 167.1 167.2 150.2 175.8 132.0 176.7 175.6 153.4 169.4 166.4 149.9 174.0 129.3 176.7 176.3 154.2 169.6 166.6 158.4 170.0 124.9 174.9 185.1 142.5 178.4 167.5 157.8 171.3 128.7 175.1 185.6 143.3 181.4 167.6 158.5 171.0 128.0 174.9 186.2 146.4 181.8 158.6 162.4 192.3 159.4 164.0 193.7 159.0 163.1 193.7 157.2 160.2 185.3 157.7 161.1 186.7 157.8 161.0 187.2 155.8 157.9 183.6 156.4 159.1 184.3 155.9 158.5 183.1 156.3 155.3 182.8 156.4 155.7 184.7 156.7 155.8 184.8 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commod.ties................................................................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .................................................................... Services........................................................................................................................... South EXPENDITURE CATEGORY Ail items ......................................................................................................................... Food and beverages ................................................................................................ Housing................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ................................................................................................ Transportation ........................................................................................................ Med cal care ........................................................................................................... Entertainment........................................................................................................... Other goods and services ....................................................................................... 168.7 157.3 175.4 131.5 175.6 180.6 147.7 172.5 170.2 157.2 176.9 137.6 176.7 182.2 148.7 176.7 170.3 157.8 176.1 137.0 176.8 184.2 151.8 177.2 170.6 157.2 176.5 127.8 179.0 183.5 161.9 174.8 171.9 157.5 177.0 132.8 180.2 184.9 162.7 179.9 172.0 157.4 177.2 132.0 180.7 185.3 162.6 180.6 168.6 154.0 174.1 127.4 177.5 188.6 153.4 174.5 169.5 153.9 174.2 131.5 179.0 191.0 154.1 177.6 170.2 153.8 175.6 130.7 179.0 193.1 156.2 178.7 168.7 157.8 177.0 110.8 173.8 193.4 151.7 171.3 170.1 158.3 177.1 117.4 174.8 197.7 152.8 174.5 170.4 158.1 178.2 117.8 174.1 199.0 152.7 173.9 159.4 160.0 181.3 160.7 162.2 183.1 160.8 162.0 183.1 161.3 162.7 184.2 162.6 164.5 185.5 162.3 164.1 186.2 159.2 161.6 182.9 160.0 162.9 184.2 160.0 162.8 185.9 158.5 158.4 184.1 159.8 160.2 185.6 159.3 159.5 186.9 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities................................................................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .................................................................... Servces........................................................................................................................... West EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items ........................................................................................................................ Food and beverages ................................................................................................ Housing................................................................................................................... Apparel and upkeep ................................................................................................ Transportât on ........................................................................................................ Medical care ........................................................................................................... Entertainment........................................................................................................... Other goods and services ....................................................................................... 170.3 156.5 179.3 126.5 177.6 185.7 144.8 173.7 172.2 156.8 180.5 129.3 181.0 188.0 145.7 182.7 172.1 157.6 179.8 126.7 181.2 187.9 146.9 183.0 169.5 159.8 174.7 130.5 178.6 182.7 148.8 174.7 170.6 159.7 175.0 131.2 181.2 183.6 152.6 179.3 170.9 161.5 174.1 131.8 181.8 184.5 154.6 179.8 161.4 155.4 159.9 122.5 174.5 189.5 157.9 170.1 162.7 155.8 161.1 127.7 176.3 190.5 154.0 174.4 162.9 155.2 160.9 125.6 177.0 193.5 158.0 175.0 167.8 163.0 167.8 145.1 172.6 188.2 163.2 176.0 170.1 164.2 172.2 147.1 172.7 188.7 165.9 179.3 170.1 164.3 171.2 146.1 173.4 189.9 169.3 180.3 155.8 155.3 188.4 158.0 158.7 190.1 157.8 157.9 190.0 159.5 159.0 182.7 160.3 160.4 184.2 161.4 161.0 183.7 157.1 157.2 166.5 158.2 158.6 168.0 157.9 158.6 168.7 157.6 154.7 182.8 158.7 155.8 186.7 159.0 156.3 186.3 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities................................................................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .................................................................... Servces........................................................................................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 79 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 22. Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average, and selected areas [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers Area1 U.S. city average2 ..................................................................................... Anchorage, Alaska (10/67 = 10 0)............................................................ Atlanta, Ga.................................................................................................. Balt more. Md............................................................................................. Boston, Mass.............................................................................................. Buffalo, N.Y................................................................................................ Chicago, III.—Northwestern Ind.................................................................... Cincinnati, Ohio—Ky.—Ind............................................................................ Cleveland, Ohio ........................................................................................ Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex.................................................................................. Oenver-Boulder, Colo.................................................................................. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Dec. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 303.5 311.7 313.0 314.5 315.3 315.3 315.5 301.5 307.5 310.3 312.1 312.2 311.9 312.2 318.2 306.3 277.9 275.5 307.3 288.2 303.9 316.4 307.4 294.5 310.8 323.3 328.9 317.6 313.4 349.9 Miami, Fla. (11/77 = 10 0)....................................................................... Milwaukee, Wis........................................................................................... Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis................................................................ New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J.............................................................. Northeast, Pa. (Scranton).......................................................................... 317.5 294.3 305.9 291.8 314.3 San Francisco-Oakland, Calif....................................................................... Seatt e-Everett. Wash.................................................................................. Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va......................................................................... 307.3 302.9 297.3 301.4 314.1 311.6 310.2 302.9 319.1 306.9 298.2 303.9 323.4 314.3 308.3 1The areas listed include not only the central city but the entire portion of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated Area 308.7 311.8 303.7 321.1 308.0 301.1 306.0 294.2 314.6 313.5 309.1 289.8 333.4 313.7 311.1 301.3 288.2 317.9 300.0 299.9 327.9 308.0 312.5 288.2 305.1 322.1 294.3 302.6 288.6 299.0 314.4 301.2 300.3 168.0 341.6 294.7 295.9 304.3 306.1 303.3 325.8 is used for New York and Chicago. 2averafle 0f 85 cities 306.1 301.3 304.2 299.9 297.7 308.5 301.8 302.6 319.3 318.6 325.0 299.8 304.3 300.0 297.6 330.9 304.0 306.5 169.6 342.7 327.0 300.4 308.7 304.2 301.2 300.6 309.2 323.8 301.6 307.9 304.6 295.7 307.1 328.8 319.3 305.3 317.9 301.7 345.1 302.9 294.5 334.4 307.7 302.6 293.7 308.0 330.7 322.7 303.2 310.8 289.8 324.4 328.2 169.7 347.9 332.5 297.1 294.6 301.4 324.6 318.1 315.8 304.3 320.9 346.1 298.9 293.6 333.6 304.5 305.1 316.0 315.1 306.5 292.0 328.1 324.8 298.3 270.9 318.2 316.4 305.3 347.1 304.8 309.1 363.7 327.5 316.5 313.0 314.0 339.7 330.7 168.3 324.3 328.0 306.6 302.5 311.4 357.1 300.9 308.7 351.3 285.6 349.4 311.9 287.4 334.4 314.1 311.9 167.9 324.0 324 8 305.0 313.9 325.4 270.9 315.0 311.6 300.8 303.4 340.1 333.7 351.3 308.0 286.0 332.0 311.2 308.6 167.0 321.3 Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J.................................................................................. Pittsburgh. Pa............................................................................................. Portland, Oreg.-Wash................................................................................ St. Louis, Mo.-Ill....................................................................................... San Diego, Calif.......................................................................................... 315.1 325.2 266.8 315.3 307.8 296.1 337.3 329.8 307.7 303.2 317.8 315.9 313.0 304.9 300.1 278.4 320.7 303.0 297.7 80 1984 1983 Dec. Detroit, Mich............................................................................................... Honolulu, Hawaii ..................................................................................... Houston. Tex.............................................................................................. Kansas City, Me. Kansas.......................................................................... Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif..................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers 1984 1983 321.5 305.5 319.8 23. Producer Price indexes, by stage of processing [1967 = 100] Commodity grouping Annual average 1984 1984 1985 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. FINISHED GOODS Finished goods....................................................................... 291.2 289.5 290.6 291.4 291.2 291.1 290.9 292.3 291.3 r289.5 291.6 292.3 292.4 292.7 Finished consumer goods .............................................. Finished consumer foods ............................................ Crude ....................................................................... Processed ............................................................... Nondurable goods less foods...................................... Durable goods ............................................................ Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy . . . Capital equipment............................................................ 290.4 273.5 283.9 270.3 337.4 236.6 239.1 294.1 288.9 272.2 306.9 266.9 335.0 235.9 236.0 291.6 290.1 274.7 313.6 269.0 336.1 236.1 236.5 292.3 291.1 276.6 323.7 270.2 336.7 236.6 237.1 292.3 290.3 274.3 299.0 269.9 336.4 236.7 237.9 294.5 290.3 271.7 270.7 269.6 338.9 236.6 238.7 293.9 290.1 270.8 258.9 269.7 339.2 236.4 238.7 293.9 291.6 275.3 270.8 273.4 339.2 236.6 240.1 294.6 290.4 274.0 274.6 271.7 336.9 236.7 240.1 294.6 r288.7 r273.0 r270.3 r271.1 r336.2 r233.0 r240.8 r292.5 290.3 271.8 277.2 269.1 337.7 237.9 240.4 296.0 291.1 272.3 265.5 270.7 339.1 238.4 241.3 296.3 291.3 274.4 270.8 272.5 337.2 238.8 241.1 296.4 291.1 279.2 263.1 273.0 335.6 240.5 243.3 298.1 320.0 316.3 317.6 319.7 320.3 320.9 321.6 321.7 321.1 320.3 319.9 320.5 319.8 319.6 INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS Intermediate materials, supplies, and components................... Materials and components for manufacturing................... 301.8 298.9 299.8 301.8 302.9 303.3 303.4 303.2 302.5 r301.9 301.2 301.8 301.1 300.7 Materials for food manufacturing................................. Materials for nondurable manufacturing ...................... Materials for durable manufacturing ........................... Components for manufacturing................................... 271.7 290.5 325.1 287.5 268.6 286.6 323.4 284.5 268.3 287.0 325.6 285.2 269.6 290.3 328.2 285.6 271.4 291.8 329.1 286.2 276.0 292.8 327.2 287.0 275.2 292.8 326.9 287.5 276.4 292.7 325.4 287.9 272.4 291.3 325.1 288.4 r270.0 r290.9 r323.5 288.9 267.2 290.3 321.9 289.2 269.2 290.1 323.2 289.8 268.4 289.3 321.8 289.7 264.9 289.2 320.5 290.5 Materials and components for construction...................... 310.3 305.5 307.8 309.6 310.5 309.8 310.3 310.9 312.0 r311.7 311.6 311.6 312.3 313.2 Processed fuels and lubricants......................................... Manufacturing industries.............................................. Nonmanufacturing industries ...................................... 566.3 483.8 638.2 556.4 474.2 628.0 561.3 477.9 634.1 567.8 483.4 641.4 562.9 480.6 634.5 567.2 485.5 638.2 575.2 490.4 649.1 576.6 491.4 650.9 569.2 484.7 643.0 r565.3 r481.8 r638.1 564.2 483.6 634.1 566.2 485.8 636.0 561.1 482.9 628.9 556.9 479.7 623.8 Containers....................................................................... 302.1 292.3 294.8 297.3 299.4 300.9 301.8 303.0 304.1 r305.2 307.9 309.4 309.3 309.9 Supplies.......................................................................... Manufacturing industries.............................................. Nonmanufacturing industries ...................................... Feeds ....................................................................... Other supplies......................................................... 283.3 279.0 285.9 215.8 300.6 282.6 274.5 287.0 243.7 296.6 282.2 276.0 285.7 227.7 298.0 283.0 276.4 286.7 232.2 298.4 284.2 277.8 287.8 233.5 299.5 284.3 278.4 287.6 229 2 300.0 283.9 279.0 286.7 221.6 300.5 283.2 279.2 285.6 211.7 301.0 284.1 280.9 286.0 208.3 302.2 r283.6 r280.7 r285.3 203.0 302.3 283.1 281.0 284.5 195.4 302.8 283.1 281.9 284.0 192.4 302.8 283.1 282.2 283.8 191.1 302.8 284.0 283.3 284.6 189.9 304.0 Crude materials for further processing ................................... 331.0 333.5 332.6 338.8 339.4 338.0 333.0 334.1 328.9 r326.2 320.0 323.7 323.1 319.4 Foodstuffs and feedstuffs................................................. 259.7 264.0 260.5 269.9 269.7 266.4 260.3 263.6 256.5 r252.7 245.5 253.4 253.7 251.3 Nonfood materials............................................................ 484.7 483.4 488.1 487.5 490 1 492.3 489.6 486.4 485.0 r484.6 480.2 475.4 473.0 466.1 Nonfood materials except fuel...................................... Manufacturing industries ......................................... Construction............................................................ 380.6 390.2 278.7 380.1 390.4 273.7 385.5 395.5 280.3 387.8 398.8 276.5 388.8 399.5 279.2 389.9 400.2 282.7 386.1 395.7 283.5 380.9 390.1 282.0 376.8 386.1 277.6 r379.3 r388.5 r279.9 374.8 384.0 276.4 369 4 377.9 276.2 367.2 375.4 276.2 361.7 368.8 278.6 Crude fuel.................................................................... Manufacturing industries ......................................... Nonmanufacturing industries................................... 931.4 1,092.4 818.1 926.1 1,086.5 813.2 926.6 1,086.3 814.2 910.6 1,064.3 802.6 920.8 1,079.6 809.1 928.4 1,088.1 816.1 932 6 1,094.5 818 4 940.2 1,103.5 825.1 953.1 r937.6 1,120.1 r1,100.0 835.1 r823.3 935.0 1,097.6 820.4 934.1 1,095.8 820.3 930.9 1,091.1 818.3 918.6 1,074.2 809.6 Finished goods excluding foods.............................................. Finished consumer goods excluding foods...................... Finished consumer goods less energy.............................. 294.8 294.1 257.9 292.9 292.5 256.1 293.6 293.1 257.2 294.0 293.6 258 2 294.6 293.5 257.8 295.3 294.9 257.1 295.4 294.9 256.7 295.7 295.0 258.9 294.8 293.8 258.5 r292 7 r291.7 257.2 295.9 294.8 258.2 296.7 295.7 258.9 296.1 294.9 259.6 296.6 294.8 261.0 Intermediate materials less foods and feeds ........................... Intermediate materials less energy................................. 325.0 303.7 320.6 300.5 322.3 301.5 324.4 303 3 325.0 304.4 325.4 304.6 326.4 304.7 326.7 304.7 326 3 304.7 325.7 304.2 325.6 303.8 326.1 304.3 325.5 304.0 325.4 304.2 Intermediate foods and feeds ................................................. 253.1 260 7 255.1 257.5 259.1 260.8 257.8 255.3 251.4 r248.1 243.8 244.1 243.1 240.4 Crude materials less agricultural products .............................. Crude materials less energy ......................................... 547.2 255.6 546.3 258.3 552.0 257.3 550.0 265.1 553.0 265.4 554.0 263.3 552.5 257.6 549.8 258.5 548.8 251.9 r546.6 r249.9 542.3 243.0 536.6 248.3 533.4 248.3 525.6 246.6 CRUDE MATERIALS SPECIAL GROUPINGS 1Data for September 1984 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised. MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 24. Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Code Commodity group and subgroup Annual average 1984 1984 1985 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. All com m odities .............................................................................................. All com m odities (1 9 5 7 -5 9 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................... 310.3 329.3 308.0 326.8 308.9 327.7 311.0 330.0 311.3 330.3 311.5 330.5 311.3 330.3 311.9 330.9 310.7 329.7 r309.3 r328.2 309.4 328.3 310.4 329.3 309.9 328.8 309.8 328.7 Farm products and processed foods and feeds ................................ Industrial c o m m o d itie s ................................................................................... 262.6 322.6 264.4 319.1 263.4 320.6 267.9 321.9 267.3 322.6 265.8 323.2 262.8 323.8 264.9 323.9 261.4 323.3 r259.4 322.3 255.8 323.2 258.4 323.8 259.2 323.0 258.0 323.2 FARM PRODUCTS AND PROCESSED FOODS AND FEEDS 01 01-1 01-2 01-3 01-4 01-5 01-6 01-7 01-8 01-9 Farm products............................................................................. Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables...................................... Grains..................................................................................... Livestock............................................................................... Live poultry............................................................................. Plant and animal fibers ......................................................... Fluid m I k ............................................................................... Eggs........................................................................................ Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ................................................. Other farm products............................................................... 255.7 278.0 239.7 251.8 240.6 228.4 278.3 210.8 256.3 285.4 263.4 291.2 245.5 250.7 252.6 229.3 279.1 282.4 287.3 280.2 261.6 312.2 235.3 251.9 251.3 232.7 275.7 280.7 265.4 278.9 267.4 308.0 250.9 260.8 258.4 250.3 274.2 (2) 281.4 277.7 265.4 263.8 262.1 260.8 240.8 252.3 272.7 264.4 282.1 279.7 260.8 251.9 256.2 254.8 240.6 259.1 271.7 201.0 297.0 288.2 257.1 273.7 257.8 250.0 227.7 252.7 271.8 177.9 272.4 279.1 258.7 281.9 248.9 260.1 259.2 235.8 273.9 184.9 245.8 277.4 253.3 293.7 236.9 253.7 218.6 211.3 276.8 181.2 242.6 284.3 r249.8 r290.1 231.4 244.9 239.7 210.3 282.1 177.6 228.4 r296.5 240.1 266.8 219.0 233.9 219.2 202.8 286.7 179.9 219.1 293.8 245.5 251.0 219.7 247.7 247.1 201.4 287.6 176.0 227.3 295.2 245.7 251.7 212.5 252.3 231.7 203.0 287.5 187.5 227.4 293.8 243.2 258.6 217.5 247.4 232.7 204.5 284.6 141.9 226.2 289.4 02 02-1 02-2 02-3 02-4 02-5 02-6 02-7 02-8 02-9 Processed foods and feeds......................................................... Cereal and bakery products.................................................... Meats, poultry, and fis h ......................................................... Dairy products....................................................................... Processed fruits and vegetables.............................................. Sugar and confectionery......................................................... Beverages and beverage materials ......................................... Fats and oils .......................................................................... Miscellaneous processed foods.............................................. Prepared animal feeds............................................................ 265.3 270.4 255.1 251.7 294.2 301.4 273.2 301.2 278.2 220.5 263.8 266.6 255.8 248.4 287.7 299.9 268.7 278.3 266.8 245.2 263.4 267.1 254.6 248.4 292.8 300.5 270.2 273.3 275.4 231.1 267.1 267.4 264.4 248.8 295.4 301.1 269.9 286.2 275.2 235.3 267.2 268.3 261.7 248.9 295.1 301.9 271.4 293.4 276.3 236.3 267.5 268.7 257.1 248.9 297.7 303.8 273.5 328.5 276.2 232.3 264.8 271.4 247.4 249.6 298.2 304.1 272.8 328.1 279.9 225.5 267.3 272.3 258.7 251.4 296.2 305.0 273.9 312.7 281.3 216.7 264.8 271.7 252.2 251.2 295.7 303.7 274.6 305.9 280.4 213.9 r263.6 r271.9 r249.5 r255.0 r291.8 r302.4 r274.6 r298.5 r281.1 r209.2 263.3 272.7 247.2 256.7 295.5 300.2 276.8 302.2 282.2 202.4 264.4 272.6 252.5 257.4 291.7 297.1 276.2 310.9 282.0 199.7 265.5 273.7 258.8 255.9 292.6 296.3 275.9 297.6 282.2 198.8 265.1 276.1 259.1 255.4 296.7 293.1 276.2 280.4 281.9 197.8 03 03-1 03-2 03-3 03-4 03-81 03-82 Textile products and apparel....................................................... Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 1 0 0 ).............................................. Processed yarns and threads (12/75 = 100) ......................... Gray fabrics (12/75 = 10 0).................................................... Finished fabrics (12/75 = 1 0 0 ).............................................. Apparel .................................................................................. Textile housefurnishings......................................................... 209.9 159.6 142.7 153.7 126.5 201.1 239.2 208.2 159.2 142.3 151.1 124.8 200.1 236.0 209.6 161.4 144.0 152.8 126.3 200.5 236.6 209.9 160.7 144.0 153.2 127.0 200.7 237.6 209.9 160.7 143.6 153.0 126.9 200.7 238.1 210.5 160.6 144.3 153.7 127.3 201.3 238.8 210.2 160.5 143.8 154.3 127.1 200.8 239.0 210.5 160.1 143.7 154.5 126.9 201.6 239.1 210.1 159.9 142.1 154.4 127.1 201.0 240.0 r210.7 159.2 142.2 r154.6 r127.3 r202.2 240.5 209.6 158.2 141.3 154.7 126.2 200.5 242.4 210.0 157.5 140.9 154.7 126.1 201.6 241.4 209.8 157.4 140.7 153.7 125.8 201.8 241.3 210.4 157.6 141.2 153.2 126.5 202.6 242.2 04 04-2 04-3 04-4 Hides, skins, leather, and related products................................. Leather .................................................................................. Footwear ............................................................................... Other leather and related products ......................................... 286.5 372.3 251.2 265.0 279.1 346.2 250.9 257.2 283.3 362.0 252.5 257.3 286.7 378.0 253.5 257.3 286.8 386.7 251.6 258.1 288.5 390.7 251.5 259.8 290.1 387.8 250.5 267.9 288.9 383.2 250.1 267.2 298.7 378.1 250.9 267.7 r288.7 r371.4 r252.0 r267.6 288.9 368.9 252.2 272.4 283.2 360.1 249.1 272.1 282.9 353.1 249.6 271.0 284.3 357.7 252.4 273.3 05 05-1 05-2 05-3 05-4 05-61 05-7 Fuels and related products and power......................................... Coal........................................................................................ Coke........................................................................................ Gas fuels3 ............................................................................. Electric power ....................................................................... Crude petroleum4 .................................................................. Petroleum products, refined5 ................................................. 06 06-1 06-21 06-22 06-3 06-4 06-5 06-6 06-7 Chemicals and allied products.............................................. Industrial chemicals6 ............................................................... Prepared paint Paint materials....................................................................... Drugs and pharmaceuticals .................................................... Fats and oils, inedible............................................................ Agricultural chemicals and chemical products......................... Plastic resins and materials.................................................... Other chemicals and allied products ...................................... 300.9 341 4 272.5 329.7 240.4 371.3 284.7 308.6 277.3 298.1 347.4 265.6 316.6 232,9 334.2 278.5 305.2 274 9 296.5 337.6 267.3 314.2 234.4 349.0 285.9 305.0 273.3 300.1 344.7 267.3 317.9 237.6 366.7 288.1 306.2 275.2 302.0 345.4 268.7 328.7 239.8 383.2 288.4 307.8 277.0 302.7 345.3 270.0 337.6 240.1 399.2 286.8 310.6 277.2 302.2 345.4 270.9 337.4 237.3 414.3 286.5 311.1 275.9 302.6 345.6 274.0 334.8 240.5 378.8 285.0 310.6 277.3 301.1 340.9 276.4 334.3 240 7 350.1 283.0 310.3 278.3 r300.9 r337.7 r277.0 r333.0 r239.7 359.4 r285.0 r311.8 r279.6 301.0 336.4 278.1 332.3 245.2 365.4 284.7 308.9 278.4 301.6 334.7 277.0 334.1 247.7 378.7 281.8 308.8 281.2 301.0 335.2 277.3 334.6 245.4 376.2 282.6 307.2 280.4 301.7 337.7 278.2 332.0 248.0 356.6 282.3 302.9 281.7 07 07-1 07-11 07-12 07-13 07-2 Rubber plastic products ............................................................ Rubber and rubber products.................................................... Crude rubber .......................................................................... Tires and tubes....................................................................... Miscellaneous rubber products .............................................. Plastic products (6/78 = 100) .............................................. 247.2 266.9 276.8 243.7 290.5 139.5 244.8 266.6 282.9 244.1 287.1 136.9 246.2 266.8 282.8 243.7 288.4 138.4 246.4 265.5 283.0 241.7 287.4 139.4 247.3 267.2 282.3 243.5 289.8 139.4 247.5 266.3 277.7 243.2 289.3 140.2 247.6 266.5 277.2 243.0 290.5 140.2 247.5 266.5 275.6 243.5 290.0 140.2 247.7 267.6 273.0 243.7 293.7 139.7 r248.3 268.1 r273.9 r244.2 r294.0 140.1 248.1 267.6 271.5 245.8 291.3 140.2 247.7 266.7 270.3 243.9 292.0 140.2 247.5 267.1 272.2 243.7 292.7 139.8 248.4 268.0 275.5 245.1 292.1 140.4 08 08-1 08-2 08-3 08-4 Lumber and wood products ....................................................... Lumber.................................................................................. Millwork.................................................................................. Plywood.................................................................................. Other wood products............................................................... 307.5 349.8 307.8 241.6 234.6 309.1 352.6 308.6 248.2 230.0 315.7 364.9 308.8 249.5 230.8 316.8 370.5 309.9 248.6 231.8 315.1 369.4 307.2 243.6 233 3 308.5 355.6 304.2 235.4 234.7 307.1 350.5 305.3 236.3 235.0 304.4 342.6 306.8 237.2 235.2 304.7 342.3 307.2 245.9 236.5 r303.3 r338.2 r307.4 243.4 235.9 300.2 334.4 306.6 240.1 236.5 301.1 336.8 309.8 235.0 236.6 303.3 339.6 312.5 235.8 238.8 304.3 343.2 312.4 234.0 238.2 INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES See footnotes at end of table. 82 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 657.0 652.1 656.0 658.7 654.7 660.6 665.9 665.0 657.9 r652.3 654.5 655.3 648.9 637.6 541.4 544.7 546.0 546.2 542.0 547.4 544.3 548.1 550.0 r549.1 543.7 546.4 548.2 550.5 436.4 418.3 437.9 438.9 442.8 441.6 442.9 441.9 437.3 r435.7 432.4 432.8 435.0 439.7 1,109.9 1,123.0 1,107.8 1,091.0 1,102.1 1,104.1 1,109.1 1,110.8 1,116.9 r1,104.6 1,113.1 1,110.1 1,101.8 1,075.5 440.0 420.5 424.4 426.7 431.5 433.1 446.7 453.5 456.7 r456.4 445.8 443.4 441.2 446.4 670.5 675.6 675.6 675.6 673.9 673.9 673.3 672.6 671.1 r670.6 670.8 658.5 652.6 631.1 665.3 663.2 669.8 680.2 667.0 677.6 679.7 673.3 654.8 r646.5 655.7 661.8 652.5 636.2 24. Continued— Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Commodity group and subgroup Code Annual average 1984 1984 1985 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES— Continued 09 09-1 09-11 09-12 09-13 09-14 09-15 09-2 Pulp, paper, and allied products................................................. Pulp, paper.and products,excluding building paper and board Woodpulp............................................................................... Wastepaper............................................................................. Paper ..................................................................................... Paperboard ............................................................................. Converted paper and paperboard products.............................. Building paper and board ....................................................... 318.3 293.1 396.6 240.1 303.2 281.1 280.9 258.9 309.1 280.8 366.2 211.5 294.2 262.2 270.6 251.9 312.0 285.0 374.2 229.3 296.6 271.8 273.7 255.1 314.0 288.3 378.6 242.9 299.8 275.6 276.5 258.6 316.3 291.5 401.1 258.8 300.4 277.1 279.1 263.8 317.7 292.7 407.9 259.3 301.3 277.8 280.1 265.2 318.4 293.3 410.3 257.3 301.6 279.1 280.6 265.1 319.8 295.7 410.6 254.7 307.7 279.1 282.1 262.9 321.3 296.3 410.2 254.5 307.0 285.1 282.4 259.8 r322.0 r297.5 r409.1 249.6 306.7 r288.6 r284.4 r259.4 322.6 298.3 399.5 235.6 308.0 291.8 285.8 257.3 323.8 299.4 398.4 221.4 308.2 293.4 288.1 253.5 323.2 298.4 392.7 206.0 307.1 292.4 288.0 253.6 326.6 297.8 383.5 190.8 307.0 288.9 289.0 255.2 10 10-1 10-17 10-2 10-3 10-4 10-5 10-6 10-7 10-8 Metals and metal products......................................................... Iron and steel.......................................................................... Steel mill products.................................................................. Nonferrous metals.................................................................. Metal containers .................................................................... Hardware............................................................................... Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings ...................................... Heating equipment.................................................................. Fabricated structural metal products ...................................... Miscellaneous metal products................................................. 316.0 357.0 366.0 277.0 350.1 296.5 300.6 253.2 310.8 295.0 312.9 353.8 362.5 276.8 344.1 293.3 293.9 247.3 306.5 290.3 314.8 356.2 363.6 280.2 344.8 294.0 296.4 248.1 307.0 291.1 316.8 356.5 363.6 286.1 345.4 294.4 299.9 248.5 308.3 292.1 317.9 356.5 364.2 289.1 345.3 294.6 301.5 250.3 309.3 293.1 317.4 357.3 364.7 284.1 348.0 295.3 301.6 252.4 310.6 293.4 317.3 357.0 365.4 282.8 348.0 296.2 302.4 252.7 311.2 294.3 316.1 357.4 367.6 277.0 348.0 297.1 302.8 255.2 311.7 294.1 316.2 357.4 368.1 275.3 352.0 298.0 304.6 255.5 312.3 295.0 r315.6 r357.9 r368.1 r271.8 r352.3 r299.0 r304.4 r255.7 312.1 r295.8 315.4 358.9 368.9 266.1 358.0 299.0 300.6 258.2 314.0 297.7 316.2 357.7 368.1 269.5 357.5 299.1 301.4 256.3 313.0 301.3 315.3 357.4 368.0 265.6 357.5 300.2 302.7 256.4 313.2 301.6 314.8 357.4 367.4 262.8 357.6 301.9 306.4 256.6 312.8 301.8 11 11-1 11-2 11-3 11 4 11-6 11-7 11-9 Machinery and equipment ......................................................... Agricultural machinery and equipment ................................... Construction machinery and equipment.................................... Metalworking machinery and equipment................................. General purpose machinery and equipment ........................... Special industry machinery and equipment.............................. Electrical machinery and equipment......................................... Miscellaneous machinery ...................................................... 293.1 336.2 357.5 333.8 314.1 348.5 248.6 275.0 289.7 331.0 354.2 329.2 310.7 342.0 244.7 275.5 290.2 331.4 355.9 330.2 310.9 343.2 245.7 274.3 291.0 332 9 355.3 330.6 311.7 344.6 246.7 274.5 292.2 335.5 357.5 332.6 313.1 346.8 247.7 274.6 292.6 338.2 357.8 333.5 313.2 348.2 248.1 273.7 293.1 337.8 358.1 333.4 314.0 348.6 249.1 273.9 294.0 338.6 358.3 334.2 315.2 351.9 249.4 274.2 294.1 338.8 356.9 334.7 315.5 352.8 249.4 274.1 r294.3 r337.2 r357.2 r335.6 r315.9 r351.1 r249.8 r274.5 295.0 338.0 359.1 336.2 316.1 350.5 250.4 276.3 295.7 337.2 360.1 337.8 316.5 351.0 251.2 276.9 295.6 337.6 358.2 338.2 316.5 351.8 251.5 275.7 296.7 338.5 360.4 338.0 318.0 355.6 252.2 276.2 12 12-1 12-2 12-3 12-4 12-5 12-6 Furniture and household durables.............................................. Household furniture ............................................................... Commercial furniture............................................................... Floor coverings....................................................................... Household appliances ............................................................ Home electronic equipment.................................................... Other household durable goods.............................................. 218.6 242.0 297.3 190.5 211.3 83.7 318.3 216.8 237.9 293.4 188.2 209 8 84.4 318.0 217.2 239.1 294.7 188.4 210.7 84.1 316.8 217.4 240.0 294.7 188.3 210.9 84.0 316.7 218.2 240.8 296.1 188.2 210.9 84.9 319.1 219.1 241.5 297.4 191.7 210.8 84.5 321.6 219.1 242.3 297.0 192.7 211.1 83.9 319.9 219.2 242.2 298.1 192.7 211.5 84.2 318.6 219.2 242.7 298.4 192.6 211.9 83.8 316.8 r219.0 r243.4 r297.5 r192.5 r211.6 r83.1 r316.8 219.0 243.9 298.0 192.7 211.9 81.8 317,0 219.6 244.9 301.0 189.2 211.8 83.1 319.2 219.7 245.4 299.8 189.3 212.0 82.7 320.1 220.3 247.1 300.1 192.7 211.3 80.9 323.1 13 13-11 13-2 13-3 13-4 13-5 13-6 13-7 13-8 13-9 Nonmetallic mineral products .................................................... Flat g a s s ............................................................................... Concrete ingredients............................................................... Concrete products .................................................................. Structural clay products, excluding refractories ...................... Refractories............................................................................ Asphalt roofing....................................................................... Gypsum products ................................................................. Glass containers .................................................................... Other nonmetallic minerals .................................................... 337.3 224.0 325.8 309.5 286.6 361.5 399.5 346.5 360.7 500.0 330.1 229.5 315.6 304.9 284.3 353.9 385.0 328.6 350.6 486.4 332.2 229.9 319.9 305.9 283.7 356.0 392.3 339.4 350.6 488.1 333.4 229.1 324.2 306.3 284.3 361.1 385.6 339.6 351.6 490.8 335.8 230.2 324.3 308.8 285.0 361.8 396.2 353.0 358.0 491.3 337.6 226.1 328.0 309.4 285.6 361.8 398.7 360.9 361.9 494.9 338.3 226.3 326.7 310.0 286.2 361.8 394.2 360.3 365.0 499.2 339.8 226.3 327.1 310.6 286.4 361.8 394.5 359.7 366.3 507.1 340.8 219.6 328.4 311.3 288.2 361.6 408.4 359.5 366.1 511.4 r340.5 r219.7 r328.2 r311.7 r289.4 r361.6 r408.0 r355 4 364.6 r509.8 339.6 218.0 328.0 311.5 288.8 362.7 410.3 339.4 364.8 507.4 339.5 217.4 329.5 311.4 288.4 366.6 410.6 332.3 364.9 505.5 339.9 218.1 329.3 312.1 289.0 366.6 412.0 329.3 364.1 507.2 342.3 221.0 331.4 314.8 290.7 367.0 409.9 328.5 363.7 513.3 14 14-1 14-4 Transportation equipment (12/68 = 100)................................... Motor vehicles and equipment................................................. Railroad equipment................................................................. 262.6 261.3 356.6 261.5 261.1 351.5 262.2 261 2 351.5 262.4 261.5 352.0 263.4 261.9 380.8 262.5 261.5 354.4 262.2 261.1 354.4 262.5 261.4 356.5 262.3 261.1 357.7 r257.8 r255.2 r357.6 264.8 263.3 364.6 265.2 263.6 358.8 265.4 263.9 358.8 267.9 266.6 358.9 15 15-1 15-2 15-3 15-4 15-5 15-9 Miscellaneous products............................................................... Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition...................... Tobacco products .................................................................. Notions.................................................................................. Photographic equipment and supplies ................................... Mobile homes (12/74 = 100)................................................. Other miscellaneous products........................... ................ 296.0 227.1 399.5 283.2 214.5 163.3 350.4 294.5 227.4 389.4 281.4 (2) 162.2 350.8 294.9 227.8 390.3 282.2 217.9 162.4 350.5 294.9 227.6 390.4 282.2 212.7 162.5 354.2 294.6 226.5 390.4 283.0 213.6 163.8 351.9 294.3 226.8 390.6 283.9 213.6 163.7 350.4 295.7 226.5 400.2 283.9 213.6 162.7 350.0 297.3 226.5 408.7 283.9 213.8 162.9 350.1 298.2 226.5 406.7 283.9 215.5 163.2 353.2 r296.7 r227.0 406.7 r283.9 215.5 r163.6 r346.9 297.0 227.2 406.8 283.5 215.5 163.2 348.2 297.0 227.4 407.1 283.5 212.8 164.8 349.3 297.1 227.5 406.9 283.6 212.9 164.7 349.3 299.9 228.8 423.8 283.6 213.8 164.7 346.5 1Data tor September 1984 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 2Not available. 3Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4Includes only domestic production, 5Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month. 6Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month. r = revised. 83 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 25. Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Annual average 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. S ept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Ail com m odities— less farm p ro d u c ts ............................................... All foods ......................................................................................................... Processed f o o d s .......................................................................................... 313.8 269.4 270.0 310.7 268.3 266.2 311.9 270.2 267.0 313.6 272.9 271.2 314.2 270.6 270.9 314.7 268.9 271.4 314.8 267.5 269.0 315.3 271.7 272.8 314.4 269.6 270.0 r313.3 r268.6 r269.1 314.1 267.2 269.1 314.7 267.9 270.9 314.3 269.5 272.4 314.4 268.5 272.0 Industrial commodities less fu e ls ............................................ Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 1 0 0 )................... Hosiery .................................................................................. Underwear and nightwear ....................................................... Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber and fibers and yarns............................................................ 287.6 142.0 147.6 229.9 284.3 140.0 145.8 228.6 285.5 141.3 147.3 229.8 286.7 141.7 147.4 r230.9 287.8 141.7 147.4 229.8 287.8 142.7 147.4 230.9 288.0 142.7 147.4 228.8 288.2 142.7 147.9 230.2 288.3 142.9 148.0 230.3 r287.6 r143.0 r148.0 r230.6 288.5 142.6 148.1 230.3 289.1 141.9 148.1 229.9 288.9 141.7 147.9 230.5 290.2 142.7 148.4 232.6 289.7 287.6 286.2 289.1 290.6 291.1 290.5 291.3 290.2 r289.9 289.7 290.0 289.6 290.6 Pharmaceutical preparations.................................................... Lumber and wood products, excluding miilwork...................... Steel mill products, including fabricated wire products ........... Finished steel mill products, excluding fabricated wire products ............................................................................. Finished steel mill products, Including fabricated wire products ............................................................................. 243.3 318.5 363.7 233.9 322.6 360.1 235.9 331.4 361.1 238.8 334.9 361.2 241.5 332.5 361.8 241.9 320.4 362.4 240.6 317.2 363.1 244.6 312.2 365.2 245.1 315.0 365.8 243.9 311.4 r365.9 249.0 307.6 366.7 252.2 307.5 366.0 250.8 309.7 365.8 254.0 311.5 365.3 367.6 367.4 366.9 Commodity grouping 1984 1985 365.5 361.7 363.2 363.1 363.6 364.1 364.8 367.0 367.5 r367.5 368.4 363.0 359.2 360.5 360.5 361.0 361.6 362.4 364.4 365.0 r365.1 366.7 365.3 365.1 364.6 Special metals and metal products ......................................... Fabricated metal products....................................................... Copper and copper products.................................................... Machinery and motive products.............................................. Machinery and equipment, except electrical ........................... 299.9 303.9 185.8 286.3 319.4 297.8 299.3 182.1 283.9 316.3 299.0 300.0 185.1 284.5 316.5 300.3 301.1 192.9 285.0 317.1 301.2 301.9 199.4 286.2 318.5 300.8 302.9 191.8 285.9 318.8 300.6 303.6 189.5 286.1 319.2 300.0 303.9 184.4 286.8 320.3 299.9 305.0 183.3 286.8 320.6 r297.2 r305.4 r182.5 r284.8 r320.6 300.4 307.3 176.6 288.3 321.3 301.0 308.1 183.4 288.9 322.0 300.6 308.5 179.3 289.0 321.7 301.4 308.8 178.4 290.8 323.0 Agricultural machinery, including tractors .............................. Metalworking machinery.......................................................... Total tractors.......................................................................... Agricultural machinery and equipment less parts...................... 353.8 364.9 382.4 341.1 347.1 359.3 374.0 335.2 347.5 362.1 374.5 335.7 349.3 361.6 376.1 337.4 352.9 363.0 384.1 340.4 357.0 363.2 386.8 343.6 356.5 363.3 386.7 343.0 357.2 364.6 386.9 344.0 357.5 365.1 385.7 344.3 r355.2 r366.6 r382.6 r342.3 355.5 368.6 386.2 342.7 354.3 370.6 381.6 341.7 354.7 371.4 379.7 342.1 356.1 370.1 384.7 343.4 Farm and garden tractors less parts ...................................... Agricultural machinery, excluding tractors less parts .............. Construction materials............................................................ 361.0 348.2 306.3 352.2 343.3 302.3 352.9 343.4 305.0 355.1 344.9 306.6 362.1 345.7 307.1 365.8 350.1 306.2 365.7 349.2 306.3 366.0 350.4 306.7 367.0 350.1 307.6 r362.3 r349.8 r307.2 364.6 348.5 307.1 357.6 351.7 306.6 358.0 352.2 307.3 360.5 352.8 308.5 1Data for September 1984 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 26. r = revised. Producer Price indexes, by durability of product [1967 = 100] Annual average 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Total durable goods ............................................................... Total nondurable goods ....................................................... 293.5 323.3 291.0 321.2 292.2 321.9 293.2 324.8 294.2 324.7 293.8 325.3 293.8 324.9 293.8 326.0 293.9 323.7 r292.7 322.3 294.2 321.0 294.8 322.3 294.8 321.5 295.7 320.5 Total manufactures.................................................................. Durable .......................................................................... Nondurable .................................................................... 302.9 293.9 312.3 300.0 291.3 309.1 301.2 292.4 310.4 302.8 293.3 312.7 303.2 294.3 312.5 303.8 293.9 314.1 303.9 294.0 314.2 304.3 294.2 314.8 303.3 294.5 312.6 r302.2 r293.2 311.7 303.0 294.8 311.5 303.9 295.5 312.5 303.5 295.5 311.8 303.9 296.4 311.6 Total raw or slightly processed goods ................................... Durable ....................................................................... Nondurable .................................................................... 347.0 266.7 351.7 348.4 267.4 353.3 347.6 275.2 351.8 352.4 278.7 356.7 352.4 280.6 356.5 350.1 277.9 354.3 348.0 273.3 352.3 349.6 264.5 354.7 346.9 259.6 352.2 r344.4 260.6 r349.4 339.9 255.9 345.0 341.6 254.1 347.0 340.7 252.1 346.1 337.7 255.8 342.6 Commodity grouping 1984 1Data for September 1984 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 84 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r= revised. 1985 27. Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] 1972 SIC code Industry description 1092 1311 Mercury ores (12/75 = 100) ................................. Crude petroleum and natural gas ........................... 1984 1985 Annual average 1984 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.1 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. 264.3 914.3 275.8 914.3 245.4 913.0 250.0 902.7 267.9 909.2 273.7 914.1 271.6 918.4 264.6 921.6 249.1 928.3 257.1 r918.2 271.6 917.1 276.6 908.6 267.9 904.4 264.1 880.8 MINING MANUFACTURING 2074 2083 2098 Cottonseed oil mills................................................. Malt ....................................................................... Macaroni and spaghetti............................................ 209.2 240.4 261.6 229.2 241.6 261.9 201.7 241.6 261.9 212.7 241.6 261.9 222.6 241.6 261.9 245.3 241.6 261 9 243.1 241.6 261.9 223.2 241.6 261.9 210.2 241.6 261.9 205.0 241.6 261.9 172.9 241.6 261.9 166.9 234.5 261.9 177.7 234.5 258.6 166.4 226.5 258.6 2298 2381 2394 2448 Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100) ........................ Fabric dress and work gloves ................................. Canvas and related products (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........... Wood pallets and skids (12/75 = 1 0 0 )................... 138.7 310.5 151.4 163.9 139.0 295.2 150.6 154.0 139.2 299.1 150.6 156.0 139.2 302.3 150.6 157.9 139.3 304.8 150.6 161.6 139.4 315.6 150.6 165.1 139.4 315.6 150.6 165.4 138.6 315.6 150.6 168.6 138.5 315.6 150.6 168.6 r138.5 315.6 r152.1 r168.7 137.4 315.6 152.9 166.0 138.6 315.6 152.9 168.2 138.6 315.6 152.9 168.5 138.5 313.5 152.9 169.0 2521 2654 2655 2911 Wood office furniture............................................... Sanitary food containers ......................................... Fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) Petroleum refining (6/76 = 100) ........................... 290.8 279.7 193.7 244.2 285.1 269.1 189.6 244.4 289.1 273.4 189.7 246.7 289.1 278.4 191.4 249 8 289.2 280.6 193.1 244.9 289.2 280.6 193.1 248.1 289.2 280.7 193.1 248.8 289.1 280.6 194.7 246.5 289.2 280.7 194.7 240.1 r291.1 r281.3 194.7 r237.5 292.3 283.0 194.7 241.0 296.3 283.2 197.8 242.8 299.8 283.1 197.7 239.4 301.0 285.6 199.1 233.4 3253 3255 3259 3261 3263 Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) .............. Clay refractories....................................................... Structural clay products, n.e.c................................... Vitreous plumbing fixtures...................................... Fine earthenware food utensils................................. 150.2 372.5 232.8 292.7 377.1 149.6 367.2 235.0 285.6 383.6 149.6 367.7 232.1 287.0 384.0 149.6 369.3 232.4 290.1 375.9 149.6 371.5 232.4 290.4 382.6 149.6 371.5 232.4 290.8 376.5 149.6 371.7 232.4 292.5 372.1 149.6 371.6 232.4 293.1 373.3 153.4 371.4 232.3 293.9 374.0 r153.4 r371.4 r232.4 r295.6 r374.8 150.5 373.4 233.0 297.6 373.1 150.5 380.9 233.0 297.5 376.3 150.5 380.8 233.0 298.0 380.9 150.5 381.4 237.7 297.9 391.7 3269 3274 3297 3482 Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ................ Lime (12/75 = 1 0 0 )............................................... Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 1 0 0 )......................... Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100)................... 191.4 183.0 219.2 192.4 191.9 182.8 213.1 190.3 192.2 184.4 215.4 190.3 191.9 183.9 220.6 190.3 192.2 184.1 220.1 190.3 192.2 184.2 220.1 190.3 186.3 183.3 220.1 190.3 187.6 180.3 219.9 190.3 187.6 179.6 219.9 190.3 r197.7 r187.2 220.3 M90.3 195.1 180.7 220.0 196.6 195.3 182.2 220.2 196.6 195.4 183.1 220.3 196.6 199.2 187.5 220.5 202.5 3648 3671 3942 3944 3955 Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 1 0 0 ).............. Electron tubes, receiving type ................................. Dolls (12/75 = 1 0 0 ).............................................. Games, toys, and children’s vehicles ...................... Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 = 100) . . . 186.6 497.2 134.3 238.0 145.7 173.5 490.6 137.6 239.3 144.3 173.5 490.8 137.8 240.6 149.0 184.9 490.8 137.7 240.1 149.0 185.0 490.9 131.6 239.7 149.1 185.6 490.9 133.4 239.1 149.1 185.7 491.3 133.6 239.2 149.1 186.3 491.6 133.6 239.2 146.7 188.1 491.6 133.6 239.1 146.7 M88.2 r491.8 r133.6 r239.3 146.7 194.3 492.0 133.3 235.0 139.7 196.9 527.2 133.3 234.9 139.7 196.9 527.2 133.3 234.9 139.7 196.9 546.7 134.3 236.7 139.7 3996 Hard surface floor coverings (12/75 = 1 0 0 )........... 167.5 165.2 165.2 165.2 166.3 166.4 166.4 168.7 168.8 168.8 169.7 169.7 169.7 171.4 1Data for September 1984 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis r = revised. NOTE: Indexes which were deleted in the March issue may now be found in Table 4 of the BLS monthly report, Producer Prices and Price Indexes. 85 PRODUCTIVITY DATA P roductivity data are compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from establishment data and from measures of compensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board. Definitions O u tp u t is the constant dollar gross product produced by the particular sector. O u tp u t p er h o u r o f all p erso n s (labor productivity) measures the value o f goods and services in constant prices produced per hour of labor. O u tp u t p er u n it o f ca p ita l se rv ices (capital productivity) measures the value o f goods and services in constant dollars per unit of capital services input. M u ltifa c to r p r o d u ctiv ity measures the output per unit of combined labor and capital input. The traditional measure of output per hour reflects changes in capital per hour and a combination of other factors— such as, changes in technology, shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in capacity utilization, research and development, skill and efforts of the work force, management, and so forth. The multifactor productivity meas ure differs from the familiar bls measure of output per hour of all persons in that it excludes the .effects of the substitution of capital for labor. C o m p e n sa tio n p er h o u r includes wages and salaries of employees plus employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans. The data also include an estimate of wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the self-employed, except for nonfinancial corporations, in which there are no self-employed. R ea l co m p en sa tio n p er h o u r is com pensation per hour adjusted by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. U n it la b o r co sts measure the labor compensation costs required to produce a unit o f output and is derived by dividing compensation by output. U n it n o n la b o r p a y m e n ts include profits, depreciation, interest, and in direct taxes per unit o f output. They are computed by subtracting com pensation o f all persons from current dollar gross product and dividing by output. U n it n o n la b o r co sts contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments except unit profits. U n it p ro fits include corporate profits and the value o f inventory adjustments per unit of output. The im p lic it p rice d efla to r is the price index for the gross product of the sector reported. It is derived by dividing the current dollar gross product by the constant dollar figures. H o u rs o f all p e rso n s measures the labor input of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers. O u tp u t p er all em p loyee h o u r describes labor productivity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed. The cap ital se rvices input index used in the mul tifactor productivity computation is developed by bls from measures of the net stock of physical assets— equipment, structures, land, and inven tories— weighted by rental prices for each type of asset. C o m b in ed u n its o f la b o r an d ca p ita l in p u t are computed by combining changes in labor and capital inputs with weights which represent each component’s share of total output. The indexes for capital services and combined units of labor and capital are based on changing weights which are averages o f the shares in the current and preceding year (the Tomquist index-number formula). Notes on the data In the business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the output meas ure employed in the computation of output per hour is constructed from Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National Product. Multifactor productivity measures (table 28) for the p r iv a t e business and p r iv a t e non farm business sectors differ from the business and nonfarm business sector measures used in the traditional labor productivity indexes (tables 2 9 -3 2 ) in that they exclude the activities of government enterprises. There is no difference in the sector definition for manufacturing. Output measures for the business sectors are derived from data supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U .S. Department o f Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to annual estimates o f output (gross product originating) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Com pensation and hours data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The productivity and associated cost measures in the tables describe the relationship between output in real terms and the labor time and capital services involved in its production. They show the changes from period to period in the amount o f goods and services produced per unit o f input. Although these measures relate output to hours and capital services, they do not measure the contributions of labor, capital, or any other specific factor o f production. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of many influences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level of output; uti lization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization of production; managerial skill; and the characteristics and efforts of the work force. For a more complete description of the methodology underlying the multifactor productivity measures, see Bulletin 2178, “ Trends in Multifactor Produc tivity, 1 9 4 8 -8 1 ” (September 1983). 70. 86 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 28. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years, 1950-83 [1977 = 100] Item 1950 1960 1970 1973 1974 1975 1976 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 49.7 98.6 63.6 39.5 64.8 98.5 75.4 53.3 86.1 98.5 90.2 78.3 94.8 103.0 97.5 91.8 92.5 96.5 93 8 89 9 94.5 92.0 93.6 88.0 97.6 96.1 97.1 93.7 100.5 101.8 101.0 105.5 99.3 100.3 99.7 107.9 98.7 95.6 97.6 106.4 100 6 94.1 98.3 109.2 100.8 89.6 96.8 106.3 103.7 92.3 99.6 111.1 79.4 40.1 62.1 50.4 82.2 54.1 70.7 65.8 90.8 79.4 86.7 87.4 96.8 89.1 94.1 92.0 97.2 93.1 95.8 95.9 93.1 95.7 94.0 102.8 95.9 97.5 96.5 101.6 105.0 103.6 104.5 98.7 108.6 107.5 108.2 98.9 107.8 111.4 109.0 103.3 108.5 116.0 111.0 106.9 105.4 118.7 109.8 112.6 107.2 120.3 111.5 112.3 55.6 98.2 68.1 38.3 68.0 98.4 77.6 52.3 86.8 98.6 90.7 77.8 95.3 103.2 97.9 91.7 92.9 96.5 94.1 89.7 94.8 91.7 93.6 87.6 97.8 96.1 97.2 93.6 100 6 101.9 101.0 105.7 99.0 100.1 99.4 108.0 98.2 95.2 97.2 106.4 99.6 93.2 97.4 108.7 99.9 88.7 95.9 105.9 103.5 91.9 99.3 111.3 69.0 39.0 56.2 56.6 77.0 53.2 67.4 69.1 89.7 78.9 85.9 88.0 96.2 88.8 93.6 92.4 96.5 93.0 95.3 96.3 92.4 95.6 93.5 103.4 95.7 97.4 96.3 101.8 105.1 103.7 104.6 98.7 109.1 107.9 108.7 98.9 108.4 111.7 109.5 103.1 109.1 116.6 111.6 106.8 106.0 119.4 110.4 112.6 107.6 121.2 112.0 112.6 49.4 94.5 59.9 38.6 60.0 88 0 67.0 50.7 79.2 91.8 82.3 77.0 93.0 108.2 96.8 95.9 90.8 99.6 93.1 91.9 93.4 89.4 92.2 85.4 97.6 96.1 97.1 93.6 100.9 101.5 101.1 105.3 101.6 99.5 101.0 108.2 101.7 90.7 98.8 103.5 104.9 89.9 100.8 106.1 107.1 82.9 100.3 99.3 111.6 87.6 104.9 104.4 78.2 40.9 64.5 52.3 84.4 57.5 75.6 68.2 97.3 83.9 93.5 86.2 103.1 88.6 99.0 85.9 101.2 92.2 98.7 91.1 91.4 95.5 92.6 104.5 95.9 97.4 96.3 101.6 104.4 103.8 104.2 99.4 106.5 108.8 107.1 102.1 101.7 114.1 104.8 112.2 101.1 118.0 105.2 116.7 92.7 119.8 99.0 129.2 93.5 119.2 99.5 127.5 PRIVATE BUSINESS SECTOR Productivity: Output per hour of all persons......................... Output per unit of capital services................... Multifactor productivity.................................... Output.................................................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons......................................... Capital services ............................................... Combined units of labor and capital input . . . . Capital per hour of all persons ........................... PRIVATE NONFARM BUSINESS SECTOR Productivity: Output per hour of all persons........................ Output per unit of capital services................... Multifactor productivity................................... Output.................................................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons......................................... Capital services .............................................. Combined units of labor and capital input . . . . Capital per hour of all persons ........................... MANUFACTURING Productivity: Output per hour of all persons......................... Output per unit of capital services................... Multifactor productivity.................................... Output.................................................................. Inputs: Hours of all persons......................................... Capital services ............................................... Combined units of labor and capital input . . . . Capital per hour of all persons ........................... 29. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years, 1950-84 [1977 = 100] Item Business sector: Output per hour of all persons......................... Compensation per hour.................................... Real compensation per hour ........................... Unit labor costs............................................... Unit nonlabor payments.................................... Implicit price deflator...................................... Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons......................... Compensation per hour.................................... Real compensation per hour ........................... Unit labor costs............................................... Unit nonlabor payments.................................... Implicit price deflator...................................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all persons......................... Compensation per hour.................................... Real compensation per hour ........................... Unit labor costs............................................... Unit nonlabor payments................................... Implicit price deflator...................................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons........................ Compensation per hour.................................... Real compensation per h o u r........................... Unit labor costs.............................................. Unit nonlabor payments.................................... Implicit price deflator...................................... 1Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984« 50.4 20.0 50.5 39.8 43.4 41.0 58.3 26.4 59.7 45.2 47.6 46.0 65.2 33.9 69.5 52.1 50.6 51.6 78.3 41.7 80.1 53.3 57.6 54.7 86.2 58.2 90.8 67.5 63.2 66.0 94.6 85.6 96.4 90.5 90.4 90.4 100.5 108.5 100.8 108.0 106.7 107.5 99.3 118.7 99.1 119.5 112.8 117.2 98.8 131.1 96.4 132.6 119.3 128.1 100.7 143.4 95.5 142.4 136.7 140.4 100.9 155.0 97.3 153.6 136.8 147.9 103.7 161.7 98.4 156.0 145.5 152.4 107.4 169.3 98.8 157.7 156.6 157.3 56.3 21.9 55.1 38.8 42.7 40.1 62 8 28.3 64.0 45.1 47.8 46.0 68.3 35.7 73.1 52.3 50.4 51.6 80.5 42.8 82.3 53.2 58.0 54.8 86.8 58.7 91.5 67.6 63.3 66.3 94.8 86.1 96.9 90.8 88.5 90.0 100.6 108.6 100.8 108.0 105.3 107.1 99.0 118.4 98.8 119.5 110.4 116.5 98.3 130.6 96.0 132.8 118.6 128.1 99.8 143.1 95.3 143.5 135.0 140.6 100.0 154.5 97.0 154.5 136.9 148.6 103.4 162.0 98.6 156.6 147.0 153.4 106.6 169.5 98.9 158.9 156.6 158.1 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1 ) (1) (1 ) <1 ) (1 ) <1 ) 68.0 37.0 75.8 54.4 54.6 54.5 82.0 43.9 84.3 53.5 60.8 56.1 87,4 59,4 92.7 68.0 63.1 66.3 95.5 86.1 97.0 90.2 90.8 90.4 100.8 108.4 100.7 107.5 104.2 106.4 100.6 118.6 99.0 117.8 106.9 114.1 99.7 130.8 96.2 131.2 117.4 126.4 101.6 143.1 95.3 140.9 135.1 138.9 102.6 154.6 97.0 150.6 138.1 146.3 106.1 161.0 97.9 151.8 149.1 150.9 49 4 21.5 54.0 43.4 54.3 46.6 56.4 28.8 65.1 51.0 58.6 53.2 60.0 36.7 75.1 61.1 61.1 61.1 74.6 42.8 82.3 57.5 69.4 61.0 79 2 57.6 89.8 72.7 65.1 70.5 93.4 85.5 96.2 91.5 87.3 90.3 100 9 108.3 100.6 107.3 102.7 106.0 101.6 118.8 99.2 117.0 99.9 112.0 101.7 132.7 97.6 130.5 97.9 120.9 104.9 145.2 96.8 138.4 111.6 130.6 107.1 158.0 99.2 147.6 110.5 136.7 111.6 163.4 99.4 146.4 128.8 141.2 <1 ) <1 ) (1) (1) <1 ) (1 ) <1 ) 116.9 169.3 98.8 144.9 (1 ) C) p = preliminary. 87 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Productivity 30. Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1974-84 Annual rate of change Year Item Business sector: Output per hour of all persons .............. Compensation per h o u r......................... Real compensation per hour ................ Unit labor costs .................................... Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator ............................ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons .............. Compensation per h o u r......................... Real compensation per hour ................. Unit labor costs .................................... Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator ........................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees........... Compensation per h o u r......................... Real compensation per hour ................ Unit labor costs .................................... Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator ........................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons .............. Compensation per h o u r......................... Real compensation per hour ................. Unit labor costs .................................... Unit nonlabor payments......................... Implicit price deflator ........................... 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 -2 .4 9.4 -1 .4 12.1 4.4 9.5 2.2 9.6 0.5 7.3 15.1 9.8 3.3 8.5 2.6 5.1 4.0 4.7 2.4 7.7 1.2 5.1 6.4 5.6 0.5 8.5 0.8 8.0 6.7 7.5 -1 .2 9.4 -1 .7 10.7 5.8 9.0 -0 .5 10.4 -2 .7 11.0 5.7 9.3 -2 .5 9.4 -1 .4 12.2 5.9 10.2 2.0 9.6 0.4 7.5 16.7 10.3 3.2 8.1 2.2 4.7 5.7 5.1 2.2 7.5 1.0 5.2 6.9 5.7 0.6 8.6 0.8 8.0 5.3 7.1 -1 .5 9.0 -2 .0 10.7 4.8 8.8 -3 .7 9.4 -1 .5 13.6 7.1 11.4 2.9 9.6 0.4 6.5 20.1 10.9 2.9 7.9 2.0 4.9 4.6 4.8 1.8 7.6 1.1 5.7 5.3 5.6 0.8 8.4 0.7 7.5 4.2 6.4 -2 .4 10.6 -0 .3 13.3 -1 .8 9.0 2.9 11.9 2.5 8.8 25.9 13.1 4.5 8.0 2.1 3.4 7.5 4.6 2.5 8.3 1.8 5.7 6.5 6.0 0.9 8.3 0.6 7.3 2.7 6.0 1982 1983 1984P 1950-84P 1973-84P 1.9 9.4 -0 .9 7.3 14.6 9.6 0.2 8.1 1.9 7.9 0.1 5.3 2.7 4.3 1.1 1.6 6.3 3.0 3.6 4.7 0.4 1.1 7.7 3.2 2.2 6.5 2.0 4.1 3.8 4.0 1.1 8.2 0.1 7.0 6.9 6.9 -0 .7 10.3 -2 .8 11.1 7.4 10.0 1.5 9.6 -0 .7 8.0 13.8 9.8 0.2 8.0 1.7 7.7 1.4 5.7 3.5 4.9 1.6 1.4 7.4 3.2 3.1 4.6 0.3 1.5 6.5 3.1 1.9 6.2 1.7 4.2 3.9 4.1 1.0 8.1 0.1 7.0 7.4 7.1 -0 .2 9.4 -1 .7 9.6 2.6 7.2 -0 .9 10.3 -2 .8 11.3 9.8 10.8 1.9 9.4 -0 .9 7.4 15.1 9.8 1.0 8.0 1.8 6.9 2.3 5.3 3.3 4.2 0.9 0.8 7.9 3.1 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) 0.7 9.7 -1 .4 9.0 -2 .6 5.7 0.2 11.7 -1 .6 11.5 -2.1 7.9 3.1 9.4 -0 .9 6.1 14.1 8.0 2.1 8.8 2.5 6.6 -1 .0 4.7 4.3 3.4 0.2 -0 .8 16.5 3.3 4.7 3.6 -0 .6 -1 .0 (1) (1> 2.6 6.3 1.8 3.6 2.6 3.4 2.1 8.5 0.4 6.3 6.2 6.8 1Not available. 31. p = preliminary. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted [1977 = 100] 1983 Business sector: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ................................. Real compensation per hour........................... Unit labor costs............................................... Unit nonlabor payments ................................. Implicit price deflator....................................... Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ................................. Real compensation per hour........................... Unit labor costs............................................... Unit nonlabor payments ................................. Implicit price deflator....................................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees................... Compensation per hour ................................. Real compensation per hour........................... Total unit costs............................................... Unit labor costs...................................... Unit nonlabor costs................................. Unit profits .................................................... Implicit price deflator...................................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ................................. Real compensation per hour........................... Unit labor costs............................................... 1Not available. 88 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Quarterly indexes Annual average Item 1982 19849 II III 1983 IV I II 1984 III IV 1 II mr IVP 103.7 161.7 98.4 156.0 145.5 152.4 107 4 169.3 98.8 157.7 156.6 157.3 100.3 153.9 97.2 153.4 137.0 147.9 100.9 156.7 97.3 155.3 135.8 148.7 101.6 158.4 98.0 155.9 136.5 149.3 102.2 160.2 99.0 156 8 139.8 151.0 103.6 161.0 98.5 155.4 144.6 151.7 104.3 161.8 98.0 155,1 147.9 152.7 104.7 164.2 98 4 156.8 149.1 154.2 105.7 166.7 98.6 157.7 151.6 155.6 107.0 167.5 98.2 156.5 157.2 156.7 107.2 169.3 98.4 158.0 158.5 158.1 107.9 171.0 98.5 158.5 159.4 158.8 103.4 162.0 98.6 156.6 147.0 153.4 106.6 169.5 98.9 158.9 156.6 158.1 99.4 153.2 96.8 154.2 137.5 148.6 100.3 156.0 96.9 155.6 136.8 149.3 100.5 157.9 97.7 157.1 136.4 150.2 101.6 160.1 99.0 157.6 140.6 151.9 103.6 161.5 98.8 155.9 146.4 152.7 104.1 162.4 98.3 155.9 149.4 153.8 104.4 164.0 98.2 157.1 151.4 155.2 105.2 166.5 98.5 158.3 152.2 156.3 106 6 168 0 98.5 157.6 156.8 157.3 106.3 169.5 98.5 159.5 158.0 159.0 106.7 170.9 984 160.2 159.5 159.9 106.1 161.0 97.9 155.2 151.8 164.9 117.2 150.9 <1> (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) <1) 102.1 153.5 97.0 154.0 150.3 164.3 86.8 146.3 103.3 156.2 97.0 154.7 151.3 164.4 86.6 146.9 103.2 157.7 97.5 157.0 152.9 168.8 75.6 147.7 104.0 159.2 98.4 156.7 153.1 167.0 92.5 149.4 105.8 160.6 98.2 155.2 151.7 165.1 111.8 150.2 107.2 161.8 98.0 154.4 150.9 164.4 126.6 151.2 107.2 162.6 97.4 154.7 151.7 163.3 135.9 152.6 108.1 164.8 97.5 155.0 152.5 162.0 143.2 153.6 108.9 165.8 97.2 155.0 152.3 162.8 151.1 154.6 108.2 167.1 97.1 157.5 154.5 165.9 145.3 156.1 (') 0 0 <1) (1) (1) (1) <1) 111.6 163 4 99 4 146.4 116.9 169.3 98.8 144.9 106.3 157.2 99.4 148.0 108.8 159.8 99 2 146.9 107.8 161.0 99.6 149.3 109.1 162.7 100.6 149.1 110.8 163.0 99.7 147.0 113.4 163.5 99.0 144.1 113.1 164.6 98.6 145.5 114.2 167.1 98.9 146.4 115.3 168.3 98.7 146.0 117.4 169.9 98.7 144.7 117.2 171.8 98.9 146.6 r = revised. p = preliminary. 32. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted at annual rate Quarterly percent change at annual rate Item Business sector: Output per hour of all persons........... Compensation per hour...................... Real compensation per hour.............. Unit labor costs................................. Unit nonlabor payments ................... Implicit price deflator......................... Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons........... Compensation per hour...................... Real compensation per hour.............. Unit labor costs................................. Unit nonlabor payments ................... Implicit price deflator......................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees . . . Compensation per hour...................... Real compensation per hour.............. Total units costs .............................. Unit labor costs ............................ Unit nonlabor costs ...................... Unit profits ...................................... Implicit price deflator......................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons........... Compensation per hour...................... Real compensation per hour.............. Unit labor costs................................. 1Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis I1 1983 to III 1983 III 1983 to IV 1983 IV 1983 to 1 1984 1 19 84 to I1 1984 I1 1984 to III 1984r Percent change from same quarter a year ago III 1984 to IV 1984P III 1982 to III 1983 IV 1982 to IV 1983 119 83 to 1 1984 I1 1983 to I1 1984 III 1983 to III 1 984r IV 1983 to IV 1984P 2.8 2.0 -2.1 -0 .8 9.5 2.5 1.4 6.1 1.6 4.6 3.1 4.1 4.0 6.2 1.2 2.1 7.0 3.7 4.9 1.9 -1 .8 -2 .9 15.4 2.9 0.6 4.4 0.8 3.7 -3 .4 -3 .6 2.6 4.1 0.3 1.5 2.3 1.8 3.4 3.3 0.7 -0.1 8.9 2.7 3.1 3.7 0.3 0.6 9.2 3.3 3.5 4.1 -0 .4 0.6 8.4 3.0 3.3 4.0 -0 .3 0.7 8.7 3.3 2.7 4.6 0.4 1.9 7.1 3.6 3.0 4.1 0.1 1.1 6.9 3.0 2.1 2.2 -1 .9 0.1 8.4 2.7 1.0 4.1 -0 .3 3.0 5.3 3.7 2.9 6.1 1.0 3.1 2.3 2.8 5.5 3.7 0.0 -1 .7 12.5 2.8 -1.1 3.6 0.0 4.7 3.1 4.2 1.7 3.5 0.3 1.8 4.0 2.5 3.9 4.1 1.5 0.2 9.2 3.0 3.9 3.9 0.6 0.0 10.9 3.3 3.5 4.0 -0 .5 0.4 8.3 2.9 2.9 4.0 -0 .3 1.1 7.1 3.0 2.1 4.4 0.2 2.3 5.7 3.4 2.2 4.2 0.2 1.9 5.4 3.1 5.3 3.1 -1 .0 -2 .0 -2.1 -1 .7 64.8 2.8 -0 .2 2.0 -2 .4 0.8 2.1 -2 .6 32.6 3.6 3.6 5.7 0.7 0.6 2.0 -3 .2 23.4 2.7 2.8 2.4 -1 .3 0.2 -0 .4 2.0 23.8 2.6 -2 .5 3.2 -0 .3 6.5 5.9 8.0 -14.5 3.9 (1> (1) (1) (1) (1) (1> (1) (1) 3.8 3.6 1.0 -0 .2 -0 .2 0.0 46.3 3.0 3.9 3.1 -0 .2 -1 .5 -0 .8 -3 .2 79.8 3.3 4.0 3.6 -0 .9 -1.1 -0 .4 -3 .0 54.8 2.8 2.9 3.3 -1 .0 -0.1 0.4 -1 .4 35.2 2.9 0.9 3.3 -0 .8 2.0 2.4 0.9 14.7 3.2 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) 9.7 1.3 -2 .8 -7 .7 -1 .0 2.9 -1 .5 3.9 3.7 6.2 1.1 2.3 4.0 2.9 -0 .8 -1.1 7.4 3.7 0.2 -3 .4 0.6 4.6 0.7 5.3 4.3 2.3 -0 .3 -1 .9 4.9 2.2 -1 .0 -2 .6 4.7 2.7 -1 .7 -1 .9 4.1 3.3 -1 .0 -0 .7 3.5 3.9 -0 .2 0.4 3.6 4.4 0.3 0.7 r = revised. p = preliminary. 89 WAGE AND COMPENSATION DATA D ata for the employment cost index are reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics by a sample of 2,000 private nonfarm estab lishments and 750 State and local government units selected to represent total employment in those sectors. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensation information on five well-specified occupations. Data on negotiated wage and benefit changes are obtained from contracts on file at the Bureau, direct contact with the parties, and secondary sources. Definitions The E m p lo y m e n t C o st In d ex (ECI) is a quarterly measure of the average change in the cost of employing labor. The rate of total compensation, which comprises wages, salaries, and employer costs for employee ben efits, is collected for workers performing specified tasks. Employment in each occupation is held constant over time for all series produced in the ECI, except those by region, bargaining status, and area. As a consequence, only changes in compensation are measured. Industry and occupational employment data from the 1970 Census of Population are used in deriving constant weights for the ECI. While holding total industry and occupational employment fixed, in the estimation of indexes by region, bargaining status, and area, the employment in those measures is allowed to vary over time in accord with changes in the sample. The rate of change (in percent) is available for wages and salaries, as well as for total compensation. Data are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey months o f March, June, September, and December. The statistics are neither an nualized nor adjusted for seasonal influence. W a g es a n d sa la r ie s consist of earnings before payroll deductions, ex cluding premium pay for overtime, work on weekends and holidays, and shift differentials. Production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-of-living adjustments are included; nonproduction bonuses are included with other supplemental pay items in the benefits category; and payments-in-kind, free room and board, and tips are excluded. B e n e fits include supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and savings plans, and hours-related and legally required benefits. D a ta on n eg o tia ted w a g e ch a n g es apply to private nonfarm industry collective bargaining agreements covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on compensation changes apply only to those agreements covering 5,000 workers or more. F ir s t-y e a r wage or compensation changes refer to average negotiated changes for workers covered by settlements reached in the period 90 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and implemented within the first 12 months after the effective date o f the agreement. C h a n g e s o v e r th e life o f th e a g r e e m e n t refer to all adjustments specified in the contract, expressed as an average annual rate. These meas ures exclude wage changes that may occur under cost-of-living adjustment clauses, that are triggered by movements in the Consumer Price Index. W a g e - r a te c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earn ings; c o m p e n s a tio n c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of total wages and benefits. E ffective w a g e a d ju stm e n ts reflect all negotiated changes implemented in the reference period, regardless of the settlement date. They include changes from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from contracts negotiated in an earlier period, and cost-of-living adjustments. The data also reflect contracts providing for no wage adjustment in the period. Effective adjustments and each of their components are prorated over all workers in bargaining units with at least 1,000 workers. Notes on the data The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quarter of 1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in the private nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee benefits were in cluded in 1980, to produce a measure of the percent change in employers’ cost for em ployees’ total compensation. State and local government units were added to the ECI coverage in 1981, providing a measure o f total compensation change in the civilian nonfarm economy. Data for the broad white-collar, blue-collar, and service worker groups, and the manufacturing, nonmanufacturing, and service industry groups are presented in the ECI. Additional occupation and industry detail are pro vided for the wages and salaries component of total compensation in the private nonfarm sector. For State and local government units, additional industry detail is shown for both total compensation and its wages and salaries component. Historical indexes (June 1981 = 100) of the quarterly rates o f changes presented in the ECI are also available. For a more detailed discussion of the ECI, see chapter 11, “ The Em ployment Cost Index,” of the BLS H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s (Bulletin 2134— 1), and the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w articles: “ Employment Cost Index: a measure o f change in the ‘price of labor,’ ” July 1975; “ How benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost Index,” January 1978; and “ The Employment Cost Index: recent trends and expansion,” May 1982. Additional data for the ECI and other measures of wage and compen sation changes appear in C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts , a monthly publi cation of the Bureau. 33. Employment Cost Index, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] Percent change Series Civilian w orkers1 ......................................................................................................... Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers.................................................................... Blue-collar workers .................................................................... Service workers .......................................................................... Workers, by industry division Manufacturing ............................................................................. Nonmanufacturing....................................................................... Services .................................................................................. Public administration2 ............................................................ Private industry w o r k e r s ....................................................................................... Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ............................................................... Blue-collar workers.................................................................. Service workers....................................................................... Workers, by industry division Manufacturing.......................................................................... Nonmanufacturing.................................................................... State and local government w o r k e r s ............................................................. Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ............................................................... Blue-collar workers .................................................................. Workers, by Industry division Services.................................................................................. Schools............................................................................... Elementary and secondary .............................................. Hospitals and other services3 .............................................. Public administration2 ............................................................ 1982 1983 1984 3 months ended 12 months ended Dec. March June Sept. Dec. March June Sept. Dec. 111.4 113.2 114.5 116.5 117.8 119.8 120.8 122.4 123.9 1.2 5.2 111.9 110.5 112.4 113.7 112.3 114.3 114.9 113.6 115.1 117.6 114.8 116.7 118.9 115.8 119.1 120.9 117.7 122.0 122.1 118.6 122.1 124.0 119.6 124.6 125.5 120.9 126.8 1.2 1.1 1.8 5.6 4.4 6.5 110.4 111.8 115.0 113.6 112.5 113.5 116.6 116.2 113.5 114.9 117.1 117.0 115.0 117.2 121.1 119.8 116.0 118.6 122.6 121.4 117.9 120.7 125.0 122.9 119.1 121.6 125.5 123.7 120.4 123.3 128.8 126.9 122.0 124.8 130.9 128.6 1.3 1.2 1.6 1.3 5.2 5.2 6.8 5.9 110.7 112.6 113.9 115.6 117.0 119.0 120.1 121.1 122.7 1.3 4.9 110.8 110.3 111.8 112.8 112.1 113.8 114.2 113.5 114.6 116.5 114.6 115.1 117.9 115.7 117.9 119.9 117.5 121.5 121.4 118.4 121.2 122.4 119.3 123.2 123.9 120.6 125.7 1.2 1.1 2.0 5.1 4.2 6.6 110.4 110.8 112.5 112.6 113.5 114.2 115.0 116.0 116.0 117.5 117.9 119.6 119.1 120.7 120.4 121.6 122.0 123.1 1.3 1.2 5.2 4.8 Decem ber 1984 115.1 116.5 117.1 120.8 122.0 123.9 124.4 128.8 130.1 1.0 6.6 115.8 113.0 117.0 114.9 117.5 115.8 121.5 118.0 122.6 119.2 124.5 121.9 125.0 122.3 129.7 125.0 131.1 125.9 1.1 0.7 6.9 5.6 115.9 115.8 116.6 116.0 113.6 116.8 116.6 117.2 117.5 116.2 117.4 116.9 117.4 118.8 117.0 121.7 121.9 123.3 121.1 119.8 122.6 122.6 123.9 122.6 121.4 124.5 124.5 125.4 124.4 122.9 125.0 124.7 125.7 125.7 123.7 129.9 130.6 132.1 127.9 126.9 131.3 132.0 133.5 129.2 128.6 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.3 7.1 7.7 7.7 5.4 5.9 1Excludes farm, household, and Federal workers. 2Conslsts of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis includes, for example, library, social, and health services. 91 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data 34. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group [June 1981 = 100] Percent change Series 1982 1983 Dec. March June 110.9 Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers......................................................... Blue-collar workers ......................................................... Service workers ............................................ 112.2 113.4 111.4 109.8 111.8 113.0 110.8 113.2 114.2 112.0 113.9 Workers, by Industry division Manufacturing ....................................................... Nonmanufacturing....................................................... Services............................................................ Public administration2 .................................................... 109.8 111.3 114.4 112.6 111.0 112.7 115.8 114.6 112.0 114.0 116.3 115.4 Private Industry w o r k e r s ..................................................................... 110.3 111.6 110.6 112.9 109.3 106.2 111.6 109.7 111.2 109.3 106.9 107.8 111.4 112.2 114.8 112.0 105.7 113.4 110.7 112.2 110.0 108.0 109.0 112.9 109.8 110.3 109.1 110.5 109.7 111.1 107.2 109.8 106.1 109.0 114.3 111.0 111.1 110.9 112.0 110.4 112.9 108.5 111.8 107.2 110.6 116.0 114.0 115.1 114.6 112.0 115.6 113.3 114.6 114.5 115.1 114.9 112.6 115.5 115.2 115.6 116.5 114.6 115.9 115.4 115.8 117.7 115.4 Civilian w orkers1 ..................................................................... Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers ................................................. Professional and technical workers.............................. Managers and administrators ................................. Salesworkers.................................................... Clerical workers............................................................ Blue-collar workers.................................................... Craft and kindred workers............................................ Operatives, except transport......................................... Transport equipment operatives............................................ Nonfarm laborers............................................ Service workers.................................................... Workers, by industry division Manufacturing............................................................... Durables............................................................... Nondurables ......................................................... Nonmanufacturing......................................................... Construction ......................................................... Transportation and public utilities.............................. Wholesale and retail trade.............................................. Wholesale trade ............................................ Retail trade................................................. Finance, insurance, and real estate........................... Services....................................................... State and local government w o r k e r s ............................................... Workers, by occupational group White-collar workers .............................................. Blue-collar workers ................................... Workers, by industry division Services....................................................... Schools......................................................... Elementary and secondary ............................................ Hospitals and other services3 ............................................ Public administration2 ................................................. 1984 Sept. 3 months ended Dec. March June Sept. Dec. 115.3 116.5 117.9 118.8 120.3 121.7 1.2 45 116.7 113.1 115.1 117.9 114.0 117.4 119.3 115.3 120.0 120.4 116.1 119.8 122.2 117.0 122.3 123.5 118.2 124.3 1.1 1.0 1.6 4.7 3.7 5.9 113.3 116.1 120.1 118.2 114.5 117.4 121.3 119.4 115.7 118.9 123.3 120.4 116.8 119.7 123.8 121.3 118.0 121.3 127.2 124.4 119.5 122.6 128.9 125.7 1.3 1.1 13 1.0 4.4 4.4 63 5.3 112.9 114.5 115.8 117.2 118.2 119.2 120.6 12 41 113.6 115.9 114.0 107.1 114.6 111.9 113.4 111.1 110.3 109.8 113.5 115.9 119.9 114.8 108.4 116.7 112.9 114.3 112.3 110.7 110.8 113.7 117.2 120.4 115.7 111.2 118.3 113.9 115.4 113.6 110.2 112.1 116.5 118.5 122.2 118.0 110.2 119.8 115.1 116.5 114.9 111.7 112.9 119.8 119.9 123.8 119.2 111.9 120.7 115.9 117.3 115.8 112.7 114.1 119.3 120.9 125.2 121.0 110.5 122.0 116.7 118.0 116.6 113.4 114.7 121.2 122.3 127.3 122.2 111.6 122.9 118.0 119.4 117.9 114.0 115.9 123.7 1.2 1.7 1.0 1.0 .7 1.1 1.2 1.1 .5 1.0 21 44 57 5.6 4 39 3.6 3.5 3.8 34 3.4 62 112.0 111.8 112.3 113.4 112.1 114.7 110.8 114.1 109.4 111.1 116.6 113.3 112.9 113.9 115.2 112.2 115.7 111.5 115.7 109.9 113.5 120.4 114.5 114.4 114.6 116.5 112.9 116.8 112.3 116.5 110.6 116.9 121.9 115.7 115.7 115.8 118.0 113.3 118.5 114.3 118.2 112.8 116.1 124.2 116.8 116.6 117.1 119.0 114.0 119.3 116.0 120.0 114.4 116.9 124.7 118.0 117.7 118.6 119.9 114.3 119.9 116.5 120.7 114.9 115.3 127.1 119.5 119.1 120.2 121.2 114.4 120.7 118.1 122.9 116.2 115.8 129.5 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.1 .1 7 1.4 1.8 1.1 .4 1.9 4.4 4.1 49 40 13 33 52 5.5 51 - 9 6.2 115.7 119.2 120.0 121.6 122.0 126.1 127.1 8 59 116.1 114.3 119.8 116.4 120.6 116.9 122.2 119.1 122.5 119.6 127.1 121.9 128.0 122.5 7 5 61 48 119.8 119.9 121.1 119.7 118.2 120.6 120.6 121.7 120.6 119.4 122.2 122.2 122.9 121.9 120.4 122.5 122.3 123.0 123.1 121.3 127.2 127.8 129.3 125.1 124.4 128.1 128.7 130.2 125 9 125.7 .7 .7 7 6 1.0 6.2 67 70 Excludes farm, household, and Federal workers. 2Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities. 92 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 12 months ended includes, for example, library, social, and health services. Decem t er 1984 5.3 35. Employment Cost Index, private industry workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size [June 1981 = 100] Percent change Series 1982 1983 1984 3 months ended 12 months ended Dec. March June Sept. Dec. March June Sept. Dec. Workers, by bargaining status1 Union ............................................................................................. Manufacturing ............................................................................. Nonmanufacturing....................................................................... 112.3 111.8 112.8 114.5 114.0 114.9 116.0 114.8 117.1 117.8 116.3 119.2 118.8 117.2 120.4 120.6 119.3 121.9 121.7 120.5 122.8 122.6 121.6 123.6 123.9 123.2 124.5 1.1 1.3 0.7 4.3 5.1 3.4 Nonunion ........................................................................................ Manufacturing ............................................................................. Nonmanufacturing....................................................................... 109.7 109.2 109.9 111.5 111.2 111.6 112.8 112.3 113.0 114.4 113.8 114.7 115.9 114.9 116.4 118.0 116.6 118.6 119.2 117.9 119.8 120.3 119.3 120.7 121.9 120.8 122.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 5.2 5.1 5.2 Workers, by region1 Northeast ........................................................................................ South ............................................................................................. North Central .................................................................................. West................................................................................................ 111.7 110.6 108.6 112.9 112.6 112.5 110.9 115.4 114.3 113.5 112.5 116.6 116.0 115.6 113.9 118.0 117.5 117.1 114.7 120.0 118.9 119.7 117.2 121.0 120.7 120.7 117.9 122.2 122.4 120.7 119.7 122.5 123.8 122.2 120.8 124.9 1.1 1.2 .9 2.0 5.4 4.4 5.3 4.1 Workers, by area size1 Metropolitan areas .......................................................................... Other areas ..................................................................................... 110.9 109.1 112.9 110.8 114.2 112.3 116.0 113.4 117.4 114.5 119.4 116.7 120.6 117.4 121.5 119.0 123.2 119.8 1.4 .7 4.9 4.6 Workers, by bargaining status1 Union ............................................................................................. Manufacturing ............................................................................ Nonmanufacturing....................................................................... 111.8 110.8 112.7 112.9 111.4 114.3 114.2 112.3 116.0 116.0 113.7 118.3 116.9 114.8 118.9 118.1 116.1 120.1 119.0 117.1 120.7 119.8 118.1 121.3 120.9 119.5 122.1 .9 1.2 .7 3.4 4.1 2.7 Nonunion ........................................................................................ Manufacturing ............................................................................. Nonmanufacturing....................................................................... 109.5 109.1 109.6 110.9 110.7 111.0 112.2 111.8 112.4 113.7 113.0 114.0 115.2 114.2 115.6 116.7 115.4 117.2 117.8 116.5 118.3 118.8 117.9 119.2 120.4 119.5 120.7 1.3 1.4 1.3 4.5 4.6 4.4 Workers, by region1 Northeast ........................................................................................ South ............................................................................................. North Central .................................................................................. West................................................................................................ 111.5 109.8 108.6 112.0 112.0 111.4 110.1 114.1 113.6 112.5 111.5 114.9 115.3 114.3 112.8 116.5 116.6 115.7 113.6 118.5 117.4 117.9 115.5 118.8 118.9 119.0 116.0 119.6 120.5 119.0 117.8 120.0 121.9 120.2 118.7 122.5 1.2 1.0 .8 2.1 4.5 3.9 4.5 3.4 Workers by area size1 Metropolitan areas .......................................................................... Other areas ..................................................................................... 110.5 108.8 111.9 110.1 113.2 111.4 114.9 112.3 116.2 113.4 117.6 115.1 118.6 116.0 119.5 117.5 121.0 118.3 1.3 .7 41 4.3 Decem ber 1984 COMPENSATION WAGES AND SALARIES 1The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see BLS Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 1910. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 93 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW March 1985 • Current Labor Statistics: Wage and Compensation Data 36. Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1980 to date [In percent] Quarterly average 1982 Measure 1980 1981 1982 IV 1984P 1983 1984P 1983 1 II III IV 1 II III IV Total compensation changes, covering 5,000 workers or more, all industries: 10.4 7.1 10.2 8.3 3.2 2.8 3.4 3.0 3.6 2.8 3.3 4.8 -1 .6 1.4 4.4 3.6 5.0 4.3 4.9 3.1 5.1 4.7 3.5 3.2 2.7 3.1 3.8 2.0 First year of contract ................... Annual rate over life of contract. . . 9.5 7.1 9.8 7.9 3.8 3.6 2.6 2.8 2.4 2.3 3.8 4.8 -1 .2 2.2 2.7 2.8 3.7 3.6 4.2 2.8 2.8 3.3 2.6 2.7 2.1 2.6 2.3 1.4 Manufacturing: First year of contract ................... Annual rate over life of contract. . . 7.4 5.4 7.2 6.1 2.8 2.6 0.4 2.1 2.3 1.4 4.1 3.9 -3 .4 4.5 1.3 .9 3.4 3.5 2.9 3.1 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.3 2.5 2.2 .9 Nonmanufacturing (excluding construction): First year of contract ................... Annual rate over life of contract. . . 9.5 6.6 9.8 7.3 4.3 4.1 5.0 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.6 5.2 3.3 5.3 5.9 5.2 5.8 4.3 4.8 2.7 4.2 4.8 4.3 4.2 2.0 2.8 4.0 3.8 Construction: First year of contract ................... Annual rate over life of contract. . . 13.6 11.5 13.5 11.3 6.5 6.3 1.5 2.4 .5 1.0 3.4 2.9 .7 2.4 1.7 2.1 1.5 2.9 1.1 2.6 -3 .6 -2 .8 1.1 1.4 2.0 2.1 -2 .8 - .8 First year of contract ................... Annual rate over life of contract. . . Wage rate changes covering at least 1,000 workers, all Industries: p = preliminary. 37. Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1980 to date Year and quarter Year 1983 1982 Measure 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984P 1 IV II 1984P III IV I II III IV Average percent adjustment (including no change): All industries.................................................................. Manufacturing ......................................................... Nonmanufacturing .................................................... 9.9 10.2 9.7 9.5 9.4 9.5 6.8 5.2 7.9 4.0 2.7 4.8 3.7 4.3 3.3 1.3 1.5 1.2 0.3 - .5 .9 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 .9 1.2 0.9 1.2 .7 0.9 1.0 .9 1.2 1.0 1.3 0.7 1.1 .4 From settlements reached in period.............................. Deferred from settlements reached In earlier period . . . . From cost-of-living clauses............................................ 3.6 3.5 2.8 2.5 3.8 3.2 1.7 3.6 1.4 .8 2.5 .6 .7 2.0 .9 .6 .4 .3 - .2 .4 .1 .3 1.0 .1 .2 .8 .2 .6 .3 .2 .1 .4 .3 .1 .7 .2 .2 .7 .3 .3 .2 .2 Total number of workers receiving wage change (in thousands)1 ......................................................... — 8,648 7,852 6,530 6,196 3,441 2,875 3,061 3,025 2,887 2,696 2,485 2,386 1,839 From settlements reached in period .................................................................. Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period............................................ From cost-of-living clauses............................................ Number of workers receiving no adjustments (in thousands) ......................................................... — 2,270 1,907 2,327 1,830 825 448 561 599 996 295 349 406 895 — — 6,267 4,593 4,846 3,830 3,260 2,327 3,681 2,514 860 1,970 812 1,938 1,405 1,299 1,317 1,218 669 1,290 986 1,459 1,159 1,150 1,581 1,214 453 1,063 — 145 483 1,187 1,134 4,895 4,842 4,656 4,693 4,830 4,634 4,844 4,944 5,491 1The total number of workers who received adjustments does not equal the sum of workers that received each type of adjustment, because some workers received more than one type of adjustment during the period. Digitized for 94 FRASER https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis p = preliminary. WORK STOPPAGE DATA W ork stoppages include all known strikes or lockouts involving 1,000 workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data are based largely on newspaper accounts and cover all workers idle one shift or more in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or secondary effect on other establishments whose employees are idle owing to material or service shortages. 38. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date Number of stoppages Month and year 1947 1948 1949 1950 Estimates of days idle as a percent of estimated working time measure only the impact of larger strikes ( 1,0 0 0 workers or more). Formerly, these estimates measured the impact of strikes involving 6 workers or more; that is, the impact of virtually all strikes. Due to budget stringencies, collection of data on strikes involving fewer than 1,000 workers was discontinued with the December 1981 data. Beginning in month or year Workers involved In effect during month Beginning in month or year (in thousands) Days idle In effect during month (in thousands) Number (in thousands) Percent of estim ated working lim e ........................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... 270 245 262 424 1,629 1,435 2,537 1,698 25 720 26 127 43 420 30 390 22 38 26 1951........................................................................................... 1952 ........................................................................................... 1953 ........................................................................................... 1954 ........................................................................................... 1955 ........................................................................................... 1956 ........................................................................................... 1957 ........................................................................................... 1958 ........................................................................................... 1959 ........................................................................................... 1960 ..................................................................................... 415 470 437 265 363 287 279 332 245 222 1,462 2,746 1,623 1,075 2,055 1,370 887 1,587 1,381 896 15 070 48 820 18 130 16 630 21 180 26 840 10 340 17 900 60 850 13 260 12 38 14 13 16 20 07 13 43 09 1961........................................................................................... 1962 ........................................................................................... 1963 ........................................................................................... 1964 ........................................................................................... 1965 ........................................................................................... 1966 ........................................................................................... 1967 ........................................................................................... 1968 ........................................................................................... 1969 ........................................................................................... 1970 ........................................................................................... 195 211 181 246 268 321 381 392 412 381 1,031 793 512 1,183 999 1,300 2,192 1,855 1,576 2,468 10 140 11 760 10 020 16 220 15 140 16 000 31 320 35 567 29 397 52 761 07 08 07 11 10 10 18 20 16 29 1971........................................................................................... 1972 ........................................................................................ 1973 ........................................................................................... 1974 ........................................................................................... 1975 ........................................................................................... 1976 ........................................................................................... 1977 ........................................................................................... 1978 ........................................................................................... 1979 ........................................................................................... 1980 ........................................................................................... 298 250 317 424 235 231 298 219 235 187 2,516 975 1,400 1,796 965 1,519 1,212 1,006 1,021 795 35 538 16 764 16 260 31 809 17 563 23 962 21 258 23 774 20 409 20 844 19 09 08 16 09 12 10 11 09 09 1981........................................................................................... 1982 .......................................................................................... 1983 .......................................................................................... 1984 .......................................................................................... 145 96 81 64 729 656 909 376 16 908 9 061 17 461 8 352 07 04 08 03 1984 January .................................................................. February .................................................................. March.................................................................... A pril....................................................................... May ....................................................................... June....................................................................... July ....................................................................... Augus!.................................................................... September............................................................... October .................................................................. November............................................................... December............................................................... 6 2 2 7 5 5 8 4 9 4 4 2 12 12 9 13 15 14 20 18 17 15 15 12 28.9 8.7 3.0 28.5 8.1 23.7 68.4 21.5 103.6 15.8 12.0 41.2 43.0 37.2 14.6 38.1 39.2 45.7 104.1 100.9 117.9 33.7 30.7 57.7 507.3 365.5 284.2 651.0 581.2 754.8 1,221.7 1,623.3 716.4 498.7 482.1 665.4 .03 .02 .01 .03 .03 .04 .06 .07 .04 .02 .02 .03 1985P January .................................................................. 2 9 4.7 16.0 276.3 .01 p = preliminary. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 95 New from BLS SALES PUBLICATIONS BLS Bulletins Productivity, A Selected A nnotated Bibliography, 1979-82, Bulletin 2212, 196 p p ., $7 (GPO Stock N o . 0 2 9 -001-02831-8). A nnotated references for 1,400 publications dealing with pro ductivity— the relationship between physical output and input in the econom y— concentrating on concepts and m ethods; measurement o f levels and trends; the source o f productivity change; and the relation o f productivity to econom ic variables (such as wages, prices, and em ploym ent); and econom ic growth. Area Wage Surveys T h ese cover o ffic e , p ro fessio n a l, tech n ical, m ain ten an ce, custodial, and material m ovem ent jobs in m ajor m etropolitan areas. The annual series o f 70 is available by subscription for $88 per year. Individual bulletins are also available separately. Published in January were: Anaheim -Santa Ana-Garden G rove, California, M etropolitan Area, O ctober 1984. Bulletin 3025-58, 52 p p ., $2.25 (GPO Stock N o . 02 9 -0 0 1-90325-1). G ary-H am m ond-East C hicago, Indiana, M etropolitan Area, Novem ber 1984. Bulletin 3025-57, 26 p p ., $1.75 (GPO Stock N o . 02 9 -0 0 1 -9 0 3 2 4-4). Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, M etropolitan Area, Novem ber 1984. Bulletin 3035-54, 29 p p ., $1.75 (GPO Stock N o. 0 2 9 -0 0 1 -9 0 0 0 0 -0 ). M em phis, Tennessee-Arkansas-M ississippi, M etropolitan Area, Novem ber 1984. Bulletin 3025-59, 29 p p ., $1.75 (GPO Stock N o . 029-001 -9 0 3 2 60-0). Philadelphia, Pennsylvania-New Jersey, M etropolitan Area, Novem ber 1984. Bulletin 3025-55, 43 p p ., $2.25 (GPO Stock N o . 0 2 9 -0 0 1 -9 0 3 2 2-7). such as lasers, fiberoptics, and biotechnology; sailmakers. 36 p p ., $3 ($11 per year). and on Producer Prices and Price Indexes. The Novem ber 1984 issue provides a comprehensive report on price m ovem ents for the m onth, plus regular tables and technical notes. 156 p p ., $4.25 ($29 per year). FREE PUBLICATIONS Area Wage Summaries A ustin, T ex., September 1984. 3 pp. Las Vegas-T onopah, N ev ., O ctober 1984. 6 pp. M cAllen-Pharr-Edinburg and Brownsville-H arlingen-San Benito, T ex., O ctober 1984. 3 pp. M ansfield, O hio, Novem ber 1984. 3 pp. New H am pshire, N ovem ber 1984. 3 pp. Sherm an-Denison, T ex., September 1984. 3 pp. Special Advisory Departm ent Store Inventory Price Indexes— Novem ber 1984. OTHER DATA SERVICES Electronic News Service Major BLS news releases are available electronically at the time of release. Mailgram A Consum er Price Index data summary is available by mailgram within 24 hours o f the CPI release. It provides unadjusted and seasonally adjusted U .S . City Average data for All Urban C on sumers (CPI-U) and for Urban W age Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). (NTISUB/158). $125 in contiguous U nited States. Telephone Summary Poughkeepsie-K ingston-Newburgh-New York Area, September 1984. Bulletin 3025-56, 25 p p ., $1.75 (GPO Stock N o. 0 2 9 -0 0 1 -9 0 3 2 3 -5 ). A recorded summary o f principal CPI, PPI, and Em ploym ent Saginaw, M ichigan, M etropolitan A rea, Novem ber 1984. Bulletin 3025-52, 24 p p ., $1.75 (GPO Stock N o . 0 2 9 -001-90319-7). To Order: Periodicals CPI Detailed Report. The Novem ber 1984 issue provides a com prehensive report on price m ovem ents for the m onth and statistical tables. 77 p p ., $4 ($25 per year). Current W age Developm ents. The January 1985 issue includes selected wage and benefit changes; work stoppages through December; m ajor agreements that expire in February; and statistics on com pensation changes. 46 p p ., $2 ($21 per year). Em ploym ent and Earnings. The January issue covers em ploym ent and unem ploym ent developm ents in Decem ber, revision o f seasonally adjusted labor force series, new data on union members and their earnings, plus regular statistical tables on national, State, and area em ploym ent, unem ploym ent, hours, and earnings. 242 p p ., $4.50 ($31 per year). O ccupational O utlook Quarterly. Winter issue features articles on how workers get their training; on careers in new technologies https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Situation numbers is available 24 hours a day on (202) 523-9658. S a le s P u b lic a tio n s : Order by title and GPO stock number from a BLS regional office (see inside front cover), or from the Superintendent o f D ocum ents, U .S . G overnment Printing O ffice, W ashington, D .C . 20402. Subscriptions are available only from the Superintendent o f D ocum ents. A ll checks— including those sent to the regional o ffices— should be m ade payable to the Superintendent o f D ocum ents. Available from the National Technical Inform ation Service, U .S . Department o f Com m erce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151. M a ilg r a m a n d o t h e r N T IS S e r v ic e : Ask for specific inform ation from the O ffice o f Publications, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, W ashington, D .C . 20212. E l e c tr o n ic N e w s R e le a s e s : Request national publications from Bureau o f Labor Statistics, U .S . Department o f Labor, W ashington, D .C . 20212 or from any regional office. Request regional office publica tions from the issuing office. Free publications are available while supplies last. F re e P u b lic a tio n s : For IOOlfea BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS has provided the most comprehensive pertinent, and useful informa tion anywhere in the world on employment and unemployment, consumer, producer and international prices; wages and industrial relations; productivity and technological impact; growth of the economy, birth and decline of occupations; and developments in labor and industry in other countries. For almost y O o f those years, the M ONTHLY LABOR REV IEW has provided incisive articles, challenging reports, and informative statistics. Some recent Review articles are: Job Training Partnership Act Men’s and women’s earnings Older workers in the labor market Occupational winners and losers Japan’s unemployment Black worker’s gains Employee-owned firms Shortage of machinists?, The labor force in 1995 Price inflation remains low Multifactor productivity Employment in energy industries, Import prices for petroleum Collective bargaining The employment cost index Work injuries from falls Youth joblessness TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE REVIEW, please fill out the following coupon and send to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Order form Please send the Monthly Labor Review for 1 year at $24 (Foreign subscribers add $6) □ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to Superintendent of Documents. □ Charge to GPO Deposit Account No. _____________________ Order No.____ □ Credit Card Orders— □ MasterCard or □ VISA, on orders to Credit Card No. Superintendent of Documents only. Expiration Date Total charges $___________ Month/Year. Name Organization (if appropriate). Address. City, State, Zip Code. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis \ U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Washington, D.C. 20212 Official Business P e n a lty 'fo r P riv ate Use. $ 3 0 0 Second-Class Mail Postage and Fees Paid U.S. Department of Labor ISSN 0098-1818 RETURN POSTAGÉ GUARANTEED https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis MLR - L I B R A * 4 2 L ISSDUEC13R LIB-RARY FED RESERVE BANK CF^ST LOUIS PC bOX *442 SAINT ,L O tiiS &CU i* 3 1 6 6 ^