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 ^
@FedFRASER